The Biden administration has released a plan to accelerate the removal of lead water pipes and lead paint from U.S. homes. As a geochemist and environmental health researcher who has studied the heartbreaking effects of lead poisoning in children for decades, I am happy to see a lot of attention being paid to this silent killer, which disproportionately affects poor communities of color.

Childhood lead poisoning has declined significantly in the U.S. over the past 50 years. That’s largely due to the elimination of leaded gasoline in the 1980s and the banning of most lead-based paints.

But the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that up to 10 million households and 400,000 schools and child care centers have service lines or other fixtures that contain lead. These pipes are ticking time bombs that can leach toxic lead into drinking water if they corrode. As long as they remain in service, children and families are vulnerable.

The same is true of lead paint, which is still present in many homes built before consumer use of lead paint was banned in 1978. Because it tastes sweet, children sometimes chew on paint chips or painted wood.

The Biden administration will spend $15 billion from the recently enacted infrastructure bill to replace lead service lines, faucets and fixtures over the next five years and is seeking additional money in the pending Build Back Better Act to reduce lead hazards in public housing and low-income communities. I see this as a key priority, since Black children and children living in poverty have average blood lead levels that are 13 percent higher than the national average.

Lead poisoning does permanent damage

Lead poisoning is a major public health problem because lead has permanent impacts on the brain, particularly in children. Young brains are still actively forming the amazing network of neurons that comprise their hardware.

Neurons are designed to use calcium, the most abundant mineral in the human body, as a transmitter to rapidly pass signals. Lead molecules look a lot like calcium molecules, so if they are present in a child’s body, they can penetrate the brain, impair neuron development and cause permanent neural damage.

Children with lead poisoning have lower IQs, poor memory recall, high rates of attention deficit disorder and low impulse control. They tend to perform poorly at school, which reduces their earning potential as adults. They also face increased risk of kidney disease, stroke and hypertension as they age. Research has found strong connections between lead poisoning and incarceration for violent crimes.

Today researchers estimate that about 500,000 U.S. children still have elevated blood lead levels. Health experts widely agree that there is no known “safe” blood lead concentration.

Where are the lead pipes?

The Biden administration’s plan calls for replacing 100 percent of lead service lines across the nation – a goal that the EPA aims to write into regulations by 2024. Step 1 is finding the pipes.

Most U.S. cities have countless miles of lead service lines buried beneath streets and sidewalks and feeding into people’s homes. Utilities don’t know where many of these aging lines are and don’t have enough data to map them.

Replacing them will require significant analysis, modeling, data and some guesswork.

Old service lines have caused lead poisoning outbreaks in such places as Washington, D.C.; Flint, Michigan; and Newark, New Jersey. The chemistry is a bit different in each case.

Lead service lines typically develop a protective “plaque” of minerals on their inside walls after a short time, which effectively separates the toxic lead pipe from the water flowing through it. This coating, which is called scale, remains stable if the chemistry of the water coursing through it doesn’t change. But if that chemistry is altered, disaster can ensue.
In 2002, Washington, D.C., shifted from chlorine to chloramine for treating its water supply. Chloramine is a more modern disinfectant that does not form dangerous reactive chlorinated byproducts as chlorine can.

This rapidly corroded the protective plaque lining the city’s pipes, flushing highly absorbable lead into homes. Tens of thousands of children were exposed over two years before the problem was adequately identified and fixed.

In Flint, state-appointed managers decided to save money during a fiscal crisis in 2014 by switching from Detroit water to water from the Flint River. But regulators did not require enough chemical analysis to determine what additives should be used to maintain the pipe plaque. And they skipped the typical step of adding phosphate, which binds chemically with lead and prevents it from leaching out of pipes, in order to save about $100 per day.

Corrosion chemistry is well controlled in many U.S. cities, but it is not a perfect science. And utilities don’t always have detection systems that adequately alert water suppliers to dangers at the tap. That’s why removing lead pipes is the only sure way to avoid the threat of more water crises.

Cities will need to innovate

Although $15 billion is a big investment, experts agree that it’s not enough to replace all lead pipes nationwide. For example, the estimated cost of replacing all of Flint’s lead service lines is about $50 million – and there are thousands of U.S. cities to fix.

