*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 1 of 33 

1 LRRP-PnCB-ANPRM_EO12866_FRN_2010-03-24.doc 

2 

3 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

4 

5 40 CFR Part 745

6 

7 [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0173; FRL–XXX–X]

8 

9 RIN 2070–AJ56

10 

11 Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program for Public and Commercial Buildings 

12 

13 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

14 

15 ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

16 

17 SUMMARY: EPA is giving advance notice of the Agency’s intention to regulate the 

18 renovation, repair and painting of public and commercial buildings under section 402(c)(3) of the 

19 Toxic Substances Control Act. This notice announces the commencement of proceedings to 

20 propose lead-safe work practices and other requirements for renovations on the exteriors of 

21 public and commercial buildings and to determine whether lead-based paint hazards are created 

22 by interior renovation, repair and painting projects in public and commercial buildings. For 

23 those renovations in the interiors of public and commercial buildings that create lead-based paint 

24 hazards, EPA will propose regulations to address these hazards. 

25 

26 DATES: Comments must be received on or before [insert date 60 days after date of publication 

27 in the Federal Register]. 

28 

29 ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA–

30 HQ–OPPT–2010–0173, by one of the following methods: 

31 

32 • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions 

33 for submitting comments. 

34 

35 • Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 

36 (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 

37 20460–0001. 

38 

39 • Hand Delivery: OPPT Document Control Office (DCO), EPA East Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 

40 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OPPT–

41 2010–0173. The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

42 holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is (202) 564–8930. Such deliveries are only 

43 accepted during the DCO’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made 

44 for deliveries of boxed information. 

45 

46 Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0173. 

47 EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 2 of 33 

48 may be made available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 

49 information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 

50 Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not 

51 submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov 

52 or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA 

53 will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your 

54 comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through 

55 regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the 

56 comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an 

57 electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information 

58 in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read 

59 your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not 

60 be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, 

61 any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. 

62 

63 Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index available at 

64 http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly 

65 available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 

66 material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly 

67 available docket materials are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

68 available in hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in the EPA Docket 

69 Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

70 DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

71 through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading 

72 Room is (202) 566–1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566–0280. 

73 Docket visitors are required to show photographic identification, pass through a metal detector, 

74 and sign the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray machine and 

75 subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC badge that must be visible at all times in 

76 the building and returned upon departure. 

77 

78 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

79 

80 For general information contact: Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental 

81 Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental 

82 Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

83 number: (202) 554–1404; e-mail address: TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov. 

84 

85 For technical information contact: Hans Scheifele, National Program Chemicals 

86 Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

87 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 564–3122; e88 mail address: scheifele.hans@epa.gov. 

89 

90 Hearing- or speech-challenged individuals may access the numbers in this unit through 

91 TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339. 

92 

93 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

94 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 3 of 33 

95 I. General Information 

96 

97 A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

98 

99 This notice is directed to the public in general. However, this notice may be of particular 

100 interest to the following entities: 

101 

102 • Building construction (North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code 

103 236), e.g., commercial building construction, industrial building construction, commercial and 

104 institutional building construction, building finishing contractors, drywall and insulation 

105 contractors, painting and wall covering contractors, finish carpentry contractors, other building 

106 finishing contractors. 

107 

108 • Specialty trade contractors (NAICS code 238), e.g., plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning 

109 contractors, painting and wall covering contractors, electrical contractors, finish carpentry 

110 contractors, drywall and insulation contractors, siding contractors, tile and terrazzo contractors, 

111 glass and glazing contractors. 

112 

113 • Real estate (NAICS code 531), e.g., lessors of non-residential buildings and dwellings, non114 residential property managers. 

115 

116 • Facilities support services (NAICS code 561210). 

117 

118 • Other general government support (NAICS code 921) e.g., general services departments, 

119 government, public property management services, government. 

120 

121 This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers 

122 regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit 

123 could also be affected. The NAICS codes have been provided to assist you and others in 

124 determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions 

125 regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the technical person listed 

126 under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

127 

128 B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 

129 

130 1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e131 mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

132 information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD133 ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify 

134 electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In 

135 addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a 

136 copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

137 inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance 

138 with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

139 

140 2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments, remember to: 

141 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 4 of 33 

142 i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject 

143 heading, Federal Register date and page number). 

144 

145 ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or 

146 organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number. 

147 

148 iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for 

149 your requested changes. 

150 

151 iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you 

152 used. 

153 

154 v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in 

155 sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. 

156 

157 vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggest alternatives. 

158 

159 vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal 

160 threats. 

161 

162 viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. 

163 

164 II. Background 

165 

166 A. EPA’s Lead-based Paint Programs 

167 

168 In 1992, Congress found that low-level lead poisoning was widespread among American 

169 children, affecting, at that time, as many as 3,000,000 children under age 6; that the ingestion of 

170 household dust containing lead from deteriorating or abraded lead-based paint was the most 

171 common cause of lead poisoning in children; and that the health and development of children 

172 living in as many as 3,800,000 American homes was endangered by chipping or peeling lead 

173 paint, or excessive amounts of lead-contaminated dust in their homes. Congress further 

174 determined that the prior Federal response to this threat was insufficient and enacted Title X of 

175 the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, Public Law 102-550 (also known as the 

176 Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992) (“the Act” or “Title X”). Title X 

177 established a national goal of eliminating lead-based paint hazards in housing as expeditiously as 

178 possible and provided a leadership role for the Federal government in building the infrastructure 

179 necessary to achieve this goal. 

180 

181 Subsequently, President Clinton created the President's Task Force on Environmental 

182 Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. Co-chaired by the Secretary of the Department of 

183 Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Administrator of EPA, the Task Force consisted of 

184 representatives from 16 Federal departments and agencies. The Task Force set a Federal goal of 

185 eliminating childhood lead poisoning by the year 2010 (Ref. 1). In October 2001, President 

186 Bush extended the work of the Task Force for an additional 18 months beyond its original 

187 charter. Reducing lead poisoning in children was the Task Force's top priority. Although more 

188 work remains to be done, significant progress has been made towards reducing lead poisoning in 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 5 of 33 

189 children. The estimated percentage of children with blood lead levels above 10 micrograms per 

190 deciliter (μg/dL) declined from 4.4% between 1991 and 1994 to 1.6% between 2003 and 2004 

191 (Ref. 2). More information on Federal efforts to address lead poisoning, including the 

192 responsibilities of EPA and other Federal Agencies under Title X, can be found in Units III.A. 

193 and III.B. of the preamble to the 2006 Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program Proposed Rule 

194 (2006 Proposal) (Ref. 3). 

195 

196 The Act added a new title to TSCA entitled “Title IV-Lead Exposure Reduction.” Most 

197 of EPA's responsibilities for addressing lead-based paint hazards can be found in this title, with 

198 section 402 of TSCA being one source of the rulemaking authority to carry out these 

199 responsibilities. TSCA section 402(a) directs EPA to promulgate regulations covering lead200 based paint activities to ensure that persons performing these activities are properly trained, that 

201 training programs are accredited, and that contractors performing these activities are certified. 

202 These regulations must contain standards for performing lead-based paint activities, taking into 

203 account reliability, effectiveness, and safety. On August 29, 1996, EPA promulgated final 

204 regulations under TSCA section 402(a) that govern lead-based paint inspections, lead hazard 

205 screens, risk assessments, and abatements in target housing and child-occupied facilities (also 

206 referred to as the Lead-based Paint Activities Regulations) (Ref. 4). “Target housing” is defined 

207 in TSCA section 401 as any housing constructed before 1978, except housing for the elderly or 

208 persons with disabilities (unless any child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside in such 

209 housing) or any 0-bedroom dwelling. The Lead-based Paint Activities Regulations created a 

210 subset of public and commercial buildings called child-occupied facilities, and defined them in 

211 terms of the amount of time a young child might spend within them. These regulations, codified 

212 at 40 CFR part 745, subpart L, contain an accreditation program for training providers and 

213 training and certification requirements for lead-based paint inspectors, risk assessors, project 

214 designers, abatement supervisors, and abatement workers. Work practice standards for lead215 based paint activities are included. Pursuant to TSCA section 404, provision was made for 

216 interested States, Territories, and Indian Tribes to apply for and receive authorization to 

217 administer their own lead-based paint activities programs. 

218 

219 On June 9, 1999, the Lead-based Paint Activities Regulations were amended to include a 

220 fee schedule for training programs seeking EPA accreditation and for individuals and firms 

221 seeking EPA certification (Ref. 5). These fees were established as directed by TSCA section 

222 402(a)(3), which requires EPA to recover the cost of administering and enforcing the lead-based 

223 paint activities requirements in unauthorized States. The most recent amendment to the Lead224 based Paint Activities Regulations occurred on April 8, 2004, when notification requirements 

225 were added to help EPA monitor compliance with the training and certification provisions and 

226 the abatement work practice standards (Ref. 6). 

227 

228 Another of EPA's responsibilities under Title X is to require that purchasers and tenants 

229 of target housing and occupants of target housing undergoing renovation are provided 

230 information on lead-based paint and lead-based paint hazards. As directed by TSCA section 

231 406(a), the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC), the Department of Housing and 

232 Urban Development (HUD), and EPA, in consultation with the Centers for Disease Control and 

233 Prevention (CDC), jointly developed a lead hazard information pamphlet entitled Protect Your 

234 Family From Lead in Your Home (PYF) (Ref. 7). This pamphlet was designed to be distributed 

235 as part of the disclosure requirements of section 1018 of Title X and TSCA section 406(b), to 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 6 of 33 

236 provide home purchasers, renters, owners, and occupants with the information necessary to allow 

237 them to make informed choices when selecting housing to buy or rent, or deciding on home 

238 renovation projects. The pamphlet contains information on the health effects of lead, how 

239 exposure can occur, and steps that can be taken to reduce or eliminate the risk of exposure during 

240 various activities in the home. 

241 

242 Pursuant to the authority provided in section 1018 of Title X, on March 6, 1996, HUD 

243 and EPA jointly promulgated regulations requiring persons who are selling or leasing target 

244 housing to provide the PYF pamphlet and information on known lead-based paint and lead-based 

245 paint hazards in the housing to purchasers and renters (Ref. 8). These joint regulations, codified 

246 at 24 CFR part 35, subpart A, and 40 CFR part 745, subpart F, describe in detail the information 

247 that must be provided before the contract or lease is signed and require that sellers, landlords, 

248 and agents document compliance with the disclosure requirements in the contract to sell or lease 

249 the property. Title X does not provide for these requirements to be administered by States or 

250 Tribes in lieu of the Federal regulations. Therefore, HUD and EPA are responsible for 

251 administering and enforcing these disclosure obligations. 

252 

253 TSCA section 406(b) directs EPA to promulgate regulations requiring persons who 

254 perform renovations for compensation in target housing to provide a lead hazard information 

255 pamphlet to owners and occupants of the home being renovated. These regulations, promulgated 

256 on June 1, 1998, are codified at 40 CFR part 745, subpart E (Ref. 9). The term “renovation” is 

257 not defined in the statute, but the regulation, at 40 CFR 745.83, defines a “renovation” as the 

258 modification of any existing structure, or portion of a structure, that results in the disturbance of 

259 painted surfaces. The regulations specifically exclude lead-based paint abatement projects as 

260 well as small projects that disturb 2 square feet or less of painted surface per component, 

261 emergency projects, and renovations affecting components that have been found to be free of 

262 lead-based paint, as that term is defined in the regulations, by a certified inspector or risk 

263 assessor. These regulations require the renovation firm to document compliance with the 

264 requirement to provide the owner and the occupant with the PYF pamphlet. TSCA section 404 

265 also allows States to apply for, and receive authorization to administer, the TSCA section 406(b) 

266 requirements. 

