### SDM S Documen t I D 204122 4



### FINA L 

# LAK ECOUNT YCOMMUNIT YHEALT H PROGRA M

200 5 ANNUA LREPORT
Apri l 200 6

Preparedfor: 

# LAK ECOUNT YCOMMUNIT YHEALT H PROGRA M WOR K GROU P and 

# U.S . ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO NAGENC Y

Regio n 8 99918*80-661 , Suit e 50 0 Denver , C O 8020 2

Prepared by: 

### MFC , INC . 490 0 Pear ! Eas t

Circle , Suit e 300

W Boulder , C O 8030 1 303-447-182 3 FA X 447-183 6LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### TABL E O F CONTENT S Pag e LIS T O FTABLE S i i LIS T OFFIGURE S • . ii LIS T O FAPPENDICE S ii i EXECUTIV E SUMMARY 1 1. 0 INTRODUCTIO N 1 0 2. 0 ENVIRONMENTA LINVESTIGATIO N PROGRA M 1 1 3. 0 ENVIRONMENTA LREMEDIATIO N PROGRA M 1 3 4. 0 EDUCATIO N AN D COMMUNIT Y OUTREAC H PROGRA M 1 6 5. 0 HEPA VACUU M LOA N PROGRA M 2 0 6. 0 BLOO D LEAD MONITORIN GPROGRA M 2 1 6. 1 Participatio n 2 1 6. 2 Dat aRevie w an dCompilatio n 2 2 6. 3 200 5 Communit y Bloo dLea dLevel s 2 4 6. 4 Compariso n o f

Bloo dLeadLevel s Amon g Group s 2 7 6. 5 Relationshi p o f

Bloo dLea dLevel s t o Environmenta l Lea dConcentration s 2 8 6. 6 Additiona l Dat aEvaluatio n2 9 6. 7 Cas e Managemen t Summar y 3 1 7. 0 COORDINATIO N WIT H INSTITUTIONA LCONTRO LPROGRA M 3 3 8. 0 PROBLEM S ENCOUNTERE D AN D PROBLE M RESOLUTIO N 3 4 9. 0 MODIFICATION S T O WOR K PLAN O ROTHE

RLCCH P PROCEDURE S 3 5 10. 0 PERFORMANC E STANDARD S EVALUATIO N 3 6 11. 0 RECOMMENDATION S O RCOMMENT S FRO M LCCH P WOR K GROU P 3 7 11. 1 Respons e t o 2004 Recommendation s o r Comment s 3 7 

### 11. 2 200 5 Recommendation s o r Comment s 3 7 12. 0 REFERENCE S 3 9

J:\BLD01\010244\Tas k10V200 5 Annua l Repon\200SAnnualRepoit_FINAL_040406.do c i MFC , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### LIS T O F TABLE S Tabl e Titl e 2- 1 Propertie s Enterin g LCCH P b y Are a 2- 2 Environmenta l Investigation s Performe di n 200 5 3- 1 200 5 Remediatio n Statu s b y Are a 3- 2 1995-200 5 Remediatio n Statu s b y Are a 4- 1 Educatio n an dOutreac hProgramSummar y fo r 200 5 6- 1 200 5 Bloo dLea dTestin g Progra mParticipatio n (age s 6 t o 7 2 months ) 6- 1 a2004 Bloo dLea dTestin g Progra mParticipatio n (age s 6 t o 7 2 months ) 6-l b 200 3 Bloo dLea dTestin g Progra mParticipatio n (age s 6 t o 7 2 months ) 6- 2 Compariso n o f

Annua l Bloo dLea dStatistic s 6- 3 200 5 Bloo dLea dStatistics , b y Are a 6-3 a2004 Bloo dLeadStatistics , b y Are a 6-3 b 200 3 Bloo dLea dStatistics , b y Are a 10- 1 Performanc e Evaluatio nResults , 2003-200 5 LIS T O F FIGURE S Titl e 1994-200 5 Annua l Participatio nNumber s fo r Youn g Childre n Residin g withi n Statistica l Unit s 1 an d2 1994-200 5 Annua l Participatio n Number s fo r Youn g Childre n Residin g withi nOU 9 1994-200 5 Geometri c Mean/Media n Bloo dLeadLeve l Ove r Tim e Percentag e o f

Childre n(0- 6 years ) Statistica l Unit s wit hBloo dLeadLeve l > 1 0 Mg/d L ES- 5 Percentag e o f

Childre n(0- 6 years ) i n Statistica l Unit s wit hBloo dLea dLeve l > 1 5 Mg/d L 1 - 1 Operabl e Uni t

9 Subarea s 6- 1 200 5 Bloo dLea dTestin g Participatio n b y Subare a 6- 2 200 5 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Subare a 6- 3 200 5 Participatio n b y Mont h 6- 4 200 5 OU 9 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Ag e Grou p 6-4 a2003-200 5 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Are aan dAg e Grou p (i n years ) 6- 5 200 5 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Statistica l Uni t an dSubarea , Age s 0-3 5 Month s an d36
- 7 2 Month s 6- 6 200 5 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Seaso n 6- 7 200 5 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Medicai dParticipatio n 6- 8 2005Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Family' s Primar y Languag e 6- 9 1994-200 5 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Averag e 0- 6 inc hSoi l Lea dLevel s 6-9 a1994-200 5 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Averag e 0- 2 inc hSoi l Lea dLevel s 6-1 0 1994-200 5 Averag e 0-6 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs. First-tes t Bloo dLea dLeve l 6-10 a1994-200 5 Statistica l Uni t 1 - Averag e 0- 6 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . First-tes t Bloo dLead Leve l 6-1 1 1994-200 5 Averag e 0- 2 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . First-tes t Bloo dLea dLeve l 6- 1 l a1994-200 5 Statistica l Uni t 1 - Averag e 0- 2 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . First-tes t Bloo dLead Leve l 6-1 2 1994-200 5 Maximu mPain t Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t

Bloo d LeadLeve l 6-12 a1994-200 5 Statistica l Uni t 1 - Maximu mPain t

Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l 6-1 3 1994-200 5 Averag e Mai n Livin g Are aDus t Lea dvs . First-tes t

Bloo dLeadLeve l

J:\BLDOH010244\Tts kI0\200 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_nNAL_04(y»06Jo c H MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### 6-13 a1994-200 5 Statistica l Uni t 1 - Averag e Mai n Livin g Are aDus t Lea dvs . First-tes t Bloo dLea dLeve l 6-1 4 1994-200 5 30-secon dFlus hWate r Lea dvs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l 6-1 5 1994-200 5 6- 8 hou r Hol dWate r

Lea dvs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l LIS T O F APPENDICE S Appendi x Titl e A Educatio n an dCommunit y Outreac hBrochure s B Lak e Count y Healt hDepartmen t Annua l Bloo dLea dSummar y Repor t C Bloo dLea dSummar y Statistic s an dTes t fo r Normalit y Result s D Time-Serie s Dat afo r Elevate dBloo dLea dChildre n E Evaluatio no f

LCCH P i n Term s o f

Performanc e Standard s fo r OU9 , 2003-200 5 FTechnica l Memorandu mfro mth e Dat aRevie w Meeting , February 2 , 200 6

J:\BLD01\010244\TasklO\2005AnnualRepon\2003AnnualRepon_FlNAU_040406Jo cM l MFG , InC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### EXECUTIV E SUMMAR Y Th e Lak e Count y Communit y Healt hProgra m(LCCHP ) i s th e selecte dremedia l actio n fo r Operabl e Uni t

9 (OU9) , Residentia l Populate dAreas , o f th e Californi aGulc hSuperfun dSit e (th e Site ) (EPA , 1999) . Th e LCCHP , als o know n a s th e Kid s Firs t Program , i s a n innovativ e remedia l actio n intende dt o provid e reductio n i n lea dexposur e fro mawid e rang e o f potentia l source s fo r

youn g childre n an dpregnan t

o r nursin g wome n an dthereb y reduc e bloo dlea dlevel s i n childre nwh o resid e withi n th e Site . Th e interi mKid s Firs t Progra moperate dbetwee n Ma y 199 5 t o Jun e 2000 , the n expande dint o th e LCCH P an dcontinue s offerin g lea dreductio n service s o n avoluntar y basis . Base do n a n evaluatio n o f th e progra mi n accordanc e wit hth e establishe dperformanc e standards , th e remedia l actio n objective s establishe db y th e EP A fo r OU 9 hav e bee n me t

i n 200 5 fo r

th e entir e site . Thi s report summarize s th e LCCH P activitie s durin g 2005 , provide s a n updat e o f th e on-goin g progres s o f

th e program , an dprovide s th e detail s o f

th e performanc e evaluation . Progra m Overvie w Lea di s ubiquitou s i n th e environmen t a s aresul t

o f industrialization , an dbothchildre n an dadult s ca n b e expose dt o lea dfro manumbe r o f differen t medi a(e.g. , soil , dust , water , air , food , consume r products ) an dpathway s (ingestion , derma l contact , inhalation) . Childre n typicall y hav e highe r intak e rate s pe r uni t bod y weigh t

o f environmenta l medi aan dten dt o absorb ahighe r fractio n o f

ingeste dlea d fro mthei r gastrointestina l trac t

an db e mor e susceptibl e t o som e o f th e advers e effect s o f

lea dtha n d o adults . Exposur e t o lea dvi afood , wate r an dai r ha s bee n significantl y reduce di n recen t year s a s aresul t o f federa l regulatio n restrictin g o r bannin g lea di n solder , gasolin e an dpain t (CDC , 1991) . I n Leadville , ther e ar e currentl y anumbe r o f pathway s b y whic hchildre n ma y com e int o contac t wit hlea doriginatin g fro mminin g activities , includin g ingestio n o f min e wastes , dust , surfac e wate r an dsediment , an d ingestio n o f

soil . Childre n ma y als o b e expose dt o lea dfro mnon-minin g source s i n an daroun dthei r homes , suc ha s lead-base dpaint , wate r i n contac t

wit hlea di n plumbin g component s an doccupationa l an dhobb y exposures . Th e primar y element s o f

th e LCCH P ar e liste dbelow :
• Communit y awarenes s an deducatio n programs ;
• Voluntar y bloo dlea dmonitorin g wit happropriat e follow-u p fo r youn g childre n (1 2 t o 7 2 months ) an dpregnan t

an dnursin g women ;
• Voluntar y residentia l environmenta l testin g fo r lead ;

J:\BLDOI\010244\Tas kI0\200 5 Annua l Rcport\2005AnnualReport_FINAL_040406.(lo c1 MFG , InC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006

* • Respons e action s t o reduc e th e ris k o f lea dexposur e t o childre n i n Leadvill e an dsurroundin g residentia l areas ;
• High-efficienc y paniculat e ai r filte r (HEPA)-vacuu mloa n program ; an d

• Institutiona l Contro l Overla y distric t (ICO ) t o hel p ensur e long-ter meffectiveness . Th e entir e LCCH P i s funde db y ASARC O Incorporate d(Asarco ) throug haTrus t Fund ; th e bloo d lea dmonitorin g progra mi s administere db y th e Lak e Count y Healt hDepartment . Th e environmenta l samplin g an drespons e progra mwa s administere db y Asarc o unti l Augus t 2005 , a t whic htim e th e environmenta l progra mwa s temporaril y suspende ddu e t o fundin g issue s associate dwit hAsarco' s bankruptc y filing . EP A resume doperation s o f th e progra mo n a n interi mbasi s i n October 2005 . Th e overal l goals , o r

remedia l actio n objective s (RAOs) , establishe dfo r th e LCCHP ar e relate dt o th e observe dan dpredicte dbloo dlea dlevel s o f childre n withi nth e site , an drea da s follows : RAO-1 : N o mor e tha n 5 percen t o f al l childre n (age s 0 t o 7 2 months ) wh o liv e a t thi s site , eithe r no w o r i n th e future , wil l hav e bloo dlea dvalue s highe r tha n 1 0 |ag/dL . RAO-2 : N o mor e tha n on e percen t o f childre n (age s 0 t o 7 2 months ) wh o liv e a t thi s site , eithe r no w o r i n th e future , wil l hav e bloo dlea dlevel s highe r tha n 1 5 ug/dL . I norde r t o achiev e th e RAO s aspecifi c se t o f performanc e standard s were develope di n 2002 . Include da s par t

o f th e Annua l Repor t

i s adetaile devaluatio n o f th e performanc e o f

th e LCCH P wit h respec t t o meetin g th e remedia l actio n objectives . Result s fro mth e bloo dlea dmonitorin g an denvironmenta l testin g program s ar e compare dt o establishe dlea dactio n levels , o r trigge r criteria . Th e trigge r

criteri afo r

lea dconcentration s i n eac h mediu minvestigate dare : Bloo dLead : greate r

tha n o r equa l t o 1 0 ug/d Li n childre n ag e 6 t o 7 2 month s an di n pregnan t an d nursin g wome n Soil : greate r

tha n o r equa l t o 3,50 0 mg/K g Hous e Dust : greate r

tha n o r equa l t o 2,000 mg/K g Interio r o r Exterio r Paint : Interio r

o r exterio r pain t i n poo r conditio n wit hlea dconcentratio n greate r tha n o r equa l t o 1 milligram/squar e centimete r (mg/cm 2 ) - educatio n provided ; wit hlea d concentratio n greate r

tha n o r equa l t o 6 mg/cm 2

- activ e remediation . Tap Water : greate r

tha n o r equa l t o 1 5 ug/ L

J:\BLDOI\010244\Tts k10C00 3 Annui l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINA1^.04(M06jto c2 MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Whe n on e o r

mor e o f th e trigge r

criteri ai s exceeded , arang e o f differen t respons e action s ar e evaluate db y th e LCCH P Wor k Group . Al l environmenta l an davailabl e bloo dlea ddat afo r apropert y ar e reviewe dan dth e Work

Grou p provide s recommendation s o n th e appropriat e respons e actions , considerin g th e preference s o f th e propert y owne r

an dresidents . N o respons e action s ar e take n withou t th e permissio n o f

th e propert y owne r

an dresidents . Th e Wor k Grou p i s mad e u p o f

representative s fro m th e Lak e Count y Healt hDepartment , th e Colorad o Departmen t o f Publi c Healt han dEnvironmen t (CDPHE ) an dAsarc o (unti l Augus t 2005) . Th e U . S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA ) provide s oversigh t o f th e progra man dreview s an dapprove s al l respons e actio n recommendation s o f th e Wor k Group . Fo r

th e purpose s o f

evaluatin g dat acollecte db y th e program , th e sit e ha s bee n divide dint o subarea s (sometime s referre dt o simpl y a s areas ) representin g geographi c area s o f th e site , whic hwere perceive dt o hav e simila r characteristic s relativ e t o potentia l lea dexposures . Thes e area s ar e identifie da s Area s A throug hG , wit ha n additiona l Are aH representin g area s withi nLak e Count y bu t outsid e o f

th e Superfun dboundarie s o f

OU9 . Thes e area s ar e identifie do n Figur e 1-1 . I n addition , fo r th e purpose s o f th e performanc e standard s evaluatio n describe dbelow , th e Sit e ha s als o bee n divide dint o wha t ar e referre dt o a s Statistica l Units . Statistica l Uni t 1 (SU1 ) include s th e previousl y define dsubarea s A , B , D , an dE , o r th e area s withi nth e Cit y o f Leadvill e an dStringtown . Statistica l Uni t 2 (SU2 ) include s subarea s C , F , an dG , o r

th e area s o f

Wes t Park , Lak e For

k Mobil e Hom e Park

an dothe r

outlyin g neighborhoods . Additiona l Dat aEvaluatio n A s discusse dmor e full y i n Sectio n 11 , th e Wor k Grou p ha dpreviousl y recommende dtha t additiona l dat aevaluatio neffort s b e undertake n t o investigat e concern s raise db y th e Independen t Revie w Pane l (IRP ) i n 2003 , includin g th e observatio n a t th e tim e tha t

th e calculate dpercentag e o f th e participant s wit hbloo dlea dlevel s greate r tha n 1 0 an d1 5 (Jg/d L(P1 0 an dP15) , respectively , ha dno t significantl y decline dove r time , particularl y i n Statistica l Uni t 1 . Th e additiona l dat aevaluatio n effor t wa s conducte dan dameetin g wa s hel do n Februar y 2 , 200 6 t o presen t th e results . Th e firs t ste p i n th e proces s wa s t o conduc t ascreenin g leve l assessmen t o f th e correlatio n betwee n pain t

(identifie db y th e IR Pa s th e possibl e dominan t exposur e tha t

ma y b e inhibitin g th e furthe r declin e o f P I 0 an dP1 5 values ) an dbloo dlea dlevels . I n additio n amor e robus t evaluatio n o f

al l trend s an dpaire ddat acollecte db y th e progra mwa s performed . A technica l memorandum , summarizin g th e presentation , discussion s an dconclusion s fro mthi s meeting , ha s bee n prepare dan di s include da s Appendi x Ft o thi s report . A summar y o f th e mai nfinding s presente di n th e Technica l Mem o i s provide d i nsectio n 6. 6 o f

th e report . J:\BLD01\010244\Tas kIOU00 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAU.040406Jo c 3 MFG , InC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Sinc e th e tim e o f

th e IRP' s revie w i n 2003 , th e P I 0 an dP1 5 value s fo r SU 1 hav e decline dan di n fac t hav e no w reache dth e level s establishe da s th e performanc e standard s fo r th e progra mt o determin e complianc e wit hth e Remedia l Actio n Objectives . Environmenta l Progra m Th e environmenta l samplin g an dinvestigatio n progra maddresse s lea dfro msoil , dust , interio r an dexterio r

paint , leade dplumbin g fixture s an dothe r potentia l source s beyon da n individua l residence . An y residen t

o r owne r o f aresidentia l propert y withi nOU 9 ma y reques t a n investigatio n o f

lea dlevel s i n soil , dust , pain t

an ddrinkin g wate r

a t th e property . Durin g 2005 , 9 4 propertie s entere dth e environmenta l program . Th e tota l numbe r o f propertie s enterin g th e progra mt o dat e (sinc e 1995 ) i s 848 . Throug hth e en do f 2005 , atota l o f

29 2 respons e action s (addressin g aspecifi c environmenta l media ) hav e bee n performe da t

23 4 properties . Durin g 2005 , 3 4 respons e action s wer e performe da t 2 8 properties . A mor e detaile dsummar y o f

th e activitie s performe ddurin g 200 5 an dsinc e 199 5 b y th e Environmenta l Program ar e provide di n Section s 2. 0 an d3. 0 o f thi s Annua l Report . Educatio n an d Outreac h A n extensiv e communit y awarenes s an deducatio n progra mt o manag e lea dexposur e a t th e site i s a n integra l par t

o f th e LCCHP . Th e focu s o f th e communit y awarenes s progra mi s t o rais e genera l publi c awarenes s o f

potentia l risk s fro mlead , especiall y risk s t o youn g children , an dt o encourag e participatio n i nth e LCCHP . A summar y o f th e educationa l an doutreac helement s o f th e progra mar e describe di n Sectio n 4.0 . A s describe di n thi s report , th e progra mi s continuall y tryin g t o maintai n an dimprov e th e educationa l material s provide dan dt o exten dth e outreac heffort s t o targe t specifi c group s base do n th e evaluatio n o f

informatio n collecte db y th e program . Bloo d Lea d Monitorin g Progra m Th e LCCH P include s voluntar y bloo dlea dmonitorin g (wit hfinancia l incentives , a s appropriate ) fo r al l childre n ag e 1 2 t o 7 2 month s an dvoluntar y bloo dlea dmonitorin g fo r pregnan t an dnursin g women . A s discusse dpreviously , th e Lak e Count y Healt hDepartmen t provide s bloo dlea dtestin g an d follow-u p cas e managemen t services . Th e bloo dlea dmonitorin g progra mi s availabl e t o al l Lake Count y residents , no t

jus t thos e residin g withi nth e Superfun dboundaries . Becaus e th e overarchin g objectiv e o f th e progra mi s t o reduc e th e bloo dlea dlevel s o f childre n withi nth e Site , th e presentatio n an devaluatio n o f communit y bloo dlea dlevel s i s aprimar y focu s o f thi s report . I n addition , participation , o r th e numbe r

J:\BLD01\OI0244\Tas kIOV2003 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FlNAL.040406A) C 4 MFG , InC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 o f childre n tested , i s tracke dclosel y b y th e program . Th e dat acollecte db y th e bloo dlea dmonitorin g program , i n 200 5 an dpreviou s years , ar e discusse di n Sectio n 6.0 . Th e progra mcontinue s t o enjo y goo dparticipatio n i n th e bloo dlea dmonitorin g program . Durin g 200 5 th e Lak e Count y Healt hDepartmen t teste d41 2 childre n i n Lak e County . Tw o hundred-thirt y si x o f thes e childre n liv e withi nth e Sit e (OU9 ) an d8 3 o f thes e childre n ha dthei r

bloo dlea dleve l teste dfo r th e firs t time . Figure s ES- 1 an dES- 2 presen t th e observe dtrend s o f

progra mparticipatio n throug h2005 , broke n dow n b y Statistica l Uni t an dne w an dreturnin g participant s fo r childre n livin g withi n th e Site . ES- 1 Annua l Participatio n Number s fo rYoun g Childre n Residin g withi n Statistica l Unit s 1 an d 2

20 0 180 -

• O 16 0 V

6 0 - - 4 0 199 4 -* - Statistica l Uni t 1 (Area s A , B , D , E )

-O - Statistica l Uni t 2 (Area s C , F , G )

199 6 199 8 200 0 200 2 200 4



### Yea r

J:\BLDOI\OI0244\Tas k

IOV200 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_nNAL_040406Jo c 

### MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 ES-2 . Annua l Participatio n Number s fo rYoun g Childre n Residin g withi n OU 9

199 4 1996 199 8 2000 200 2 200 4 Yea r -Al l participant

s -Ne wparticipant

s

- Relumin g participant s Figur e ES- 3 graphicall y display s communit y bloo dlea dlevel s ove r tim e i n th e for mo f

geometri c mea n bloo dlea dlevel s fo r al l childre n withi nth e Sit e (OU9 ) an dStatistica l Uni t 1 , a s wel l a s th e tren do f reporte dnationa l averag e bloo dlea dlevel s i n youn g children .



