skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: An evaluation of the effectiveness of lead paint hazard reduction when conducted by homeowners and landlords

Abstract

This research project was conducted in collaboration with the Iowa Department of Public Health to evaluate whether property owners who follow recommended procedures for lead-based paint removal/repair can do the work safely and effectively. This study included 29 homes where a lead-based paint hazard had been identified and lead-based paint was removed or repaired (hazard reduction). Exposure evaluation included pre-project surface dust wipe sampling, air monitoring during lead-based paint removal, post-project surface dust wipe sampling, and pre- and post-project blood samples from adult study participants. The comparison of surface dust wipe samples taken before and after lead paint hazard reduction was used to evaluate the effectiveness of lead paint hazard reduction. The lead loadings on window sill surfaces in the work area were significantly lower after completion of the project, and the lead-based paint removal did not contaminate the adjoining living area. The proportion of homes with surface dust lead loading exceeding Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) clearance standard was 73% pre-project and 38% post-project. Personal airborne exposures during lead removal activities reinforce the need to respiratory protection and good hygiene. There was no difference in adult pre-/post-blood levels, indicating that participants die remove lead in a safemore » manner with respect to their own exposures. The results indicate that hazard reduction can be done effectively when recommended procedures for the removal of lead-based paint are followed.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Univ. of Iowa, Iowa City, IA (US)
OSTI Identifier:
20020661
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene; Journal Volume: 14; Journal Issue: 8; Other Information: PBD: Aug 1999
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; INDOOR AIR POLLUTION; PAINTS; LEAD; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; AIR POLLUTION CONTROL; HOUSES; AIR POLLUTION MONITORING; SAMPLING

