Document NeN83o7Z19bvevk8pZp7dDYmR

$ lje NeUrfork S im es Real Estate Sunday, April 7, 1991 1Section 0 The Pervasive Problem of Lead Paint AFederalReportFinds 57MillionDwellings MayPoseHealthRisks ByTHOMASJ.LUECK . je F T E R decades of anxiety over the health risks of lead-based paint in older American homes, a spate of suits, court rulings, Government reports and medical studies is raising broad new fears over the extent of the problem and the huge cost of removing the threat. . Health experts say the paint, which contains lead as a pigment, is emerging as one of the most pervasive environmental hazards in the nation. A study by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Develop ment, released in December, found thurtwo-thirds of the privately owned homes and ap artm en t buildings con structed before 1980 -- 57 million dwellings in all -- contained lead-based paint . ) It also concluded that 3.8 million homes were a ``priority hazard" because they were occupied by fam ilies with young children, and the paint had peeled or / discharged high levels of lead d u st . While prompting new worries, the research has also created a quandary for home sellers and buyers, partic ularly those with small children. Since Massachusetts is the only state with rigorous laws requiring lead paint removal, experts say most families lack clear guide lines to how much lead-based paint is in their homes and a t what point it is an unacceptable risk. F irst identified as a hazard to children in the 1950's, lead-based paint was banned for use in all homes and most buildings in 1978. At the time, Congress was persuaded by mounting evidence that lead was respon sible for learning disabilities and even deaths, mainly among youngsters in poorly maintained, publicly assist ed housing who had swallowed peeling or chipped paint. More recent medical research shows the threat to be far more widespread. . . ``The older the home, the more probable there is lead paint, and the problem doesn't know socioeconomic bounds," said Joseph Carra, deputy director of the Office of Toxic Substances of the Federal Environmen tal Protection Agency. In the last four months, his agency, H.U.D. and the Centers for Disease Control have submitted reports to Congress on lead-paint hazards. The reports find that the biggest threat may be from dust emitted by lead paint, rather than the more obvious problem of chips or peeling paint. Severe retar dation, stunted growth and even death have been linked to lead ingested or inhaled by children and the Govern ment researchers say it can be responsible for lowered Continued on Page 8, Col. 1 ; Crew removing material with lead-based paint in Bedford-Stuyvesant rowhouse. \ Duh Pran/The New York Time* 03607 'wJ AS / The All-Pervasive Problem of Le i. ... . Continued From PageI by New York City to remove lead paint from buildings cited, for safety violations. Among other infractions, city inspectors look for intelligence, hyperactivity and more subtle problems in early childhood development Lead-based paint was used almost univer sally before 1950, and was applied most liber ! ally in expensive homes because it was con peeling or chipped paint. At work last week on a three-story rowhouse on Patchen Avenue in the BedfordStuyvesant section of Brooklyn, Mr. Afzal's crew wore respirators, used plastic sheeting and duct tape liberally to keep the dust from ! sidered the most attractive and durable wall settling into cracks on the floor, and replaced j covering. Government researchers say that moldings and window sills rather than trying ! means most people living in homes more to remove layers of paint from them. than 40 years old can assume some lead- The cost, which the city will try to recover based paint is there even if it has been from the owner of the Brooklyn rowhouse, is covered and sealed away under more recent $8,000. In almost all cases, Mr. Afzal said, coats that pose no hazard, lead-paint removal or containment will cost ; Coming at a time when other hazardous homeowners "thousands, not hundreds."...... ' materials in homes have been brought to ' In its report to Congress, H.U.D. estimated c | public consciousness --radon gas and asbes- that the cost of dealing with lead-based paint i tos among them --some experts say the new in homes across the country would range ! data on lead-based paint may evoke little from $2,100 to $11,900 per home, depending on | more than sighs of resignation from home- the procedures used. One report to Congress j owners. said the total national cost could be as high as j "It might seem little more than the scare $499 billion. . ri. : of the week," said Stephanie Pollack, staff 1attorney for the Conservation Law Founda- "We don't want to break the bank, but people must realize that lead-based paint is a I ! tion, a nonprofit group in Massachusetts, and very serious long-term hazard," said Dr. Sue ( t- K , an adviser to the Centers for Disease Control >and other Federal agencies. Others fear burdensome new rules requir Binder, director of the lead poisoning preven tion branch of the Centers for Disease Con trol. "When we look at what we as a society ing removal of the paint. -- are paying as a result of kids with develop "We are concerned that new regulations mental problems, dropping out of school and will be excessive and ineffective," said Dick suffering