### ES-3 . 1994-200 5 Geometri c Mea n Bloo d Lea d ove rTim e

2 • - NHANE S Reporte d Nationa l Averag e Value s

198 6 198 8 199 0 1992 199 4 199 6 199 8 200 0 200 2 200 4 Yea r

J:\BLDOIVQl0244\Tas k

10\2005 Annua l Reporl\2005AnnualRcport_FINAL_04(M06Joe 6 MFC , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Performanc e Standard s Evaluatio n A summar y o f

th e result s o f

th e performanc e standard s evaluatio ni s presente di n Sectio n 10.0 , wit hsupportin g detail s provide da s i n Appendi x E t o thi s report . On e o f th e performanc e standard s establishe dfo r

th e progra mi s t o tes t

a t leas t 36 0 childre n (18 0 fro meac hStatistica l Unit ) ove r athree
yea r period , wit ha t

leas t 50 % o f th e estimate dnumbe r

o f newl y eligibl e children , o n average , teste deac h year . Althoug hi t

i s difficul t

t o obtai n a n exac t

numbe r o f childre n unde r

th e ag e o f

si x livin g withi n th e sit e a t an y give n time , th e numbe r ha s bee n estimate da t

500 . A newl y eligibl e chil dmean s achil dwh o i s bor n an di s residin g i n th e sit e o r achil dag e 0 t o 7 2 month s wh o move s int o th e site . Th e estimate d numbe r o f newl y eligibl e childre n i n an y give n year i s base dupo n dat afro mth e 200 0 census , annua l live
birt hcount s fro mth e CDPHE , an dth e numbe r o f childre n enrolle di n kindergarte n eac hyear . I n general , th e estimate dnumbe r

o f newl y eligibl e childre n ove r th e las t severa l year s ha s varie dbetwee n approximatel y 5 0 an d100 . Ove r th e pas t fou r year s th e numbe r

o f childre n teste dfo r

th e firs t tim e eac h yea r ha s exceede dth e estimate dnumbe r o f newl y eligibl e childre n withi n OU9 . Whil e th e averag e bloo dlea dlevel s o f al l teste dchildre n an dparticipatio n i n th e progra mar e importan t indicator s o f

th e succes s o f

th e program , th e performanc e o f th e progra mi s evaluated , primarily , i n term s o f

th e number , o r

percentage , o f

childre n wit hbloo dlea dlevel s ove r 1 0 ug/d L (considere delevated ) an d1 5 ug/dL . Severa l uniqu e term s wer e develope da s part o f th e performanc e standard s evaluation . Th e P1 0 refer s t o th e percentag e o f childre n wit hbloo dlea dlevel s abov e 1 0 pg/d L an dth e P I 5 refer s t o th e percentag e o f childre n wit hbloo dlea dlevel s abov e 1 5 pg/dL . Thes e value s ar e calculate db y usin g astatistica l mode l t o predic t th e P1 0 an dP I 5 values , bu t ar e base do n th e actua l dat a fro mth e program . Eac hStatistica l Uni t

mus t mee t th e performanc e standard s individually . Th e goa l i s t o achiev e a P I 0 value , ove r

athree-yea r

period , o f

les s tha n 5 % an daP1 5 o f les s tha n 1% . Statistica l Uni t 2 me t th e performanc e standard s i n 2002 , an dtherefor e n o additiona l evaluatio ni s bein g performed . Th e progra m continue s t o offe r

service s t o resident s o f

SU 2 unti l bot hstatistica l unit s mee t th e performanc e standards . Th e trend s i n P1 0 an dP I 5 value s sinc e 1994 ar e presente dgraphicall y i n Figure s ES- 4 an dES-5 , respectively . A s indicate do n thes e figures , th e progra mobserve dasignifican t declin e i n th e percentag e o f childre n wit helevate dbloo dlea dlevel s sinc e 200 2 resultin g i n adownwar dtren di n predicte dbloo d lea dlevels . Th e 200 5 P1 0 an dP I 5 value s fo r SU 1 (th e Cit y o f

Leadvill e an dStringtown ) wer e 1.5 % an d 0.2% , an dfo r

th e thre e yea r

perio d2003-200 5 4.2 % an d0.8% , respectively . A s illustrate do n Figur e ES
3 , th e 200 5 singl e yea r

P I 0 an dP15ar e th e lowes t observe dsinc e beginnin g th e Kid s Firs t Progra mi n J:\BLD01\010244\TasklO\2005AnnualRepon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_040406Ax : 7 MFG , IllC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 1995 . Th e thre e yea r

combine dvalue s mee t

th e performanc e standard s fo r th e site , thereb y achievin g th e goal s fo r th e LCCHP a s define db y th e RAOs . ES-4 . Percentag e o f

Childre n (0- 6 years ) Statistica l Unit s wit h Bloo d Lea d Leve l > 1 0 Mg/d L

1 4

199 4 199 6 200 4 ES-5 . Percentag e o f

Childre n (0- 6 years ) i n Statistica l Unit s wit h Bloo d Lea d Leve l > 1 5 pg/d L

199 4 199 6 200 4

J:\BLDOl\Ol0244\Tas k

J0\200 5 Annua l Report\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_W0406.do c 8 MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Wit hth e publicatio no f

thi s Annua l Report , th e U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA ) ha s determine dtha t th e remedia l actio n objective s establishe db y th e EP A fo r OU 9 hav e bee n me t fo r al l residentia l area s o f

th e site . A lette r

wil l b e sen t

t o al l resident s an dpropert y owner s withi nth e site , providin g notificatio n tha t Jun e 9 , 200 6 wil l b e th e fina l deadlin e t o reques t environmenta l testin g a t eligibl e propertie s withi n OU9 .

Afte r thi s fina l enrollmen t

period , th e LCCH P wil l transitio n int o amodifie dlea dris k reductio n progra mdesigne dt o hel p maintai nth e progres s mad e i n reducin g children' s bloo dlea dlevel s i n Lak e County . Th e modifie dprogra mwil l likel y continu e th e bloo dlea dmonitorin g progra mfo r youn g childre n an dpregnan t

an dnursin g women ; provid e educatio n t o minimiz e exposur e t o lead ; an dinclud e investigation s o f

propertie s wit hyoun g children . A work pla n i s bein g develope dt o defin e th e scop e an d specific s o f

th e modifie dprogra man donc e th e draft wor k pla n i s complete , EP A wil l announc e aforma l commen t perio dt o allo w th e publi c th e opportunit y t o revie w an dprovid e comment s o n th e plan .

J:\BLDOI\010244VTas kIOG00 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnuolRepon_FINAU.04W06.do c 9 MFG , InC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### 1. 0 INTRODUCTIO N Th e Lak e Count y Communit y Healt hProgra m(LCCHP ) i s th e selecte dremedia l actio n fo r Operabl e Uni t

9 (OU9) , Residentia l Populate dAreas , o f th e Californi aGulc hSuperfun dSit e (th e Site ) (EPA , 1999) . Th e LCCHP , als o know n a s th e Kid s Firs t Program , i s bein g implemente dt o reduc e residen t children' s potentia l exposur e t o lea dfro mvariou s sources , includin g yar dsoil , hous e dust , interio r hous e pain t

an dexterio r

hous e pain t

an ddrinkin g water . Th e LCCH P provide s arang e o f services , includin g environmenta l testin g an dremediatio n a t residentia l propertie s an dbloo dlea dtestin g fo r youn g children , t o assis t

resident s i n reducin g thei r exposur e t o lea di n an daroun dthei r homes . A ful l descriptio n o f

th e service s offere db y th e LCCH P i s include di n th e Work Pla n fo r th e LCCH P (Asarco , 1999) . Owner s an doccupant s o f residence s withi nOU 9 (Figur e 1-1 ) tha t wer e populate do r

zone dfo r residentia l us e a s o f

Septembe r

1 , 1999 , ar e eligibl e t o participat e i n th e LCCH P an dreceiv e th e LCCHP' s environmenta l an dhealt hservices . LCCH P healt hservice s (bloo dlea dtestin g an dappropriat e follow-up ) ar e als o availabl e t o al l Lak e Count y residents , includin g thos e residin g outsid e o f OU9 . Participatio n i n an y aspec t o f th e LCCH P i s voluntary . Th e LCCH P ha s bee n operatin g i n accordanc e wit hth e fina l Wor k Pla n (Asarco , 1999) , sinc e Jun e 2000 . ASARC O Incorporate d(Asarco ) manage dth e LCCH P operation s unti l filin g bankruptc y i n Augus t 2005 . EP A resume doperation s o f th e progra mo n a n interi mbasi s i n Octobe r 2005 . Oversigh t

o f thes e operation s i s provide db y atechnica l workin g group , know n a s th e LCCH P Work Grou p tha t include s representative s fro mth e Colorad o Departmen t o f Publi c Healt han dEnvironmen t (CDPHE) , Lak e Count y an dAsarc o (unti l Augus t 2005) . Th e LCCH P Wor k Grou p review s al l environmenta l dat a an drelease dbloo dlea ddat athe n make s recommendation s t o th e U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA ) fo r remedia l action s a t

individua l propertie s i n accordanc e wit hth e procedure s detaile di n th e Wor k Plan . EP A approva l i s require dfo r al l remedia l action s befor e the y ar e considere dfina l action s a t a property . Consisten t

wit hth e Wor k

Pla n fo r th e LCCHP , th e LCCH P Wor k Grou p i s responsibl e fo r providin g EP A wit ha n annua l repor t t o describ e progra mimplementatio n an dresults . MFG , Inc . ha s prepare dthi s repor t

wit hcontribution s an dfina l approva l fro mth e LCCH P Work Group , t o provid e a descriptio n o f

th e program' s activitie s durin g th e 200 5 calenda r yea r (Januar y 1 throug hDecembe r 31 , 2005) .

J:\BLDOI\010244YTas k10G00

5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon.FTNAL_(M0406ato c1 0 MFG , InC .LCCHP

2005Annual

Report April 2006 

### 2. 0 ENVIRONMENTA L INVESTIGATIO N PROGRA M Durin g th e 200 5 calenda r

year , th e LCCH P continue denvironmenta l investigation s a t residentia l propertie s withi nOU9 . A tota l o f 9 4 propertie s entere dth e environmenta l progra mdurin g 2005 . Sevent y fou r propertie s entere dint o th e progra ma s aresul t o f propert y owner s o r

resident s contactin g th e progra m includin g propert y owner s o f 3 1 undevelope dlot s withi nth e Cit y o f Leadville . Fiv e entrant s were referre dt o th e progra mb y th e Lak e Count y Healt hDepartment , 1 1 entere db y asingl e propert y owne r wit hmultipl e unit s an dfou r entere dthroug hreferral s fro mth e Lak e Count y Buildin g Department . Twent y fou r

o f th e propertie s enterin g th e environmenta l progra mhav e youn g childre n o r apregnan t

o r nursin g woma n residin g a t th e property . A summar y o f th e propertie s enterin g th e LCCH P durin g 2005 , b y area , i s provide di n Tabl e 2-1 . Are aX i s th e designatio n fo r propertie s tha t

ar e withi nOU9 , bu t

no t withi non e o f

th e othe r designate dareas , a s specifie di n Figur e 2-1 . Tabl e 2-1 . Propertie s Enterin g th e LCCHPb y Are ai n 2005 

# m

A B C D E F G X 

### Tota l & , Numbe rEnterin g : •

through" ; , Environmental ^

' fe l Program/Multl f 4 

### Properties/IC O

2 4 9 2 4 9 1 1 3 0 8 9 

### Numbe rReferre d b y

Lak e Count yHealt h Departmen t A ! » 0 0 

### 1 4 0 0 0 0 5 

### Tota l Numbe ro f

Propertie s Enterin g ; i n 200 5 > ;

• ' '•'•' •j/' : : r .-M-??-sW'. ; ,:'-'-' :

2 4 9 3 5 3 1 1 3 0 9 4 

### Statistica l Uni t

2 (SU2) , whic hinclude s are aC , Fan dGme t th e performanc e standard s i n 2002 . Propertie s ca n stil l ente r

th e program , bu t

th e progra mn o longe r

activel y recruit s fro mthes e areas . Propertie s ar e considere dt o hav e entere dth e Progra man dgive n apropert y identificatio n numbe r afte r the y contac t

th e progra man da n initia l intervie w an dsurve y i s scheduled . Acces s fo r samplin g wa s no t obtaine da t

fou r o f th e enterin g propertie s b y th e en do f th e calenda r

year . Th e followin g bullet s describ e th e situation s encountere dfo r th e propertie s wher e acces s wa s no t obtained :

• A t tw o properties , th e residen t a t th e propert y entere dth e program , bu t a s o f th e en do f 200 5 th e propert y owne r

ha dno t responde dt o request s fo r acces s t o conduc t

sampling .

J:\BLDOI\OI0244\Tas k

10\2005 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL040406Jio c 1 1 MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006



### • A t on e property , th e initia l intervie w an dsurve y wa s schedule dbu t th e appointmen t

wa s no t kep t an dth e Programha s been unabl e t o reschedule . • A t on e property , th e owne r

entere dthroug hth e IC O distric t bu t chos e no t t o continu e afte r th e IC O wa s repealed . Tabl e 2- 2 present s th e numbe r o f propertie s wher e environmenta l investigation s were performe d durin g 2005 , b y medi atyp e sampled . Not e tha t no t al l propertie s tha t

entere dth e progra mdurin g 2005 wer e sample dfo r

al l medi adurin g 200 5 an dtha t som e o f th e propertie s tha t

entere dth e progra mdurin g previou s year s wer e investigate ddurin g 2005 . I n addition , no t al l medi aar e sample da t

every property dependin g o n ag e o f

th e structur e an downer/residen t preference . Soi l sample s were collecte dfro m3 0 undevelope dlot s i n Area s B an dD .

Tabl e 2-2 . Environmenta l Investigation s Performe d i n 200 5

Descriptio n Soi l Interio rPain t Exterio rPain t Dus t 

### Wate r 200 5 Total ^ -. : 

### .'v. 9 7 2 5 2 8 3 2 34

J:\BLDOI\010244\Tas k

10\200 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon.FlNAL_040406Jo c 

### 1 2 

### MFC , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### 3. 0 ENVIRONMENTA L REMEDIATIO N PROGRA M Environmenta l remediatio n wa s performe da t residentia l propertie s base do n recommendation s fro mth e LCCH P Work

Grou p an dconsiderin g owner/residen t preferences . Tabl e 3- 1 provide s a remediatio n statu s summar y b y area . Th e numbe r o f propertie s enterin g th e program , th e numbe r o f complete dremedia l action s a t th e en do f

th e calenda r

year , an dasummar y o f

th e type s o f

remediation s performe d(o r

medi aaddressed ) ar e presente dfo r tw o differen t

tim e periods : calenda r

year 200 5 an d total s fo r th e progra mto-dat e fro m199 5 throug h2005 . I n summary , atota l o f 3 4 action s were performe d at 2 8 differen t

propertie s durin g 2005 . I n Augus t 2005 , Asarc o file dfo r

bankruptc y an dfundin g fo r th e progra mwa s disrupted , a s discusse dfurthe r

i n Sectio n 8.0 . A s aresul t o f thi s disruption , n o remediatio n activitie s wer e conducte d betwee n Augus t

1 0 an dOctobe r

10 , 2005 . Afte r

fundin g wa s re-establishe dthroug hth e EP A te n soi l remediation s wer e completed , bu t additiona l work

wa s prohibite db y th e onse t o f winte r weather . Soi l remediatio n wa s complete da t 2 5 propertie s wit hth e followin g Kid s Firs t Property I D Numbers : 012 , 142,423,432 , 492 , 520 , 533 , 540 , 547 , 564 , 567 , 573 , 617 , 619 , 622 , 626 , 647 , 661 , 684 , 695 , 709 , 740 , 805 , 80 6 an d807 . Soi l remediatio n wor k fo r Kid s Firs t

Propert y I D 80 6 wa s conducte db y EPA . Interio r

pain t remediatio n wa s complete da t si x propertie s wit hth e followin g Kid s Firs t Property I D Numbers : 564 , 600 , 647 , 683 , 68 4 an d760 . Dus t remediatio n wa s complete da t thre e propertie s wit h th e followin g Kid s Firs t

Propert y I D Numbers : 600 , 64 7 an d760 . N o exterio r pain t o r wate r remediation s wer e conducte di n 2005 . Tabl e 3-1. 2005 Remediatio n Statu s b y Are a 

# r- - . " 1:35 5 No . o f Propertie s Enterin g Progra m No . o f Propertie s wher e Remedia l Action s wer e performe d i n 200 5 Remediation s Complete d b yTyp e Soi l Dus t Interio rPain t Exterio rPain t Wate r 2 4

1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 P-of p 9 7 5 1 4 0 0 tft&SSiF^' 

## m*m 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 3 1 0 9 2 2 0 0 V 1
- •"+*;••.• 

### i ; 

### -E * 

### 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 S^Vfe , K, El?

V 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 

# #m 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 ftfc«#s*M<: ' I^XJBf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

### TOfl S

QA O" T 2 8 2 5 3 6 0 0

J:\BLDOI\010244\Tas k IOC00 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualReport.FINAL_OI0406A) C 1 3 

### MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Tabl e 3-2 . 1995-200 5 Remediatio n Statu s b y Are a



# ' • No . o f Propertie s Enterin g Progra m No . o f Propertie s wit h Complete d Remedia l Action s Remediation s Complete d b yTyp e Soi l Dus t Interio rPain t Exterio rPain t Wate r A

13 3 4 6 4 2 4 1 0 1 0 B 11 1 3 6 2 2 1 0 1 3 2 1 C 6 7 4 2 1 1 0 0 D 31 6 10 0 9 5 2 1 1 9 1 2 ; ' E •.-'-.' ' 1 5 1 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 

# ^fr ; 17 8 3 6 3 5 4 0 0 2 

## %Mi 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 fil l 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 8 23 4 20 8 3 4 4 2 4 4 Thirt y fiv e o f

th e propertie s investigate ddurin g 200 5 ha dn o exceedance s o f th e trigge r

criteri a fo r an y o f th e medi ainvestigated . Additiona l investigation s wer e stil l pendin g a t th e en do f

th e year o r th e LCCH P Work

Grou p wa s stil l i n th e proces s o f determinin g th e recommende dactio n a t som e o f th e propertie s enterin g th e progra mi n 2005 . Becaus e th e progra mi s acontinuall y evolvin g proces s i t i s difficul t t o quantif y th e numbe r

o f propertie s unde r

eac hscenari o a t

th e year' s end . A s discusse di n Sectio n 2.0 , som e propertie s initiall y counte da s 'entering ' th e Progra mdi dno t continu e throug hwit h environmenta l investigations . I n som e case s thes e propertie s ma y re-ente r th e progra ma t

alate r dat e unde r ne w ownershi p o r

wit hdifferen t

residents , o r

apropert y ma y re-ente r

th e progra mwhe n additiona l medi aar e investigated . Fo r example , resident s i n amobil e hom e par k tha t ha s undergon e soi l investigatio nan dremediatio n i n apreviou s year , ma y contac t th e progra mfo r

dus t an dwate r

samplin g th e followin g year . Thi s propert y woul db e counte da s enterin g th e progra mi n eac hyear , bu t woul donl y b e adde dt o th e cumulativ e tota l once . Tabl e 3- 2 attempt s t o maintai nacoun t o f th e tota l numbe r

o f propertie s tha t

hav e entere dth e progra man di s adjuste deac hyea r s o tha t propertie s ar e no t

counte dtwic e i n th e cumulativ e totals . Fo r thi s reason , th e number s totale di n previou s year s canno t alway s b e simpl y adde dt o th e curren t

year' s totals . Durin g 2005 , th e LCCH P Wor k Grou p requeste dapprova l fro mth e EP A o f fina l remedia l action s fo r 3 5 properties . A publi c revie w documen t prepare db y th e LCCH P Work Grou p wa s mad e availabl e fo r publi c revie w an dcommen t on e tim e durin g th e year , i n May . Thi s publi c revie w documen t present s th e result s o f

lea dsamplin g a t

eac hpropert y reviewe db y th e Wor k Group , th e recommendation s mad e b y th e Wor k Group , an dwher e a n actio n wa s recommended , present s adescriptio n o f th e respons e action(s) . A 30-da y revie w an dcommen t perio dwa s announce dthroug hloca l newspape r advertisement s an da publi c meetin g wa s hel do n Jun e 2 , 2005 . N o comment s wer e receive ddurin g th e publi c commen t period . EP A approve dal l o f th e recommendation s mad e b y th e LCCH P Wor k Grou p durin g 2005 . Fina l remedia l action s wer e approve do n Jun e 21 , 200 5 fo r Kid s Firs t

Propert y Numbers : 116 , 223 , 398,431 , J:\BLD01\OI0244\Tas k

KA2005 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_04(M06A) c 1 4 MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 451 , 606 , 678 , 680 , 696 , 713 , 714 , 721 , 722 , 723 , 724 , 725 , 726 , 727 , 728 , 729 , 730,731 , 732 , 733 , 734 , 735 , 736,737 , 739 , 741 , 742 , 743 , 745,74 7 an d750 . Th e LCCH P Wor k Grou p meeting s were mad e publi c fo r environmenta l informatio n i n 2005 . N o comment s wer e provide dt o th e Work Grou p regardin g recommendation s discusse da t th e meetings . Publi c revie w document s wil l continu e t o b e prepare dt o solici t publi c comment s o n Work Grou p recommendations .

J:\BLDOI\010244\Tas kIOV20Q 5 Annua l Report\2005AnnualReponJTNAU_W0406.do c1 5 MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 4. 0 EDUCATIO N AN D COMMUNIT Y OUTREAC H PROGRA M Th e educationa l subcommitte e fro mth e LCCH P Wor k Grou p me t

o n Apri l 21 , 2005 t o continu e implementatio n o f

recommendation s fo r

educatio n an dcommunit y outreach . Consisten t wit hth e objective s describe di n th e Wor k Plan , th e fundamenta l objectiv e o f th e program' s outreac heffort s i s t o reac hever y eligibl e participan t i n th e communit y t o infor mthe mo f th e program' s service s an dencourag e the mt o participate . Th e followin g educatio n an doutreac hmaterial s wer e prepare ddurin g 2005 :

• A Lak e Count y bloo dlea dprogra minformatio n flye r an dane w flye r

discussin g lea di n foreig n candy . Copie s o f thes e item s ar e provide di n Appendi x A . • Ne w newspape r

advertisements . • Tw o letter s t o encourag e participatio n i n th e environmenta l progra mwer e develope ddurin g 2005 , bu t neithe r lette r wa s distributed . I t

wa s decide dt o us e th e letters , a s needed , i f an d whe n participatio n bega n t o decline . On e lette r target s familie s wit hyoun g childre n an dth e othe r lette r target s propert y owner s i n specifi c area s o f th e site . Th e progra massiste di n th e organizatio n o f th e fort hannua l Children' s Healt h& Safet y Fai r i n collaboratio n wit hEarl y Childhoo dConnections/Chil dFind , th e Lak e Count y Healt hDepartment , Hea d Start , St . Vincent' s Hospital , an dBuildin g A Generatio n an dothe r communit y groups . Th e purpos e o f th e fai r wa s t o expos e parents/guardian s o f childre n age s 0- 8 year s ol dt o group s an dagencie s tha t provid e service s t o childre n i n th e community . Approximatel y 27 4 childre n attende dth e fair , whic hwa s hel do n Apri l 9 , 2005 . Th e LCCHP wa s represente db y staf

f fro mbot hth e bloo dlea dmonitorin g an denvironmenta l portion s o f th e Program . Th e Progra mfeature da n interactiv e displa y encouragin g childre n t o was hthei r hands . Th e informatio n wa s presente dbothi n Spanis han dEnglish . Magneti c pictur e frame s wer e give n t o familie s a t th e en do f

th e display . Th e LCCH P als o provide dlog o boo k bag s an dwate r

bottle s t o participant s an dvolunteer s t o improv e th e visibilit y o f

th e progra mwithi nth e community . Th e environmenta l progra mparticipate di n th e firs t Asset s Exp o fo r

Lak e Count y i n October . Th e Exp o wa s hel da t

th e Minin g Museu mt o provid e businesse s an dgroup s aforu mt o displa y thei r services . Th e attendanc e wa s significantl y bette r tha n expecte dan dprovide da n opportunit y t o discus s th e progra mwit hare aresidents .