267 

268 TSCA section 403 directs EPA to promulgate regulations that identify, for the purposes 

269 of Title X and Title IV of TSCA, dangerous levels of lead in paint, dust, and soil. EPA 

270 promulgated regulations pursuant to TSCA section 403 on January 5, 2001, and codified them at 

271 40 CFR part 745, subpart D (Ref. 10). These hazard standards define lead-based paint hazards in 

272 target housing and child-occupied facilities as paint-lead, dust-lead, and soil-lead hazards. A 

273 paint-lead hazard is defined as any damaged or deteriorated lead-based paint, any chewable lead274 based painted surface with evidence of teeth marks, or any lead-based paint on a friction surface 

275 if lead dust levels underneath the friction surface exceed the dust-lead hazard standards. A dust276 lead hazard is surface dust that contains a mass-per-area concentration of lead equal to or 

exceeding 40 micrograms per square foot (μg/ft2

) on floors or 250 μg/ft2 277 on interior windowsills 

278 based on wipe samples. A soil-lead hazard is bare soil that contains total lead equal to or 

279 exceeding 400 parts per million (ppm) in a play area or average of 1,200 ppm of bare soil in the 

280 rest of the yard based on soil samples. 

281 

282 B. EPA’s Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 7 of 33 

283 

284 Section 402(c) of TSCA addresses renovation and remodeling. For the stated purpose of 

285 reducing the risk of exposure to lead in connection with renovation and remodeling activities, 

286 section 402(c)(1) of TSCA requires EPA to promulgate and disseminate guidelines for the 

287 conduct of such activities that may create a risk of exposure to dangerous levels of lead. In 

288 response to this statutory directive, EPA developed the guidance document entitled “Reducing 

289 Lead Hazards when Remodeling Your Home” in consultation with industry and trade groups 

290 (Ref. 11). This document has been widely disseminated to renovation and remodeling 

291 stakeholders through the National Lead Information Center, EPA Regions, and EPA's State and 

292 Tribal partners and is available at http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/rrpamph.pdf. 

293 

294 Section 402(c)(2) of TSCA directs EPA to study the extent to which persons engaged in 

295 various types of renovation and remodeling activities are exposed to lead during such activities 

296 or create a lead-based paint hazard regularly or occasionally. EPA conducted this study in four 

297 phases. Phase I, the Environmental Field Sampling Study (Ref. 12), evaluated the amount of 

298 leaded dust generated by various typical renovation activities. Phase II, the Worker 

299 Characterization and Blood Lead Study (Ref. 22), involved collecting data on blood lead and 

300 renovation and remodeling activities from workers. Phase III, the Wisconsin Childhood Blood301 Lead Study (Ref. 14), was a retrospective study focused on assessing the relationship between 

302 renovation and remodeling activities and children’s blood-lead levels. Phase IV, the Worker 

303 Characterization and Blood-Lead Study of R&R (Renovation and Repair) Workers Who 

304 Specialize in Renovations of Old or Historic Homes (Ref. 15), was similar to Phase II, but 

305 focused on individuals who worked primarily in old historic buildings. More information on the 

306 results of these peer-reviewed studies can be found in Unit III.C.1. of the preamble to the 2006 

307 Proposal (Ref. 3). 

308 

309 Section 402(c)(3) of TSCA directs EPA to revise the regulations promulgated under 

310 TSCA section 402(a), i.e., the Lead-based Paint Activities Regulations, to apply to renovation or 

311 remodeling activities in target housing, public buildings constructed before 1978, and 

312 commercial buildings that create lead-based paint hazards. Based primarily on the four-phase 

313 study conducted under TSCA section 402(c)(2), EPA issued a proposed rule in January 2006 to 

314 cover renovation, repair, and painting activities that disturb painted surfaces in target housing 

315 and child-occupied facilities (Ref. 3). In the 2006 Proposal, EPA proposed to conclude that all 

316 such activities in the presence of lead-based paint create lead-based paint hazards because 

317 available information indicated that all such activities create dust-lead levels that exceed the 

318 hazard standards established under TSCA section 403. 

319 

320 After the 2006 Proposal was issued, EPA conducted a field study entitled 

321 “Characterization of Dust Lead Levels after Renovation, Repair, and Painting Activities” (Dust 

322 Study) to better characterize dust lead levels resulting from various renovation, repair, and 

323 painting activities (Ref. 16). This study, completed in January 2007, was designed to compare 

324 environmental lead levels at appropriate stages after various types of renovation, repair, and 

325 painting preparation activities were performed on the interiors and exteriors of target housing 

326 units and child-occupied facilities. The renovation activities were conducted by local 

327 professional renovation firms, using personnel who received lead safe work practices training. 

328 The activities conducted represented a range of renovation, repair, and painting activities that 

329 would have been permitted under the 2006 Proposal, including work practices that are restricted 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 8 of 33 

330 or prohibited under the final rule, such as the use of high-speed machines without high-efficiency 

331 particulate air (HEPA) filtered exhaust control to remove paint. Of particular interest was the 

332 impact of using specific work practices that renovation firms would be required to use under the 

333 proposed rule, such as the use of plastic to contain the work area and a multi-step cleaning 

334 protocol, as opposed to more typical work practices. The Dust Study reinforced EPA’s proposed 

335 finding that typical renovation and remodeling activities that disturb lead-based paint create lead336 based paint hazards. 

337 

338 In April 2008, EPA issued the final Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule (RRP Rule) 

339 under the authority of section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to address 

340 lead-based paint hazards created by renovation, repair, and painting activities that disturb lead341 based paint in target housing and child-occupied facilities (Ref. 17). The term “target housing” 

342 is defined in TSCA section 401 as any housing constructed before 1978, except housing for the 

343 elderly or persons with disabilities (unless any child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside 

344 in such housing) or any 0-bedroom dwelling. Under the RRP Rule, a child-occupied facility is a 

345 building, or a portion of a building, constructed prior to 1978, visited regularly by the same child, 

346 under 6 years of age, on at least two different days within any week (Sunday through Saturday 

347 period), provided that each day's visit lasts at least 3 hours and the combined weekly visits last at 

348 least 6 hours, and the combined annual visits last at least 60 hours. The RRP Rule establishes 

349 requirements for training renovators, other renovation workers, and dust sampling technicians; 

350 for certifying renovators, dust sampling technicians, and renovation firms; for accrediting 

351 providers of renovation and dust sampling technician training; for renovation work practices; and 

352 for recordkeeping. Interested States, Territories, and Indian Tribes may apply for and receive 

353 authorization to administer and enforce all of the elements of the RRP Rule. 

354 

355 C. Recent Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program Developments 

356 

357 Shortly after the RRP Rule was published, several petitions were filed challenging the 

358 rule. These petitions were consolidated in the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of 

359 Columbia Circuit. On August 24, 2009, EPA entered into an agreement with the environmental 

360 and children’s health advocacy groups in settlement of their petitions (Ref. 18). In this 

361 agreement, EPA committed to propose several changes to the RRP Rule. EPA also agreed to 

362 commence rulemaking to address renovations in public and commercial buildings, other than 

363 child-occupied facilities, to the extent those renovations create lead-based paint hazards. For 

364 these buildings, EPA agreed, at a minimum, to do the following: 

365 

366 • Issue a proposal to regulate renovations on the exteriors of public and commercial 

367 buildings other than child-occupied facilities by December 15, 2011, and to take final action on 

368 that proposal by July 15, 2013. 

369 

370 • Consult with EPA’s Science Advisory Board by September 30, 2011, on a methodology 

371 for evaluating the risk posed by renovations in the interiors of public and commercial buildings 

372 other than child-occupied facilities. 

373 

374 • Eighteen months after receipt of the Science Advisory Board’s report, either issue a 

375 proposal to regulate renovations on the interiors of public and commercial buildings other than 

376 child-occupied facilities or conclude that such renovations do not create lead-based paint 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 9 of 33 

377 hazards. 

378 

379 On October 28, 2009, EPA proposed to eliminate the “opt-out” provision that currently 

380 exempts a renovation firm from the training and work practice requirements of the rule where the 

381 firm obtains a certification from the owner of a residence he or she occupies that no child under 

382 age 6 or pregnant woman resides in the home and the home is not a child-occupied facility (Ref. 

383 19). EPA also proposed to require renovation firms to provide a copy of the records 

384 demonstrating compliance with the training and work practice requirements of the RRP rule to 

385 the owner and, if different, the occupant of the building being renovated or the operator of the 

386 child-occupied facility. The final rule on these “opt-out” and recordkeeping provisions is 

387 published elsewhere in this Federal Register. 

388 

389 Elsewhere in this section of this Federal Register, EPA is issuing a proposal that contains 

390 additional requirements for renovations already covered by the RRP Rule. These additional 

391 requirements are designed to ensure that lead-based paint hazards generated by renovation work 

392 are adequately cleaned after renovation work is finished and before the work areas are re393 occupied. Specifically, the proposal would require dust wipe testing after many renovations 

394 covered by the RRP rule. In addition, for a subset of jobs involving demolition or removal of 

395 plaster through destructive means or the disturbance of paint using machines designed to remove 

396 paint through high-speed operation, this proposal would also require the renovation firm to 

397 demonstrate, through dust wipe testing, that dust-lead levels remaining in the work area are 

398 below regulatory levels. The proposal also contains several clarifications of existing provisions 

399 of the RRP Rule and several modifications that would facilitate implementation of the existing 

400 rule. 

401 

402 Finally, on August 10, 2009, EPA received a petition from several environmental and 

403 public health advocacy groups requesting that the EPA amend regulations issued under Title IV 

404 of TSCA (Ref. 20). Specifically, the petitioners requested that EPA lower the Agency’s dustlead hazard standards issued pursuant to section 403 of TSCA from 40 μg/ft2

 to 10 μg/ft2 405 or less 

for floors and from 250 μg/ft2 to 100 μg/ft2 406 or less for window sills. The petitioners also asked 

407 EPA to modify the definition of lead-based paint in 40 CFR 745.103 and 745.223 from 0.5 

408 percent by weight (5,000 parts per million (ppm)) to 0.06 percent by weight (600 ppm) with a 

409 corresponding reduction in the 1.0 milligram per square centimeter standard. On October 22, 

410 2009, EPA granted this petition under section 553(e) of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 

411 USC 553(e) (Ref. 21). In granting this petition, EPA agreed to commence the appropriate 

412 proceeding, but did not commit to a particular schedule or to a particular outcome. Because 

413 Congress gave the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) statutory authority to 

414 establish a lower level of lead in paint for the purpose of the definition of the term “lead-based 

415 paint” in target housing, EPA agreed to work with HUD in taking the appropriate action on the 

416 request pertaining to the definition of the term “lead-based paint.” 

417 

418 D. Information on Lead and its Health Effects 

419 

420 Lead is a soft, bluish metallic chemical element mined from rock and found in its natural 

421 state all over the world. Lead is virtually indestructible, is persistent, and has been known since 

422 antiquity for its adaptability in making various useful items. In modern times, it has been used to 

423 manufacture many different products, including paint, batteries, pipes, solder, pottery, and 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 10 of 33 

424 gasoline. Through the 1940's, paint manufacturers frequently used lead as a primary ingredient 

425 in many oil-based interior and exterior house paints. Usage gradually decreased through the 

426 1950's and 1960's as titanium dioxide replaced lead and as latex paints became more widely 

427 available. 