permanent injury, it may outweigh t,. the price of abatement." In a flurry of reports and recent Congres r. Thereislittle sional hearings, her assessment has been echoed by several senior officials of the Bush Administration. - agreementonremedial In February, Dr. Louis W. Sullivan, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, procedures. called lead poisoning "the No. 1environmen Monica Santiago and parents tal hazard facing our children." Rayito and Carmen at house in ( ONE key policy change, experts say, Morris, a senior technical advisor for the National Association of Home Builders. He added that new laws requiring homeowners to pay thousands of dollars to remove old paint may provide no more protection than if they simply washed and dusted their wood work on a routine basis. "As long as lead paint is. bound to the . surface, it is hard to get into people's blood," < ' he said. ' No one questions that removing or perma (could come later this month when Dr. Binder's agency is expected to recom mend to physicians across the country that every child under the age of 7 be routinely screened for lead poisoning. The agency is also widely expected to lower the threshold of exposure that it would officially deem as hazardous, from a current level of 25 micro grams per deciliter of blood to 15 or 10 micrograms. If the threshold were lowered to 15 micro grams, Federal studies estimate, 17 percent nently encasing lead-based paint is expen of the nation's big-city children 6 months to 5 sive. But there is little agreement over what years old would test out as threatened with procedures are necessary. long-term developmental problems. And as Options include scraping away all rem that worry sinks in with parents across the nants of lead paint, covering it with protec country, some suggest that lead-based paint tive coats of another finish, or some combina will become a greater environmental issue. tion in which floor moldings, window sills and "The amazing thing is how many people other areas most likely to come into contact have the problem and don't know it," said with young children are replaced, and all Ms. Pollack of the Conservation Law Founda lead paint on walls within five feet of the floor tion. If the new standard is adopted, she is removed. added, "parents will be outraged." . " It has to done on a case-by-case basis," For now, the experts say, there are no easy said Mohammad Afzal, president of Fine or complete answers for families and homd- Construction, a Queens company that is owners worried about lead paint in their among more than a dozen contractors hired homes, but they offer a laundry list of sugges- Mattapan, Mass., where Monica was inj ured by lead-based paint. tions. ' One is to avoid partial, do-it-yourself paint removal projects in older homes. Often, they warn, weekend fix-up projects have only served to expose layers of lead paint that would otherwise have been safely covered by other, more recent coats. Such amateur. . work, particularly if it involves scraping, also runs the risk of freeing dangerous amounts of lead dust, which comes to rest on floors or in crevices within the reach of small children. ; Researchers say the most hazardous areas . of exposure are floor moldings, window sills, stair banisters and balusters and old wood work that is within the reach of a child's < hands or tongue. If parents fear these are covered with lead paint --particularly if the paint is peeling or damaged -- the best advice may be to remove and replace the ; sills, woodwork or other elements. Perhaps most important for people in old < homes is to keep their walls and floors clean. Routine washing of walls, floors and wood- > I N E W YORK TI M ES, SUNDAY, APRI L 7, 1991 roblem of Lead-Based Paint om ong for bwi rdal's fing om ced 'ing iver e, is aid, cost ited aint mge g on ress h as but :is a Sue ven- Con- :iety ;lop- and eigh .' ;res- been Bush . the ices, nen- say, i Dr. comthat ineiy Cy is old of n as licroir 10 icrorcent s to 5 with id as s the paint ;sue. eople ; said unda- she easy ome- Cindy M. Loofor The New Y ork f irnes Monica Santiago and parents Rayito and Carmen at house in Mattapan, Mass., where Monica was injured by lead-based paint. tions. One is to avoid partial, do-it-yourself paint removal projects in older homes. Often, they warn, weekend fix-up projects have only served to expose layers of lead paint that would otherwise have been safely covered by other, more recent coats. Such amateur work, particularly if it involves scraping, also runs the risk of freeing dangerous amounts of lead dust, which comes to rest on floors or in crevices within the reach of small children. Researchers say the most hazardous areas of exposure are floor moldings, window sills, stair banisters amj balusters and old wood work that is within the reach of a child's hands or tongue. If parents fear these are covered with lead paint --particularly if the paint is peeling or damaged -- the best advice may be to remove and replace the sills, woodwork or other elements. Perhaps most important for people in old work will greatly reduce any risk of expo sure, the experts say. And while many legal questions remain about who is liable for personal injury and the cost of lead-paint removal, real estate executives say the best policy for people buying an old home is to ask the seller or