J:\BLDOIV010244\TasklO\200 5 Annua l Rcpon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_040«6Jo c1 6 MFG , IllC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 I n anticipatio n o f

th e IC O distric t

apubli c meeting , apres s releas e an dafac t shee t wa s develope d t o explai n th e ne w ordnance . Th e buildin g departmen t me t wit hloca l realtors , th e titl e compan y an dlocal bank s t o explai n th e ICO . Loca l utilitie s wer e contacte dan dmeeting s wer e arrange dt o discus s th e IC O an dsaf e wor k practices . Additiona l outreac heffort s included :

• Distributio n o f

th e previousl y develope dprogra mbrochures . • Individua l counselin g wit hparticipant s i n th e bloo dlea dan denvironmenta l program s durin g face-to-fac e meetings . • Coordinatio n wit hothe r communit y agencie s an dprogram s providin g service s t o familie s wit hyoun g childre n (Socia l Services , WIC , Hea dStart , Medicaid , Earl y Childhoo dCouncil , Earl y Childhoo dConnection s (Par t C) , Chil dFin d(Part

B) )

• Presentation s t o communit y group s t o provid e a n overvie w o f th e progra man dt o discus s th e program' s progress . • Publi c meetin g t o presen t th e 2004 Annua l Report . • Provide dbrochure s o n lea dris k reductio n t o daycare/preschoo l facilities . • Bilingua l newspape r

advertisement s an darticle s encouragin g participatio n i n th e bloo dlea d progra man dth e environmenta l program . Tabl e 4-1 , below , identifie s th e targe t group s se t

fort hi n th e Work

Plan an dth e outreac htool s tha t hav e bee n develope dan dimplemente dt o dat e fo r eac hgroup . Th e Progra mcontinue dt o focu s outreac heffort s o n familie s wit hyoun g childre n wit ha secondar y emphasi s o n th e group s eligibl e t o participat e i n th e LCCHP , includin g resident s withou t youn g childre n an dal l othe r propert y owner s withi nOU9 . Th e buildin g department , lan dus e offic e an d loca l rea l estat e office s continu e t o refe r curren t an dpotentia l propert y owner s t o th e Program . Th e educationa l subcommitte e wil l conven e i n 200 6 t o discus s th e directio n fo r outreac heffort s an dbegi n th e fina l notificatio nproces s t o resident s withi nStatistica l Uni t 1 (SU1) .

J:\BLDOI\010244\Tas kIOV300 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepoit.FINAI^O«M06jlo c1 7 MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Tabl e 4-1 . 200 5 Educatio n an d Outreac h Progra m Summar y

200 5 Outreac h Effor t o r Tobi l 

# s Educatio n an d Outreach , Targe t Grou p

H fe S I I O ; .c . | (D ; '55 ; 0 ) IT 

# IT - S' S ( 0 ff l ® o o c 2 o o <" • o 9
-

wc C ( 0 •0 ;

T O ( 0

- 

### I Notes/Comments^S " Informatio n flyer/foreig n cand y poster s Poste d a t th e pos t office, preschools , healt h department , th e middl e schoo l an d loca l businesses . Children' s Healt h & Safet yFai r Attendanc e t o 27 4 childre n Asse t Exp o Attendanc e o f ove r25 0 individual s Pictur e Frame s Distributed t o familie s a t th e Fai ran d throug h th e Bloo d Lea d Progra m IC O fac t sheet , publi cmeetin g an d newspape r advertisement s X Bib s Distributed t o familie s wit h newborn s Buildin g Dept . referenc e librar

y wit h EPA/HU D brochure s
Coordinate d wit h othe ragencie s an d group s Coordinatio n wit h Socia l Services , WIG , Hea d Start , Medicaid , Earl yChildhoo d Council , Earl yChildhoo d Connection s (Par

t C) , Chil d Fin d (Par t B) , Nurs e Famil y Partnership , Privat e Daycar e licensin g an d th e Lak

e Count yInteragency Roundtabl e (LIAR) . Presentation s t o communit ygroup s Continue d targetin g familie s wit h youn g children . Als o reachin g communityleaders an d agencies . Publi cmeetin g fo r th e 200 4 Annua l 

### Repor t Informatio n Packet s fo rHea d Start Distribute d 7 0 packet s

J:\BLD01\010244\Tas k

10\200 5 Annua l Report\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_(VI0406Jo c 1 8 

### MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Welcom e brochur e Lea d Source s Brochure/Tip s fo r Hom e Cleanin g Brochur e Individua l counselin g Brochure s at preschools/daycar e Newspape r advertisement s X

X X

X X X X X X X X X

X X

X Distribute d throug h th e

environmenta l progra m an d realit yoffices . Distribute d t o 9 4 familie s throug h environmenta l progra m

3 8 individua l advertisement s fo rth e bloo d lea d progra m an d th e environmenta l program .

J:\BLDOIWI0244\Tas k

]0\200 5 Annua l ReponV2005AnnualRepon.FINAL_040406Ax : 

### 1 9 MFC , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### 5. 0 HEP A

VACUU M

LOA N PROGRA M Th e LCCH P currentl y ha s fiv e commercial-grad e HEPA vacuum s an dtw o residential-grad e HEPA vacuums . Th e commercial-grad e vacuum s ar e availabl e throug hth e vacuu mloa n progra mt o provid e resident s wit hacces s t o high-qualit y vacuum s fo r us e whe n conductin g remodelin g work o r a thoroug hcleanin g o f

thei r home . Th e residential-grad e vacuum s ar e provide dt o resident s a t th e directio n o f th e LCCH P Work

Group . HEPA vacuu mloan s d o no t constitut e dus t

respons e actio n t o addres s lea d concentration s i n dus t

abov e th e program' s trigge r level . Durin g 2005 , 1 9 differen t familie s checke dou t

th e commercia l vacuums . Th e checkou t duratio n varie dfro mon e da y t o on e mont han dmultipl e times , dependin g o n th e resident' s individua l needs . Th e residential-grad e vacuum s ar e use dfo r long-ter mloa n t o individua l families . On e famil y ha dlong-ter m us e o f aresidential-grad e vacuu mdurin g 200 5 t o us e whil e waitin g fo r soi l remediatio n an ddus t abatemen t

respons e action s t o b e completed . Ther e ar e n o youn g childre n residin g a t th e property .

J:\BLDOI\OI0244\Tas k10\200S Annua l Report\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_W0406.do c2 0 MFG , InC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### 6. 0 BLOO D LEA D MONITORIN G PROGRA M
A s par t o f th e LCCHP , th e Lak e Count y Healt hDepartmen t provide s bloo dlea dtestin g an d follow-u p cas e managemen t service s t o Lak e Count y familie s wit hyoun g children . Th e result s fro mth e 200 5 blood-lea dmonitorin g progra mar e describe di n thi s section . 6. 1 Participatio n I n 2005 , 41 2 childre n betwee n th e ages o f 6 an d7 2 month s an dresidin g i n Lak e Count y participate di n th e Count y bloo dlea dmonitorin g progra mb y receivin g a t leas t on e bloo dlea dtest . O f thos e participants , 23 6 reside dwithi n th e OU 9 boundaries . Eighty-thre e (83 ) o f th e OU 9 childre n wer e first-tim e participant s i n th e bloo dlea dmonitorin g progra man d15 3 wer e returnin g fo r follow-u p tests . Ther e wer e als o 5 9 first-tim e teste dchildre n fro moutsid e th e OU 9 are a(Are aH) . Tabl e 6- 1 list s number s o f

participatin g childre n b y subarea , an dFigur e 6- 1 map s th e numbe r o f childre n participatin g fro meac hsubare adurin g 2005 . Tabl e 6- 1 aan d6-l b presen t participatio n number s fo r th e previou s years , 2004 an d2003 , respectively . A tota l o f 31 2 familie s participate di n th e bloo dlea dprogra mdurin g 200 5 b y havin g on e o r mor e childre n teste dfo r

bloo dlead . A tota l o f

37 3 saving s bond s ($5 0 valu e each ) an d30 4 gif t certificate s ($2 5 each ) fo r

Safeway ® wer e distribute dt o thes e participatin g familie s a s par t o f th e incentiv e progra m fo r bloo dleadtesting . Tabl e 6-1 . 200 5 Bloo d Lea d Testin g Progra m Participatio n (age s 6 t o 7 2 months ) Number s o f Childre n Participatin g b y Are a 

## fr ~ "" . ":r : 

## :- r- . ••'..'•••.- • 

# i H^^^^^^^HH^^^B^I^HHH^HHHIHHIIBH^SH^^^K^^W^^MM^ I Tota l Participatio n First Tes t i n 200 5 

# woD^mmm^wm^imim^^m^' m- m- :: 

# ~'m - 23 6 8 3 3 2 2 4 6 9 5 5 3 3 3 2 0 0 1 3 9 1 8 2 8 1 8 6 0 h ' rt ;; ' ' 17 6 5 9 !•»;-•>'-*' . : ; ;'-*,•.. , •'. ' Total; , fLake S Count y 41 2 142

J:\BLDOIW10244\Tas k

J0\200 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnuolRepon_FINAL_O10406A) C 

### 2 1 

### MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Tabl e 6-la . 200

4 Bloo d Lea d Testin g Program Participatio n (ages 6 to 7 2 months ) Number s o f Childre n Participatin g b y Are a ,_

. . f Tota l 'anticipatio n Firs t Tes t i n 200 4 OU 9

26 1 9 4 . •. , . ; . . . , . -. ' v..;. ; ..;i;::=if . J^' i



### ••. . ' •: . ';-i

,-;/. ;;;f;^j| | gp ;

. . . J ."" ' -'-•' , v~ : - ••>•-• * "*?- H f* . I A B C D E : ...•' •; •RMSv-G^lKXa : 3 2 2 0 8 4 7 2 5 35 * 1 3 0 1 3 7 3 5 2 3 2 9 5 0 ; -, : f" x i~;- x • - ^&^ ^•-''•v^'^- J ,* - 3?Hl : i- ; 15 4 5 6 ^ v*'!« f ,?<".'"• ; ^vlofal ^ *" : 'l!afct?*> '<• ' ..I^H.'^T?.^- : ^GlpUnty? : 415 * 15 0 * Include s on e chil dwh o wa s tested , bu t th e resul t wa s no t use dwhe n generatin g th e statisti c evaluations , se e Sectio n 6.3 . Tabl e 6-lb . 200 3 Bloo d Lea d Testin g Progra m Participatio n (age s 6 t o 7 2 months )

Number s o f

Childre n Participatin g b y Are a

' ; •' ' ; . \.--' . Tota l Participatio n Firs t Tes t i n 200 3 OU 9

24 4 10 4 *~\ . . . * x 1 A B CD E F< G X 2 5 2 1 7 7 7 0 3 3 3 1 3 2 1 3 8 3 5 2 9 1 1 1 5 2 _, , - « ^ ^ H « f 145 6 3 Total s ^'Lak e / County ^ 389 * 16 7 * Include s tw o childre nwh o wer e tested , bu t th e result s wer e no t

use dwhe n generatin g th e statisti c evaluations , se e Sectio n 6.3 . 6. 2 Dat aRevie w an d Compilatio n Th e Lak e Count y Healt hDepartmen t provide s ayear-to-dat e summar y o f bloo dlea dtes t

result s t o th e LCCHP Wor

k Grou p a t eac hWor

k Grou p Meeting , a s a n automate dfunctio n o f thei r database . Th e purpos e o f

thi s repor t

i s t o assis t

th e Work Grou p i n trackin g bloo dlea dlevel s throughou t th e year . Th e Healt hDepartment' s en do f yea r summar y fo r

200 5 i s include dfo r

referenc e a s Appendi x B t o thi s report . Sinc e th e progra mi s acontinuall y evolvin g process , individua l children' s bloo dlea dlevel s ma y var y throughou t

th e year . Th e Healt hDepartmen t repor t track s al l childre n i n th e bloo dlea dprogram , an dma y includ e childre n whos e bloo dlea ddat ai s exclude dfro mbloo dlea dstatistica l summarie s presente di n thi s Annua l Report . Dat ama y b e exclude deithe r becaus e achild' s bloo dlea dleve l wa s believe dt o b e th e resul t

o f lea dexposur e prio r

t o movin g t o th e area , o r becaus e th e sourc e o f

thei r bloo d lea dwa s identificie da s bein g outsid e o f th e contro l o f

th e LCCHP . Fo r

2005 , n o childre n ha dbloo dlea d dat aexclude dfro mth e bloo dlea dsummarie s presente di n thi s report . A serie s o f

additiona l dat arevie w an dcompilatio n step s wer e followe dt o provid e th e workin g dat ase t fo r thi s report' s evaluatio n o f communit y bloo dlea dlevel s (BLLs ) durin g 2005 . Thes e steps , J:\BLD01\0102<W\Tas k

J0\200 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAU_(M0406A) C 

### 2 2 

### MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 provide dbelow , ar e consisten t wit hth e procedure s develope db y EP A i n 199 7 (Brattin , 1997 ) an d adopte dfo r

genera l us e b y th e Kid s Firs t Progra m(predecesso r

t o th e LCCHP ) i n 1999 :

• Test s o n childre n ag e 6 t o 7 2 months , inclusive , a t th e tim e o f

testin g ar e include di n dat aset . • Test s fo r

childre n residin g withi nOU 9 fo r les s tha n 3 month s ar e exclude dfro mth e dat aset . • Fo r capillar y test s tha t

ar e followe db y avenipunctur e tes t withi n3 0 days , onl y th e resul t fro mth e confirmator y venipunctur e tes t i s retaine di n th e dat aset . • Fo r childre n wit hmor e tha n on e tes t resul t durin g th e year , a n arithmeti c annual-averag e bloo dlea dleve l (BLL ) i s computed . • Annual-averag e BLL s ar e use dt o comput e bloo dlea dstatistic s b y area . • Th e statisti c use dt o describ e centra l tendenc y i s th e geometri c mean . • Age s assigne dt o eac htes t resul t ar e th e ag e a t

tim e o f testing . • Age s assigne dt o annual-averag e tes t result s ar e th e averag e o f age s a t eac htes t tha t year . • First-tim e teste dchildre n ar e thos e no t previousl y teste db y th e Lak e Count y bloo dlea d program . Wit hrespec t

t o th e us e o f

capillar y tes t

results , describe di n th e thir dbulle t above , aslightl y differen t procedur e wa s adopte di n 2002 . Capillar y tes t result s ar e stil l exclude dfro mth e calculatio n o f th e individual , annua l averag e bloo dlea dlevels , i n favo r o f venipunctur e result s whe n th e capillar y tes t i s confirme db y avenipunctur e tes t withi n3 0 days . However , othe r capillar y tes t

results , whic har e no t followe dwithi n3 0 day s b y aconfirmator y venipunctur e test , ar e use di n calculatin g individual , annua l averag e bloo dlea dlevels . I n addition , eac hyea r

astatistica l analysi s o f

th e bloo dlea ddat ai s performe dt o determin e th e distributio n o f

th e data , t o allo w calculatio n o f appropriat e statistica l measure s t o describ e an devaluat e th e availabl e bloo dlea ddata . Statistica l test s ar e use dt o determin e whethe r th e dat afal l int o anorma l distributio n (i.e. , th e distributio n o f dat aca n b e represente db y asymmetrica l bel l shape dcurv e whe n plotted ) o r

non-norma l (i.e. , nonparametric ) distribution . Onc e th e distributio n o f th e dat ai s determined , statistic s ca n b e calculate dt o describ e th e centra l tendenc y o f th e dat a(th e numbe r

tha t represent s th e cente r o f th e distribution ) an dt o describ e ho w th e dat adeviat e fro mthi s centra l value . Thi s informatio n i s use dt o tes t

hypothese s abou t

whethe r th e collecte dbloo dlea ddat aindicat e th e RAO s establishe dfo r th e LCCHP hav e bee n met . Biomonitorin g data , suc ha s bloo dlea dvalue s withi nates t population , ofte n fal l approximatel y int o wha t i s calle dalog-norma l distribution , meanin g th e logarithm s o f th e bloo dlea dvalue s (o r log
transforme dvalues ) ar e approximatel y normall y distributed . Statistica l test s ar e conducte deac hyear a s par t o f th e LCCH P annua l repor t proces s t o confir mth e distributio no f th e bloo dlea ddatase t

an dt o J:\BLD01\D10244\Tas kIO\200J Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_W0406.<lo c2 3 MFG , InC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 determin e th e appropriat e metho dt o us e t o selec t tes t statistic s t o compar e th e progra mbloo dlea ddat at o th e progra mperformanc e standards . Fo r norma l o r

lognorma l distributions , amea n o r geometri c mea n i s use dt o calculat e th e centra l tendenc y value , an dastandar ddeviatio n o r geometri c standar ddeviatio n i s use dt o describ e th e dispersio n fro mth e mean . I f th e dat afal l int o anon-norma l distribution , amedia n i s calculate dan duse da s th e centra l tendenc y value . Th e media n i s th e poin t o n th e distributio n o f

dat a wher e hal f

o f th e value s ar e abov e tha t numbe r an dhal f o f th e value s ar e belo w it . Fo r eac ho f th e dat aset s compile dt o describ e communit y BLL s withi n OU9 , o r an y subare ao f OU9 , ates t

fo r normalit y (Shapir o Wilk s tes t fo r normalit y a t

95 % confidenc e level ) wa s applie dt o determin e th e actua l dat adistribution . I n 2005 , th e bloo dlea ddat aset s fo r Subarea s A , B , C , D , an dSU 1 ar e log-normall y distributed ; Subarea s E , F , an dGdisplaye dnorma l dat adistribution . Th e 200 5 bloo d lea ddat aset s fo r

subare aH , OU 9 an dLak e Count y ar e non-normall y distributed . Th e tes t result s fo r

al l o f th e subare adat asets , a s wel l a s th e combine ddat aset s fo r OU 9 an dSU 1 ar e include di n Appendi x C . Summar y statistic s fo r

eac hsubare adat ase t

(median , geometri c mean , geometri c standar ddeviation , 9 5 percen t uppe r confidenc e limi t

o n mea n an d25th , an d75thpercentiles ) ar e als o include di n Appendi x C . 6. 3 200 5 Communit y Bloo d Lea d Level s Tabl e 6- 2 present s asummar y o f th e bloo dlea dmonitorin g result s ove r th e pas t thre e year s fo r

al l childre n withi nth e Sit e (OU9), al l childre n withi nStatistica l Uni t 1 (SU1) , an dal l childre n teste dresidin g outsid e o f th e Sit e (Are aH) . Presente di n th e tabl e ar e th e numbe r o f childre n teste dwithi n eac h geographi c area , th e arithmeti c mea n o r geometri c mea n BLL , th e median , th e standar ddeviatio n o r geometri c standar ddeviatio n (GSD) , th e numbe r o f childre n wit hannual-averag e BLL s betwee n 1 0 an d 14. 9 u:g/dL , an dth e numbe r o f childre n wit haBL Labov e 1 5 uvg/dL . Th e 200 5 BL Ldat aset s fo r Are aH an dOU 9 wer e no t

normall y distributed . Fo r thi s reason , media n value s ar e presente dfo r compariso n o f 2005 , 2004 , an d200 3 BL Ldata . I n bot hTable s 6- 2 an d6- 3 th e geometri c mea n i s presente dwhe n th e dat arepresente di s log-normall y distribute dan dth e arithmeti c mea n (o r average ) i s presente dwhe n th e distributio n o f

th e dat arepresente di s eithe r norma l o r

not-norma l (Se e Appendi x C) . Th e 200 5 media n BL Lvalu e fo r

OU 9 wa s 2. 8 u,g/d

L(Tabl e 6-2) . Durin g 2005 , n o childre n wh o reside di n OU 9 ha da n annual-averag e BL Lgreate r tha n o r equa l t o 1 0 pg/d

L an dn o childre n ha da n annual-averag e BL Labov e 1 5

J:\BLDOI\OI0244\Tas kI0\2005 Annua l Report\2005AnnualReport_FINAL_W0406.do c2 4 MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### Tabl e 6-2 . Annua l Bloo dLea dMonitorin g Result s (200 3 - 2005 )

**" T}<i"**>t'- ' J f t i » " £**$$£&& 

# ; 1 200 5 - OU 9 200 4 - OU 9 200 3 - OU 9 200 5 - SU 1 200 4 - SU 1 200 3 - SU 1 200 5 - Are a H 200 4 - Are a H 200 3 - Are a H 5 j " • • : -': ; ;•;':'* ' ' : .. . '•"••'^•i'5-f^V-'"''.. - • ' • • - . -i^ . '••-•. .•'-;-y." •,-•.•: ' " *• - « Compariso n o f Annua l Bloo d Lea d Statistic s N 23 6 26 1 24 2 11 4 12 8 11 8 17 6 15 4 14 5 Mean/Geo .

Mea n 3.12 * 3.98 * 3.91 * 3.0 1 4.46 * 3.7 5 2.83 * 3.0 5 3.0 9 '•'••• •• \ '•• Media n 2. 8 3. 6 3. 3 3. 0 4. 2 3. 5 2. 4 3. 1 3. 0 SD/GS D

1.7 9 2.3 9 2.5 3 1.7 4 2.6 6 1.84 1.87 2.4 4 1.78 n=10-14. 9



### pg/d L 0 3 5 0 3 5 3 2 2 n>15^g/d L

0 1 1 0 

### 1 1 0 

## 1 0

* Bloo dlea ddat awer

e non-normall y distribute dan dtherefore , acompariso n o f media n value s ma y b e mor e appropriate . Mea n value s denote dwit ha n asteris k i n thi s tabl e ar e th e arithmeti c mean . Pleas e se e Appendi x C fo r mor e details . 