My own city, Indianapolis, has a population of about 850,000 – about 10 times larger than Flint – and officials have only a rough idea of where to find the lead service lines. There are ways to statistically model the likelihood that a given portion of the water system has lead service lines, using information such as water main sizes, locations and construction dates, but they are imperfect.

Cities will need to get creative to make whatever funds they get go as far as possible. As one example, I am working with colleagues to develop a citizen science project that will provide thousands of tests for lead at taps around Indianapolis. This effort, a partnership with the University of Notre Dame funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, may augment modeling with real data on levels of lead in homes, and will increase public awareness of this issue.

In spite of these difficulties, I believe more urgency on this issue is long overdue. Every lead pipe that’s replaced will pay off in higher lifetime earnings and lower rates of illness for families that gain access to safer tap water.

The post US making plans to replace all of its lead water pipes from coast to coast appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By SUMAN NAISHADHAM
Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Included in the bipartisan infrastructure deal reached with President Joe Biden last week is a plan to eliminate the country’s remaining lead pipes and service lines, which for decades have posed a risk for contaminated water in millions of homes and schools.

Lead can enter drinking water when water utility pipes or the service lines that connect to homes corrode. It is considered harmful at any level, and children are particularly vulnerable because it can slow growth, cause anemia and result in learning and behavior problems.

Federal regulations over the years have banned the use of lead in plumbing systems, but some pipes and service lines that were built before the rules were enacted have yet to be replaced. The White House says lead pipes continue to serve an estimated 400,000 schools and child care centers and 6 million to 10 million homes.

A look at how lead pipes are being addressed.

WHO CHECKS FOR LEAD IN MY WATER?

The Environmental Protection Agency requires public water systems to conduct annual water quality tests and alert residents if lead contamination is found.

If lead is detected, water utilities have to replace pipes within 15 years and provide filters to households during the process.

But then there are the service lines that connect the utilities’ pipes to homes, and are often on private property. Checking for lead in those lines is generally the homeowner’s responsibility, though some cities and states provide funding to help replace them. Residents can hire a certified plumber to test service lines.

Some homes also have privately supplied water, such as from wells. In those cases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says residents should test water annually and contact their local public health departments if lead is detected.

Local health departments or nearby water utilities that use ground water also keep information about local contaminants.

WHAT HAS BEEN DONE SO FAR ABOUT LEAD PIPES?

States and cities have worked for years to replace pipes and service lines, but efforts have lagged in many places in part because of the steep price tag.

The EPA estimates the average cost of replacing a lead service line ranges from $1,200 to $12,300 for a homeowner, and has made grants available for local governments to disperse.

Chicago, Denver and Newark, New Jersey are among the cities that have provided individual homeowners with full or partial financial aid in recent years to get rid of lead service lines.

WHAT ABOUT THE REMAINING PIPES?

To lessen the risk posed by lead pipes, cities treat drinking water with additives that help prevent their corrosion. Experts say such measures have helped reduce overall levels of exposure, but do not eliminate risk.

WHO IS AFFECTED BY LEAD PIPES?

Black and Hispanic Americans have long been at disproportionate risk of lead exposure in drinking water and lead-based paint, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, environmental advocates and medical researchers.

Children who live in housing built before 1978 or in households with incomes at or below the federal poverty line are thought to face the greatest risk of exposure.

The lead-tainted water crisis of Flint, Michigan, disproportionately hurt Black residents, who make up a majority of the city. When the city switched its water source in 2014 to the Flint River, state regulators advised local officials not to treat the river water with anti-corrosion chemicals. That resulted in river water scraping lead off the city’s aging pipes and plumbing fixtures.

A report later issued by the Michigan Civil Rights Commission found “systemic racism” at the core of problems that caused the water crisis.

WHAT IS CHANGING?

Under the Trump administration, the EPA modified a regulation to require water utilities to test fountains and faucets for lead at schools and child care centers. The Biden administration suspended and is reviewing that rule, which also would have nearly doubled the time utilities have to replace pipes when lead is found in them.