428 

429 1. Health effects in general. Lead bioaccumulates, and is only slowly removed, with 

430 bone lead serving as a blood lead source for years after exposure and may serve as a significant 

431 source of exposure. Bone accounts for more than 90% of the total body burden of lead in adults 

432 and 70% in children (Ref. 22). In comparison to adults, bone mineral turns over much more 

433 quickly in children as a result of growth. Changes in blood lead concentration in children are 

434 thought to parallel more closely to changes in total body burden. Therefore, blood lead 

435 concentration is often used in epidemiologic and toxicological studies as an index of exposure 

436 and body burden for children. 

437 

438 Lead is known for its “broad array of deleterious effects on multiple organ systems via 

439 widely diverse mechanisms of action” (Ref. 22, p. 8–24 and section 8.4.1). This array of health 

440 effects includes effects on heme biosynthesis and related functions, neurological development 

441 and function, reproduction and physical development, kidney function, cardiovascular function, 

442 and immune function. The weight of evidence varies across this array of effects and is 

443 comprehensively described in the EPA Air Quality Criteria for Lead (Criteria Document) (Ref. 

444 22). There is also some evidence of lead carcinogenicity, primarily from animal studies, together 

445 with limited human evidence of suggestive associations (Ref. 22, sections 5.6.2, 6.7, and 8.4.10). 

446 Lead has also been classified as a probable human carcinogen by the International Agency for 

447 Research on Cancer (inorganic lead compounds), based mainly on sufficient animal evidence, 

448 and as reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen by the U.S. National Toxicology 

449 Program (lead and lead compounds) (Ref. 22, section 6.7.2). EPA considers lead a probable 

450 carcinogen (http:// www.epa.gov/iris/ subst/0277.htm (Ref. 22, p. 6–195)). 

451 

452 This discussion is focused on those effects most pertinent to ambient exposures, which, 

453 given the reductions in ambient lead levels over the past 30 years, are generally those associated 

454 with individual blood lead levels in children and adults in the range of 10 μg/dL and lower. 

455 These key effects include neurological, hematological, and immune effects for children, and 

456 hematological, cardiovascular, and renal effects for adults (Ref. 22, Tables 8–5 and 8–6, pp. 8–

457 60 to 8–62). As evident from the discussions in chapters 5, 6, and 8 of the Criteria Document, 

458 “neurotoxic effects in children and cardiovascular effects in adults are among those best 

459 substantiated as occurring at blood lead concentrations as low as 5 to 10 μg/dL (or possibly 

460 lower); and these categories are currently clearly of greatest public health concern” (Ref. 22, p. 

461 8–60). At mean blood lead levels, in children, on the order of 10 μg/dL, and somewhat lower, 

462 associations have been found with effects to the immune system, including altered macrophage 

463 activation, increased immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels and associated increased risk for 

464 autoimmunity and asthma (Ref. 22, sections 5.9, 6.8, and 8.4.6). A meta-analysis of numerous 

465 studies estimates that a doubling of blood-lead level (e.g., from 5 to 10 μg/dL) is associated with 

466 ~1.0 millimeter of mercury (mm Hg) increase in systolic blood pressure and ~0.6 mm Hg 

467 increase in diastolic pressure (Ref. 22, p. E–10). With respect to renal effects in adults, increased 

468 risk for nephrotoxicity was observed at the lowest lead exposure levels in epidemiological 

469 studies included in the Criteria Document (Ref. 22, p. 8-49). Nephrotic effects were reported 

470 among some adults with mean concurrent blood lead levels as low as 2 to 4 μg/dL (Ref. 22, p. 8-
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 11 of 33 

471 48). 

472 

473 The toxicological and epidemiological information available “includes assessment of new 

474 evidence substantiating risks of deleterious effects on certain health endpoints being induced by 

475 distinctly lower than previously demonstrated lead exposures indexed by blood lead levels 

476 extending well below 10 μg/dL in children and/or adults” (Ref. 22, p. 8– 25). Some health 

477 effects associated with individual blood lead levels extend below 5 μg/dL, and some studies have 

478 observed these effects at the lowest blood levels considered. With regard to population mean 

479 levels, the Criteria Document points to studies reporting “lead effects on the intellectual 

480 attainment of preschool and school age children at population mean concurrent blood-lead levels 

481 [BLLs] ranging down to as low as 2 to 8 μg/dL” (Ref. 22, p. E–9). 

482 

483 EPA notes that many studies over the past decade, in investigating effects at lower blood 

484 lead levels, have utilized the CDC advisory level or level of concern for individual children (10 

485 μg/dL). This level has variously been called an advisory level or level of concern. In addressing 

486 children’s blood lead levels, CDC has stated, “[s]pecific strategies that target screening to high487 risk children are essential to identify children with BLLs ≥ 10 μg/dL” (Ref. 1) as a benchmark 

488 for assessment, and this is reflected in the numerous references in the Criteria Document to 10 

489 μg/dL. Individual study conclusions stated with regard to effects observed below 10 μg/dL are 

490 usually referring to individual blood lead levels. In fact, many such study groups have been 

491 restricted to individual blood lead levels below 10 μg/dL or restricted to blood lead levels below 

492 levels that are lower than 10 μg/dL (e.g., the blood lead levels must be below 8 μg/dL). EPA 

493 notes that the mean blood lead level for these groups will necessarily be lower than the blood 

494 lead level below which they are restricted, because the restricted blood lead level is the upper 

495 end of the blood lead level range of the study. 

496 

497 Threshold levels, in terms of blood lead levels in individual children, for neurological 

498 effects cannot be discerned from the currently available studies (Ref. 22, pp. 8–60 to 8–63). The 

499 Criteria Document states, “There is no level of lead exposure that can yet be identified, with 

500 confidence, as clearly not being associated with some risk of deleterious health effects” (Ref. 22, 

501 p. 8–63). As discussed in the Criteria Document, “a threshold for lead neurotoxic effects may 

502 exist at levels distinctly lower than the lowest exposures examined in these epidemiologic 

503 studies” (Ref. 22, p. 8– 67). Physiological, behavioral and demographic factors contribute to 

504 increased risk of lead-related health effects. Population groups potentially at risk, sometimes 

505 also referred to as sensitive populations, include those with increased susceptibility (i.e., 

506 physiological factors contributing to a greater response for the same exposure), as well as those 

507 with greater vulnerability (i.e., those with increased exposure such as through exposure to higher 

508 media concentrations or resulting from behavior leading to increased contact with contaminated 

509 media), or those affected by socioeconomic factors, such as reduced access to health care or low 

510 socioeconomic status (Ref. 22). 

511 

512 Children are at increased risk of lead-related health effects due to various factors that 

513 enhance their exposures (e.g., via the hand-to-mouth activity that is prevalent in very young 

514 children, (Ref. 22, section 4.4.3)) and susceptibility. While children are considered to be at a 

515 period of maximum exposure around 18–27 months, recent epidemiologic studies have found 

516 other blood lead measurements, including concurrent blood lead levels or lifetime averages, to be 

517 stronger predictors of lead-associated effects than peak blood lead concentration (Ref. 22, pp. 6-
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 12 of 33 

518 60 and 6-61). The evidence “supports the idea that lead exposure continues to be toxic to 

519 children as they reach school age, and [does] not lend support to the interpretation that all the 

520 damage is done by the time the child reaches 2 to 3 years of age” (Ref. 22, section 6.2.12). The 

521 following physiological and demographic factors can further affect risk of lead-related effects in 

522 some children. 

523 

524 • Children with particular genetic polymorphisms (e.g., presence of the d-aminolevulinic 

525 acid dehydratase-2 [ALAD-2] allele) may have increased sensitivity to lead toxicity, which may 

526 be due to increased susceptibility to the same internal dose and/or to increased internal dose 

527 associated with same exposure (Ref. 22, p. 8–71, sections 6.3.5, 6.4.7.3, and 6.3.6). 

528 

529 • Some children may have blood lead levels higher than those otherwise associated with a 

530 given lead exposure (Ref. 22, section 8.5.3) as a result of nutritional status (e.g., iron deficiency, 

531 calcium intake), as well as genetic and other factors (Ref. 22, chapter 4 and sections 3.4, 5.3.7, 

532 and 8.5.3). 

533 

534 • Situations of elevated exposure, such as residing near sources of ambient lead, as well 

535 as socioeconomic factors, such as reduced access to health care or low socioeconomic status can 

536 also contribute to increased blood lead levels and increased risk of associated health effects from 

537 air-related lead (Refs. 23, 24). 

538 

539 • [C]hildren in poverty and black, non-Hispanic children have notably higher blood lead 

540 levels than do economically well-off children and white children, in general (Ref. 25). 

541 

542 2. Neurological effects in children. Among the wide variety of health endpoints 

543 associated with lead exposures, there is general consensus that the developing nervous system in 

544 children is among the, if not the, most sensitive. While blood lead levels in U.S. children have 

545 decreased notably since the late 1970s, newer studies have investigated and reported associations 

546 of effects on the neurodevelopment of children with these more recent blood lead levels (Ref. 22, 

547 chapter 6). Functional manifestations of lead neurotoxicity during childhood include 

548 neurophysiologic, motor, cognitive, and behavioral impacts. Numerous epidemiological studies 

549 have reported neurocognitive, neurobehavioral, neurophysiologic, and neuromotor function 

550 effects in children with blood lead levels below 10 μg/dL (Ref. 22, sections 6.2 and 8.4). As 

551 discussed in the Criteria Document, “extensive experimental laboratory animal evidence has 

552 been generated that (a) substantiates well the plausibility of the epidemiologic findings observed 

553 in human children and adults and (b) expands our understanding of likely mechanisms 

554 underlying the neurotoxic effects” (Ref. 22, p. 8–25; section 5.3). 

555 

556 Cognitive effects associated with lead exposures that have been observed in 

557 epidemiological studies have included decrements in intelligence test results, such as the widely 

558 used IQ score, and in academic achievement as assessed by various standardized tests as well as 

559 by class ranking and graduation rates (Ref. 22, section 6.2.16 and pp. 8–29 to 8–30). As noted in 

560 the Criteria Document with regard to the latter, “[a]ssociations between lead exposure and 

561 academic achievement observed in the above-noted studies were significant even after adjusting 

562 for IQ, suggesting that lead-sensitive neuropsychological processing and learning factors not 

563 reflected by global intelligence indices might contribute to reduced performance on academic 

564 tasks” (Ref. 22, pp. 8–29 to 8– 30). Further, neurological effects in general include behavioral 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 13 of 33 

565 effects, such as delinquent behavior (Ref. 22, sections 6.2.6 and 8.4.2.2), sensory effects, such as 

566 those related to hearing and vision (Ref. 22, sections 6.2.7 and 8.4.2.3), and deficits in 

567 neuromotor function (Ref. 22, p. 8–36). 

568 

569 With regard to potential implications of lead effects on IQ, the Criteria Document 

570 recognizes the “critical” distinction between population and individual risk, identifying issues 

571 regarding declines in IQ for an individual and for the population. The Criteria Document further 

572 states that a “point estimate indicating a modest mean change on a health index at the individual 

573 level can have substantial implications at the population level” (Ref. 22, p. 8–77). As an 

574 example, the Criteria Document states, “although an increase of a few mm Hg in blood pressure 

575 might not be of concern for an individual’s well-being, the same increase in the population mean 

576 might be associated with substantial increases in the percentages of individuals with values that 

577 are sufficiently extreme that they exceed the criteria used to diagnose hypertension” (Ref. 22, p. 