### Tabl e 6- 3 present s th e numbe r o f childre ntested , mea no r

geometri c mea n BLL , media nBLL , an dnumbe r

o f childre nwit ha n annual-averag e BL Lgreate r tha no r equa l t o 1 0 |ig/d

L an dles s tha n 1 5 JJg/dL , an dnumbe r

o f childre n wit ha n annual-averag e BL Lgreate r tha no r equa l t o 1 5 (J-g/dL , broke n dow n b y subarea . Th e sam e subare adat aar e presente dgraphically , usin g bo x an dwhiske r plot s (showin g 5th , 10th , 25th , 50th , 75th , 90than d95thpercentiles) , o n Figur e 6- 2 t o allo w fo r direc t compariso n o f

th e distributio no f

BLL s i n th e variou s subareas . Tabl e 6-3 . 200 5 Bloo d Lea d Statistics , b y Are a
Mean/del^ : Mean ! | rMedian * n>1 5 3 2 

### 2.8 9 2.9 5 B 2 4 2.6 4 2. 7

6 9 2.1 8 2. 3 5 5 3.3 0 3. 2

2.6 3 3. 0 3 3 2.5 9 3. 7 2 0 

### 2.5 1 2.3 5

J:\BLDOI\OI0244\Tas k

I0\200 5 Annua l Repcm\2005AnnualReport_FINAL_040406.do c 

### 2 5 MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Tabl e 6-3a . 200 4 Bloo d Lea d Statistics , b y Are a •&•&:>';,'- Area ; A B C D E F G X aS :: ->'- - : . ••'•>. . 200 4 Bloo d Lea d Statistics'bVAi4^^i|S|BSffiiilH^ S

N 3 2 2 0 84 7 2 5 3 5 1 3 0 Mean/Geo . Mea n

4.1 3 3.3 2 3.5 4 4.7 7 2.9 4 3.1 1 2.5 5

~ Media n

3. 8 3. 4 3.3 5 4.8 5 2. 7 2.9 5 2. 7

- - •n=10-14.9 v gg/dl!3 p

1 0 0 2 0 0 0

- - IWn'MSTtig/dE^I ^

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 •• Tabl e 6-3b . 200 3 Bloo d Lea d Statistics , b y Are a
Are a A B C D E F G X ; - ••- . " i : - ";•'• •'f~-;-f^:^~^y'^S(':iS^^!^- lf <K"~iX

f ' f ,' .••••.;•.••• •200 3 Bloo d Lea d Statistic s by'Arei^^ M ^KS^iMN 2 5 2 1 7 7 6 9 3 3 2 1 3 2 Mean/Geo . Mea n

3.6 2 2.4 5 3.3 8 4.2 5 5.6 3 3.6 1 2.3 7 2.6 5 Media n

3. 6 2. 5 3. 3 4. 1 4. 0 3. 3 2. 6

- n=10-14.9pg/dli% !

1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Ja.vy'-iv0 ' ; "j'i^w-'i^ f iji i fcz. f * r s<, |ft.:ns>1; 5 :pg/dli?;y^ 0 0 0 

## 1 0 0 0 0 Participatio n i n th e progra mvarie dthroughou t th e year . Th e numbe r

o f participant s increase d durin g th e month s o f

Ma y throug hSeptember , a s i s show n i n Figur e 6-3 . Figur e 6- 3 als o show s tha t June , July , an dAugus t

ha dth e highes t

percentag e o f

participation . Th e Healt hDepartmen t focuse dthei r outreac han drecruitmen t

effort s i n th e summe r

an dfal l becaus e exposure s t o outdoo r source s o f

lea dar e likel y t o b e highes t

durin g th e summe r

months , an dBLL s ar e expecte dt o b e a t thei r highes t durin g lat e summe r an dearl y fall . I n additio n t o th e participatio n o f youn g childre n describe dabove , 3 8 adul t resident s o f

Lake Count y ha dbloo dlea dtestin g durin g 2005 . Th e averag e Lak e Count y bloo dlea dleve l fo r adult s wa s 2.3 7 }ig/d Lan dth e maximu mwa s 26.6 3 |ig/d L fro msubare aH . Include di n th e 3 8 adult s teste dwere 3 1 pregnan t wome n wit ha n averag e BL Lo f 1.7 8 jig/dL an d7 nursin g mother s wit ha n averag e BL Lo f 4.9 9 Hg/dL .

J:\BLDOI\OI0244VTas k

10\2005 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FlNAL_040406.do c 

### 2 6 MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 6. 4 Compariso n o f

Bloo d Lea d Level s Amon g Group s Severa l bo x an dwhiske r

plot s wer e compile dt o graphicall y displa y th e BLL s fo r differen t group s o f childre n residin g withi nOU 9 an dallo w fo r compariso n amon g thos e groups . Plot s wer e als o prepare d t o depic t thi s dat ab y subare ao r

statistica l unit . Onl y dat aset s wit haminimu mo f fiv e value s were include do n th e bo x an dwhiske r plots . Figur e 6- 4 display s th e BLL s fo r childre n residin g withi n OU 9 groupe db y ag e i n years . Figur e 6-4 adisplay s th e BLL s fo r childre n groupe db y ag e i n year s an db y subarea . Anothe r ag e compariso n o f BLL s i s show n i n Figur e 6-5 , whic hshow s th e distributio n o f BLL s groupe db y subare aan dstatistical unit , wit hdat adisplaye dfo r tw o ag e groups ; age s 0-3 5 month s an d36-7 2 month s old . Figur e 6- 6 show s BLL s durin g month s whe n childre n ar e mor e likel y t o b e outsid e (Jun e t o October ) compare dwit hmonth s whe n the y ar e mor e likel y t o b e insid e (Novembe r t o May) . Thes e dat a ar e presente dfo r

al l o f OU 9 an dfo r

SU 1 only . A compariso n o f

BLL s fo r childre n i n th e Medicai dprogra m( n = 96 ) an dchildre n no t i n th e Medicai dprogra m( n = 140 ) i n OU 9 i s show n o n Figur e 6-7 . SU 1 data , als o presente do n Figur e 6-7 , sho w 4 2 childre n wer e Medicai dparticipant s an d7 2 wer e not . I n 200 5 th e geometri c means , media n an d 75* , 90 th , an d95 t hpercentil e value s fo r

th e Medicai dparticipant' s dat awer e lowe r tha n thos e sam e value s fo r Non-Medicai dparticipants . Prio r t o 2004 th e geometri c mean , an dth e dat aset s i n general , wer e slightl y highe r

fo r Medicai dparticipant s whe n compare dwit hnon-Medicai dparticipants . Thes e sligh t variations , o r

fluctuations , ma y indicat e tha t Medicai dparticipatio n i s no t ademographi c indicato r tha t i s strongl y relate dt o achild' s potentia l lea dexposur e fo r thi s area . O f th e childre n participatin g i n th e bloo dlea dprogra mfro mOU 9 i n 2005 ; 17 4 wer e fro mhome s wher e Englis hi s th e primar y languag e spoke n an d6 2 wer e fro mhome s wher e Spanis hi s th e primar y languag e spoken . Similarly , i n SU1 , 8 0 childre n teste dwer e fro mhome s wher e Englis hi s th e primar y languag e spoke n an d3 4 wer e fro mhome s wher e Spanis hi s th e primar y languag e spoken . A compariso n o f th e distributio n o f

OU 9 an dSU 1 BLL s b y Family' s Primar y Languag e i s graphicall y presente di n Figur e 6-8 . I n 2005 , th e mean , media n an d75* , 90 * an d95 * percentil e value s wer e lowe r i n Spanish
speakin g participants , compare dt o English-speakin g participant s i n bot hOU 9 an dSU1 . Thi s observatio n i s simila r t o wha t wa s see n i n 2004 , bu t

differen t tha n tha t observe di n 2003 , whe n th e mea n an ddat a distributio nwer e ver y simila r fo r eac ho f th e group s i n OU9 , bu t

i n SU 1 th e mea n fo r

th e Spanis h speakin g participant s wa s slightl y higher . J:\BLDO]V)l02*)\Tas kIO\20Q 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualReport.FINAL^040406jto c2 7 MFG , InC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 6. 5 Relationshi p o f

Bloo d Lea d Level s t o Environmenta l Lea d Concentration s Th e relationshi p betwee n observe dBLL s an dth e lea dconcentration s i n environmenta l medi a characterize dthroug hth e LCCHP environmenta l investigatio n progra mar e discusse di n thi s sectio n an d graphicall y depicte di n anumbe r o f figures . Fo r

thes e comparison s th e firs t bloo dlea dtes t

resul t o f eac h yea r wa s use dfo r

childre n residin g a t

propertie s wher e th e environmenta l tes t dat ao f interes t ar e als o availabl e (paire ddata) . Becaus e no t al l environmenta l medi aar e teste da t eac hproperty , th e numbe r o f dat apoint s use di n eac hcompariso n ma y vary . Fo r eac henvironmenta l mediu mtested , eithe r a maximu mlea dconcentratio n o r acomputed , propert y averag e lea dconcentratio n wa s use di n thes e comparisons , a s indicate do n eac hfigure . Bo x an dwhiske r

plot s presentin g th e distributio n o f first-tes t BLL s fo r group s o f

children , residin g withi nOU9 , categorize db y range s o f propert y averag e 0 t o 6-inc hsoil-lea dconcentratio n ar e presente da s Figur e 6-9 . Th e thre e range s o f averag e soil-lea dconcentration s use dt o grou p th e dat aare : les s tha n1,500 mg/k g (low) ; 1,50 0 t o 3,50 0 mg/K g (medium) ; an dgreate r tha n 3,50 0 mg/K g (high) . 'Figur e 6-9 apresent s th e dat ausin g th e 0 t o 2-inc hpropert y averag e soil-lea dvalues . Thes e figure s indicat e tha t

th e media n bloo dlea dleve l an drang e o f bloo dlea dlevel s increas e wit hhighe r soi l lea d levels . Figure s 6-1 0 throug h6-1 5 presen t bi-variat e plot s fo r

first-tes t BLL s an dcorrespondin g averag e o r maximu mlea dconcentration s i n soil , paint , dus t an dwate r

a t th e child' s residence . Additiona l bi
variat e plot s wer e als o prepare dt o presen t th e dat afro mStatistica l Uni t 1 fo r th e sam e comparison s o f first-tes t BLL s t o lea dlevel s i n environmenta l medi aa t th e residence s o f

teste dchildren . Th e additiona l plot s hav e bee n numbered , a s reference dbelow , usin g a n 'a ' subscrip t fo r Statistica l Uni t

1 data . Th e followin g environmenta l lea dresult s wer e use dt o prepare thes e plots :

• Averag e soi l lea dconten t compute dusin g al l result s fo r soi l fro mth e 0 t o 6 inc hdept h interva l (Figure s 6-1 0 an d6-10a ) an dth e 0 t o 2 inc hdept hinterva l (Figure s 6-1 1 an d6- 1 la) . • Maximu mlea dconten t o f pain t i n poor-conditio n (Figure s 6-1 2 an d6-12a) . • Averag e mai n livin g are alea dconcentratio n i n dus t (Figure s 6-1 3 an d6-13a,) . • Averag e lea dconcentratio n i n tap wate r compute dusin g result s fo r sample s collecte dafte r

a 30-secon dflus ho f

faucet/plumbin g (Figur e 6-14) . • Averag e lea dconcentratio n i n ta p wate r compute dusin g result s fo r sample s collecte dafte r holdin g wate r

i n th e plumbin g fo r

a6 t o 8-hou r

perio d(Figur e 6-15) .

J:\BLD01\010244\Tas k10\200

3 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_04l»06Jo c2 8 MFG , IllC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### A simpl e linea r

regressio n analysi s wa s performe dfo r eac hbi-variat e plo t

t o evaluat e th e correlatio n betwee n eac henvironmenta l variabl e an dfirst-tes t BLL s i n residen t

children . Th e linea r regressio n equatio n an dR 2 

### result s fo r thos e analyse s ar e include do n th e bi-variat e plots . Th e R 2 

### valu e i s th e amoun t

o f varianc e i n bloo dlea dleve l explaine db y th e environmenta l variable . Fo r example , a n R 2 

### valu e o f 0. 2 indicate s tha t

2 0 percen t

o f th e BL Lvarianc e i s explaine db y th e variatio n i n th e environmenta l lea dleve l plotted . Non e o f th e linea r regressio n analyse s performe dfo r thes e dat a comparison s indicat e goo dcorrelatio n (e.g. , R 2 

### > 0.50 ) betwee n bloo dlea dlevel s an dan y on e environmenta l medi a(R 2 

### value s typicall y les s tha n 0.06) . Childre n ma y b e expose dt o lea dfro mman y possibl e sources , includin g potentia l source s no t investigate do r

addresse db y th e LCCHP . Th e Progra mdoe s however , conduc t detaile dsurvey s wit h eac hfamil y t o characteriz e demographi c information , famil y activitie s an doccupation s an dinformatio n regardin g othe r

potentia l source s o f

lea dexposur e i n thei r

home . I n additio n t o th e environmenta l medi a investigate db y th e Progra ma t achild' s primar y residenc e (soil , dust , paint , an dwater) , othe r possibl e source s o f exposur e include : hobb y and/o r parents ' wor k

activities ; cigarett e smoke ; th e us e o f certai n hom e remedies ; certai n type s o f glaze dan dcla y pottery ; foreig n candy ; exposur e t o al l source s tha t ma y b e encountere da t

da y care , pla y areas , o r

othe r residence s an dlocation s visite db y th e child ; an dexposur e tha t ma y occu r

prio r t o movin g t o th e site , o r

fro mtrave l t o othe r

locations , includin g foreig n countries . Wit hthi s numbe r

o f potentia l source s an dth e possibilit y tha t childre n ar e ofte n expose dt o multipl e potentia l sources , i t

i s difficul t

t o determine , wit han y certainty , th e dominan t source , o r

sources , o f

lea d contributin g t o a n elevate dbloo dlea dlevel . A s ha s bee n th e cas e i n th e past , bi-variat e plot s o f bloo d lea dversu s environmenta l lea ddat asho w tha t ther e i s n o predictabl e con-elatio n o r relationshi p betwee n individua l medi alea dconcentration s an dbloo dlea dlevels . Alternativ e dat apresentatio n technique s displayin g th e rang e o f

observe dbloo dlea dlevel s a t varyin g range s o f

lea dconcentration s i n soil , a s presente do n Figure s 6- 9 an d6-9a , ma y however , suppor t th e hypothesi s tha t

highe r environmenta l lea d concentration s d o represen t agreate r exposur e risk . 6. 6 Additiona l Dat aEvaluatio n I n respons e t o arecommendatio n fro mth e Work Group , additiona l dat aevaluatio n effort s wer e undertake n i n 200 5 t o investigat e concern s raise db y th e Independen t Revie w Pane l (IRP ) i n 2003 , includin g th e observatio n a t th e tim e tha t

th e calculate dpercentag e o f th e participant s wit hbloo dlea d level s greate r

tha n 1 0 an d1 5 pg/d L(P I 0 an dP I 5) , respectively , ha dno t significantl y decline dove r time , particularl y i n Statistica l Uni t 1 . A s discusse di n Sectio n 11.1 , ameetin g wa s hel di n February 200 6 t o presen t an ddiscus s th e finding s o f thi s additiona l dat aevaluatio n effort . A Technica l Memorandu m J:\BLDOIV010244\Tas k10C00 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL.O«406Ax : 2 9 MFG , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 prepare dt o explai n th e purpos e o f thi s effort , documen t

th e dat apresente dan devaluated , an dt o summariz e th e majo r

finding s i s include da s Appendi x Ft o thi s Annua l Report . Th e bullet s liste dbelo w summariz e th e majo r finding s an dconclusion s o f th e additiona l dat a evaluatio n an dth e discussion s a t th e meeting . I t

shoul db e noted , however , tha t subsequen t

t o th e Februar y 200 6 dat aevaluatio n meetin g th e performanc e standard s evaluation , performe da s part o f thi s Annua l Report , reveale dtha t th e performanc e standard s hav e bee n me t fo r SU1 .

• Sinc e th e tim e o f

th e IRP' s revie w i n 2003 , th e P1 0 an dP1 5 value s fo r SU 1 hav e decline d an di n fac t

ar e approachin g level s establishe da s th e Performanc e Standard s fo r th e program tha t defin e achievemen t

o f th e Program' s Remedia l Actio n Objectives .

• Centra l tendenc y indice s o f th e bloo dlea ddata , includin g geometri c mean , arithmeti c mean , an dmedian , continu e t o declin e ove r tim e fo r al l o f OU9 , SU 1 an dwithi n individua l area s o f th e Site .

• Additiona l dat apresente dregardin g communit y bloo dlea dlevel s fo r 2000-2004 indicat e tha t SU 1 an di n particula r

Are aD continu e t o hav e th e highes t frequenc y o f

childre n wit h elevate dbloo dlea dlevel s withi n th e site .

• A s describe di n Appendi x F , anumbe r o f bi-variat e analyse s an dstratifie dstatistica l analyse s wer e conducte dt o explor e th e relationshi p betwee n bloo dlea dlevel s an dconcentration s o f lea di n individua l environmenta l medi a(soil , paint , dust , drinkin g water) . Thes e statistica l test s sho w tha t

ther e i s n o observabl e correlatio n o r stron g relationshi p betwee n bloo dlea d level s an dth e lea dconcentratio n i n an y on e individua l environmenta l medium . However , thi s doe s no t

mea n tha t

exposur e source s suc ha s lead-base dpain t o r lea di n soi l o r

dus t ma y no t b e a n importan t

exposur e sourc e i n som e cases , onl y tha t n o on e dominan t

facto r wa s identified , base do n th e statistica l test s applied , tha t account s fo r

elevate dbloo dlea dlevel s i n are achildren . Thi s lac k

o f ademonstrabl e correlatio n ma y i n par t b e du e t o acombine deffec t fro mman y differen t

variable s an dth e inabilit y o f bi-variat e analyse s t o accoun t fo r multipl e contributin g factor s simultaneously .

• Alternativ e dat apresentatio n technique s displayin g th e rang e o f observe dbloo dlea dlevel s a t varyin g range s o f

lea dconcentration s i n soi l an dpain t do , however , sho w tha t

th e media n bloo dlea dleve l an drang e o f bloo dlea dlevel s ten dt o increas e wit hhighe r soi l an dpain t

lea d levels . Thi s observatio n support s th e hypothesi s tha t highe r environmenta l lea d concentration s d o represen t agreate r exposur e risk .

• Th e dat apresente dcomparin g th e change s i n bloo dlea dlevel s o f EB Lchildre n indicat e a slightl y greate r

averag e decreas e i n bloo dlea dlevel s whe n arespons e actio n (suc ha s pain t abatemen t o r soi l remediation ) i s take n t o addres s environmenta l medi awit hlea d concentration s abov e th e trigge r levels , compare dt o educatio n alone .

• Overall , th e dat aevaluatio n support s previou s conclusion s tha t lea di n avariet y o f

medi a (soil , paint , dust ) contribut e t o EBL s i n childre n i n OU9 , wit hn o on e dominan t sourc e identified . Base do n th e dat aevaluatio n performed , th e PSW Gdoe s no t believ e tha t

an y furthe r

evaluatio n o r multi-variat e analysi s i s warrante da t thi s time . J:\BLD01\OI0244\Tas k10V200

3 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAt_W0406.do c3 0 MFG , IllC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### 6. 7 Cas e Managemen tSummar y Durin g 2005 , on e chil dteste db y th e bloo dlea dmonitorin g progra man dresidin g withi nth e sit e fo r som e par t

o f th e year , ha da t

leas t on e bloo dlea dtes t

resul t greate r tha no r equa l t o 1 0 pg/dL a t

some tim e durin g 2005 . Th e child' s secon dtes t wa s les s tha n 1 0 ug/d Lan dth e averag e o f th e result s i s slightl y les s tha n 1 0 |Jg/dL . Th e child' s BL Li s declining , bu t wil l continu e t o b e monitored . Th e chil dreside s withi nth e Sit e boundarie s a t th e en do f

2005 . A tim e serie s plo t

o f BLL s fo r Chil d742 6 i s include di n Appendi x D . Als o include di n Appendi x D ar e th e tim e serie s plot s fo r 5 childre n wh o ha da t

leas t on e BL Lgreate r

tha n o r equa l t o 1 0 ug/d La t

som e tim e durin g 2004 , wer e teste dagai n i n 2005 , an dwh o stil l liv e withi nth e County . Th e chil didentificatio nnumber s presente do n thes e plot s hav e bee n change d fro mth e actua l identificatio nnumber s use di n th e databas e t o maintai nth e privac y o f progra m participants , howeve r

th e numbe r

i s th e sam e fro mpas t

reports . Wheneve r

achil dwit ha n elevate dbloo dlea dleve l i s identified , th e LCH D conduct s individua l counselin g wit hth e famil y an dfollow s th e procedure s outline di n th e Work Plan , base do n th e CD C guideline , t o addres s th e child' s exposur e t o lead . A s par t o f thi s counseling , al l availabl e informatio n gathere db y th e program , includin g demographics , surve y information , an denvironmenta l informatio n i s evaluate dan duse di n developin g cas e managemen t activitie s fo r

participatin g families . Whe n th e chil d reside s withi nth e site , thi s include s areferra l o f th e famil y t o th e LCCH P environmenta l testin g progra m t o evaluat e an daddres s potentia l source s o f lea dexposure . I n additio n t o th e counselin g an dcas e managemen t service s provide dthroug hth e LCHD , th e followin g type s o f

additiona l action s wer e performe db y th e LCCH P fo r th e on e first-tim e teste dchil d wit ha n elevate dbloo dlea dtes t valu e durin g 2005 :

• Prio r t o moving , a n environmenta l investigatio nwa s conducte dan dremediatio n complete da t thi s child' s forme r

home . Soi l samplin g wa s als o conducte da t th e child' s curren t

residenc e an dth e result s d o no t

excee dth e program' s trigge r criteria . A t

thi s tim e th e famil y ha s decline dt o hav e othe r

medi ainvestigated , bu t

wil l continu e t o hav e thei r child' s bloo dlea d tested . Tw o childre n ha da n initia l capillar y tes t greate r tha n 1 0 pg/d Li n 2005 , however , th e confirmatio n venou s sample s fo r bot hchildre n wer e les s tha n 1 0 ug/d Lan dth e bloo dlea dlevel s hav e continue dt o declin e i n subsequen t tests . Bot hchildre n wer e referre dt o th e environmenta l progra mb y th e LCH D fo r

services . Th e LCCH P wil l continu e t o encourag e routin e testin g o f al l childre n wh o ha d a n elevate dbloo dlea dtest .