Some experts say lead tests for water pipes are unreliable, since results can vary based on factors such as how recently the pipe was flushed or whether construction shook lead particles loose at the time of testing.

Those variables can make concentrations of lead in water “fluctuate quite a bit,” said John Rumpler, clean water program director for Environment America, which advocates for environmental protections.

WOULD THE PROPOSED FUNDING GET RID OF ALL LEAD PIPES?

Biden’s proposed plan had set aside money for mapping out the extent of lead piping in the U.S., which remains difficult to assess in many older cities and towns. But experts say the $45 billion included in the proposal is a realistic ballpark figure for eliminating what’s estimated to remain.

Money for replacing pipes would be distributed through water programs and grants administered by the EPA to state and local governments and public water systems.

WOULD THIS END THE RISK OF LEAD EXPOSURE?

No. Water isn’t the only potential source of lead. Other sources include lead-based paint, which can be found in homes built before 1978 and soil contaminated from industrial sources including leaded gasoline.

The post Infrastructure deal targets lead pipes appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Contractors are breaking the rules and potentially poisoning themselves and children as a result, according to city officials and industry professionals.

Three years ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency established a that required contracting firms to become licensed before working on houses or facilities that were built before 1978 and are occupied routinely by children. The rule’s purpose was to prevent lead poisoning for both contractors and children.

EPA investigations of lead-based paint projects

Since June 2011, when the Construction Contractors Board most recently filed an enforcement report, a number of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency investigations have resulted in sanctions for firms.

Number of investigations: 187

Investigations resulting in sanctions: 95

Many contracting firms are ignoring this rule because of the time and cost tied to licensing, said Ed Gay, a licensed hazardous materials inspector with .

“I’d say there are quite a few (contractors) out there that are avoiding the process,” Gay said. “When you follow the rules, it lengthens out the project somewhat and also makes it more expensive.”

Gay and AMEC offer training courses on handling lead-based paint. These eight-hour courses are offered by a variety of businesses and organizations, and are required for licensing.

Not all contractors need to be licensed to work on projects involving lead-based paint; the requirement is for only the project’s supervisor, who is required to teach other project workers.

However, a course costs $215 – potentially a day of pay. And the cost can add up if a firm needs multiple workers to take the course.

“The folks that have taken the training are usually larger-type firms with long-established reputations,” Gay said. “A lot of the smaller guys are just sitting back and waiting to see what’s going to happen. Just to protect themselves from huge liability, they should do it.”

In Multnomah County, 80 percent of the housing stock was built before 1978, when lead-based paint was banned. Also, 55 percent of the stock was built before 1950 and is very likely to have lead-based paint in it, according to Andrea Matthiessen, program manager for the .

Since 1996, the PHB has received millions of dollars in federal grants to help low-income families mitigate lead-based paint problems in their homes. Dust from the paint can be extremely hazardous to children, as well as pregnant women and even normal adults in cases of extensive exposure.

The PHB has helped pay for more than 1,800 renovations, and according to Matthiessen all were performed by licensed workers.

However, the PHB often receives complaints from contractors and others that unlicensed workers are tackling projects with lead-based paint, Matthiessen said.

“We hear it all the time,” she said. “Folks who don’t … do the proper training really have the potential to create a hazard and poison children.”

Dave Nielsen, CEO of the , said he often hears such stories.

“It’s similar to there being a lot of contractors out there still operating without a license,” he said. “Part of it needs to be an issue of oversight and policing.”

The Construction Contractors Board is in charge of oversight; it conducts random jobsite inspections and investigates complaints and claims.

Since June 2011, when the CCB most recently filed an enforcement report with the EPA, the agency has conducted 187 investigations involving lead-based paint projects; 95 have resulted in sanctions for firms. Initial fines are $1,000 and become increasingly expensive.

Despite the CCB’s work, a lack of oversight is one of the reasons why some firms are able to break the rules, Gay believes.

“The enforcement has not been very strong because of limited personnel,” he said. “Just getting the people out there and having enough (inspectors) to send around is pretty tough on the regulatory people.”