578 8–77). A downward shift in the mean IQ value is associated with both substantial decreases in 

579 percentages achieving very high scores and substantial increases in the percentage of individuals 

580 achieving very low scores (Ref. 22, p. 8–81). For example, for a population mean IQ of 100 

581 (and standard deviation of 15), 2.3% of the population would score above 130, but a shift of the 

582 population to a mean of 95 results in only 0.99% of the population scoring above 130 (Ref. 22, 

583 pp. 8–81 to 8–82). For an individual functioning in the low IQ range due to the influence of 

584 developmental risk factors other than lead, a lead-associated IQ decline of several points might 

585 be sufficient to drop that individual into the range associated with increased risk of educational, 

586 vocational, and social failure (Ref. 22, p. 8–77). 

587 

588 Other cognitive effects observed in studies of children have included effects on attention, 

589 executive functions, language, memory, learning, and visuospatial processing (Ref. 22, sections 

590 5.3.5, 6.2.5, and 8.4.2.1), with attention and executive function effects associated with lead 

591 exposures indexed by blood lead levels below 10 μg/dL (Ref. 22, section 6.2.5 and pp. 8–30 to 

592 8–31). The evidence for the role of lead in this suite of effects includes experimental animal 

593 findings (Ref. 22, section 8.4.2.1; p. 8–31), which provide strong biological plausibility of lead 

594 effects on learning ability, memory and attention (Ref. 22, section 5.3.5), as well as associated 

595 mechanistic findings. 

596 

597 The persistence of such lead-induced effects is described in the Criteria Document (e.g., 

598 Ref. 22, sections 5.3.5, 6.2.11, and 8.5.2). The persistence or irreversibility of such effects can 

599 be the result of damage occurring without adequate repair offsets or of the persistence of lead in 

600 the body (Ref. 22, section 8.5.2). It is additionally important to note that there may be long-term 

601 consequences of such deficits over a lifetime. Poor academic skills and achievement can have 

602 “enduring and important effects on objective parameters of success in real life,” as well as 

603 increased risk of antisocial and delinquent behavior (Ref. 22, section 6.2.16). 

604 

605 Multiple epidemiologic studies of lead and child development have demonstrated 

606 inverse associations between blood lead concentrations and children’s IQ and other cognitive607 related outcomes at successively lower lead exposure levels over the past 30 years (Ref. 22, 

608 section 6.2.13). For example, the overall weight of the available evidence, described in the 

609 Criteria Document, provides clear substantiation of neurocognitive decrements being associated 

610 in children with mean blood lead levels in the range of 5 to 10 μg/ dL, and some analyses 

611 indicate lead effects on intellectual attainment of children for which population mean blood lead 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 14 of 33 

612 levels in the analysis ranged from 2 to 8 μg/dL (Ref. 22, sections 6.2, 8.4.2, and 8.4.2.6). Thus, 

613 while blood lead levels in U.S. children have decreased notably since the late 1970s, newer 

614 studies have investigated and reported associations of effects on the neurodevelopment of 

615 children with blood lead levels similar to the more recent, lower blood lead levels (Ref. 22, 

616 chapter 6). 

617 

618 Children in minority populations and children from low-income families have an 

619 increased risk of exposure to harmful lead levels. Non-Hispanic black children and children 

620 from low-income families have an increased risk of exposure to harmful lead levels. Analysis of 

621 the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) data show that overall the 

622 incidence of elevated blood lead levels have decreased for all groups assessed (Ref. 25). 

623 However, the geometric mean blood lead level was significantly higher for non-Hispanic blacks 

624 (2.8 μg/dL), compared with Mexican Americans (1.9 μg/dL) and non-Hispanic whites (1.7 

625 μg/dL). For children aged 1-5 years from families with low income, the geometric mean blood 

626 lead level was 2.5 μg/dL. Further, the incidences of blood-lead levels greater than 10 μg/dL and 

627 greater than or equal to 5μg/dL were higher for non-Hispanic blacks (3.4% and 14% 

628 respectively) than for Mexican Americans (1.2% and 4.7%, respectively) and non-Hispanic 

629 whites (1.2% and 4.4%, respectively). The analysis indicates that residence in older housing, 

630 poverty, age, and being non-Hispanic black are still major risk factors for higher lead levels (Ref. 

631 25). 

632 

633 3. Adult health effects. As previously noted, the adult health effects of lead exposure 

634 include negative impacts on renal and cardiovascular function. While cardiovascular effects are 

635 well substantiated as occurring at blood lead levels as low as 5 to 10 μg/dL (or possibly lower), 

636 newly-demonstrated renal system effects among general population groups are also emerging as 

637 low-level lead exposure effects of concern (Ref 22, p. 8-60). 

638 

639 Most studies in general adult and patient populations published during the past two 

640 decades have observed associations between “Pb dose and worse renal function.” (Ref 22, p. 6-

641 112) The cumulative effect of higher blood lead levels from past exposure may be a factor in the 

642 nephrotoxicity observed at current blood lead levels. However, one study found associations 

643 between blood lead and concurrent serum creatinine in participants whose peak blood lead levels 

644 were equal to or less than 10 μg/dL (Ref 22, p. 6-112). The threshold for lead-related 

645 nephrotoxicity cannot be determined based on current data, but associations with clinically646 relevant renal outcomes have been observed in populations with mean blood lead levels as low 

647 as 2.2 μg/dL (Ref 22, p. 6-112).” In addition, the available data are not sufficient to determine 

648 whether the observed nephrotoxicity is related more to such current blood lead levels, higher 

649 levels from past exposures, or both (Ref 22, p. 8-49). Some adult populations are at an even 

650 greater risk for adverse health effects as a result of lead exposure. The influence of an 

651 individual’s health status on susceptibility to lead toxicity has been demonstrated most clearly 

652 for renal outcomes. “Individuals with diabetes, hypertension, and chronic renal insufficiency are 

653 at increased risk of Pb-associated declines in renal function, and indications of altered kidney 

654 function have been reported at blood Pb levels ranging somewhat below 5 μg/dL (Lin et al., 

655 2001, 2003; Muntner et al., 2003; Tsaih et al., 2004).” (Ref 22 p. 8-72) 

656 

657 Positive associations between lead exposure and increased blood pressure have been 

658 observed in numerous studies. Epidemiologic studies that have examined the effects of blood 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 15 of 33 

659 lead levels on blood pressure have generally found positive associations, even after controlling 

660 for confounding factors such as tobacco smoking, exercise, body weight, alcohol consumption, 

661 and socioeconomic status (Ref 22, p. 8-45). Recent meta-analyses of these studies have reported 

662 robust, statistically-significant, though small effect-size, associations between blood-Pb 

663 concentrations and blood pressure. For example, the meta-analysis of Nawrot et al (2002) 

664 indicated that a doubling of blood lead corresponded to a 1 mm Hg increase in systolic blood 

665 pressure. Although this magnitude of increase is not clinically meaningful for an individual, a 

666 population shift of 1 mm Hg is important (Ref 22, p. 8-45). The majority of the more recent 

667 studies employing bone lead level have also found a strong association between long-term lead 

668 exposure and arterial pressure. “Since the residence time of Pb in blood is relatively short but 

669 very long in bone, the latter observations have provided compelling evidence for the positive 

670 relationship between Pb exposure and a subsequent rise in arterial pressure in human adults.” 

671 (Ref 22, p. 8-45) 

672 

673 Studies also demonstrate a relationship between increased lead exposure and other 

674 adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including increased incidence of hypertension and 

675 cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (Ref. 22, p. 6-154). “Lead interference in calcium676 dependent processes, including ionic transport systems and signaling pathways important in 

677 vascular reactivity may only represent the first step in the cascade of Pb-induced physiological 

678 events that culminates in cardiovascular disease. Lead alteration of endothelial cell response to 

679 vascular damage, inducement of smooth muscle cell hyperplasia, alteration of hormonal and 

680 transmitter systems regulating vascular reactivity, and its clear role as promoter of oxidative 

681 stress suggest mechanisms that could explain the Pb-associated increase in blood pressure, 

682 hypertension, and cardiovascular disease noted in this section.” (Ref 22, p. 6-153) 

683 

684 Current research does not definitively indicate whether health impacts observed later in 

685 life are the result of current lead exposure or exposure which occurred during early childhood or 

686 at some other time in the past. The following excerpts from the Criteria Document illustrate the 

687 uncertainties surrounding this issue: 

688 

689 • “It could be that damage occurred during a circumscribed period when the critical 

690 substrate was undergoing rapid development, but that the high correlation between serial blood 

691 Pb levels impeded identification of the special significance of exposure at that time.” (Ref. 22, p. 

692 8-73) 

693 

694 • “While some observations in children as old as adolescence indicate that exposure 

695 biomarkers measured concurrently are the strongest predictors of late outcomes, the 

696 interpretation of these observations with regard to critical windows of vulnerability remains 

697 uncertain.” (Ref 22, p. 8-74) 

698 

699 4. Renovations in residential settings and elevated blood lead levels. EPA’s Wisconsin 

700 Childhood Blood-Lead Study, described more fully in Unit III.C.1.c. of the preamble to the 2006 

701 Proposal, provides ample evidence of a link between renovation activities and elevated blood 

702 lead levels in resident children (Ref. 14). This peer-reviewed study concluded that general 

703 residential renovation and remodeling is associated with an increased risk of elevated blood lead 

704 levels in children and that specific renovation and remodeling activities are also associated with 

705 an increase in the risk of elevated blood lead levels in children. In particular, removing paint 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 16 of 33 

706 (using open flame torches, using heat guns, using chemical paint removers, and using wet 

707 scraping/sanding) and preparing surfaces by sanding or scraping significantly increased the risk 

708 of elevated blood lead levels. 