J:\BLDOI\010244\Tas kI0\200 5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FWALJM0406.clo c3 1 MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 Non e o f th e childre n wh o entere dth e bloo dlea dmonitorin g progra mi n previou s year s ha da bloo dlea dtes t

resul t greate r tha n o r equa l t o 1 0 ug/d Li n 2005 . O f th e si x childre n i n 200

4 wh o ha d elevate dBLL s o r

a n elevate dbloo dlea dtest , th e progra mcontinue dt o follo w fiv e tha t remaine di n th e County . On e chil dmove dawa y i n 2004 . A s mentione dpreviously , time-serie s plot s o f BLL s fo r th e fiv e childre n remainin g i n th e Count y ar e presente di n Appendi x D . Tw o o f th e remainin g fiv e childre n ha da BL Lgreate r

tha n 1 0 ug/d La t

th e tim e o f

thei r las t tes t i n 2004 , bu t

bot hteste dbelo w 1 0 ug/d Li n 2005 . Th e BLL s o f

th e thre e othe r

childre n ha ddroppe dbelo w 1 0 ug/d Lb y th e en do f 2004 . Al l thre e o f

thes e childre n wer e teste da t

leas t on e tim e i n 200 5 an dal l o f th e children' s test s remaine dbelo w 1 0 Mg/dL . Al l fiv e childre n continu e t o liv e withi nth e Sit e boundaries . Th e LCH D continue s t o provid e service s a s outline di n th e Work

Plan .

J:\BLD01\OI0244\TosklO\2005AnnualRepon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL_040406Jo c3 2 MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 7. 0 COORDINATIO N WIT H INSTITUTIONA L CONTRO L PROGRA M Althoug hth e performanc e standard s hav e bee n met , th e remed y wil l no t b e considere dcomplet e unti l appropriat e institutiona l control s ar e i n place . A citize n workgrou p ha s bee n convene dt o conside r alternative s an doption s t o addres s institutiona l contro l requirement s relate dt o th e Superfun dSite . Th e loca l government s wil l als o b e workin g wit hth e EP A an dth e Stat e o f Colorad o t o designat e a n acceptabl e repository , o r

disposa l site , fo r

contaminate dsoil s generate dfro moperation s an dmaintenanc e o r othe r post-remediatio n activitie s withi nth e Superfun dSite .

J:\BLD01\OI0244\Tas kIOV2005 Annua l Rcpon\2005AnnualReponJ=INAU.04(M06Jo c3 3 MFG , IflC .LCCHP

2005Annual

Report April 2006 

### 8. 0 PROBLEM S ENCOUNTERE D AN D PROBLE M RESOLUTIO N Thi s sectio n present s a n itemizatio no f implementatio n problem s o r managemen t

issue s an dth e processe s use do r

action s take n t o resolv e them .

• Asarc o file dfo r

bankruptc y a t

th e beginnin g o f

Augus t 2005 . Thi s temporaril y suspende dth e fundin g fo r

th e LCCH P ceasin g al l environmenta l activitie s includin g samplin g an d remediation . Th e EP A wa s abl e t o secur e interi mfundin g an dcontinue doperation s o f th e Kid s Firs t Progra mi n Octobe r

2005 . Afte r th e Progra mbega n operatin g again , activitie s i n Octobe r an dNovembe r

focuse do n soi l samplin g an dth e completio n o f soi l respons e actions . A t thi s time , fundin g i s limite db y statut e t o respons e action s fo r soil , exterio r

pain t an ddust . I t

i s uncertai n whe n fundin g wil l b e availabl e fo r

interio r pain t an dwate r

responses . EP A i s workin g wit hAsarc o an dth e bankruptc y cour t

t o hav e additiona l fundin g mad e available . Th e progra mnotifie dal l affecte dpropert y owner s an dresident s o f th e issues . I f

an dwhe n fundin g become s availabl e fo r interio r pain t an dwate r

respons e actions , schedulin g o f thi s wor k

wil l b e prioritize db y th e LCCHP Work

Grou p t o addres s propertie s wit hyoun g childre n first , the n i n th e order i n whic hpropertie s entere dth e program . Currently , ther e ar e 1 3 propertie s waitin g fo r interio r pain t o r wate r respons e actions , base do n recommendation s mad e b y th e Work Group .

J:\BLDOI\010244\Tas k10V200S Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL.04(M06Jo c3 4 MFG , Inc .LCCHP

2005 Annual

Report April 2006 

### 9. 0 MODIFICATION S T O WOR KPLA N O ROTHE RLCCHPPROCEDURE S N o modification s t o th e Wor k Pla n wer e recommende db y th e Work Grou p i n 2005 .

J:\BLD01\OI0244\Tos k10\2005 Annual Repon\2005AnnualRqxmJTNAU_W0406.do c3 5 MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### 10. 0 PERFORMANC E STANDARD S EVALUATIO N Th e performanc e o f

th e LCCH P i n meetin g th e remedia l actio n objective s establishe db y EP A fo r OU 9 wa s evaluate dusin g dat acollecte db y th e progra mdurin g th e year s 2003 , 200 4 an d2005 . Performanc e standards , includin g th e specifi c method s t o b e use dfo r measurin g performance , were finalize dan ddocumente di n arepor t entitle dMethod s an dStandard s fo r Evaluatin g th e Performanc e o f th e Lak e Count y Communit y Healt hProgra m(PSWG , 2002) . A detaile devaluatio n o f LCCHP performanc e relativ e t o thes e standard s i s include dwit hthi s Annua l Repor t a s Appendi x E . A s state di n Appendi x Ean di n accordanc e wit hth e Performanc e Standard s document , OU 9 wa s subdivide dint o tw o area s tha t are , describe da s Statistica l Unit s fo r th e purpose s o f

evaluatin g th e program' s performance . Statistica l Uni t 1 include s th e previousl y define dsubarea s A , B , D an dE , o r th e area s withi nth e Cit y o f

Leadvill e an dStringtown . Statistica l Uni t 2 include s th e subareas C , Fan dG , t o th e area s o f

Westpark , Lak e For

k Mobil e Hom e Par

k an dothe r neighborhood s withi n th e site . A summar y o f

th e evaluatio n result s fo r

eac hStatistica l Uni t

i s provide di n Tabl e 10-1 . Tabl e 10-1 : Performanc e Evaluatio n Results , 2003-2005 

# ^SSSmSS^ 1 . Th e tota l numbe r

o f participant s i s at leas t 18 0 an dat

leas t 50 % o f ne w eligibl e childre n participat e o n averag e fo r

a3-y r period . 2 . Fo r a3-yr period , th e calculate d P I 0 valu e < 5 % an dth e calculate d P1 5 valu e < 1 % ; n o individua l P1 0 valu e exceedin g 8% . 3 . Fo r a3-y r period , th e probabilit y tha t th e tru e P1 0 exceed s 7 % i s les s tha n 5 % an dth e probabilit y tha t th e tru e P I 5 exceed s 2 % i s les s tha n 5% . 4 . Fo r childre n participatin g ove r th e las t 3 yrs , th e proportio n o f associate dsoi l lea dvalue s greate r tha n th e 70 * percentil e valu e fo r th e entir e Statistica l Uni t

i s no t significantl y lowe r

tha n 30% . Fina l Decisio n gaff e Statistica l Uni t

1 , < , . ... v Standar d ISlm? ' (A , B , D , E ) '''" '•'-- Met ? 36 0 participant s over

las t 3 years ; >90 % o f estimate dnewl y eligibl e childre n (sit e wide ) fo r

eac h o f 3 year s 3-yr P1 0 = 4.2% , P1 5 = 0.8 % 200 3 P I 0 = 6.0% , P I 5 = 1.4 % 200 4 P I 0 = 4^0% , P I 5 = 0.3 % 200 5 P I 0=1 . 5% , P1 5 = 0.2 % Probabilit y tha t

th e tru e P I 0 exceed s 7 % i s les s tha n 1 % Probabilit y tha t

th e tru e P I 5 exceed s 2 % i s les s tha n 1 % 28 % o f soil lea dvalue s for participatin g childre n ar e greate r tha n th e 7 0 percentil e fo r

soi l lea dvalue s determine dt o dat e i n Statistica l Uni t 1 . ye s
ye s ye s

ye s
Statistica l Uni t

1 ha s me t

al l performanc e standards . .-.,.. , Statistica l Uni t 2 ••£ ' * • Standar d (C , F , G ) ••;?>,•?'• • Met ? Standar dme t

i n 200 2
Standar dme t

i n 2002

Standar dmet

i n 2002

Standar dme t

i n 2002
Statistica l uni t

2 me t al l performanc e standard s at

th e en do f

2002 ; 200 3 result s confir mn o increasin g tren di n P1 0 an dPI S values . ye s ye s ye s

ye s



### A s indicate db y th e informatio nsummarize di n Tabl e 10-1 , th e performanc e standard s hav e bee n achieve dwithi nbothStatistica l Uni t 1 (subarea s A , B , D an dE ; Cit y o f Leadvill e an dStringtow n areas ) an dStatistica l Uni t

2 (subarea s C , Fan dG ; outlyin g neighborhood s aroun dLeadvill e an dLak e For k Mobil e Hom e Park) . J:\BLDOI\010244\Tas k

10\200 5 Annua l Rcp,in\2005AnnunlRepon_HNAL_OJ0406do c 

### 3 6 

### MFC , Inc .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 

### 11. 0 RECOMMENDATION S O RCOMMENT S FRO M LCCHPWOR KGROU P

11. 1 Respons e to 200 4 Recommendation s o rComments On e recommendatio n fro mth e LCCHP Work Grou p wa s provide ddurin g th e preparatio n o f th e 2004 Annua l Report . Th e commen t i s liste dbelo w (i n italics ) an dprogres s i n addressin g thi s ite mdurin g 200 5 i s discusse dbelow . 1. As discussed

in {he 2004 Annual

Report under Data Management

and Statistical

Analysis, the Work Group anticipates tasking the Performance Standards Working Group with developing a strategy to investigate the participants with blood lead levels greater

than 10and

15pg/dL (P10 and P15). The Performance Standards Working Group will develop a technical

memorandum from their

discussions for

distribution. A summary of the conclusions reached

as a result

of this effort will also be included

in the 2005Annual

Report. Analyses of

blood lead data presented

in the 2004 Annual

Report will be used by the Performance Standards Working Group as a starting point for discussion of

a plan for

additional

data analyses to address previous comments from the Independent

Panel Review. Th e meetin g wa s schedule di n Augus t 2005 , bu t du e t o Asarco' s bankruptc y wa s reschedul e t o Decembe r 2005 . Du e t o weathe r

condition s th e meetin g wa s agai n cancelle dan dreschedule di n Februar y 2006 . A t

th e meetin g anumbe r

o f additiona l dat aevaluation s wer e presente dan d discussed . Th e Performanc e Standard s Workin g Grou p ha s develope datechnica l memorandum , summarizin g th e presentation , discussion s an dconclusion s fro mthi s meeting , whic hi s include d a s Appendi x F . 11. 2 200 5 Recommendation s o rComment s Recommendation s o r

comment s provide db y th e LCCH P Wor k Grou p durin g 2005 an di n th e preparatio n o f

thi s Annua l Repor t

fo r 200 5 includ e th e following : 1 . Althoug hth e Performanc e Standard s hav e bee n met , ther e ar e anumbe r o f properties , previousl y investigate db y th e Program , wher e th e Work Grou p ha s recommende darespons e actio nt o addres s potentia l lea dexposur e risks . Th e Work Grou p recommend s tha t

th e Progra mcomplet e al l pendin g respons e actions , wher e owne r acces s ca n b e obtained . I n addition , th e EP A decide dt o provid e a60-da y notificatio nperio dt o allo w resident s an d propert y owner s on e fina l opportunit y t o hav e thei r propertie s investigate dfo r lead . However , initiatio nan dcompletio n o f investigation s an dremediation s ar e dependen t o n whe n th e LCCH P trus t

fun dca n b e accessed . I t

i s possibl e tha t

delay s coul db e experience d sinc e thi s trus t

fun dha s bee n impacte db y Asarco' s bankruptcy . 2 . Th e Wor k

Grou p requeste dt o revie w th e lis t o f propertie s pendin g remediatio n a t eac hWor

k Grou p meetin g t o discus s prioritie s an dt o designat e an y additiona l prioritie s afte r thos e liste d i nth e Wor

k Plan . Th e Work

Grou p develope dapriorit y lis t fo r propertie s pendin g remediation , an dreceive da n update dlis t a t subsequen t

Work Grou p meetings . J:\BLDOI\OI0244\Tas kI0\200 5 Annua l RepoaV2005AnnualRepon_F7NAL.040406Jo c3 7 MFG , IflC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 3 . Th e Count y requeste dtha t th e Work Grou p meeting s b e ope n t o th e public . Th e Work Grou p agreed , although , th e meeting s hav e bee n spil t int o tw o parts , on e par t

ope n t o th e publi c t o discus s environmenta l dat ab y propert y numbe r an dth e othe r

whic hwil l remai n close dt o discus s confidentia l medica l information . 4 . Th e Count y recommende daddin g a n additiona l soi l remediatio n contracto r i n 200 6 t o increas e th e numbe r

o f soi l remediation s bein g conducte deac hyear .

J:\BLD01\OI0244\Tas k10Q00

5 Annua l Rcpon\2005AnnualRepon_FINAL.(MOI06jJo c3 8 MFG , IllC .LCCHP2005Annual Report April 2006 12. 0 REFERENCE S Asarco , Incorporated , 1999 . (Asarco , 1999 ) Fina l Work Pla n fo r th e Lak e Count y Communit y Healt h Program , Prepare db y MFC , Inc . fo r Asarco , Decembe r

1999 . Brattin , Bill , 1997 . (Brattin , 1997 ) Dat aReductio n Approach , Memorandu mt o Rebecc aThomas , December , 1997 . Cente r fo r Diseas e Contro l an dPreventio n (CDC) , 1991 . (CDC , 1991 ) Preventin g Lea dPoisonin g i n Youn g Children . U.S . Departmen t o f Healt han dHuma n Services , Publi c Healt hService , Atlanta . October . LCCH P Performanc e Standard s Workin g Group , 2002 . (PSWG , 2002 ) Method s an dStandard s fo r Evaluatin g th e Performanc e o f th e Lak e Count y Communit y Healt hProgra m(LCCHP) . July , 2002 . Lak e Count y Communit y Healt hProgra mIndependen t Revie w Panel , Response s t o Ke y Issues/Questions , 2003 . (IRP , 2003 ) Prepare db y Conli n Associate s fo r CDPHE , LCCH P Work Group , Lak e Count y Healt hDepartment , U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agency . December , 2003 . Lak e Count y Healt hDepartment , 2006 . (LCHD , 2006 ) 200 5 Annua l Bloo dLea dSummar y Report . February , 2006 . U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , 1999 . (EPA , 1999 ) Recor do f Decisio n fo r

Operabl e Uni t

9 , Populate dResidentia l Areas , Californi aGulc hSite , Lak e County , Colorado . U.S . Departmen t

o f Commerc e Censu s Bureau , 2003 . Year 200 0 Unite dState s Censu s Data . June , 2003 .

J:\BLD01\OI0244\Tas k10C00

5 Annua l Repon\2005AnnualRepon_FlNAU.04(M06Jo c3 9 MFG , Inc .

# TABBE D PAGE

FIGURE S

### FIGURE S

# Colo rMap(s ) Th e followin g page s contai n colo rtha t doe s no t appea ri n th e scanne d images . T o vie wth e actua l images , pleas e contac t th e Superfun d Record s Cente ra t (303 ) 312-6473 .13-JUN-200 5 GRA : NMRCPRJ?5626\6RA\OU9.GRA ' AMI : N:\ARCPrU2\5626VWL\OU9.AM L



# D EXPLANATIO N Operabl e Uni t 9 (Residentia l Populate d Areas ) Othe r Operabl e Unit s Delete d Are a Operabl e Uni t 9 Sub-Are a Boundarie s Californi a Gulc h Super f un d Sit e Boundar y Sub-Are a Designatio n 

### Notes : 1 . Operabl e Uni t Boundarie s fro m 199 4 Consen t Decre e 2 . Su b Area s H an d X ar e no t delineate d o n thi s figure .

- Sub - Are a H i s th e designatio n use d fo rblood-lea d progra m participant s wh o liv e outsid e th e superfun d sit e boundaries .

- Sub - Are a X i s th e designatio n use d fo rparticipant s livin g withi n th e superfun d sit e boundarie s bu t no t withi n an y othe rdesignate d Sub - Area .

SCAL E I N FEE T 250 0 250 0 

### CALIFORNI AGULC H SUPERFUN D SIT E

FIGUR E 1 - 1 OPERABL E UNI T 9 SUB - AREA S PROJECT : 5626.1 0 REV: 1 DATE : JUN E 13 , 200 5 BY : CR L | CHECKED : DL L 

### MFC , Inc . consulting

scientists

and engineersVIAR-200 6 GRA : N:\ARCPRJ2\562RGRA\WORKPLN 9 060302.GRA ' AM I N1ARCPRJ2\5626WML\WORKPLN 9 060302.AM L EXPLANATIO N Operabl e Uni t 9 (Residentia l Populate d Areas ) Othe rOperabl e Unit s Operabl e Uni t 9 Sub-Are a Boundarie s Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Sit e Boundary Note : Operabl e Uni t Boundarie s fro m 199 4 Consen t Decre e

Sub-are a wit h numbe r g g o f participant s 

### Sub-are a # o f Participant s 

### A B C D E F G H X 3 2

2 4 6 9 5 5 

### 3 3 3 2 0 

### 17 6 0 Note : Sub-Area s H an d X ar e no t delineate d o n thi s map .

250 0 250 0 CALIFORNI A GULC H SUPERFUN D SIT E

FIGUR E 6- 1 200 5 BLOO D LEA D TESTIN G PARTICIPATIO N B Y SUB - ARE A PROJECT : 5626.1 0 REV: 1 DATE : MARC H 02 , 200 6 BY : NJ N I CHECKED : DC C 

### MFC , Inc . consulting

scientists

and engineers

## Figure 6-2 . 200 5 Bloo d Lea d Level s b ySubare a

CO < D T 3 O ^ D O

B C D F G H

(n=32 ) (n=24 ) (n=69 ) (n=55 ) ( n=3 3 ) (n=20 ) (n= l76 ) 

### Subare a Notes : Bloo d lea d dat a i s annua l averag e blood-lea d fo reac h child . Area s wit h les s tha n fiv e bloo d lea d value s wer e no t include d i n thi s plot . Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentiles .

## Figure 6-3 : 200 5 Participatio n b y Mont h 12 0 Q Tota l Test s D Firs t Tim e Test s

Januar yFebruar

yMarc h Apri l MayJun e Jul yAugus t Septembe rOctobe rNovembe rDecembe r 

## Montr T

## Figure 6-4 . 200 5 OU 9 Bloo d Lea d Level s b yAg e Grou p



## 1 0

T J I 5 f 0 ) CO CD O

_ O CO

1- 2 2- 3 3- 4 , 4

(n=53 ) (n=45 ) (n=51 ) ( n =



### Ag e Grou p (i n years ) 5- 6 (n=34 )

Notes : Dat a includ e averag e bloo d lea d level s fo reac h child . Ag e grou p calculate d a s averag e o f ag e a t tim e o f eac h test . Ag e group s wit h les s tha n fiv e bloo d lea d value s wer e no t include d i n thi s plot . Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentiles .

## Figur e 6-4a . 2003-200 5 Bloo d Lead Level s b yAre a an d Ag e Grou p (i n years )

£ H 

### Area/Ag e Grou p (years ) Notes : Areas/ag e group s wit h les s tha n fiv e bloo d lea d value s wer e no t includedJ n thi s plot . Dat a includ e annua l averag e bloo d lea d fo reac h child . Som e childre n ma yb e represente d mor e tha n once . Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentiles .

### Figur e 6-5 . 200 5 Bloo d Lea d Level s b yStatistica l Uni t an d Subarea , Age s 0-3 5 Month s an d 36-7 2 Month s

2 0 - i l o
1C - I D 1 A -

=0 rT\ H n 3,
" S i n < 0 1 U

_ i " o 8 "



### _ o m F , H i Q 4 - 2 - O J J L 

# M -^- V
to C M C O 1^

- 6 < 0 < 3 IT ) ^

~ I F i C I I

—' C 

### SU 1

• 

# T 

# i -L <!f> ' 

### § 8 ^ C D ^ - > —, I I O

— I F •

4 _i

_ i n C M C O 1^

- I 1 C M . — . C M CO I I CO C I I

—C -f — 

# -'-J L "« - ^-=s^~ i n C M C O l~|- O C O 

# « 2 O ) ,—

. C M O

^ ^ '*"""" ' C 

### SU 2



### • ^

- w 

### 

### 4

_ U 5 O

J co r* * O C O LL " ^ ^- c\

T I I C M C I I -f f l '

-4 - I O C M C O N O C O 

# s s O O x

^ I I C M

^ S • •

, 1 i n C M co r

^ O C O ± ± C O —. c ^\ ^" C 

### Subare a an d Ag e Rang e Notes : Bloo d lea d dat a i s annua l averag e bloo d lea d fo reac h child . Area/ag e groups-wit h les s tha n fiv e bloo d lea d value s wer e no t include d i n thi s plot . Ag e grou p calculate d a s averag e o f ag e a t tim e o f eac h test . Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentiles .

## Figur e 6-6 . 200 5 Bloo d Lead Level s bySeaso n

\IL •\r\ I U

^ Q . " 3 

## " 8 f i C D O 0 ) T3 0 / I C D 4

-

n - 4

4 »

» 4

- J »



# L - •
•



# _ L • • OU 9 Jun e t o Octobe r (n=177 ) Geometri cMean = 2.7 3 ng/d L OU 9 Novembe r t o Ma y (n=59 ) Geometri c Mea n = 2.5 4 |ug/d L SU 1 Jun e t o Octobe r (n=80 ) Geometri cMean = 3.0 5 ng/d L SU 1 Novembe r t o Ma y (n=34 ) Geometri cMea n = 2.9 5 |ag/d L Notes : Bloo d lea d dat a fro m childrens ' firs t tes t o f 2005 . Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentiles .

## Figure 6-7 . 200 5 Bloo d Lea d Level s b yMedicai d Participatio n

1 2 1 0

> c a 6 < D T 3 O 

### 5 5 4

OU 9

Medicai d Participant s (n=96 ) Geometri c Mea n = 2.4 5 ng/d L OU 9 Non-Medicai d Participant s

(n=140 ) Geometri c Mea n = 2.8 4 jag/d L SU 1 Medicai d Participant s (n=42 ) Geometri cMean = 2.7 6 ng/d L SU 1 Non-Medicai d Participant s

(n=72 ) Geometri cMea n = 3.1 6 ng/d L Notes : Bloo d lea d dat a i s annua l averag e fo reac h child — Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentiles .

## Figure 6-8 . 200 5 Bloo d Lea d Level s b yFamily' s Primar yLanguag e 1 2 1 0 -

• o 1 *

- o CO 0 ) 

# m4

Q

2 -

1 OU 9 Spanis h Primar

y Laguag e (n=62 ) Geometri c Mea n = 2.2 4 ng/d L 1 SU 1 Spanis h Primar

y Laguag e (n=34 ) Geometri cMea n = 2.5 5 |jg/d L OU 9 Englis h Primar

y Languag e (n=174 ) Geometri c Mea n = 2.8 5 pg/d L SU 1 Englis h Primar

y Languag e (n=80 ) Geometric

Mean = 3.23 ng/dl 

### Family' s Primar

yLanguag e Notes : Bloo d lea d dat a i s annua l averag e fo reac h child. - Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentiles .

## Figure 6-9 . 1994-200 5 Bloo d Lea d Level s b yAverag e 0- 6 Inc h Soi l Lea d Level s

tu - 1 Q T o I D ' 1 A 

### j 1 4 

### ^ O ) * 1 O i i \£

.
" S m C D 1 U " 0 )

" O f i X ° C O c u 4 -
0 . • *

- p



# . T

i
i i i <150 0 1500-350 0 >350 0 (n=412 ) (n=145 ) (n=87 ) Geometri cMea n = Geometri cMea n = Geometri cMea n = 3.7 4 ng/d L 5.0 6 ng/d L 5.7 6 ng/d L


### 0-6 " Soi l Lea d Leve l (mg/Kg )

Notes : Bloo d lea d dat a fo rchildrens ' firs t test , fo rOU 9 resident s only . Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentiles .

## Figur e 6-9a . 1994-200 5 Bloo d Lea d Level s b yAverag e 0- 2 Inc h Soi l Lea d Level s

£ U n 1 f i - i I D 1 K - 1/ 1 - 

# 5 * O ) 1 O _ tr t 1 0 - o

_ J o o 

### m o " 4


### _

- n - *

*

l

•

I d k • • < 150 0 1500-350 0 >350 0 (n=428 ) (n=132 ) (n=82 ) Geometri cMea n = Geometri cMea n = Geometri cMea n = 3.7 1 ng/d L 5 4 7 ng/<j L 5.7 3 uq/d L 

### 0-2 " Soi l Lea d Leve l (mg/Kg ) Notes : Bloo d lea d dat a fo rchildrens ' firs t test , fo rOU 9 resident s only . Th e lin e withi n th e boxe s indicate s th e median . Th e boundarie s o f th e boxe s indicat e th e 25t h an d 75t h percentiles . Th e whisker s indicat e th e 10t h an d 90t h percentiles . Th e dot s indicat e th e 5t h an d 95t h percentile s (minimu m n = 10) .

### Figure 6-10 . 199 4 - 200 5 Sitewid e Averag e 0- 6 Inc h Soi l Lea d vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l

3 5
3 0

0 )

" S 2 0 o> o £ m 1 5 t o 1 0 Trendlin e Equatio n y= O.OOOS x+ 4.520 2 R 2 = 0.05 4



# :

200 0 400 0 600 0 800 0 1000 0 1200 0 Average0-6 " SbilLead(mg/Kg ) 1400 0 1600 0 1800 0 _

### Figure 6- 1 Oa . 1994-200 5 - Statistica l Uni t 1 - Averag e 0- 6 Inc h Soi l Lea d vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l 4 0
3 5
3 0
2 5 o> 2 0

• o o o 5 1 5 t « 1 0

0 

# "•• 

# i n *

« " * * * *
•

$ Trendlin e Equatio n y= 0.0004 X + 5.509 2 R 2 = 0.020 1

200 0 400 0 _. 600 0 . _800 0 Averag e 0-6 " Soi l Lea d (mg/Kg ) 1000 0 1200 0

### Figure 6-11 . 199 4 - 200 5 Sitewid e Averag e 0- 2 Inc h Soi l Lea d vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l

4 0
3 5
3 0
2 5 2 <u

" g 2 0 o> •D O £ C D 1 5 2 il 1 0 Trendlin e Equatio n y= 0.0005 x+ 4.531 2 R 2 = 0.059 8

500 0 1000 0 1500 0 Averag e 0-2 " Soi l Lea d (mg/Kg ) 2000 0 2500 0

### Figure 6-1 1 a . 1994-200 5 - Statistica l Uni t 1 - Averag e 0- 2 Inc h Soi l Lea d vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l 4 0
3 5
3 0 I 

# a 2 5 1 v.
" S 2 0 T J § 5 1 5 1 0 * ^

* * 

## * / * • 

# « I * * * * 

### * . 

### *

* * * 4 * Trendlin e Equatio n y= 0.0004 X + 5.539 4 R 2 = 0.02 2

* f~ A ** * 

# ^ t * ^1* * v**- v * . ^» . -*-*- < j" 5 * .

200 0 400 0 600 0 800 0 Averag e 0-2 " Soi l Lea d (mg/Kg ) 1000 0 1200 0

### Figure 6-12 . 1994-200 5 - Sitewid e - Maximu m Pain t Lea d Concentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l 3 5

3 0

^ 2 5 I J 2 0 • o ( 0 1 5 m * « ( 0 

# * : Trendlin e Equatio n y= 0.4418 x+5.098 9 R 2 = 0.052 8



# •• * : . 

# • * »***'. »

0 3456 7 Maximu m Lea d i n Poo r Conditio n Pain t (mg/cm 2 ) 

### 1 0

### Figure 6-12a . 1994-200 5 - Statistica l Uni t 1 - Maximu m Pain t Lea d Concentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l 3 5

3 0

2 5


### £2 0 CO 0 ) 

### o 1 0 

### m £

## 1 0 * * *



# * < * « % • • • Trendlin e Equatio n y= 0.3645 X + 5.703 4 R 2 = 0.034 5



## % * 

## ,.-•-•* •
* *

** * 4 » * 

### » * 

# : *

123456 7 Maximu m Lea d i n Poo r Conditio n Pain t (mg/cm 2 ) 

### 1 0

### Figure 6-13 . 1994-200 5 - Sitewid e - Averag e Mai n Livin g Are a Dust Lea d vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l

Trendlin e Equatio n y= O.OOOS x+ 6.285 8 R 2 = 0.003 8

200 0 400 0 600 0 800 0 Averag e Dus

t Lead (mg/Kg ) 1000 0 1200 0 1400 0

### Figure 6-13a . 1994-200 5 - Statistica l Uni t 1 - Averag e Mai n Livin g Are a Dus t Lea d vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l

3 5 3 0 

# 4 2 6 0 > 0 ) 

### 2 0 • o o o 

### 5 1 5 1 0 

# t

* * 

# r * * * *

* v

# • * *

* * * * * Trendlin e Equatio n y= -6E-05 x+ 7.215 3 R 2 = 0.000 2

t 

### 200 0 400 0 600 0 800 0 Averag e Dus t Lea d(mg/Kg ) 1000 0 .1200 0 1400 0

### Figure 6-14 . 1994-200 5 - Sitewid e - 30-secon d Flus h Wate r Lea d vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l

3 5 3 0 1 3 2 5 2 o>
" g 2 0 o> • o o 

### 5 1 5 « 1 0 

# !

*» * 

# >*' * Trendlin e Equatio n y=-0.1634 x +6.080 9 R 2 = 0.004 7

6 8 1 0 30-secon d Flus h Wate r Lea d (mg/L) 1 2 .1 4 

### 1 6 -

### Figur e 6-15 . 1994-200 5 - Sitewid e - 6- 8 hou r Hol d Wate r Lea d vs . First-tes t Bloo d Lea d Leve l

3 5
3 0 1 2 5 Trendlin e Equatio n f= -0.1064 x+ 6.457 2 R 2 = 0.004 9

1 0 15

_2 0 2 5 3 0 6- 8 hou r Hol d Wate r Lea d (mg/L) 3 5 4 0 4 5

### APPENDI X A Educatio n an dCommunit y Outreac hBrochure s

# Colo rPhoto(s ) Th e followin g page s contai n colo rtha t doe s no t appea ri n th e scanne d images . T o vie wth e actua l images , pleas e contac t th e Superfun d Record s Cente ra t (303 ) 312-6473 .

# Mebears bee ntestedfor highlea dyet ? No ? Callu s at486-011 8

•s r

### w > 3 £'« ^ 

## ITesting i&available a t n o charg e for 1 children 1 2 t

o 3 6 month s old , pregnant an dnursin g women to insur e their newborn s are no t expose dt o lead . Lak e Count

y Nursing Servic

e Bloo d Lea d Progra

m 11 2 West5t

h St . ^ ~ Leadville , CO . 8O 4 6 13*33 8 

# Lak e Count y Nursin g Service 486-011 8 Enfenneri ad

e Saludde l Condad o Lak e 486-011 8 /-"^"^ \ ,--~^>" A TO P1 2 CANDIE S T O AVOI D EVIT A LO S 1 2 DULCE S ALT O E N

PLOM O



### Boliri m

Rottif o deTamarind o

Luca s Limo n

Tablarind o HIGHES T RESULT CANDY(ppm ) RESULTADO S ALTO S DULC E (ppm ) 

### 5,80 0
0. 3 

## 0. 6
0. 7


## 1. 4 HIGHES T RESULT S

WRAPPER(ppm ) RESULTADO S ALTO S ENVOLTURA(ppm )

5,00 0

3,80 0 

## 1. 7 N/ A 11,00 0 HO W MAN Y TIME S OVE R FDA' S raai H stHdar4(.lppn ) CL'APiTA S VECE S S E A PASAD O D E LA S NORMA S DE L FDA' S (JPPM I 29,000 times(candy ) 29,000veces(dulce ) 8.3times(wrapper ) 8.3veces(envoltura ) 1

1.2 5 rimes(candy ) 1.25veces(dulce ) 6.3times(wrapper ) 63veces(envoltura ) 3times(candy ) 3veces(dulce ) 3.26 time s (candy ) 3.26veces(diilce )
7 time s (candy ) Tveces(dulces ) 18_3times(wrappers ) 183veces(envoltura ) Serpentina s 

### 0. 4 

### 15,00 0 2times(candy ) 2veces(dulce ) 25times(wraper ) 25veces(envoltura ) Supe rRebanadit ;

Tam aRoc a

Paleto n co n chil e 

### 0. 5



## 1. 1 N/ A J^Ssrasp^gK a 

## N/ A

22,00 0 7,00 0 2.5time s (candy )

2.5vcces(dulce )

S.Stime s (candy ) 5. S vetes(dulce ) 37times(wrapper ) 37veces(envol1ura ) 12times(wrapper ) 12veces(envo!tura)

### APPENDI X B

Lak e Count y HealthDepartmen t Annua l Bloo dLea dSummar y Repor t

# Kid s Firs tRepor t 2005 Bloo d Lea d Testin g Result s Lak e County , Colorad o 2l-Feb-06



### Ne w Are a A B C D E F G A- G 

### Kid s Are a A B C D E F G A- G 

### Kid s Teste d i n 2005 Wh o Liv e i n Superfun d Sit e

Numbe r 1 3 9 1 8 2 8 1 8 6 8 3 

### i n Sit e Teste d Numbe r 1 9 1 5 5 1 2 7 2 2 5 1 4 15 3 Averag e Bloo d Lea d

2.4 6 1.9 6 '2. 6 3.3 6 3. 0 4.4 3 2.0 9 2.8 3 

### Prio rt o an d Agai n i n Averag e Bloo d Lea d 3.2 3 3.1 5 2.0 4 3.2 4 2.2 6 2.7 7 2.2 1 2. 6 1 0 to 14. 9 ug/d L

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 1 0 to 14. 9 ug/d L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 1 5 ug/d L

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

> 1 5 ug/d L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Maximu m Bloo d Lea d

4. 4 2. 9 7. 2 9.9 5 3. 0 8. 3 5. 5 9.9 5 Maximu m Bloo d Lea d

9. 3 7 . 1 5. 9 9 . 1 3. 4 6. 6 4. 4 9. 3 

### Kid s Tested i n 2005 Wh o Liv e i n Superfun d Sit e fo rAre aX Are aNumbe rAverag e Bloo d Lead 1 0 t o 14. 9 ug/d L > 1 5 ug/d L Maximu m Bloo d Lead 

### Kid s Tested i n 2005 Wh o Liv e Ou to f Superfun d Sit e Are aNumbe rAverag e Bloo d Lea d 1 0 t o 14. 9 ug/d L > 1 5 ug/d L H 17 6 2.3 8 3 0 Maximu m Bloo d Lea d 12.3 5 

### Al l Kid s an d Area s Tested i n 2005

Numbe rAverag e Bloo d Lea d 41 2 2.5 5 1 0 to 14. 9 ug/d L > 1 5 ug/d L Maximu m Bloo d Lea d 3 0 12.3 5 

### Adult s (1 5 yrs . o rolder ) Teste d i n 2005

Numbe rAverag e Bloo d Lead 3 8 1.6 1 1 0 to 14. 9 ug/d L > 1 5 ug/d L 0 1 Maximu m Bloo d Lea d 26.6 3 

### Tota l Individual s Tested i n 2005 = 45 4 Notes : Number s ar e base do nagree dupo n criteri afo r inclusio n: Averag e bloo dlea di s base do n geometri c mea n o f individua l averag e value s Tota l kid s ma y no t

equa l th e su mo f

th e kid s b y area s i f

area s ar e no t

assigne dt o al l o f

th e bloo dlea dresult s Tota l individual s ma y no t equa l kid s plu s adult s i f

individual s les s tha n6 month s o r betwee n 6 an d1 5 year s o f ag e wer e teste dAPPENDI X C Bloo d Lea d Summar y Statistic s an d Tes tfo rNormalit y Result sSummary Statistics : 200 5 Bloo d Lea d Level s Are a A B C D E F G H SU 1 OU 9 Lake Count

y n

3 2 2 4 6 9 5 5 3 3 3 2 0 17 6 11 4 23 6 41 2 Distributio n

Typ e Lognorma l Lognorma l Lognorma l Lognorma l Norma l Norma l Norma l Not Norma l Lognorma l No t Norma l No t Norma l Mean/Geometri c

Mean * 2.8 9 2.6 4 2.1 8 3.3 0 2.6 3 3.5 9 2.5 1 2.8 3 3.0 1 3.1 2 2.9 9 St . Dev./Geo .

St . Dev 1. 8 1. 6 1. 2 2. 2 1. 0 1. 8 1. 3 1. 9 2. 0 1. 8 1. 8 Media n

3. 0 2. 7 2. 3 3. 2 3. 0 3. 7 2. 4 2. 4 3. 0 2. 8 2. 6 Minimu m

1. 0 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0 1. 5 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0 25t h

Percent ! l e 2. 1 2. 2 1. 5 2. 3 2. 3 2. 3 1. 4 1. 6 2. 1 1. 8 1. 8 75t h

Percentil e 3. 8 3. 4 3. 1 4. 8 3. 2 4. 5 3. 2 3. 5 4. 1 3. 9 3. 7 Maximu m

9. 3 7. 1 7. 2 10. 0 3. 4 8. 3 5. 5 12. 4 10. 0 10. 0 12. 4
Notes : • Th e mean , standar d deviation , an d upperconfidenc e limi t o n th e mea n are compute d base d o n distributiona l assumption s consisten t wit h th e distributio n typ e listed . Fo rno n normall ydistribute d dat a sets , includin g thos e wit h n<3 , mea n an d standar d deviatio n compute d assumin g th e norma l distribution : non-parametri c method s use d t o comput e Ih e 95 % UCL .

J:\BLD01\010244\Tas k

10\200 5 Annua l Report\Data\2005BLLDataByAre aLognomalQ-OPIotforA

-2. 5 -2. 0 •1. 5 -1. C -0. 5 O. C 0. 5 Theoretica l Quantle

o (Standar

d Nomai ; 1. 0 1. 5 2. 0 2 5

M . 32 . Mea n . 1.C612 . S d . 0.5305 Slope = 1.0180 . Intercep

t = 0.0001) . Coirelation . R = 0.9916269 8 Shapiro-Wil k

Statisti c= 0.979 . Cntica l Vakje(0.05 ) = 0.939 . Data ar e Lognorma l Lognorma ) Q- Q Ho t fo rB

-1. 0 •0. 5 0 0 0. 5

Theoretica l Quantile

s (Standar

d Normal ) 1. 0 1. 5 2. 0

N = 24 . Mean • 0.9E9G . S d = 0 548 9 Slope = 1.0137 . Intercep

t = 0.0000 . Correlation . R = 0.9812238 1 Shapiro-Wil k

Statisti c= 0.953 . Cntica l Value(0.05) = 0 91 6 Dat a are Lognorma lLognorma l Q- Q Plo t fo rC

-2. 5 -2. 0 -1. 5 •l. C -0. 5 0. 0 0. 5 theoretica l Quantile

s (Standar

d Normal } 1. 0 V 5 2. 0 2. 5

N = 69 . Mean • 0.7783 . S d • 0.482 1 Slop e = 1.0040 . Intercep

t = O.OOOD . Correlation . R = 0.9894C49 8 Ljltefor s Statisti c = 0.081 . Crtica l Value(O.D5 ) = 0.107 . Dat a a n Lognorma l

LognoimalQ-QPkitfor D

-2. 5 -2. 0 -1. 5 -1. 0 -0. 5 0. 0 0. 5 Theoretica l Quantile

s (Standar

d Normal ) 1 0 1. 5 2. 0 2. 5

M-55 . Mea n .1.1941 . S d = 0.572 9 Slop e = 1.0D8 0 Intercep

t = 0.0000 . Correlation . R = 0.5906689 8 Liliefor e Statisti c = 0.054 . Critica l Value(0.05 ) = 0.119 . Dat a ar e Lognorma lNorma l Q O Plo t fo rE

-0. 2 0. 0 0. 2 Theoretica l Quarmle

s (Standar

d Normal' , 0. 4 0. 8 l. C

N • 3 . Mean = 2.6333 . S d . 1.C31 7 Slop e = 1.03S9 . Intercep

t = 0.0000 . Correlation . R = 0.94M2CK 1 Shapiro-W * Statisti c - 0.899 . Critica l Value(0.05) • = 0.767 . Dat

a a m Norma l

Normal Q- Q Plo

t fo rF

•2. 0 -1. 5 -1. 0 -0 5 0. 0 0. 5 Theoretica l Quarffle s (Standar d Normal ) 1. 0 1. 5 2. 0 2. 5

N . 33 . Mean . 3.5864 . S d = 1.795 4 Slop * = 1.0086 . Hercept = 0.0000 . Correlation . R = 0.9830384 6 Shapiro-Wil t Statisti c = 0.960 . Crtica l Value(O.OS ) = 0.931 . Data ar e Norma lNonnalQ- Q Plo t fo rG

•1. 0 -0. 5 0 0 0. 5

Theoretica l Quant

a (Standar

d Normal ) 1. 0 1. 5 2. C

N . 2D . Mea

n = 2.5050 . S d = 1.337 1 Slop e = 0.9968 , Intercep

t = 0.0000 . Correlation . R = Q.9602613 1 Shawo-Wil k

Statsti c= 0.911 . Crtica l Value(O.OS ) = 0.905 . Dat a ar e Norma l LognormalQ- Q Plo

t fo rH

Theoretica l Quartite s (Standar d Normal ) M = 176 . Mean = 0.8687 . Sd.0.573 2 Slop e = 0.9896 , Intercep

t ^ 0.0000 , Contblion . R = 0.9827717 2 UlCefor s Statislj c= 0.033 . Critica l Vabe(0.05 ) = 0.067 . Data not Lognorma lLognorma l Q- Q Plo t fo rLak e Count y

Theoretica l Quarto (Standar

dNome! } N - 412 . Mea

n ° 0.9348 . S d - C.E67 4 Slope = 0.9908 . Intercep t • O.CO . Correlation . R = 0.9874530 3 Ullidor e StaalK : = 0.072 . Criticzl V«!ue(O.Q5 ) = 0.044 . Dal anot Lognoima l
Lognoma l Q- Q Plo

t fo rOU 9

Theoretica l QuarM M (Standar d Noimal ) N = 236 . Mea n • 0.9841 . S d = 0.559 2 Slop e = 0.9951 . Intercep t = 0.0000 . Correlation . R = 0.98970S3 3 Uiefor a Statisti c = 0.062 . Cntica l Value(0.05 ) = 0.056 . Dat a no

t Loflnorma lLognormalO Q Plo t fo rSU 1

Theoretica l Quantiles (Standar d Normal ) N.114 . Mea n •1.1021 . S d • 0.555 1 Slope =• 1.0012 . Intercep t = 0.0000 . Correlation . R = 0.9914517 8 LilWor s Ststisti c = 0.055 . Critica l Va!ue{0.05 ) = 0.083 . Dat a ar e Lognorma lHistogra m

2 4

Histogra m 2 5 T 2 0 - 1 5 - -
< u 1 0 - - 5 - - H—I— H 1 2 1 6 2 0 2 4 Are a C Histogra m

= 6

H—f—I—I—I—I— I 1 2 1 6 2 0 Are a B 2 4

Histogra m 1 6

1 2 1 6 2 0 2 4 Are a DHistogra m

9 y 8 - 7 - • 6 - S T4

8 1 2 1 6 2 0 2 4

Histogra m 5 0 -r4 5 - - 4 0 - - 3 5 - I " 3 0 - • I 25 ' £ 20- - u . 1 5 - 1 0

8 1 2 1 6 2 0 2 4 Area H Histogra m

1 2 1 6 2 0 2 4

Histogra m

8 1 2 1 6 2 0 2 4

OU 9Histogra m

2 4 Histogra m

2 4

### APPENDI X D Time-Serie s Dat afo r

Elevate dBloo dLea dChildre n1 4 Chil d 44 4

1 2

1 0

^ 

# j •g o 5

S 

### * * s * J& Dat eChil d 93 8

0 - DateChild 165 8

•8 o 

## s

Dat e2 0

1 8

1 6
1 4 1 2

1 0 Chil d 541 5

e> pa

Nov-0 4 Dec-0 4 Jan-0 5 Feb-0 5 Mar-0 5 Date Apr-0 5 May-0 5 Jun-0 5Chil d742 6

1 2

1 0

I 6 - -
O O 4 - -

0 - Oct-0 5 Nov-0 5 Dat e1 6 Chil d 763 1

1 4

1 2 -

1 0 I 

# j

• a §

Dat e

### APPENDI X E

Evaluatio n o f

LCCH P i n Term s o f

Performanc e Standard s fo r OU9,200 3 - 200 5

## Appendi x E

Evaluatio n o f

LCCH Pi n Term s o f

Performanc e Standard s fo rOU 9 Th e performanc e o f

th e LCCH Pi n meetin g th e remedia l actio n objective s establishe db y EP A fo r OU 9 wa s evaluate dusin g dat acollecte db y th e progra mdurin g th e calenda r year s 2003 , 200 4 an d2005 . Th e followin g repor t summarize s step s take nt o assembl e an danalyz e thos e dat a an dpresent s th e result s o f evaluatio no f

th e dat ai n accordanc e wit hth e Method s an dStandard s fo r Evaluatin g th e Performanc e o f th e LCCH P prepare db y th e LCCH P Performanc e Standard s Workin g Grou p (Jul y 2002) . Fo r th e purpose s o f

evaluatin g th e program' s performance , OU 9 i s subdivide dint o tw o areas , describe da s Statistica l Units . Statistica l Uni t 1 include s th e previousl y define dsubarea s A , B , D an dE . o r

th e area s withi nth e Cit y o f Leadvill e an dStringtow n (Figur e 1-1) . Statistica l Uni t 2 include s th e subarea s C , Fan dG(Figur e 1-1) . A s state di n th e Method s an dStandard s document , th e remed y fo r aStatistica l Uni t

wil l b e considere dcomplet e whe n th e followin g performanc e standard s ar e achieved . 