According to the CCB’s enforcement manager, Rich Blank, budget cuts have hindered the board’s ability to communicate with contractors. For example, the CCB formerly reached out to the industry via a newsletter that was widely read; now, it posts news only on its website, which many contractors don’t visit.

“It would be really nice if we had more money and resources,” Blank said. “The unfortunate fact is when you have a lack of resources, the first things to go are your education and your outreach.”

Blank also believes that the recession has led some contractors to not pursue a license. He said he wasn’t surprised by the accusations that firms were not following the EPA’s rule because of cost.

However, budget woes have not hindered the CCB’s ability to conduct regulatory actions frequently and effectively, Blank said.

“I don’t think we are hampered,” he said. “We’re fairly well staffed with a competent team.”

The CCB has no plans to ramp up its oversight.

The bottom line is that lead poisoning should be avoidable, said Perry Cabot, a community education supervisor for the , a nonprofit that offers lead-based paint training courses for contractors.

“It’s hard to explain what it would be like to be the parent of a lead-poisoned child,” he said. “It’s generally an avoidable thing with education and awareness.”

The post Disregard for federal lead paint rule blamed for hazard appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

More than 100 housing units in Portland will be analyzed for lead paint and other building hazards this year thanks to a $1 million grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Portland’s Housing Bureau in collaboration with REACH Community Development and the Multnomah County Health Department will use the Healthy Homes Production Grant to perform environmental assessments and improvements on 175 rental housing units in Portland. The money will also be used to train workers in lead hazard abatement as well as for public outreach.

Rental housing in East Portland will be targeted for the project, the Housing Bureau said. A 2009 survey of 356 multi-family properties in Lents found 50 percent of properties had identifiable external repair needs.

The project is anticipated to begin in April. Owners of rental properties in East Portland should contact Andrea Matthiessen, the Housing Bureau’s neighborhood housing manager at 503-823-2379 to be considered for the program.

Portland’s grant was one of 51 grants totaling $127 million awarded nationally on Thursday under HUD’s Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Reduction grant programs.

The post East Portland slated for housing improvements appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Nearly six months have passed since the Oregon Construction Contractors Board began enforcing new rules for contractors working with potentially lead-based paint. But not everyone is following those rules.

The board has received and processed 2,586 applications for lead-based paint licenses, which are required for any contractors working on pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities. It also has received 228 complaints about contractors failing to comply with the new rules, which were imposed by the federal Environmental Protection Agency in July 2010.

The cost for a license, $50, isn’t a financial burden for most contractors, according to Dave Siegner, president of Siegner and Co. and member of the Portland chapter of the Painting and Decorating Contractors of America. Contractors performing unlicensed work are doing so willfully, Siegner said.

“A homeowner who doesn’t want to pay to perform projects in conformance with the new laws will seek out a painting contractor who is not licensed and doesn’t care,” Siegner said. “Those people will continue to find each other.”

The Construction Contractors Board last year relied on just 10 field investigators to check 1,388 job sites between July 1 and Sept. 30, according to Gina Fox, public information officer with the board. Each investigation of a home that appears to have been built before 1978 includes a review of the contractor’s work practices, and a licensing determination.

Someone who performs lead-paint remediation unsafely or without a license can be fined up to $5,000. The amount, Fox said, depends on what problems could have occurred and whether anyone was put at risk. With renovations of older homes occurring around the state every day, the board has relied on citizens, as well as its investigators, to report noncompliant work.

“There are more people out there painting than we have investigators,” Fox said. “But we also have homeowners calling in to say their neighbor is renovating an old home and contractors calling to say another contractor may not be licensed. The challenge of such a large new regulation is not necessarily enforcement, but communication.”

Also, the EPA in September tasked the Oregon Department of Human Services with updating its own rules for handling lead-based paint. In the past, homeowners and landlords could opt out of DHS work practice requirements for lead paint if they signed a statement saying no pregnant women or children lived in the home. That provision was removed Sept. 24, when the DHS, as directed by the EPA, established temporary rules for work in pre-1978 structures, according to Richard Leiker, manager of occupational health with the DHS. So far, it has received several complaints about homeowners or landlords performing unsafe renovations involving lead-based paint, but no fines have been issued, Leiker said.