709 

710 Three studies from New York support the findings of the Wisconsin Childhood Blood711 Lead Study. In 1995, the New York State Department of Health assessed lead exposure among 

712 children resulting from home renovation and remodeling in 1993–1994. A review of the health 

713 department records of children with blood lead levels equal to or greater than 20 μg/dL identified 

714 320, or 6.9%, with elevated blood lead levels that were attributable to renovation and remodeling 

715 (Ref. 26). An update to that study with data from environmental investigations conducted during 

716 2006-2007 in New York State (excluding New York City) identified renovation, repair, and 

717 painting activities as the probable source of lead exposure in 14% of 972 children with blood 

718 lead levels equal to or exceeding 20 μg/dL (Ref. 27). The authors concluded that children living 

719 in housing undergoing renovation, repair, and painting that was built before 1978, and 

720 particularly before 1950, when concentrations of lead in paint were higher, are at high risk for 

721 elevated blood lead levels. The final study was a case-control study that assessed the association 

722 between elevated blood lead levels in children younger than 5 years and renovation or repair 

723 activities in homes in New York City (Ref. 28). EPA notes that the authors show that when dust 

724 and debris was reported (by respondents via telephone interviews) to be “everywhere” following 

725 a renovation, the children’s blood lead levels were significantly higher than those of the children 

726 at homes that did not report remodeling work. On the other hand, when the respondent reported 

727 either “no visible dust and debris” or that “dust and debris was limited to the work area,” there 

728 was no statistically significant effect on blood lead levels relative to homes that did not report 

729 remodeling work. Although the study found only a weak and nonsignificant link between a 

730 report of any renovation activity and the likelihood that a resident child had an elevated blood731 lead level, the link to the likelihood of an elevated blood-lead level was statistically significant 

732 for surface preparation by sanding and for renovation work that spreads dust and debris beyond 

733 the work area. The researchers noted the consistency of their results with EPA’s Wisconsin 

734 Childhood Blood-Lead Study (Ref. 28, at 509). 

735 

736 III. Renovations in Public and Commercial Buildings 

737 

738 In many respects, EPA’s approach to determining how to regulate exterior renovations on 

739 public and commercial buildings and whether and how to regulate interior renovations in public 

740 and commercial buildings must be similar to the approach taken towards renovation activities in 

741 and on target housing and child-occupied facilities. The statutory directive under TSCA section 

742 402(c)(3) is the same for all of these buildings. EPA must revise the regulations issued under 

743 TSCA section 402(a) to apply to those renovations that create lead-based paint hazards. 

744 

745 An important consideration in determining how to regulate renovations on the exteriors 

746 of public and commercial buildings is that these renovations can create lead-based paint hazards 

747 on and in target housing and child-occupied facilities. Lead dust can travel in the environment 

748 and has been shown to be readily tracked into homes and other buildings. In fact, as discussed in 

749 Unit III.B.1. below, a substantial proportion of interior dust is due to track-in activities. 

750 

751 A. Definitions of “Public Building” and “Commercial Building.” 

752 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 17 of 33 

753 While the term “target housing” is defined in TSCA section 401, TSCA Title IV does not 

754 provide definitions for the terms “public building” and “commercial building.” The issue of the 

755 buildings that could and should be covered by these terms was raised, but not conclusively 

756 resolved, in the rulemaking to establish the existing Lead-based Paint Activities Regulations. 

757 

758 As discussed previously, EPA promulgated the final Lead-based Paint Activities 

759 Regulations under TSCA section 402(a) in 1996 (Ref. 4). These regulations cover lead-based 

760 paint inspections, lead hazard screens, risk assessments, and abatements. The regulations include 

761 training and certification requirements for individuals and firms, accreditation requirements for 

762 lead-based paint training providers, and work practice standards designed in accordance with the 

763 statutory directive to ensure that lead-based paint activities are conducted safely, reliably and 

764 effectively. As initially proposed in 1994, one set of requirements for the training and 

765 certification of contractors and the accreditation of training programs, as well as specific work 

766 practice standards would have applied to lead-based paint activities conducted in target housing 

767 and public buildings (Ref. 29). The 1994 proposal would have defined public buildings to 

768 include all buildings generally open to the public or occupied or visited by children, such as 

769 stores, museums, airports, offices, restaurants, hospitals, and government buildings, as well as 

770 schools and day-care centers. In the final rule, EPA decided to focus on buildings frequented by 

771 children and, thus, established a subset of the buildings EPA had intended to define as public. 

772 This subset is called “child-occupied facilities” and it is delineated terms of the frequency and 

773 duration of visits by particular children (Ref. 4). 

774 

775 EPA continues to believe that it is important to emphasize the deleterious effects of lead 

776 exposure on young children, a sub-population that has long been identified as being particularly 

777 susceptible to the adverse effects of lead. However, it is also important to address exposures for 

778 other sensitive sub-populations, such as women who are pregnant or who may become pregnant 

779 in the future. In addition, as discussed in Unit II.D. of this preamble, a growing body of 

780 scientific literature documents lead’s adverse effects on older children and adults at lower levels 

781 of exposure than previously documented. As a result, EPA does not believe that the Agency’s 

782 efforts in this rulemaking should be limited to those buildings or situations where young children 

783 are likely to be exposed. EPA intends to evaluate all of the available information on hazards, 

784 exposures, and risk to determine which renovations TSCA requires EPA to regulate and how 

785 TSCA requires EPA to regulate them. 

786 

787 While TSCA Title IV does not define “public building” or “commercial building,” a 

788 definition of “public and commercial building” was provided in TSCA Title II. TSCA Title II 

789 addresses the management of asbestos-containing building materials in school buildings and the 

790 training and accreditation (or certification) of persons who perform asbestos inspections or 

791 design or conduct asbestos abatement in public or commercial buildings. Because the primary 

792 focus of TSCA Title II is primary and secondary schools, and ensuring that asbestos-containing 

793 building materials in such schools are properly managed, primary and secondary schools are 

794 specifically excluded from the definition of the term “public and commercial building” in TSCA 

795 section 202. However, the rest of the definition signals Congress’s intention for EPA to interpret 

796 the term broadly, because a public and commercial building is defined as “any building” other 

797 than a school building or a “residential apartment building” of fewer than 10 units. EPA’s 

798 regulatory definition of “public and commercial building” at 40 CFR part 745, subpart C 

799 provides examples of the types of buildings covered, including industrial and office buildings, 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 18 of 33 

800 government-owned buildings, colleges, museums, airports, hospitals, churches, preschools, 

801 stores, warehouses and factories. Notwithstanding the differences in focus between TSCA Title 

802 II and Title IV, EPA believes that a similar broad approach to interpreting “public building” and 

803 “commercial building” is warranted in this rulemaking. Of course, EPA must still determine 

804 which renovations in which buildings create lead-based paint hazards. 

805 

806 One other factor must be considered in interpreting the terms “public building” and 

807 “commercial building.” In 1978, the CPSC banned the use of paint containing more than 0.06% 

808 lead by weight on toys, furniture, and interior and exterior surfaces in housing and other 

809 buildings and structures used by consumers (Ref. 30). However, this ban specifically exempted 

810 “[i]ndustrial (and commercial) building and equipment maintenance coatings, including traffic 

811 and safety marking coatings.” It is likely that Congress was thinking of this ban, and the 

812 exemption, when it limited rulemaking authority in TSCA section 402(c)(3) to public buildings 

813 built before 1978, but applied no such limitation to commercial buildings. Lead-based paint is 

814 still thought to be in use in commercial buildings, especially when resistance to water and 

815 corrosion is needed. 

816 

817 With this in mind, EPA requests comment, information and data from the public on the 

818 types of buildings that should be considered “public buildings” or “commercial buildings.” 

819 Specifically, EPA asks commenters to consider the following questions: 

820 

821 1. What types of buildings should be considered to be public buildings? What types 

822 should be considered to be commercial buildings? Why? 

823 

824 2. What types of building classifications should be considered? Should the criteria for 

825 classifying buildings include the presence of young children or population density? Is it possible 

826 to categorize buildings based on the contractors and the workforce renovating them (i.e., do 

827 different contractors perform renovations in different types of public and commercial buildings)? 

828 Is it possible to classify public and commercial buildings using building codes or zoning? 

829 Should various classifications of buildings be treated differently with regard to required work 

830 practices and cleaning methods? 

831 

832 3. Every four years, the Department of Energy (DOE) collects information on the stock of 

833 commercial buildings in the United States, their energy-related building characteristics, and their 

834 energy consumption and expenditures. For the purposes of this survey, the Commercial 

835 Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), commercial buildings include all buildings in 

836 which at least half of the floor space is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or 

837 agricultural. This survey includes building types that might not traditionally be considered 

838 commercial, such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. 

839 More information on the CBECS can be found at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/. DOE 

840 also collects data every four years on buildings used for manufacturing activities. The 

841 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) collects data on buildings used by the 

842 manufacturing sector, defined by NAICS codes 31 to 33. The MECS data does not include 

843 information on building vintage. More information on MECS can be found at 

844 http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/contents.html. What other information is available on the 

845 ages, types, sizes, and other characteristics of public and commercial buildings in the United 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 19 of 33 

846 States? In particular, what data is available on the age, types, sizes, and other characteristics of 

847 public or commercial buildings not included in the CBECS or MECS? 

848 

849 Based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2003 American Housing Survey, there are 

850 77,888,000 target housing units. “Target housing” is defined under section 401 of TSCA as any 

851 housing constructed before 1978, except housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities 

852 (unless any child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside in such housing) or any 0-bedroom 

853 dwelling. EPA estimates that there are 97,000 child-occupied facilities (COFs), as defined at 40 

854 CFR 745.83. By comparison, according to DOE’s CBECS data, there are 2,826,000 commercial 

855 buildings constructed prior to 1980. This includes building types such as schools and buildings 

856 used for religious worship, so there is some double-counting with the target housing and COFs 

857 figures described above. According to DOE’s MECS there are 368,000 manufacturing 

858 buildings, but this includes post-1978 buildings because MECS does not indicate the age of the 

859 buildings. EPA is not aware of data on the number of agricultural buildings. 

860 

861 The estimates from the CBECS and MECS data provide an indication of the relative 

862 magnitude of different building types, but at this time should not be considered reflective of the 

863 number of buildings that would be affected by a future EPA regulation. The number of buildings 

864 affected by an EPA regulation will depend on how EPA ultimately decides to define public and 

865 commercial buildings and the scope of the regulation within that definition. Aside from the 

866 number of structures, the characteristics of public and commercial buildings may differ from 

867 target housing and COFs, including the prevalence of lead-based paint; the frequency, type, and 

868 size of renovation work performed; and the baseline renovation work practices used. EPA is 

869 seeking information in this notice on all of these characteristics. 

870 

871 B. Lead-based Paint Hazards and Public and Commercial Building Renovations. 

872 

873 1. Leaded dust and debris created by exterior renovations. The Dust Study, as described 

874 in Unit II.B., demonstrated that renovations on the exteriors of target housing and child-occupied 

875 facilities create an enormous amount of leaded dust that can contaminate soil in the vicinity. 

876 Including both bulk debris and dust created by these renovations, geometric mean lead levels in 

877 exterior samples from collection trays placed on top of the containment plastic covering the 

adjacent ground ranged from a low of 60,662 μg/ ft2 878 for door replacement to a high of 7,216,358 

μg/ft2 879 for removing paint with a high temperature heat gun (Ref. 16). EPA requests public 

880 comment on the extent to which this study should inform EPA’s determination on lead-based 

881 paint hazards created by exterior renovations on public and commercial buildings, especially 

882 considering that some of the exterior renovations in the Dust Study were performed on a school 

883 building, which represents one type of public buildings. 

884 

885 Studies have demonstrated that exterior dust and soil that contains lead will contaminate 

886 interior building areas when dust and soil is tracked inside on the shoes and clothing of building 

887 occupants and visitors and through air exchange. In one study, a regression analysis was used to 

888 investigate those factors that were most statistically significantly associated with lead loadings in 

889 dust samples taken from residential carpets (Ref. 29). The study found that soil-lead 

890 concentration, the practice of removing shoes before entering, and the use of walk-off mats at 

891 entrances were all statistically significant predictors of dust-lead loading in carpets. Dust and 

892 soil samples collected during the study were screened to include only particles smaller than 150 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 20 of 33 

893 microns, because these particles were considered more likely to appear on a child’s hand (Ref. 

894 31). 

895 

896 EPA possesses data on the transport of leaded dust and debris resulting from exterior 

897 renovations. In EPA’s Dust Study, measured lead dust and debris were found up to 18 feet from 

898 the exterior work area, and the average distance traveled by lead dust and debris was 10.81 feet 

899 (Ref. 16). However, it is important to keep in mind that exterior vertical containment was used 

900 where necessary during the Dust Study to ensure that leaded dust and debris did not contaminate 

901 adjacent properties, and this limited the distance leaded dust and debris could travel. 