### Standar d 1 Th e tota l numbe r

o f bloo dlea dprogra mparticipant s fro mth e Statistica l Uni t ove r th e precedin g 3-yea r

perio d(i.e. , th e su mo f

th e numbe r

o f participant s fo r

eac ho f thre e runnin g years ) shal l b e a t

leas t 18 0 childre n (ag e 6-7 2 months) , an dth e 3-yea r averag e recruitmen t

o f newl y eligibl e individual s shal l b e 50 % o r greater . 

### Standar d 2 Base do n th e consolidate dbloo dlea ddat ase t fo r th e thre e yea r

period , th e calculate dP1 0 valu e shal l b e 5 % o r

less , an dth e calculate dP1 5 valu e shal l b e 1 % o r less , wit hn o individua l P1 0 valu e i n an y o f

th e thre e year s exceedin g avalu e o f 8% .

1 J:\BLDOI\OI024-l\Ta5 k

10,200 5 Annua l Rcpon\Appcndi x E- PcrfSlds\200 5 App x EFJNAL_MW06.do c

### Standard B Base do n th e consolidate dbloo dlea ddat ase t fo r th e thre e yea r

period , th e probabilit y shal l b e les s tha n 5 % tha t th e tru e P1 0 valu e exceed s 7% . an dth e probabilit y shal l b e les s tha n 5 % tha t th e tru e P1 5 valu e exceed s 2% . Standar d 4 Base do n th e se t

o f soi l lea ddat afo r

bloo dlea dprogra mparticipant s durin g th e precedin g thre e yea r

period , th e proportio n o f soi l lea dvalue s abov e th e 70 thpercentil e o f th e Statistica l Uni t

a s awhol e wil l no t

b' e significantl y lowe r

tha n30% , unles s th e reaso n fo r th e differenc e i s unavoidable . 

## Performanc e Standar d Dat aCompilatio n Th e type s o f

dat ause di n th e performanc e evaluatio n included : numbe r o f childre n unde r

si x year s ol dparticipatin g i n th e bloo dlea d monitorin g progra meac h year (childre n havin g a t

leas t on e tes t tha t year) ; estimat e o f

numbe r o f newl y eligibl e children , eac hyear , fro mkindergarte n enrollmen t

fro mMargare t

J . Pitt s Elementar y Schoo l an dJoyfu l Nois e Kindergarte n an dliv e birt hcoun t fro mth e Colorad o Departmen t o f Publi c Healt han dEnvironment ; annua l averag e (arithmeti c mean ) bloo dlea dlevel s fo r eac hchil dteste di n eac h o f th e thre e years ; individua l first-tes t

result s fo r

childre n tesie di n eac ho f th e thre e year s wh o reside da t propertie s tha t

ha dsoi l investigatio n results ; an d soi l investigatio n dat afo r al l propertie s investigate dthroug h200 5 b y th e LCCHP . Convention s use dt o selec t bloo dlea dtes t

result s fo r

inclusio n i n th e annua l averag e fo r eac hchil dan di n th e annua l summar y fo r teste dchildre n wer e consisten t wit hth e dat areductio n approac hinclude di n Attachmen t 8 o f th e Method s an dStandard s document . Th e 200 5 bloo d lea ddat ause dfo r

th e performanc e standard s evaluatio n ar e consisten t wit hthos e presente di n thi s 200 5 annua l report .
2 J:\BLD01\010244\Tas k

I0'i200 5 Annua l Repon\Appendi x E- PcrfSlds\200 5 App x EFINAL_CMM06.do cI f

ther e ar e an y childre n wit helevate dbloo dlea dlevel s attributabl e t o source s outsid e o f OU 9 o r beyon dth e contro l o f

th e LCCHP , thos e children' s tes t result s ar e exclude dfro mth e annua l dat areports . N o childre n wer e eliminate dfro mth e 200 5 dat aset . T o complet e th e evaluatio n o f Standar d4 , soi l investigatio nresult s wer e compile db y computin g a n averag e lea dconcentratio n i n yar dsoi l fo r eac ho f th e teste dpropertie s usin g al l th e reporte dresult s fo r

soil s collecte dfro mth e 0
- t o 6
- inc hdept hinterva l an dfro mth e surface-to
root-zon e depth s o f

garde n be darea s (typicall y fro mth e surfac e t o 4- 8 inc hdepths) . A t eac h sample dproperty , th e averag e yard-soi l concentratio n i s asimpl e arithmeti c mean . Ther e i s n o weightin g fo r

area s represente db y eac hsampl e becaus e representativ e area s ar e no t estimate dfo r mos t o f th e sample s collecte db y th e LCCHP . Thi s approac hprovide s agenera l descriptio n o f th e averag e lea dconcentration s i n yar dsoil , bu t thes e value s ma y b e biase db y th e number s o f sample s collecte di n differen t area s o f th e yard . Fo r investigate dpropertie s wher e soi l remediatio n ha s alread y bee n completed , post remediatio n soil-lea ddat aar e typicall y no t available . I n thes e cases , asubstitut e valu e o f 20 0 ing/K g i s assigne dt o th e propert y a s th e averag e yard-soi l lea dconcentration . Give n th e statistica l metho duse dt o compar e averag e soi l lea dvalue s (comparison s o f uppe r percentile s fro mtw o dat asets) , th e substitutio n valu e use da t th e lo w en do f

th e dat adistributio n i s no t critica l (i.e. , doe s no t

influenc e th e compariso n tes t result) . Eac hchild' s firs t

tes t dat e an dresidenc e addres s wer e compare dt o th e lis t o f teste dan d remediate dproperties . ] f th e chil dreside da t

apropert y wit hsoil-tes t

results , thos e result s wer e linke dt o th e child . I f

th e chil dreside da t

apropert y wit hsoil-tes t

results , bu t

th e propert y ha d bee n remediate dbefor e th e child' s firs t bloo dlea dtes t

date , the n th e replacemen t resul t fo r ai remediate dproperty , 20 0 mg/Kg , wa s linke dt o th e child . Resultin g dat aset s use dfo r statistica l evaluation s i n th e performanc e standar devaluatio n ar e include da s Attachmen t 1 . 

## Statistica l Evaluatio n o f

Dat a Th e sit e i s divide dint o tw o unit s fo r statistica l evaluatio n o f

bloo dlea dlevel s i n youn g childre n residin g withi nOU9 . Th e firs t unit , Statistica l Uni t

1 (SU1) . comprise s Area s A , B , D

J:\BLDOIWI0244\Tas kIO\J00 5 Anima l Rcpon\Appcndi x E - PerfSlds\200 5 App x E FlNAL_04M06.do c

### an dE . Statistica l Uni t 2 (SU2 ) comprise s Area s C , Fan dG , bu t becaus e th e performanc e standard s hav e bee n attaine dfo r thi s area , n o furthe r

evaluatio n i s required . Th e followin g evaluatio n step s wer e complete dfo r SU1 : Fo r eac ho f th e thre e year s (2003-2005) , th e tota l numbe r o f childre n teste da t age s unde r 6 year s ol dwa s counted . Fo r eac ho f th e thre e year s (2003-2005) , th e numbe r o f childre n unde r

6 year s ol d teste dfo r th e firs t tim e tha t yea r wa s counted . Fo r eac ho f th e thre e year s (2003-2005) , th e se t o f annua l averag e bloo dlea d levels , on e valu e fo r

eac hparticipatin g child , wa s teste dfo r normality , an dP1 0 an dP I 5 value s wer e identifie dusin g ametho dappropriat e t o th e dat a distribution . Fo r th e thre e year s combined , th e se t o f annua l averag e bloo dlea dlevels , on e valu e fo r eac hchil dparticipatin g i neac ho f th e thre e years , wa s teste dfo r normality , an dP1 0 an dP I 5 value s wer e identifie dusin g ametho dappropriat e t o th e dat adistribution . Fo r th e thre e year s (2003-2005 ) combined , th e soi l lea dvalue s a t propertie s wher e teste dchildre n reside da t th e tim e o f

thei r firs t tes t wer e compile dfo r compariso n t o th e soi l lea dvalue s a t al l o f th e propertie s teste dwithi n th e SU . I f th e P1 0 an dP1 5 value s identifie dfo r annua l an dthree-yea r

combine ddat aset s fo r

a n individua l S U me t

thei r performanc e standards , the n th e uncertaint y associate dwit hth e estimate s o f th e P1 0 an dP I 5 value s i s evaluate dt o determin e whethe r th e possibl e error s associate dwit h thos e value s ar e acceptabl e fo r decisio n makin g i naccordanc e wit hPerformanc e Standar d3 . 

## Result s o f Statistica l Evaluatio n fo rYear s 2003-200 5 Th e result s o f

th e performanc e evaluatio n fo ryear s 2003-200 5 ar e liste d o n Tabl e E-l . Statistica l Uni t1 (Area s A , B , D , E ) Tabl e E- l list s th e result s fo r th e SU 1 performanc e evaluation . Ther e wer e 36 0 childre n fro mSU 1 teste di n 2003 , 200 4 an d200 5 combined . Thi s exceed s th e performanc e standar do f 18 0 fo r th e 3-yea r tim e period .

4 J:\BLD01WI0244\Tasl cI0\200 i Annua l Rcpon\Appcndi x E - Pcrf Slds\200 5 App x E FINAL_WW06.do cTh e estimat e o f newl y eligibl e childre n teste dwa s complete dfo r th e entir e site , rathe r tha n b y SU , becaus e ther e ar e n o dat aavailabl e t o describ e th e relativ e proportion s o f newl y eligibl e childre n residin g i n eac hstatistica l unit . Whe n compare dt o th e numbe r o f ne w birth s an dnumbe r

o f childre n enrollin g i n kindergarte n eac hyear , i t appear s tha t

th e numbe r

o f ne w childre n teste dfro mOU 9 exceed s th e require dminimu mo f 7 0 percen t

o f th e newl y eligibl e childre n fo r

eac hyea r

fro m200 3 throug h2005 . Th e calculate dP1 0 an dP I 5 value s fo r eac hyea r

an dfo r th e thre e year s combine dar e reporte do n Tabl e E- l an dshow n graphicall y o n Figur e E-2 . Th e P1 0 an dP1 5 value s fo r SU 1 i n 200 5 ar e 1.5 % an d0.2% , respectively . Th e distributio n o f th e 200 5 bloo dlea ddat ase t wa s determine dt o b e log-normall y distributed . A plo t o f th e dat adistributio n an dspreadshee t mode l use dfo r thes e calculation s ar e provide da s attachment s i n thi s Appendix . Th e P1 0 valu e fo r th e thre e year s combine d(2003-2005 ) i s 4.2% , an dth e P I 5 valu e i s 0. 8 % withi n SU1 . Thi s dataset ; i s bes t fi t b y alog-norma l distribution , an dth e spreadshee t mode l provide di n th e Method s an d Standard s documen t

wa s use d1 0 calculat e th e P1 0 an dP I 5 values . Thes e result s mee t th e performanc e standard s fo r th e thre e yea r

P1 0 an dP I 5 o f

5 % an d1% , respectively , an dcontinu e th e downwar dtren do f

thes e value s observe dove r th e las t 4 years . Th e uncertaint y analysi s (Standar d3 ) wa s performe dt o evaluat e error s associate dwit h th e P1 0 an dP I 5 valu e estimates . Th e probabilit y o f th e tru e P I 0 valu e exceedin g 7 % i s les s tha n 1% . Th e probabilit y o f

th e tru e P I 5 exceedin g 2 % i s als o les s tha n 1% . Therefore , SU 1 bloo d lea ddat amee t

th e performanc e standards . Result s o f th e uncertaint y analysi s ar e include di n th e attachment s 1 0 thi s Appendi x an dinclud e graphica l presentation s o f th e frequenc y an dcumulativ e frequenc y distributio n diagrams . Regardin g soil-lea dlevel s fo r teste dchildren , th e compariso n performe dt o evaluat e Standar d4 indicate s tha t

2 8 percen t

o f th e assigne dsoi l lea dvalue s fo r participatin g childre n (soi l lea da t 2 3 o f 8 3 properties ) ar e greate r tha n th e 70thpercentil e fo r al l soi l lea dvalue s obtaine dt o dat e withi nth e statistica l unit . Base do n th e evaluatio n criteri aoutline di n th e Method s an d Standard s fo r

Evaluatin g th e Performanc e oftheLCCHP . childre n teste dfro mSU 1 resid e a t propertie s tha t

adequatel y represen t

propertie s wit helevate dsoil-lea dlevel s withi n th e S U a s a whole . Therefore , SU 1 meet s performanc e standar dnumbe r 4 .

5 J:\BLDOI\OI02l4\Tasl i lO'JOO S Annua l RcponXAppcndi x E • Pcr f Sids\200 5 App x E FINAL_04W06.do c

### Statistica l Uni t2 (Area s C , F , G ) Fo r SU2 , al l performanc e standard s wer e attaine da t th e en do f

200 2 (i.e. , year s 2000
- 2002) . Becaus e th e highes t P1 0 an dPI 5 value s wer e bot hfro mth e yea r 2002 , th e wor k

grou p recommende dtha t

ates t fo r tren db e performe da t

th e en do f

200 3 usin g fou r

year s o f bloo dlea d dat arathe r

tha n jus t three . Th e tes t

fo r tren ddi dno t

indicat e astatisticall y significan t upwar d tren da t th e 9 5 percen t

confidenc e level . Th e remed y i s considere dcomplet e withi n Area s C , F an dGo f OU9 , an dth e P1 0 an dP I 5 value s ar e n o longe r bein g calculated . 

## Summar y Th e dat acollecte db y th e LCCH P fro m2003-200 5 wer e use dt o complet e th e dat a analyse s require dfo r

evaluatio n o f

th e program' s performanc e durin g thos e years . Thos e analyse s indicat e tha t

th e performanc e standard s hav e bee n achieve dwithi n bot hStatistica l Uni t 1 (subarea s A , B , D an dE ; Cit y o f Leadvill e an dStringtow n areas ) an dStatistica l Uni t 2 (subarea s C , Fan dG ; outlyin g neighborhood s aroun dLeadvill e an dLak e Fork Mobil e Hom e Park) . Th e ra w dat aan doutpu t

fro mstatistica l analyse s describe di n thi s summar y ar e attache d fo r reference .

6 J:\BLD01\OI0244\Tas kI (MOO S Annua l Rcpon\Appencli » E • Per f Sids\200 5 App x E FINAL_04CW06.dci c

## Tabl e E-l . Performanc e Evaluatio n Results , 2003-200 5

1 . Th e tota l numbe r

o f participant s i s a t

leas t 1 8 0 fo r eac hS U an dat

leas t 50 % o f ne w eligibl e childre n (sit e wide ) participat e o n averag e fo r

a3-y r period . 2 . Fo r a3-y r period , th e calculate dPI O valu e < 5 % an dth e calculate dP I 5 valu e < 1% ; n o individua l PI O valu e exceedin g 8% . 3 . Fo r a3-y r period , th e probabilit y tha t th e tru e PI O exceed s 7 % i s les s tha n 5 % an dth e probabilit y tha t

th e tru e P1 5 exceed s 2 % i s les s tha n 5% . 4 . Fo r childre n participatin g ove r th e las t 3 yrs , th e proportio n o f

associate dsoi l lea dvalue s greate r tha n th e 70 thpercentil e valu e fo r th e entir e Statistica l Uni t

i s no t significantl y lowe r tha n 30% . 

### Fina l Decisio n '^Statistica l UnitlilOff t ': ' - " ^ '^••'

(A , B , D,'E ) ' "^' : 

### ^

f < 36 0 participant s ove r

las t 3 years ; >90 % o f estimate dne w eligibl e childre n(sit e wide ) fo r

eac ho f 3 year s 3-yrP1 0 =4.2% , P I 5 = 0.8 % 200 3 PI O = 6.0% , P I 5 = 1.4 % 200 4 P 1 0 = 4.0% , P 1 5 = 0.3 % 200 5 P 1 0 = 1 .5% , P 1 5 = 0.2 % Probabilit y tha t

th e tru e PI O exceed s 7 % i s les s tha n 1 % Probabilit y tha t

th e tru e P I 5 exceed s 2 % i s les s tha n1 % 28 % o f soi l lea dvalue s fo r participatin g childre n ar e greate r tha n th e 7 0 percentil e fo r

soi l leadvalue s determine dt o dat e i n Statistica l Uni t 1 . 

### Standard ? •: - it-s« ! tey s t 

### •#*Met? * ye s

ye s

ye s

ye s 

### Statistica l Uni t

1 ha s me t

al l performanc e standards . ^'•' V i 

### * Statistica l Uni t

2 ' 

# •:'•*' (C,F,G) . • • -' : 

# . ?:: ; Standar dme t

i n 2002 .

Standar dme t

i n 200 2

Standar dme t

i n 200 2

Standar dme t

i n 200 2 

### Standar d Met ? ye s

ye s

ye s

ye s 

### Statistica l uni t

2 me t al l performanc e standard s a t

th e en do f

2002 ; 200 3 result s confirme dn o increasin g tren di n PI O an d P1 5 values .

J:\BLDOI\nin244\Tm k

1IA2(KI 5 Atimin l RcpnrtWppcndi n E - Per f Std.«\200 5 App i E FINAL_04n4IM.do c

### Appendi x EAttachment s Documentatio n o f

Dat aAnalyse s Complete dt o Evaluat e Performanc e o f Lak e Count y Communit y Healt hProgra m 2003-200 5Recruitmen t Rat e Estimat eRecruitmen t Rat e i n LCCH P Bloo d Lea d Monitorin g Progra m (withi n OU 9 boundaries )

Yea r 199 3 199 4 199 5 199 6 199 7 199 8 199 9 200 0 200 1 200 2 200 3 200 4 200 5 Live-birth s Coun t

9 2 9 6 11 2 11 4 100 12 9 13 3 13 9 14 0 14 4 12 4 11 4 12 4 Kindergarte n Coun t 11 3 12 4 11 7 10 2 9 8 11 5 10 6 10 3 10 0 10 0 9 5 Ne w Childre n

Move d I n

1 0 2 3

- 8 3 -2 9 -3 3 -4 4 Ne wEligibl e Childre n

Lak e Count y

11 0 13 1 13 6 13 1 14 3 11 5 9 1 7 0 OU 9

7 4 8 8 9 1 8 8 9 6 7 7 6 1 4 7 First-tim e Teste d

OU 9 152(1994+1995 ) 14 9 14 5 8 8 7 7 8 7 8 5 14 1 10 4 9 4 8 3 Recruitmen t Rat e

w/i n OU 9

1.1 9 0.8 8 0.9 5 0.9 7 1.4 7 1.3 5 1.5 4 1.7 7 Notes: 98-0 5 averag e rat e = 1.2 7 Live-births

Count from Lake County Health

Department. Kindergarten

Count from Margaret

J. Pitts Elementary

School and Joyful Noise Kindergarten

based on the number of children 5 years and older on October 1 of calendar

year. New Children

Moved In is the kindergarten

count this year minus the live births 5 years previous. New Eligible Children/Lake

County is the sum of # of live births from previous

year and M of children moved into site. New Eligible Children/OU9

represents

67 percent of Lake County value. Participation

Rate is the first-time

tested count divided by the estimate

of new eligible children in OU9. Italics indicates

estimated

values. NA =

Not Available.

2005participation_022706.xl sStatistica l Uni t 1 PI 0 an d P1 5 Calculation s an d Uncertaint yAnalysi sSU 1 200 5

INSTRUCTION S

1 Ente rbloo d lea d value s int o coulm n B (ma x= 50 0 values ) ,- . •• : . • ~ ^ 2 Pres s Contro l C : - ' * '.' ' ' - • "'•' . .'•.'.'..'••"-'•'< • •'.••', - ' - . - ' J- | 3,Calculate d an d observe d RI O an d p,,15.values are,show n below "v*'.'•'•'"/,;•-.••;V: ; -I l 4 [Accep t ifi'Ahderso n . ' Summar yStatistic s N tota l 11 4 G M 3.0 1 GS D 1 .7 4 >io'""~"~'^~~ i .5 % "^ P1 5 -0.2 % ADSta l -114.63 6 A D Critica l 0.75 2 Decisio n Accep t L N Ran k Pb B In(PbB ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. 3 1. 4 1. 5 1. 5 1. 6 1. 7 1. 7 1. 7 1. 7 1. 8 1. 8 1. 8 1. 9 1. 9 2 2 2. 1 2. 1 2. 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.26 2 0.33 6 0.40 5 0.40 5 0.47 0 0.53 1 0.53 1 0.53 1 0.53 1 0.58 8 0.58 8 0.58 8 0.64 2 0.642 0.69 3 0.69 3 0.74 2 0.74 2 0.74 2 plil e

0.00 9 0.01 7 0.02 6 0.03 5 0.04 3 0.05 2 0.06 1 0.07 0 0.07 8 0.08 7 0.09 6 0.10 4 0.11 3 0.12 2 0.13 0 0.13 9 0.14 8 0.15 7 0.16 5 0.17 4 0.18 3 0.19 1 0.20 0 0.20 9 0.21 7 0.22 6 0.23 5 0.24 3 z-scor e

-2.37 8 -2.11 1 -1.94 2 -1.81 5 -1.71 2 -1.62 4 -1.54 8 -1.47 9 -1.41 7 -1.36 0 -1.30 7 -1.25 7 -1.21 1 -1.16 6 -1.12 4 -1.08 4 -1.04 6 -1.00 9 -0.97 3 -0.93 9 -0.90 5 ^0.87 3 -0.842 -0.81 1 -0.78 1 -0.75 2 -0.72 3 -0.69 5 m u sigm a 1.1 0

0.5 6

I Z(i ) 2i- 1 Anderso n Darlin g Calc s n+1- i Z(n+1-i ) term(i ) Ra wA D Adjuste d A D 

### 1 2 0.0235 5 0.0235 5 1

3 11 4 11 3 0.0235 5 0.0235 5 -3.77226 8

-11.316 8 -H3.8676 .