Citation Formats

Etre, L.A., Reynolds, S.J., Burmeister, L.F., Whitten, P.S., and Gergely, R. An evaluation of the effectiveness of lead paint hazard reduction when conducted by homeowners and landlords. United States: N. p., 1999. Web. doi:10.1080/104732299302512.
Etre, L.A., Reynolds, S.J., Burmeister, L.F., Whitten, P.S., & Gergely, R. An evaluation of the effectiveness of lead paint hazard reduction when conducted by homeowners and landlords. United States. doi:10.1080/104732299302512.
Etre, L.A., Reynolds, S.J., Burmeister, L.F., Whitten, P.S., and Gergely, R. 1999. "An evaluation of the effectiveness of lead paint hazard reduction when conducted by homeowners and landlords". United States. doi:10.1080/104732299302512.
@article{osti_20020661,
title = {An evaluation of the effectiveness of lead paint hazard reduction when conducted by homeowners and landlords},
author = {Etre, L.A. and Reynolds, S.J. and Burmeister, L.F. and Whitten, P.S. and Gergely, R.},
abstractNote = {This research project was conducted in collaboration with the Iowa Department of Public Health to evaluate whether property owners who follow recommended procedures for lead-based paint removal/repair can do the work safely and effectively. This study included 29 homes where a lead-based paint hazard had been identified and lead-based paint was removed or repaired (hazard reduction). Exposure evaluation included pre-project surface dust wipe sampling, air monitoring during lead-based paint removal, post-project surface dust wipe sampling, and pre- and post-project blood samples from adult study participants. The comparison of surface dust wipe samples taken before and after lead paint hazard reduction was used to evaluate the effectiveness of lead paint hazard reduction. The lead loadings on window sill surfaces in the work area were significantly lower after completion of the project, and the lead-based paint removal did not contaminate the adjoining living area. The proportion of homes with surface dust lead loading exceeding Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) clearance standard was 73% pre-project and 38% post-project. Personal airborne exposures during lead removal activities reinforce the need to respiratory protection and good hygiene. There was no difference in adult pre-/post-blood levels, indicating that participants die remove lead in a safe manner with respect to their own exposures. The results indicate that hazard reduction can be done effectively when recommended procedures for the removal of lead-based paint are followed.},
doi = {10.1080/104732299302512},
journal = {Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene},
number = 8,
volume = 14,
place = {United States},
year = 1999,
month = 8
}
  • The authors evaluated worker lead exposures and cleaning effectiveness during initial cleanup of 19th-century buildings with highly deteriorated lead-based paint. Eighteen rooms of similar size and condition in two university-owned buildings were selected for a pilot project to compare three methods for removing loose paint, paint chips, and dust. The methods used were: dry scraping followed by dry sweeping (no engineering or work practice controls); wet scraping and high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) vacuuming; and the latter method with the addition of a portable HEPA-filtered exhaust fan in the room providing about 40 air changes per hour. The final step formore » all methods was wet-mopping once with tri-sodium phosphate solution. During a single day 18 rooms were cleaned; each of three two-person work crews cleaned six room, two with each method. Air and surface samples were collected before, during, and after cleaning. All of the methods were potentially hazardous to workers: 44% of the method-based exposures and one of five full-shift exposures exceeded the OSHA PEL.« less
  • While lead paint has long been known to be a major source of lead poisoning, only a few small epidemiologic studies have attempted to assess directly the relative risk of lead poisoning due to the presence of lead paint. Using data from over 200,000 screening tests of children in the city of Chicago performed between 1976 and 1980, the relative risks can be quantified for children living in a major urban area. Lead paint was found to be a significant predictor of the probability of a child having lead toxicity. As expected, the reduction in leaded gasoline sales during themore » period reduced mean blood lead levels and increased the percentage of lead toxic children whose toxicity could be attributed to paint lead. Poisson regression models indicated that with the elimination of leaded gasoline, the relative risk of lead toxicity given lead paint exposure was 5.70 (95% CI, 4.13-7.86) during the winter and fall. The relative risk rose to 12.81 (95% CI, 7.33-22.4) in the spring and 15.8 (95% CI, 8.90-28.1) in the summer, probably due to increased exposure to window wells.« less
  • This prospective environmental intervention study was conducted to determine the impact of low-technology lead hazard reduction activities among children with mildly elevated blood lead levels. Children whose homes had severe lead hazards were automatically assigned to the intervention group. Children whose homes had lesser hazards were randomly assigned to the intervention group or comparison group. The one-time intervention focused mainly on cleaning and repainting window areas and educating caregivers to maintain effective housekeeping techniques. Changes in blood lead and dust lead loading levels were observed following the interventions. Analysis of covariance was used to adjust comparisons of postintervention levels formore » preintervention levels and other variables. The lead hazard reduction activities were associated with a modest decline in blood lead levels among children with severe hazards. The magnitude of the decline depended on the confounder that was controlled; the majority ranged from {minus}1.1 to {minus}1.6 {micro}g/dL. A moderate reduction in window well dust lead loading levels was also observed. While low-technology lead hazard reduction measures appeared to be an effective secondary prevention strategy among children with severe household lead hazards, larger studies are needed to confirm these results.« less
  • In response to a request from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Officer for Policy Development and Research, an investigation was made into possible hazardous working conditions during the HUD Lead Based Paint Abatement Demonstration (SIC-1521). The demonstration took place in 172 vacant housing units in several different cities. The abatement methods used included abrasive removal, chemical removal, heat gun removal, encapsulation, enclosure, and replacement. Evaluations were made during the demonstrations and it was determined that the workers were exposed to lead (7439921) with the highest exposure levels coming during the heat gun method of removal. Exposures tomore » volatile organic compounds were low. Maximum personal and general area airborne lead concentrations were 916 micrograms/cubic meter and 1296 micrograms/cubic meter, respectively. Soil sampling indicated that lead paint abatement in some cases resulted in increases in soil lead levels 1 to 3 feet from the exterior walls. The author concludes that workers were potentially overexposed to lead during lead abatement. The author recommend specific measures concerning training, work practices, engineering controls, safety programs, risk assessment, respiratory protection programs, medical monitoring and surveillance.« less
  • The US Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD's) Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing strongly recommend that after lead hazard control interventions all walls, ceiling, floors, and other horizontal surfaces be cleaned using a three-step process to reduce lead-contaminated dust and debris. The three steps are: an initial vacuuming using a machine equipped with a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter (HEPA vacuum), wet wash with a lead cleaner, and a final HEPA vacuum. This study evaluated the effectiveness of two cleaning protocols: (1) the HUD-recommended three-step procedure, and (2) an abbreviated two-step cleaningmore » procedure that omits the final HEPA vacuum. Cleaning procedures were evaluated in 27 dwelling units that had undergone significant lead hazard control interventions likely to produce lead dust. Dust lead samples were collected on floors and in window sills and troughs prior to the lead control hazard intervention, after the wet wash step of the cleaning procedure, and after completion of the second HEPA vacuuming. The results of the study demonstrate that dust lead surface loading on smooth and cleanable surfaces following the three-step and two-step cleaning procedures can achieve 1995 federal guidance dust clearance levels and levels substantially lower. Although the dust lead clearance rates before and after the second HEPA vacuum were the same, the time saved by omitting the second HEPA is small relative to the other elements of the cleaning process.« less