902 Nevertheless, the Dust Study demonstrates that individuals residing in and visiting nearby 

903 properties could be exposed to leaded dust and debris created by exterior renovations when 

904 vertical containment or other containment measures are not used. Renovation firms or building 

905 owners and managers may not specifically consider the potential for these exposures on nearby 

906 properties when designing and performing renovations on the exteriors of public and commercial 

907 buildings. 

908 

909 Numerous studies have found elevated soil lead levels in residential areas surrounding 

910 residential and public and commercial buildings that have been demolished. In one study of a 

911 major building demolition, lead dust was found to travel up to 20 kilometers from the demolition 

912 site (Ref. 32). While EPA recognizes that this situation involves whole building demolition, the 

913 Agency expects that partial demolition and similar renovation activities would be expected to 

914 release similar types of lead-based paint dust particles with the ability to travel long distances 

915 and contaminate soil and other horizontal surfaces such as streets, playgrounds and other 

916 surfaces with which children could come into contact. Another study (Ref. 33) found increased 

917 levels of lead in alleys up to 100 meters from row house demolition. These lead levels were 

918 observed despite the fact that water wetting was used during demolition and debris removal to 

919 reduce the amount of dust released. In another study, abrasive blasting of a bridge was found to 

920 deposit 50% of the removed lead-based paint beyond 300 yards of the operation with a four mile 

921 per hour wind. This study indicates that current abrasive methods have the demonstrated 

922 potential to contaminate the surrounding environment and have the potential to create lead-based 

923 paint hazards (Ref. 34). 

924 

925 There are data on the maintenance of bridges and structures (such as water towers) that 

926 could be used to determine the extent of transport of lead dust resulting from exterior 

927 renovations. Paints on many of these steel structures contain up to 60-70% lead by weight (Ref. 

928 35). Of particular interest are studies of the impacts of renovating these structures in urban areas 

929 or near schools. Evidence from steel structures suggests that exterior public and commercial 

930 building renovations can result in significant health impacts for children and others in close 

931 proximity to the renovation, repair and painting work. 

932 

933 Given these considerations, EPA requests public comment, information, and data, 

934 especially peer-reviewed studies, on the following topics: 

935 

936 a. What information is available on dust-lead and soil-lead levels generated by exterior 

937 renovations on public and commercial buildings? To what extent is the data from the Dust Study 

938 relevant? 

939 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 21 of 33 

940 b. To what extent will dust drift from exterior renovations onto neighboring properties? 

941 Would this, for instance, resemble modeling plumes from smelters? 

942 

943 c. How far will lead-containing dust and debris travel from the exterior of properties 

944 undergoing renovation? What factors will influence the travel of lead dust? Such factors might 

945 include particular renovation practices, the time of year, wind conditions, ground cover (e.g., 

946 asphalt, concrete, dirt, vegetation), average precipitation, or the height and concentration of 

947 surrounding structures. 

948 

949 d. To what extent can the data on building demolition or steel structure maintenance be 

950 used to predict the extent to which dust and debris travel from exterior public and commercial 

951 building renovations? 

952 

953 e. To what extent will exterior dust from the exterior renovation of public and 

954 commercial buildings be tracked into the interior of buildings being renovated or nearby 

955 buildings? To what extent will lead-based paint dust enter these buildings through open 

956 windows, doorways and air exchange? 

957 

958 2. Leaded dust and debris generated by interior renovations in public and commercial 

959 buildings. In determining which renovations in target housing and child-occupied facilities 

960 create lead-based paint hazards for the 2008 RRP Rule, EPA relied heavily on two Agency 

961 studies that evaluated dust-lead levels generated by renovations. One of these studies, the 

962 Environmental Field Sampling Study (Ref. 12), Phase I of the study conducted under TSCA 

963 section 402(c)(2), evaluated the amount of leaded dust generated by the following activities: 

964 

965 • Paint removal by abrasive sanding. 

966 

967 • Removal of large structures, including demolition of interior plaster walls. 

968 

969 • Window replacement. 

970 

971 • Carpet removal. 

972 

973 • HVAC repair or replacement, including duct work. 

974 

975 • Repairs resulting in isolated small surface disruptions, including drilling and sawing 

976 into wood and plaster. 

977 

978 The dust lead levels generated by abrasive sanding were evaluated through a literature survey. 

979 The results of the literature survey included both residential buildings and public or commercial 

980 buildings. The rest of the evaluated activities were performed as part of the study in residential 

981 buildings. 

982 

983 EPA also relied heavily on the Dust Study (Ref. 16) to promulgate the final RRP Rule. 

984 The Dust Study evaluated the dust-lead and soil-lead levels generated by the following activities 

985 in and on an unoccupied school building and/or unoccupied target housing: 

986 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 22 of 33 

987 • Making cut-outs in the walls. 

988 

989 • Replacing a window from the inside. 

990 

991 • Removing paint with high and low temperature heat guns. 

992 

993 • Removing paint by dry scraping. 

994 

995 • Removing paint with a power planer. 

996 

997 • Removing kitchen cabinets. 

998 

999 EPA requests public comment, information, and data, particularly peer-reviewed studies, 

1000 on the dust-lead levels that are generated by renovations on the interiors of public and 

1001 commercial buildings. EPA also requests comment on the extent to which these two EPA 

1002 studies should inform EPA’s determination on lead-based paint hazards created by renovations in 

1003 the interiors of public and commercial buildings, especially considering that some of the 

1004 renovations in the Dust Study were performed in a school building. 

1005 

1006 3. Other evidence of lead-based paint hazards. While EPA primarily relied on the two 

1007 studies described above to determine that renovations in and on target housing and child1008 occupied facilities create lead-based paint hazards, EPA also looked at the available evidence for 

1009 a relationship between renovations and blood lead levels. In particular, EPA considered the 

1010 results of the other three phases of the study conducted under TSCA section 402(c)(2). Phase II, 

1011 the Worker Characterization and Blood Lead Study (Ref. 13), involved collecting data on blood 

1012 lead and renovation and remodeling activities from workers. Notably, half of the renovations 

1013 studied occurred in commercial buildings and half occurred in residential housing. Thus, this 

1014 study provides evidence of a relationship between commercial building renovation activities and 

1015 worker blood lead levels. Phase IV, the Worker Characterization and Blood-Lead Study of R&R 

1016 (Renovation and Remodeling) Workers Who Specialize in Renovations of Old or Historic 

1017 Homes (Ref. 15), was similar to Phase II, but focused on individuals who worked primarily in 

1018 old historic buildings. 

1019 

1020 As discussed in Unit II.E. of this preamble, EPA also relied on the evidence presented by 

1021 Phase III of the TSCA section 402(c)(2) study, the Wisconsin Childhood Blood-Lead Study 

1022 (Ref. 14), which documented a relationship between renovation and remodeling activities and the 

1023 blood-lead levels of resident children. This evidence of a relationship is corroborated by New 

1024 York studies also discussed in Unit II.E. 

1025 

1026 EPA also considered several studies conducted by the National Institute of Occupational 

1027 Safety and Health (NIOSH) that assessed worker exposure and transport of lead dust from 

1028 renovation activities (Refs. 36 and 37). For example, one study done at the University of 

1029 California, Berkeley, assessed lead-based paint exposures of workers during exterior renovation 

1030 work on campus buildings (Ref. 37). Estimated average exposures during dry manual sanding, 

1031 dry manual scraping, power finish sanding, and power finish sanding with bag would exceed the 

1032 permissible exposure limit (PEL) within an 8-hr period. Estimated average exposures for power 

1033 sanding with HEPA exhaust, flame burning, wet manual sanding, and wet scraping would be 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 23 of 33 

1034 below the PEL. Although it resulted in relatively low worker exposures, flame burning was 

1035 among the tasks associated with the higher lead levels in air and settled dust levels in nearby 

1036 areas (Ref. 37). 

1037 

1038 EPA requests public comment, as well as additional information and data, particularly 

1039 peer-reviewed studies, on the relationship between renovations in and on public and commercial 

1040 buildings and blood lead levels in workers, building occupants, and visitors. EPA also requests 

1041 public comment on the extent to which these blood-lead studies can inform EPA’s determination 

1042 on lead-based paint hazards created by public and commercial building renovations. 

1043 

1044 C. Prevalence of Leaded Paint and Lead Levels in Leaded Paint in and on Public and 

1045 Commercial Buildings. 

1046 

1047 An important consideration in determining which renovations create lead-based paint 

1048 hazards and how best to address those hazards is likely to be the prevalence of leaded paint 

1049 disturbed and the level of lead in that paint. In issuing the 2008 RRP Rule covering renovations 

1050 in target housing and child-occupied facilities, EPA relied heavily on two surveys sponsored by 

1051 HUD. The first, the National Survey of Lead and Allergens in Housing, was a representative 

1052 sampling of housing units where children could reside for lead-based paint, lead-based paint 

1053 hazards, and allergens (Ref. 38). This survey provided valuable information on the prevalence 

1054 of and levels of lead in lead-based paint in target housing. A similar survey, the First National 

1055 Environmental Health Survey of Childcare Centers, was conducted in licensed child-care centers 

1056 and included sampling for lead in paint, lead-based paint hazards, allergens, and pesticides (Ref. 

1057 39). 

1058 

1059 EPA requests public input on these issues related to the presence of leaded paint in and 

1060 on public and commercial buildings: 

1061 

1062 1. What information and data are available on the prevalence of leaded paint? What 

1063 information and data are available on the levels of lead (concentration or percentage of total) in 

1064 such paint? Does the prevalence or lead level differ by building component or type (e.g., interior 

1065 or exterior; doors and windows, trim, or walls; wood substrate or metal substrate)? 

1066 

1067 2. What information and data are available on the trends in prevalence and lead levels 

1068 over time? 

1069 

1070 3. What available data would help EPA estimate the likelihood that a public or 

1071 commercial building contains lead-based paint? Are there factors that should be considered 

1072 other than the year in which it was constructed? 

1073 

1074 4. What voluntary consensus standards or other guidelines or specifications affect the 

1075 prevalence of leaded paint and the levels of lead in such paint? 

1076 

1077 5. What federal, state, and local laws, regulations, or ordinances affect the prevalence of 

1078 leaded paint and the lead levels in such paint? 

1079 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 24 of 33 

1080 6. What information is available on the current manufacture and import of lead-based 

1081 paint for commercial building use? 

1082 

1083 D. Typical Renovation Activities and Building Management Practices for Public and 

1084 Commercial Buildings. 

1085 

1086 In making the determination which renovation activities in and on public and commercial 

1087 buildings create lead-based paint hazards, EPA must evaluate information on the typical 

1088 renovations performed and the typical practices used in performing these renovations. EPA is 

1089 also interested on types of lead-paint containing building components that may be reused during 

1090 a renovation of a public or commercial building. EPA encourages the public to submit 

1091 comments, information, and data relating to these considerations. 

1092 

1093 1. What types of renovations are typically performed in and on public and commercial 

1094 buildings, and how often is each type performed? What is the span or range in size and duration 

1095 of each type of renovation job? 

1096 

1097 2. Do renovation firms typically assess whether the paint they will disturb during a 

1098 renovation job in or on a public or commercial building contains lead? Before hiring a 

1099 renovation firm to perform a renovation, or performing a renovation using building maintenance 

1100 staff, do public and commercial building owners or managers assess whether leaded paint is 

1101 present? What methods and procedures are currently employed by contractors or building 

1102 owners/managers to assess whether paint contains lead? 