his broker if it contains lead paint. Although sellers may not know the answer, they would be obligated to disclose any knowledge of a health threat. Increasingly, the unresolved legal and health questions are being addressed in courts and in medical research. In March, the Centers for Disease Control reported that a 28-month-old Wisconsin boy died from eating lead-paint chips that had fallen from the walls of his family's home. It said the case was the first death connected to lead paint in a decade, adding that it under scored the need for routine testing of all children. IN February, a New York State Appellate court ruled that New York City must intensify its efforts to remove lead-based paint in cases where landlords are cited for building violations. It said that the city, which retains outside contractors to remove the paint in some cases, must now do so within 24 hours, treat lead dust as just as great a ^hazard as chips or peeling paint, and remove or encapsulate the paint in all buildings that are cited, including those built since 1960, when the sale of lead paint was banned by a city law. , " I am not sure that'all of New York City will have to be encapsulated, but this puts a new focus on the problem," said Megan Char- lop, director of the New York City Coalition to End Lead Poison, one of the plaintiffs that had sought the Appellate Court ruling. In Boston, lawyers said they expect a trial date in August in the case of Monica Santia go, an 18-year-old who has learning disabili ties and has been in special education classes since the 1970's, when her family lived in Mattapan, a Boston suburb, in a house with high levels of lead paint. She has already won $25,000 in damages from the owner of the house, and her attorney, Neil T. Leifer, is seeking damages from the Sherwin Williams Company and five other manufacturers that marketed lead-based paints before they were banned in 1978. The paint makers are also being sued by New York City, Philadelphia and other cities, which claim that they were aware of the hazards of lead-based paint long before its use was banned, but continued to make and market the product. In another court case that is raising new questions about liability for the costs of lead- based paint removal, attorneys in Maryland say they will go to trial later this month seeking damages from a realtor and mort gage lender who were involved in the 1988 sale of a home, as well as the Roman Catholic Church, which sold it. Solms, said their 3-year-old daughter suf fered high levels of lead exposure in the house and it is too early to tell whether she will have long-term developmental prob lems. But he added that the family was forced to move out because of the risks and cannot afford the necessary repairs, which might cost $94,000. Mr. Levin, calling the lead paint a "latent defect" in the house, said the seller, bank and realtor were obligated to fix it, even though the Solms family signed a standard sales agreement acknowledging they were buying the home in "as is" condition. The Maryland suit and prospect of others like it are worrying real estate industry executives across the nation. "A broker is licensed to sell property, not to search for lead paint, asbestos or any other hazardous material," said William D. North, a lawyer and executive vice president of the National Association of Realtors. He added that the problem for brokers, as well as for many home sellers, is that lead-based paint is often buried under several more recent coats of paint and difficult to detect, and Federal agencies have failed to provide "any reason able standard" for what levels of lead-based paint are acceptable. For now, the task of writing new regula tions for lead-based paint removal or con tainment is falling largely on state legisla tures. Although more than a dozen states adopted laws in the 1960's requiring removal of the paint after homeowners or landlords are cited for safety violations -- normally after a child is injured -- a few states are expanding the rules. The most sweeping law is in Massachu setts, which since 1988 has required the re moval of lead-based paint from homes in which children.under 7 live. Although it does not require the removal of all lead paint, the paint must be dealt with on all moldings,, window sills and other areas, that children are likely to come into contact with, and on all wall areas within five feet of the floor. The law requires home sellers to inform buyers if there is lead paint in the house, or, if they do not know, to give buyers 10 days to have it inspected. Experts say the effect has been that the cost of removing the paint has become part of the negotiation in home sales, and shared by buyers and sellers. Massachusetts requires doctors to test all children 1 to 4 years old annually for lead poisoning. It also has established training and licensing standards for workers who test for the presence of lead paint and remove or encase it, and gives homeowners a $1,000 state income tax abatement to partially off set the cost of paying for this. Experts say the most rigorous proposal for new laws is in Rhode Island, where bill were introduced in March creating rules and fi nancial incentives similar to those in Massa chusetts but making home sellers responsi ble for removing or encapsulating lead-based paint before selling. The bills would also