When the DHS makes its rules permanent later this year, individuals or firms licensed for lead paint in other states will be able to work in Oregon without obtaining a local license, Leiker said.

“All you have to do is show your appropriate accreditation from another state,” Leiker said. “If you were trained in Washington to work with lead-based paint and you show us those credentials, we will honor those.”

Seigner believes consumer education, and not enforcement, will lead to a decrease in unlicensed work. When he hears from homeowners who suspect unlicensed painting projects, he refers them to the Construction Contractors Board’s website, where consumers can look up a contractor by name to see whether they are licensed. The EPA this year could decide to extend its residential lead paint rules to apply to all commercial structures, and Seigner said state agencies’ emphasis should be on education.

“Our government has taken on more of a prosecution than education mentality,” Seigner said. “The EPA put out these residential regulations with the heavy-handed stuff about what would happen if you don’t conform without having the educational aspect. The industry needs time to adapt to new regulation. I am hopeful with what the EPA has learned, the next set of rules will go smoother.”

The post Some contractors ignoring lead-paint rules appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Fifteen building trade groups have asked the Environmental Protection Agency to gather more input from the building industry before pushing forward a proposed rule for handling lead paint during commercial and public building projects.

The rule would extend the coverage of the recently passed Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Program Rule, which applies only to pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities, to all pre-1978 commercial and public structures. The rule requires workers to obtain new certifications and training, as well as use specific equipment and other work practices on the job. If contractors fail to comply, they face fines up to $37,500.

Although the rule has only been proposed, it is already drawing criticism from the building industry. The Associated General Contractors, Associated Builders and Contractors and Painting and Decorating Contractors of America sent comments to the EPA earlier this month asking for a Small Business Advocacy Review Panel to be created so that industry concerns about the rule can be expressed.

Portland-area builders and remodelers say the EPA nowadays is focusing its new rules more on enforcement than on working with the industry to make practices safer, and cost effective, for all involved. Dave Siegner, member of the Portland chapter of PDCA and president of Siegner and Co., said commercial project costs could rise by 20 to 50 percent if the EPA’s proposed rule were put into effect.

The Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Program went into effect for residential structures in April and raised costs for home builders and remodelers, Siegner said. The EPA recently decided to delay enforcement of that program until September 2010, after some industry professionals complained that more time was needed to obtain the required training and certifications.

“Let’s not have what occurred in the residential sector happen in commercial,” Siegner said. “We’re all about training for our people and having them be responsible in handling hazardous materials. But this stuff costs money. It would feel better to see more collaboration.”

Some contractors don’t feel that lead paint abatement is necessary in commercial structures, unless demolition at a site releases lead particles in the air, said Art DeMuro of Venerable Development. His company works entirely with pre-1978 structures. When lead paint is present at a project, DeMuro said his contractors will paint over it, or cover it in another manner.

“I’ve never had anyone have hazardous exposure on our projects,” DeMuro said. “If this rule goes into effect, it could have a serious cost impact on rehabilitation projects. The fact is that many of these older buildings bear lead paint.”

The building industry is still seeing low numbers of new construction, with much of the available work coming from renovation projects, said John Killin, president of the Associated Builders and Contractors Northwest Chapter. Adding a rule with significant cost implications is not advisable right now, Killin said.

“This is another of a litany of federal efforts placing uncertainty into business decisions and delaying job creation,” Killin said.

The EPA is performing studies and seeking public comment on the proposed rule for commercial and public buildings. It is also consulting with its Science Advisory Board to evaluate the level of risk posed by renovations in these buildings. If the board finds that renovation activities do create lead-based paint hazards, the EPA must issue a rule specifying work practices within 18 months. Final action on the rule is required before July 15, 2013.

In the meantime, Siegner said the EPA has an opportunity to reach out to industry groups about the best practices needed to keep everyone safe.

“This is not a done deal,” Siegner said. “The public benefits when industry and government work together. We don’t need an enforcement mentality in this economy.”

The post Builders bemoan new lead paint rule appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Shepard Painting President Justin Shepard is watching for unlicensed contractors.