1103 

1104 3. Do building owners or managers typically provide notice of the lead content of 

1105 building paint to renovation firms, building occupants or the public? What triggers these 

1106 notifications? Do renovation firms or building owners/managers typically provide advance 

1107 notice of renovation activities to building occupants or the public? 

1108 

1109 4. Do renovation firms typically separate renovation work areas from other areas of the 

1110 building or grounds to limit access and minimize the spread of dust, chips, and debris? How 

1111 often are the following practices used to accomplish this separation? 

1112 

1113 • Restricting access of other building occupants or the public into or around the building 

1114 during renovation through warning signs and/or barriers. 

1115 

1116 • Closing the windows of the building during exterior renovations and the windows of 

1117 other buildings adjacent to the work area. 

1118 

1119 • Placing plastic on the ground to capture the falling chips and paint dust during exterior 

1120 renovations. 

1121 

1122 • Avoiding exterior renovation work during windy conditions. 

1123 

1124 • Shutting off the ventilation system and sealing the supply and return grills during 

1125 interior renovation. 

1126 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 25 of 33 

1127 • Sealing off the work area (establishing a work area containment system) for interior 

1128 renovations. 

1129 

1130 • Maintaining negative pressure in the work area with respect to the adjacent areas during 

1131 interior renovations. 

1132 

1133 • Practicing good housekeeping in the work area. 

1134 

1135 5. What clean-up practices do renovation firms typically follow during and after 

1136 renovation activities in and on public and commercial buildings? How often are brooms used? 

1137 How often is wet cleaning or mopping performed? How often is vacuuming performed, and are 

1138 shop vacuums or high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) vacuums typically used? 

1139 

1140 6. How often is dust wipe testing for leaded dust performed after renovations in public 

1141 and commercial buildings? How often is soil tested for lead after renovations on public and 

1142 commercial buildings? Do renovation firms or building owners/managers use any other methods 

1143 to assess lead levels in dust or soil remaining after renovations? Are the results of these tests or 

1144 assessments used to determine whether the work area may be re-occupied by other building 

1145 occupants or visited by the public? 

1146 

1147 7. What routine cleaning procedures do the owners and managers of public and 

1148 commercial buildings follow? How often are these procedures followed? 

1149 

1150 8. To what extent are building components that contain lead-based paint reused? 

1151 

1152 9. What measures are typically taken to avoid the release of lead dust during the 

1153 installation and use of reused lead-contaminated building materials (such as paint removal 

1154 techniques)? 

1155 

1156 10. What information is available on the scale of new renovation and repair projects on 

1157 public and commercial buildings? 

1158 

1159 11. What types of practices are used to protect workers from exposure to lead-based paint 

1160 containing building components which are being removed for future re-use? 

1161 

1162 E. Renovation Waste. 

1163 

1164 Waste from building renovations can create lead-contaminated waste. Lead1165 contaminated waste from the renovation of residences, regardless of who generates the waste, is 

1166 excluded from the Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Regulations under the Resource Conservation 

1167 and Recovery Act (RCRA) (Ref. 40). This includes waste from the renovation of single family 

1168 homes, apartment buildings, public housing, and military barracks. This waste may be disposed 

1169 of in a municipal solid waste landfill or in a construction and demolition (C&D) landfill. 

1170 However this exclusion does not apply to lead-contaminated waste generated from public and 

1171 commercial building renovations. That waste must be managed in accordance with the RCRA 

1172 Hazardous Waste Regulations. Given this regulatory status, EPA requests public comment, 

1173 information, and data responsive to the following questions: 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 26 of 33 

1174 

1175 1. What information is available on current practices for the cleanup, handling, and 

1176 disposal of lead-contaminated wastes after public and commercial building renovations? 

1177 

1178 2. To what extent (i.e. quantities) is lead-contaminated waste from public and commercial 

1179 building renovations recycled? What information is available on the methods and practices 

1180 currently in use for recycling such wastes? 

1181 

1182 3. To what extent (i.e. quantities) are lead-containing building components and other 

1183 waste removed from public and commercial buildings during renovations reused? What 

1184 information is available on the methods and practices currently employed for reusing such 

1185 components? 

1186 

1187 4. Other than RCRA, what federal, state or local statutes, regulations, ordinances, or 

1188 protocols govern the cleanup, handling, and disposal of lead-contaminated waste from public and 

1189 commercial building renovations? 

1190 

1191 5. What measures are typically taken to avoid the release of leaded dust during the 

1192 removal and disposal of lead-contaminated wastes from public and commercial building 

1193 renovations? 

1194 

1195 F. The Renovation Workforce in Public and Commercial Buildings. 

1196 

1197 In determining which public and commercial building renovations create lead-based paint 

1198 hazards and in designing safe, reliable, and effective work practice standards to address those 

1199 lead-based paint hazards, EPA must take into account the typical renovation workforce for public 

1200 and commercial buildings. Accordingly, EPA seeks public comment and data to help inform the 

1201 Agency’s understanding of this workforce. 

1202 

1203 1. What kinds of contractors perform renovations in and on public and commercial 

1204 buildings? How often is building maintenance staff used to perform renovations in and on public 

1205 and commercial buildings? 

1206 

1207 2. When hiring a contractor to perform a renovation, how often do building 

1208 owners/managers check to see whether the personnel who will be performing the renovation 

1209 have been trained in lead-safe work practices, i.e., work practices designed to minimize the 

1210 creation of leaded dust and debris, control the spread of such dust and debris, and properly clean 

1211 up this dust and debris after the renovation has been completed? How often do building owners 

1212 and managers train building maintenance staff in lead-safe work practices? What kind of lead1213 safe work practices training do contractor employees or building maintenance staff typically 

1214 receive? 

1215 

1216 3. How often do building owners/managers or renovation contractors hire consultants 

1217 trained to evaluate lead-based paint and lead-based paint hazards to assess the renovation work 

1218 area before work begins? How often do building owners/managers or renovation contractors 

1219 hire consultants trained in lead-safe work practices to assist them in designing and conducting 

1220 renovation projects? 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 27 of 33 

1221 

1222 4. Who typically provides health and safety oversight during renovation projects in public 

1223 and commercial buildings—the building owner, the building manager, the construction 

1224 contractor, or another party? Are other specially qualified individuals involved in the oversight 

1225 of renovation projects? Are interior and exterior renovations handled differently in this respect? 

1226 

1227 5. Typically, do contractors who perform renovations in public and commercial buildings 

1228 also perform renovations in residential buildings? Are the same work practices followed in both 

1229 settings? To what extent are the contractor employees the same from job to job? How likely is it 

1230 that an employee used to perform a public or commercial building renovation will have received 

1231 the training required by the 2008 RRP Rule for renovation work in target housing and child1232 occupied facilities? Do renovation contractors in public and commercial buildings typically 

1233 establish and enforce standard renovation work practice procedures for their employees? 

1234 

1235 G. Exposure Considerations 

1236 

1237 In determining which public and commercial building renovations create lead-based paint 

1238 hazards and in fashioning reliable, safe, and effective work practices for those renovations, EPA 

1239 must consider the exposures of building occupants and visitors. To help inform EPA’s decision1240 making, EPA requests public comment, information, and data, particularly relevant peer1241 reviewed studies, related to exposures. 

1242 

1243 1. What are the pathways for exposure in each type of public or commercial building? 

1244 

1245 2. While the Agency has developed research-based daily activity patterns for general use 

1246 in its analyses for children and adults, none of the patterns distinguish activities based on the 

1247 character or ownership of the buildings where activities occur (Ref. 41). What data or studies are 

1248 available that would assist EPA in estimating the amount of time that any particular individual 

1249 will spend in public and commercial buildings and what portion of that time will be in a building 

1250 containing leaded paint or lead-based paint hazards? What data or studies exist that characterize 

1251 the range or distribution of time spent by typical individuals? How much variation in exposure 

1252 exists in exposure by typical people? 

1253 

1254 3. What information and data are available on occupancy rates (e.g., number of people, 

1255 days per year of occupancy), exposed population, and time-activity patterns of occupants of each 

1256 type of public or commercial building? 

1257 

1258 4. If surveys were to be conducted and testing methods employed to assess the presence, 

1259 distribution and scope of lead-containing materials in every public and commercial building 

1260 before proceeding with renovations, how frequently would such surveys be carried out in any 

1261 given month in a town of 20,000? How frequently would such surveys be carried out in a rural 

1262 county? After what period, could EPA be satisfied that all such public and commercial buildings 

1263 have been so characterized? 

1264 

1265 5. To what extent will people other than renovation workers, such as other building 

1266 occupants, visitors, passers-by, and occupants of nearby buildings, be exposed to leaded dust and 

1267 debris created by public and commercial building renovations? For instance, when scaffolding is 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 28 of 33 

1268 installed, how likely is debris to waft down to passersby or to fill the ambient air? 

1269 

1270 6. What information is available on the number of potentially-exposed occupants of 

1271 buildings undergoing renovations or buildings recently renovated, the duration of the occupants’ 

1272 exposure per work day, and the number of days or hours exposed per year during and after 

1273 exterior and interior renovations? 

1274 

1275 7. What information and data are available on the proximity of residential properties to 

1276 public or commercial buildings? What is the distribution of distances of residences, schools and 

1277 day care facilities from public or commercial buildings? What information and data are 

1278 available on the correlation between the distribution of distances of residences, schools and day 

1279 care facilities from public or commercial buildings and average incomes of communities? For 

1280 example, many low income communities are in mixed-use neighborhoods. 

1281 

1282 8. What information and data are available on the demographics of mixed-use 

1283 neighborhoods? 

1284 

1285 9. For low income communities in mixed-use neighborhoods, particularly those in which 

1286 the housing stock is primarily pre-1978, how should EPA consider multiple exposures from both 

1287 residential buildings and public and commercial buildings? 

1288 

1289 10. Do communities in mixed-use neighborhoods have higher burdens of lead exposure? 

1290 What factors should EPA consider in assessing the extent to which renovations in and on public 

1291 and commercial buildings contribute to disproportionate impacts? 

1292 

1293 11. What studies and other sources of information are available on the frequency of use 

1294 or effectiveness of work practices designed to prevent other building occupants and visitors and 

1295 persons in nearby buildings from being exposed to leaded dust and debris created by renovations 

1296 in and on public and commercial buildings? 

1297 

1298 12. To what extent have recent building renovations or constructions installed reused 

1299 building materials that are coated with lead-based paint? To what extent have installers abated 

1300 or used techniques to eliminate worker or occupant exposure to lead from these materials? 

1301 

1302 13. To what extent do green building certification systems encourage the reuse of lead1303 contaminated building materials? To what extent do these systems encourage lead abatement of 

1304 reused materials? 

1305 

1306 IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

1307 

1308 Under Executive Order 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 

1309 51735, October 4, 1993), this action was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget 

1310 (OMB) for review. Any changes to the document that were made in response to comments 

1311 received by EPA during that review have been documented in the docket as required by the 

1312 Executive Order. 

1313 

1314 Since this document does not impose or propose any requirements, and instead seeks 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 29 of 33 

1315 comments and suggestions for the Agency to consider in possibly developing a subsequent 

1316 proposed rule, the various other review requirements that apply when an agency imposes 

1317 requirements do not apply to this action. Nevertheless, as part of your comments on this 

1318 document, you may include any comments or information that you have regarding the various 

1319 other review requirements. 

