Document 06yegK5pO3R5a93a51kmQKNrm

May 20, 1971 Laad Industries Association 292 Madison Avenue Hew York, New York 10017 Present at the meeting to discuss Public Law 91-695 were: J. L. Kimberley, Executive Vice President, L.I.A. Jerome P. Smith, Manager, Technical Affairs and Advertising, L.I.A. Roger D. Walker, Vice President, Chemicals 6 Metals Division, Kagle-Plcher Jefferson Hudson, President, Chemicals A Metals Division, Eagle-PIchar Richard Hunt, Manager, Washington office, IL Industries Bruce McKinney, Quemetco Henry Whiter,NL Industries Robert I. Bell, President, McGregor Laad Company J. S. Mordyke, Hammond Lead Products, Inc. After much review and discussion, the following conclusions were reached: 1. 91-695 is not, of Itself, s threat to the use of lead pigments for natal protective purposes in steel structures. There may be some limited ban vith regard to their use on exposed metal in housing. 2. 91-695 does not presently ban anything, and will not until the directives are Issued by H.E.W. and H.D.D. Robert E. Novick of H.E.W. has the duty of preparing the H.E.W. directive after due consultation. Whan that is done. Dr. Irwin Billick of H.U.D. will issue a formal directive. H.U.D. is now operating under a temporary order which bans the use of lead based paints. 3. There is feeling at NPVLA, some paint manufacturers, pre primed lumber producers, and such influential people as Dr. Paul Campbell at the National Bureau of Standards, to the effect that lead-baaed wood primer paints for exterior use should not be banned. Since Title 4 gives H.E.W. some discretion with regard to what "may be necessary or appropriate" in the way of prohibitions, the door is not closed to this use. It can be closed only by directive. We concluded that L.I.A. should not actively join in an effort to keep this uae free, but to support and encourage \\ LIA25018 May 20, 1971 L.I.A. Meeting - Public Lew 91-695 all who will do so. We feel that the preaence of L.I.A. could be detrimental. If L.I.A. la asked any questions with regard to possible hazards, they should be answered with complete frankness. We would, of course, take a positive position with regard to other toxic hazards. We think that practical reasons of several kinds will prevent further use of lead-based exterior wood primer paints. $. While there is no present visible threat to the use of leadbased paints for structural uses, we must be alert to the dangers from over zealous functionaries who have a way of misinterpreting laws or directives. We must inform L.I.A. of any state, county or local bills, or proposed ordinances, which come to our attention, so that unwise provisions can be forestalled. We must be prepared to testify factually to the conse quences of removing lead pigments from metal protective paints, both from the standpoint of the results on protection and on the comparative hazard. 5. There is one federal government, 50 states, 3,600 counties, and who knows how many municipalities, all of whom know about lead and all of whom can be expected to take some kind of legislative action. Most of these will have little background for their decisions. We must do everything possible to keep L.I.A. and NPVLA informed of any actions proposed, or hearings to be held at any level of government. (I have asked Bill Spangenberg to prepare a letter to go to all of our agents, asking them to Inform us promptly of any such actions or proposed actions.) John S. Nordyke May 21, 1971 - 2- L IA25019