1 -alph a i;;.-114.6365 •

0.950

3. 0 2. 0 - 1. 0 - X I ? 0. 0 -1. 0 - -2. 0 -3. 5 -2. 5 -1. 5 -0. 5 0. 5 Z-scor e 1. 5 2. 5 3. 5

Pb B L N Fit-N o CensoringSU1_2005.xl sU >

o o 

## t n o o ( V W o = • n "J T O E
i c

. o

i n * - C M <£ >

CD 1. 1 E w N

L o

i n o >

co Q

inen * c o

. . i n c o in a> ^ C O T

co co C M C M o o C M C M q q o d 5 t o co co

co co C M C M o o C M C M q q d d in CO in o i in in o

in q co q rv j q

d q

C N (X)U |

° - " 5 " D X)

- - Q- D

) ~ TJ- £ <na -c mg TO 2 mQ iS^l l i- o - t S ! o c " o < o o £ *- 

### I s o 5 '- ^ ! 

### t e 

### S 3 f c S re 8 z i^u j a . q < , O ^ C M C O T f U a 

### 5 C O ( D Tj - C O C

M C M C O T CM O C O I

D >3
- CM i n i n i n r

r - ^ r r TT CMCMCMCMCMCMfMC M

qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqoqqoqo o ddddddddddddddddo'dddddo'ddddo' d OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCMCMCMCMCMCMCMC M OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOCOCOU31DIO( D qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqp'-'-T-'-CMCNiojo j ddddddddddddo'ddddddddddddo'dd d
C M CMIC M C M COiCOICOiC O

inID o*-cMcOTTin<r>r^coO 5 CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMC M W a>

o Z 0 0

### 2003-200 5 Uncertainty Simulatfoh i INSTRUCTION S

1 . Ente rdat a i n yello wcell s 2 . Ru n Crysta l Bal l simulatio n t o evaluat e uncertaint yi n P1 0 an d P1 5 values . 3 . Characteriz e result s a s th e probabilit ytha t th e tru e P1 0 valu e i s greate rtha n 7 % o rth e probabilit ytha t th e tru e P1 5 i s greate rtha n 2% . INPU T G M

GS D n CALCULATE D

mu-ha t sigma-ha t P10-ha t P15-ha t n- 1 3.4 9 G M derive d b yfittin g bloo d lea d dat a t o a lognorma l distributio n 1.8 4 GS D derive d b yfittin g bloo d lea d dat a t o a lognorma l distributio n 36 1 Numbe ro f dat a point s i n th e bloo d lea d dat a se t 1.249 9 0.609 8 36 0 PDFu(mu )

PDF v Chisq(n-l )

m u var-ha t sigm a P1 0 P1 5 -0.4806 3

394.91 2 1.2653 3 0.3389 4 0.5821 9

£ TMonte'•:€aflo l Simulatio n Results ! j; mu «np -i •. k ': Percentil e P1 0 P1 5 4.2 %

0.8 % 95.0% i

5.6 % 1.3 % 6.9 %

1.8 %Forecast : P1 0 Cell : C2 6 Summary : Entir e rang e i s fro m 2.0 % t o 7.8 % Bas e cas e i s 4.2 % Afte r10,00 0 trials , th e std . erro ro f th e mea n i s 0.0 % Statistics : Trial s Mea n Media n Mod e Standar d Deviatio n Varianc e Skewnes s Kurtosi s Coeff . o f Variabilit y Minimu m Maximu m Rang e Widt h Mea n Std . Erro r Valu e 10,00 0 4.3 % 4.2 % 0.8 % 0.0 % 0.3117 3 3.0 3 0.1769 9 2.0 % 7.8 % 5.7 % 0.0 %
Cumulativ e FrequencyView-V--.-. ; .;,;•. '

•• • - •---•• •• '

2.2 % 2.5 % 2.7 % 3.0 % 3.3 % 3.6 % 3.8 % 1.1 %

2.2% 2.5 % 2.7 % 3.0 % 3.3 % 3.6 % 3.6 % 1.1 % 1.4 %

P1 0 an d P1 5 Uncertaint y Simulation05.xl s P1 0 dist .Forecast : P1 5 Cell : C2 7

Summary : Entir e rang e i s fro m 0.3 % t o 2.2 % Bas e cas e i s 0.8 % Afte r10,00 0 trials , th e std . erro ro f th e mea n i s 0.0 % Statistics : Trial s Mea n Media n Mod e Standar d Deviatio n Variance Skewnes s Kurtosi s Coeff . o f Variabilit y Minimu m Maximu m Rang e Widt h Mea n Std . Erro r Valu e 10,00 0 0.9 % 0.8 % 0.2 % 0.0 % 0.6151 9 3.4 9 0.2811 8 0.3 % 2.2 % 1.9 % 0.0 %
10.000 TMA^;;';r.;i^^^|ii^||^J.iVi.-- . " Cumulativ e Frequenc

yVie w •' . ...... . 9.990 Displayed

0.3 % 0.4% . 0.5% ' 0.6% ' 0.6 % 0.7 % 0.6 % 0.9% 1 D % 1.1 % 12 % 1.3 % 1.4 % 1.5 % 1.6 % 17X - '1.811', ' 1.8%'•;- . •- '' - •

P1 0 an d P1 5 Uncertaint ySimulation05.xl s P15dist .T es tResult s fo rPerformanc e Standar d 4 Participan t

Representatio n o f

Soi l Lea dCondition s Withi n Statistica l Uni t

1SU 1 2003-200 5

Inde x 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 Tes t Se t ( m

1160 0 489 1 480 9 477 3 407 6 341 9 333 8 333 3 297 7 280 5 276 7 266 1 265 0 259 8 240 0 232 3 223 9 215 4 215 3 213 7 181 4 179 7 172 9 165 2 164 2 162 7 155 7 150 7 142 8 141 4 Referenc e Se t (S ) 1823 3 997 3 947 8 890 0 862 0 820 0 786 7 700 0 688 4 640 0 616 7 562 3 562 2 560 0 556 7 550 0 550 0 542 1 540 7 511 7 492 8 473 7 460 0 460 0 442 0 435 3 430 0 430 0 427 8 414 0 R > X ?

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

### s>x ?

1 

### 1 1 

### 1 1 1 1 1 1 

### 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

### 1 1 

### 1 1 1 1 

### 1 1 1 1 1 1 R (test )

S (reference ) Count s

8 3 48 0 G M

86 0 108 6 GS D

2. 8 2. 9 I Cutof f (X ) | 1679 [Alph a 0.0 5 Z-tes t fo ruppe rbi n N > X N Tota l Phat l Phat 2 Pha t Phat'(l-Phat ) z P(TesKRef) Tes t

2 3 83 0.27 7 0.30 0 0.29 7 0.20 9 -0.422 0.33 7 Re f

14 4 48 0

I f P < 0.05 , th e tes t se t i s probabl y under-representin g th e hig h en d o f th e referenc e dat a se t Powe r Delt a Z(1-a ) Z b Powe r 0.1 0

1.64 5 0.22 8 59 % I f powe r i s low , the n a negativ e resul t ( p > 0.0 ! ma y no t b e reliabl e CONCLUSIO N Th e soi l dat a PAS S Performance Standar d 4 .

PS4SoilP b SU 1 03-05.xl s

## Performanc e Standar d 4 : SU 1 200 3 - 200 5



# 1. 0 0. 9 0. 8



### S 0. 6 

### o 0. 5 0. 4 

### E O 0. 3 0. 2 0. 1 

## o. o 4- - 10 0 

### * Referenc e nTes t



### 1,00 0 10,00 0 

## Concentratio n o f Lea d i n Soi l (ppm ) 100,00 0

### APPENDE X F Technica l Memorandu mfro mth e Dat aRevie w Meetin g

Februar y 2,200 6

### TECHNICA LMEMORANDU M

Date : Marc h30 , 200 6 To : Unite dStat e Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y

Kid s First/Lak e Count y Communit y Healt hProgra mWork Grou p From : Performanc e Standard s Work Grou p RE : Californi aGulc hDat aRevie w fo r Operabl e Uni t

9 - Residentia l Th e Performanc e Standard s Work Grou p (PSWG ) wa s taske db y th e Kid s First/Lak e Count y Communit y Healt hProgra mWork Grou p (Wor k

Group ) t o develo p astep-wis e approac ht o furthe r evaluat e an dpotentiall y identif y th e lea dsources , o r combinatio n o f

lea dsources , tha t ma y b e determinan t

factor s i n children' s bloo dlea dlevel s withi n th e residentia l portion s o f th e Californi aGulc hSite . I n reviewin g comment s receive db y th e 200 3 Independen t Revie w Pane l (IRP) , th e Wor k

Grou p recommende dthi s activit y t o evaluat e th e specifi c comment s regardin g th e observatio n tha t th e calculate dpercentag e o f th e participant s wit hbloo dlea d level s greate r

tha n 1 0 an d1 5 ug/d L(P1 0 an dPI5) , respectively , ha dno t significantl y decline dove r

time , particularl y i n Statistica l Uni t 1 [prio r t o 2003] . Th e PSW Gdetermine dtha t ascreenin g leve l assessmen t o f th e correlatio n betwee n pain t (identifie db y th e IR Pa s th e possibl e dominan t exposur e tha t

ma y b e inhibitin g th e furthe r declin e o f P1 0 an dP1 5 values ) an dbloo dlea dlevel s wa s a n appropriat e firs t ste p i n th e process . Additiona l evaluatio n o f al l trend s an dpaire ddat acollecte db y th e progra mwa s als o performe dt o addres s comment s fro mth e IRP . O n Februar y 2 , 200 6 th e PSW Gme t wit hth e Wor k Grou p an dmember s o f

th e communit y t o presen t th e finding s o f

thi s additiona l dat a evaluation . A lis t

o f th e figures , diagram s an dtable s presente da t th e meetin g i s presente da t th e en do f thi s memorandum . Th e presentatio n t o th e Work Grou p include darevie w o f communit y bloo dlea dleve l trend s an davariet y o f

graphica l dat apresentation s an ddat asummarie s intende dt o explor e an d evaluat e th e relationshi p betwee n bloo dlea dlevel s an denvironmenta l dat afro mth e source s investigate db y th e program . Th e Fishe r Exac t Tes t wa s use di n th e screenin g leve l assessmen t

t o furthe r

evaluat e th e contributio n o f lead-bas e pain t

exposur e a t

th e site . Figure s fro mth e 200 4 Annua l Report , additiona l bi-variat e plot s an dbo x an dwhiske r diagram s wer e create dt o evaluat e th e mos t likel y determinan t

factor s o f

lea dexposure . Simplifie dmulti-variat e plot s wer e als o create dusin g th e 1994-200 4 data . Finally , th e PSW G presente ddat acomparin g th e observe dchange s i n bloo dlea dlevel s fo r childre n whos e bloo d lea dleve l ha dexceede d1 0 ug/d l a t som e tim e durin g thei r

testin g perio dan dwh o ha da t leas t tw o tests . Thi s compariso n evaluate dth e average , an drang e of , chang e i n bloo dlea dlevel s o f childre n groupe dint o severa l categories , includin g al l childre n withi n OU9 , thos e residin g a t propertie s wher e remediatio n wa s performe dafte r thei r firs t tes t bu t befor e thei r

las t test , n o actio nproperties , an dthos e childre n wh o ha dcontac t onl y wit hth e bloo dlea dprogra m (childre nwh o resid e outsid e o f th e OU 9 sit e boundaries) .

### Californi aGulc hDat aRevie w fo r OU 9 - Residentia l Populate dArea s LCCH P Performanc e Standard s Wor k Grou p Marc h30 , 200 6 Pag e 2 o f 5 Th e followin g bullet s summariz e th e majo r finding s an dconclusion s o f th e additiona l dat a evaluatio n an dth e discussion s a t th e meeting :

• Sinc e th e tim e o f

th e IRP' s revie w i n 2003 , th e P1 0 an dP I 5 value s fo r SU 1 hav e decline dan di n fac t

ar e approachin g level s establishe da s th e Performanc e Standard s fo r

th e progra mtha t

defin e achievemen t

o f th e Program' s Remedia l Actio n Objectives . • Centra l tendenc y indice s o f th e bloo dlea ddata , includin g geometri c mean , arithmeti c mean , an dmedia n continu e t o declin e ove r tim e fo r al l o f OU9 , SU 1 an dwithi n individua l area s o f th e Site . Th e observe ddat ad o indicat e sligh t increase s i n som e o f

thes e value s year

t o year , bu t

th e overal l tren di s i n decline . • Additiona l dat apresente dregardin g communit y bloo dlea dlevel s fo r 2000-200 4 indicat e tha t

SU 1 an di n particula r

Are aD continu e t o hav e th e highes t frequenc y o f childre n wit helevate dbloo dlea dlevel s withi n th e site . Fo r example , ove r

thi s tim e period , approximatel y 50 % o f th e childre n teste dresid e i n SU1 , bu t EB L childre nwithi n SU 1 accoun t fo r 92 % o f th e tota l numbe r

o f EB Lchildre n withi n th e Site . Approximatel y 27 % o f th e childre n teste dresid e i n Are aD , bu t EB L childre n withi n Are aD accoun t fo r 65 % o f th e tota l numbe r

o f EB Lchildre n withi n th e Site . • Screenin g leve l bi-variat e analysi s o f bloo dlea dversu s pain t

lea d(Fishe r

Exac t Test ) di dno t

detec t astatisticall y significan t correlatio n betwee n increase d incidenc e o f

elevate dbloo dlea dlevel s (EBL ) an dan y o f th e pain t

exposur e metric s evaluated . However , thi s doe s no t mea n tha t

lead-base dpain t

ma y no t b e a n importan t

exposur e sourc e i n som e cases , onl y tha t i t doe s no t see mt o b e th e dominan t facto r i n accountin g fo r

elevate dbloo dlea dlevel s i n are achildren . • A s ha s bee n th e cas e i n th e past , bi-variat e plot s o f bloo dlea dversu s environmenta l lea ddat asho w tha t ther e i s n o observabl e correlatio n o r relationshi p betwee n individua l medi alea dconcentration s an dbloo dlea dlevels . Thi s lac k o f ademonstrabl e correlatio n ma y i n par t b e du e t o acombine deffec t fro mman y differen t

variable s (e.g. , soil , paint , dust , age , a s wel l a s behaviora l differences ) an dth e inabilit y o f bi-variat e analysi s t o accoun t fo r multipl e contributin g factor s simultaneously , thereb y weakenin g th e likelihoo do f detectin g asignifican t

correlatio n fo r

an y on e media . Alternativ e dat apresentatio n technique s displayin g th e rang e o f observe dbloo dlea dlevel s a t varyin g range s o f lea dconcentration s i n soi l an dpain t do , however , sho w tha t

th e media n bloo dlea d leve l an drang e o f

bloo dlea dlevel s ten dt o increas e wit hhighe r soi l an dpain t

lea d levels . Thi s observatio n support s th e hypothesi s tha t highe r environmenta l lea d concentration s d o represen t agreate r exposur e risk . • Becaus e o f

th e lac k o f correlatio n betwee n environmenta l lea dlevel s an dbloo d lea dlevel s i t

i s difficul t

t o asses s th e appropriatenes s o f th e sit e specifi c trigge r level s establishe dfo r

th e program . Alternativ e statistica l method s suc ha s multivariat e o r

structura l analysi s woul db e necessar y t o pursu e thi s issu e further . • Relationship s betwee n bloo dlea dan denvironmenta l medi awer e furthe r explore d

### Californi aGulc hDat aRevie w fo r OU 9 - Residentia l Populate dArea s LCCH P Performanc e Standard s Wor k Grou p Marc h30 , 200 6 Pag e 3 o f 5 throug hth e evaluatio no f anumbe r o f subsets , o r

stratification , o f

th e paire ddat a set . Thes e include dth e evaluatio n o f relationship s ove r

differen t period s o f

time , th e evaluatio n o f

th e relationshi p usin g bloo dlea ddat aabov e o r belo w th e median , an devaluatio n o f

th e relationshi p an ddistributio n o f th e bloo dlea ddat aa t differen t range s o f

lea dconcentration s i n th e medi atested . I n addition , th e effec t o f lea di n combination s o f medi awa s explore dthroug hasimplisti c visua l presentatio n o f

th e data . Thes e evaluation s als o di dno t revea l an y statisticall y significan t o r predictabl e correlation . Although , a s note dabove , eac hmedi ama y contribut e alon e o r

i n combinatio n alon g wit hothe r factor s t o a n individua l child' s exposur e t o lead . • Th e dat apresente dcomparin g th e change s i n bloo dlea dlevel s o f EB Lchildre n indicat e aslightl y greate r averag e decreas e i n bloo dlea dlevel s amon g childre n wit helevate dbloo dlea dlevels , whe n arespons e actio n i s take n t o addres s environmenta l medi awit hlea dconcentration s abov e th e trigge r levels , compare d t o educatio n alone . However , th e dat aset s use di n thi s compariso n ar e relativel y smal l an dadditiona l informatio n an danalysi s woul dlikel y b e neede dt o mak e an y definitiv e conclusion s regardin g th e effectivenes s o f certai n element s o f

th e program . • Overall , th e dat aevaluatio nsupport s previou s conclusion s tha t lea di n avariet y o f medi a(soil , paint , dust ) contribut e t o EBL s i n childre n i n OU9 , wit hn o on e dominan t sourc e identified . Base do n th e dat aevaluatio nperformed , th e PSW Gdoe s no t believ e tha t

an y furthe r evaluatio no r

multi-varial e analysi s i s warrante da t thi s time . Th e PSW Gdi drecommen dtha t th e Progra mcontinu e t o focu s it s effort s an dresource s o n evaluatin g an daddressin g potentia l lea dexposure s wit hStatistica l Uni t 1 an dAre aD , i n particular , unti l th e performanc e goal s ar e 

### met . A t th e Februar y 2 n d

### meetin g severa l additiona l dat aevaluatio n request s wer e made . Thes e includ e abasi c statistica l summar y o f mouthin g behavio r

dat aa t achild' s firs t

tes t collecte d throug hfamil y surveys , an dadditiona l informatio n o n environmenta l an dothe r demographi c dat aa t propertie s wher e bot hbloo dlea ddat aan denvironmenta l dat aar e availabl e an dwher e remedia l action s wer e performe ddurin g bloo dlea dtestin g o f elevate dbloo dlea dchildren . Th e followin g i s alis t

o f figures , diagram s an dtable s presente db y th e PSWG :

• 1994-200 4 centra ] tendencie s fo r th e geometri c mean , th e arithmeti c mea n an dth e media n • 2002-200 4 bloo dlea ddat adistributio n fo r Statistica l Uni t

1 an dAre aD , al l test s an dfirs t tim e test s • 1994-200 4 demographi c characteristic s ove r tim e • 1999-200 4 bloo dlea dprogra mparticipatio n • Compariso n o f

1994-199 9 wit h2000-200 4 are ao f residenc e (a t

firs t tim e test ) fo r

### Californi aGulc hDat aRevie w fo r OU 9 - Residentia l Populate dArea s LCCH P Performanc e Standard s Wor k Grou p Marc h30 , 200 6 Pag e 4 o f 5 evaluate dbloo dlea dlevel s (EBLs ) b y percentag e an dtota l numbe r o f childre n • 1994-200 4 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Are a • 1994-200 4 OU 9 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Ag e Grou p (i n years ) • 1994-200 4 Averag e 0- 6 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . First-tes t Bloo dLea dLeve l (bi-variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Bloo dLea dLevel s b y Averag e 0- 6 inc hSoi l Lea dLevel s (bo x an d whiske r diagram ) • 1994-200 4 Maximu mPain t Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t Bloo dLea dLeve l (bi-variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Statistica l Uni t 1 - Maximu mPain t

Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l (bo x an dwhiske r diagram ) • 1994-200 4 Statistica l Uni t 1 - Maximu mPain t

Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l (bi-variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Statistica l Uni t 1 - Maximu mPain t

Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l (bo x an dwhiske r diagram ) • 1994-200 4 Statistica l Uni t 1 - Pain t Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First
tes t Bloo dLea dLeve l (bo x an dwhiske r diagram ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 Averag e 0- 2 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . First-tes t Bloo dLea d Leve l (bi-variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 Averag e 0- 2 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . First-tes t Bloo dLea d Leve l abov e an dbelo w th e Media n Leve l (bi-variat e plot ) • Operabl e Uni t

9 - Compariso n o f

1994-199 9 wit h2000-200 4 Averag e 0- 2 Inc h Soi l Lea dvs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l (bi-variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Averag e 0- 2 Inc hSoi l Lea dabov e an dbelo w 300 0 pp mvs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l (b i plot)-variat e • 1994-200 4 Are aD Averag e 0- 2 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . First-tes t Bloo dLea dLeve l (bi
variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Maximu mPain t

Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . First-tes t

Bloo dLea dLeve l abov e an dbelo w th e Media n Leve l (bi-variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Mai n Livin g Are aDus t Lea dvs . First-tes t

Bloo d Lea dLeve l abov e an dbelo w th e Media n Leve l (bi-variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 Averag e 0- 2 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . Averag e Dus t Lea d (bi-variat e plot ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 Maximu mPain t

Lea dConcentratio n (poo r condition ) vs . Averag e Dus t

Lea d(bi-variat e plot ) • Spli t Se t Compariso n o f

Bloo dLea dDat aabov e an dbelo w th e media n vs . Environmenta l Dat a(table ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Averag e 0- 6 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . Bloo dLea dLeve l (bo x an dwhiske r

diagram ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Averag e Dus t

Leadvs . Bloo dLea dLeve l (bo x an d whiske r diagram ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Maximu mPain t

i n Poo r Conditio n vs . Bloo dLea d Leve l (bo x an dwhiske r

diagram )

### Californi aGulc hDat aRevie w fo r OU 9 - Residentia l Populate dArea s LCCH P Performanc e Standard s Wor k Grou p Marc h30 , 200 6 Pag e 5 of 5

• 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Averag e 0- 6 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . Bloo dLea dLeve l vs . Pain t Hazar d(multi-variat e plots ) • 1994-200 4 Are aD - Averag e 0- 6 Inc hSoi l Lea dvs . Bloo dLea dLeve l vs . Pain t Hazar d(multi-variat e plots ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Averag e Mai n Livin g Are aDus t vs . Bloo dLea d Leve l vs . Pain t

Hazar d(multi-variat e plots ) • 1994-200 4 Operabl e Uni t 9 - Averag e Mai n Livin g Are aDus t vs . Bloo dLea d Leve l vs . Averag e 0- 6 Inc hSoi l Lea d(multi-variat e plots ) • Dro p i n Bloo dLea dLevel s afte r Firs t Tes t fo r Elevate dBloo dLea dChildre n (table ) • Chang e i n Bloo dLea dLevel s fro mFirs t t o Las t Tes t fo r Elevate dBloo dLead Childre n(bo x an dwhiske r diagram )