1320 

1321 In particular, EPA is interested in any information that would help the Agency to assess 

1322 the potential impact of a rule on small entities pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

1323 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); to consider voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the 

1324 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, 

1325 section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note); to consider environmental health or safety effects on children 

1326 pursuant to Executive Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of Children from Environmental Health 

1327 Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); or to consider human health or 

1328 environmental effects on minority or low-income populations pursuant to Executive Order 

1329 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 

1330 Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

1331 

1332 EPA specifically requests information and data to facilitate its analyses in the following 

1333 two areas: 

1334 

1335 a. Small Entities. EPA is particularly interested in receiving comments and information 

1336 about the various characteristics of potentially impacted small entities that would 

1337 facilitate the Agency’s evaluation of the number of firms that might experience an impact 

1338 from a rulemaking in this area, as well as an assessment of the potential size of that 

1339 impact on small entities. In commenting or providing information about small entities 

1340 that might be impacted by a rulemaking in this area, please note that the phrase “small 

1341 entities” encompasses small businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and small 

1342 organizations. In the analysis the Agency expects to perform under the RFA, these 

1343 entities are specifically defined in sections 601(3) - (5) of the RFA. The definitions for 

1344 “small business” are codified in the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) regulations 

1345 at 13 CFR 121.201. SBA defines small business by category of business using the North 

1346 American Industrial Classification System (NAICS). 

1347 (http://www.sba.gov/regulations/121/201.htm) Small business default definitions can be 

1348 found on SBA’s internet site at http://www.sba.gov/size/indextableofsize.html. A “small 

1349 governmental jurisdiction” is “a government of a city, county, town, school district or 

1350 special district with a population of less than 50,000.” A “small organization” is any 

1351 "not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant 

1352 in its field." 

1353 

1354 b. Environmental Justice. EPA is particularly interested in receiving comment and 

1355 information about potential impacts – both benefits and costs – on the human health or 

1356 environmental conditions in minority or low-income populations. Such information 

1357 would facilitate the Agency’s consideration of environmental justice during the 

1358 development of the proposed rule. 

1359 

1360 This information will be used in the identification and evaluation of options for the 

1361 proposed rule, and will inform the analyses that the Agency intends to prepare for the proposed 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 30 of 33 

1362 rule. Any comments on this topic should be submitted to the Agency in the manner specified 

1363 under ADDRESSES. The Agency will consider such comments during the development of any 

1364 subsequent proposed rule as it takes appropriate steps to address any applicable requirements. 

1365 

1366 V. References 

1367 

1368 As indicated under ADDRESSES, a docket has been established for this rulemaking 

1369 under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-0173. The following is a listing of the 

1370 documents that are specifically referenced in this document. The docket includes these 

1371 documents and other information considered by EPA, including documents that are referenced 

1372 within the documents that are included in the docket, even if the referenced document is not 

1373 physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating these other documents, please consult 

1374 the technical contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

1375 

1376 1. President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. 

1377 Eliminating Childhood Lead Poisoning: A Federal Strategy Targeting Lead Paint Hazards 

1378 (February 2000). 

1379 

1380 2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Public Health Service (PHS), 

1381 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Preventing Lead Poisoning in Young 

1382 Children; A Statement by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention August 2005). 

1383 

1384 3. USEPA. Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Proposed Rule. Federal 

1385 Register (71 FR 1588, January 10, 2006). 

1386 

1387 4. USEPA. Lead; Requirements for Lead-Based Paint Activities in Target Housing and 

1388 Child-Occupied Facilities: Final Rule. Federal Register (61 FR 45778, August 29, 1996). 

1389 

1390 5. USEPA. Lead; Fees for Accreditation of Training Programs and Certification of Lead1391 based Paint Activities Contractors; Final Rule. Federal Register (64 FR 31091, June 9, 1999). 

1392 

1393 6. USEPA. Lead; Notification Requirements for Lead-based Paint Abatement Activities 

1394 Training; Final Rule. Federal Register (69 FR 18489, April 8, 2004). 

1395 

1396 7. USEPA, Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), U.S. Department of Housing 

1397 and Urban Development (HUD). Protect Your Family From Lead in Your Home (EPA 747-K1398 99-001, June 2003). 

1399 

1400 8. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), USEPA. Lead; Requirements 

1401 for Disclosure of Known Lead-Based Paint and/or Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing; Final 

1402 Rule. Federal Register (61 FR 9064, March 6, 1996). 

1403 

1404 9. USEPA. Lead; Requirements for Hazard Education Before Renovation of Target 

1405 Housing; Final Rule. Federal Register (63 FR 29907, June 1, 1998). 

1406 

1407 10. USEPA. Lead; Identification of Dangerous Levels of Lead; Final Rule. Federal 

1408 Register (66 FR 1206, January 5, 2001). 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 31 of 33 

1409 

1410 11. USEPA. Reducing Lead Hazards When Remodeling Your Home (EPA747-K-97-001, 

1411 September 1997). 

1412 

1413 12. USEPA. Lead Exposure Associated With Renovation and Remodeling Activities: 

1414 Phase I, Environmental Field Sampling Study (EPA 747-R-96-007, May 1997). 

1415 

1416 13. USEPA. Lead Exposure Associated With Renovation and Remodeling Activities: 

1417 Phase II, Worker Characterization and Blood-Lead Study (EPA747-R-96-006, May 1997). 

1418 

1419 14. USEPA. Lead Exposure Associated With Renovation and Remodeling Activities: 

1420 Phase III, Wisconsin Childhood Blood-Lead Study (EPA 747-R-99-002, March 1999). 

1421 

1422 15. USEPA. Lead Exposure Associated With Renovation and Remodeling Activities: 

1423 Phase IV, Worker Characterization and Blood-Lead Study of R&R Workers Who Specialize in 

1424 Renovation of Old or Historic Homes (EPA747-R-99-001, March 1999). 

1425 

1426 16. USEPA. Characterization of Dust Lead Levels After Renovation, Repair, and 

1427 Painting Activities. (November 13, 2007). 

1428 

1429 17. USEPA. Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Final Rule. Federal 

1430 Register (73 FR 21692, April 22, 2008). 

1431 

1432 18. USEPA, Sierra Club, etc. Settlement. (August, 2009). 

1433 

1434 19. USEPA. Lead; Amendment to the Opt-out and Recordkeeping Provisions in the 

1435 Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Proposed Rule. Federal Register (74 FR 55506, 

1436 October 28, 2009). 

1437 

1438 20. Sierra Club, etc. Petition to Lower Dust Lead Hazard Standard. (2009) 

1439 

1440 21. USEPA. Response to Petition on Dust Lead Hazard Standard (October, 2009). 

1441 

1442 22. USEPA. Air Quality Criteria for Lead (September 29, 2006). 

1443 

1444 23. USEPA. Framework for Cumulative Risk Assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, 

1445 Washington, DC, EPA/630/P–02/001F (May 2003). 

1446 

1447 24. USEPA. Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate 

1448 Matter: Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information, OAQPS Staff Paper. EPA–

1449 452/R–05–005a. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park (2005). 

1450 

1451 25. Jones, Robert L., David M. Homa, Pamela A. Meyer, Debra J. Brody, Kathleen L. 

1452 Caldwell, James L. Pirkle, and Mary Jean Brown. “Trends in Blood Lead Levels and Blood Lead 

1453 Testing Among U.S. Children Aged 1 to 5 Years, 1988-2004.” Pediatrics 2009, Vol. 123, No. 3, 

1454 pp. e376-385, March 2009. 

1455 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 32 of 33 

1456 26. HHS, PHS, CDC. “Children with Elevated Blood Lead Levels Attributed to Home 

1457 Renovation and Remodeling Activities--New York, 1993-1994.” Morbidity and Mortality 

1458 Weekly Report (45(51); 1120-1123, January 3, 1997). 

1459 

1460 27. HHS, PHS, CDC. Children with Elevated Blood Lead Levels Related to Home 

1461 Renovation, Repair, and Painting Activities – New York State, 2006-2007. Morbidity and 

1462 Mortality Weekly Report (58(03); 55-58, January 30, 2009). 

1463 

1464 28. Reissman, Dori B., Thomas D. Matte, Karen L. Gurnite, Rachel B. Kaufmann, and 

1465 Jessica Leighton. “Is Home Renovation or Repair a Risk Factor for Exposure to Lead Among 

1466 Children Residing in New York City?” Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York 

1467 Academy of Medicine. Vol. 79, No. 4, 502-511, December 2005. 

1468 

1469 29. USEPA. Lead; Requirements for Lead-Based Paint Activities: Proposed Rule. 

1470 Federal Register (59 FR 45872, September 2, 1994). 

1471 

1472 30. CPSC. Federal Register (42 FR 44199, September 1, 1977, as amended at 43 FR 

1473 8515, March 2, 1978). 

1474 

1475 31. Roberts, J.W., D.E. Camann, and T.M. Spittler. “Reducing Lead Exposure from 

1476 Remodeling and Soil Track-In in Older Homes.” In: Proceedings, Annual Meeting - Air and 

1477 Waste Management Association. Publication No. 91-134.2. (1991a). 

1478 

1479 32. Stefani D, D. Wardman, T. Lambert. The Implosion of the Calgary General Hospital: 

1480 Ambient Air Quality Issues. J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2005 Jan; 55(1):52-9. 

1481 

1482 33. Farfel M.R., A.O. Orlova, P.S. Lees, C. Rohde, P.J. Ashley, J. Chisolm. “A Study of 

1483 Urban Housing Demolition as a Source of Lead in Ambient Dust on Sidewalks, Streets, and 

1484 Alleys.” Environ Res. 2005 Oct; 99(2):204-13. Epub 2004 Dec 15. 

1485 

1486 34. Snyder, M.K. and D. Bendersky. “Removal of Lead Based Bridge Paints.” Midwest 

1487 Research Institute. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report #265 for the 

1488 Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, December 1983. 

1489 

1490 35. State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations; Department of the Attorney 

1491 General. Rhode Island Lead Nuisance Abatement Plan (September 14, 2007). 

1492 

1493 36. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Health Hazard 

1494 Evaluation; Vermont Housing & Conservation Board. HETA #98-0285-2989 Montpelier, 

1495 Vermont (December 2005). 

1496 

1497 37. NIOSH. Health Hazard Evaluation; University of California, Berkley. HETA #99-

1498 0113-2853 Berkeley, California (July 2001). 

1499 

1500 38. HUD. National Survey of Lead and Allergens in Housing, Volume I: Analysis of 

1501 Lead Hazards, Final Report, Revision 7.1. (October 31, 2002). 

1502 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

Page 33 of 33 

1503 39. HUD. First National Environmental Health Survey of Child Care Centers, Volume I: 

1504 Analysis of Lead Hazards, Final Report. (July 15, 2003). 

1505 

1506 40. USEPA, Office of Solid Waste (OSW). Memorandum from Elizabeth A. Cotsworth, 

1507 Director, “Regulatory Status of Waste Generated by Contractors and Residents from Lead-Based 

1508 Paint Activities Conducted in Households” (July 31, 2000). 

1509 

1510 41. USEPA. Exposure Factors Handbook (Final Report) EPA/600/P-95/002F a-c (1997). 

1511 

1512 List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 745 

1513 

1514 Environmental protection, Hazardous substance, Lead poisoning, Reporting and 

1515 recordkeeping requirements. 

1516 Dated: ________ 

1517 _____________________ 

1518 Administrator

1519 

1520 [FR Doc. 10–????? Filed ??–??–10; 8:45 am] 

1521 BILLING CODE 6560–50–S