Specifically, he’s on the alert for Portland contractors trying to skirt new Environmental Protection Agency regulations requiring all contractors who renovate pre-1978 homes and buildings to obtain a certified lead-based paint renovation contractor license.

The new rules went into effect on April 22, and Shepard received his certification in April. But he said most contractors have not. And for some, he alleged, it has been intentional.

“There are a number of contractors out there going renegade and doing this work without certification,” Shepard said. “Customers don’t understand or know about the new regulations. I’m seeing it often enough to be mildly concerned.”

The new rules require employees who work with lead-based paint to purchase the $50 license and renew it for the same cost every year. In addition, companies must have at least one owner or employee who holds a course completion certificate from an accredited renovation, repair and painting training provider.

The state Construction Contractors Board, the agency tasked with enforcing the new regulations in Oregon, has received 509 applications so far for lead-based paint licenses. But Shepard said he is hearing from clients about uncertified painting contractors offering low bids in exchange for looking the other way.

“When I qualify a customer, I’ll ask if they are getting other bids to see who else they are looking at,” Shepard said. “If someone comes in with a bottom-of-the-barrel quote from another contractor, I’ll keep tabs and see if they are certified. If they aren’t, I’ll bring that out to the encourage the client to confirm that the contractor submitting this bid is certified.”

Angelique Posten of Posten Painting Inc. said she too sees signs of unlicensed activity. She has heard from clients who say they have been offered low bids by contractors in exchange for being paid under the table to avoid being cited for not possessing licenses.

CCB spokeswoman Kathy Dixon said her agency plans to enforce the new rules by performing random checks on job sites. Meanwhile, building trade organizations report they are still getting calls daily from contractors who say they were unaware that the rule had gone into effect.

“People seem completely blindsided by this,” said Vicki Danielson of the Oregon Remodelers Association. “We’ve been offering the training since January. A guy called yesterday and told me he was in the industry for 20 years and didn’t know this was coming.”

The Oregon Remodelers Association periodically sends e-mails to its 1,000 members reminding them to get certified. It also offers the training classes. Other building organizations such as the Painting and Decorating Contractors of America, the Portland Home Builders Association, and the Oregon Home Builders Association also are offering classes and sending out reminders to their members.

But Patrick J. Lehne, program manager for the Western Regional Lead Training Center, said the Environmental Protection Agency has done a poor job of notifying contractors and the greater public about the new lead-paint rules.

“They have been relying on word of mouth more than anything else,” Lehne said. “EPA was supposed to come up with public service announcements for print, television and radio. I still have not seen them.”

According to Wallace Reid, EPA lead team leader and asbestos program manager, his agency has been reaching out to contractors for the past two years by contacting 250 property management firms and 6,500 trade organizations. It also produced multimedia public service announcements about renovation requirements and training opportunities. Soon, EPA will start running print and radio ads targeted at homeowners to encourage them to hire lead-safe firms.

Reid pointed out that the EPA isn’t in charge of outreach efforts on the new lead-paint rules in Oregon; that task falls to the CCB as well as the Oregon Public Health Division.

“We have been sending out as much information as we can,” said Richard Leiker, manager of lead programs for the Oregon Public Health Division. “Our website directs you to the information we have about the new rules, as does the CCB website.”

Shepard expects to see the number of lead-paint certified contractors increase as word gets out, especially when the CCB starts to crack down on those they find working without a license. He also plans to start a blog soon that will call out contractors he learns are working without the lead-paint license that will educate customers on the new laws.

“Anytime there’s a new rule this massive, you’re going to have a learning curve,” Shepard said. “Most people are trying to do what’s right. As far as the other people, I just don’t know.”

The post Contractors ignoring lead-paint rules appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

A certified lead-based paint renovation contractor license is required to work on child-occupied facilities and on any structures built before 1978. A license is $50 and is available from the Construction Contractors Board. The license must be renewed annually, which also costs $50.

To qualify as a certified lead-based paint renovation contractor, one must:

• Be a construction contractor licensed by the CCB,
• Submit an application form,
• Pay an application fee, and
• Have at least one owner or employee who holds a course completion certificate from an accredited renovation, repair and painting (RRP) training provider.

The EPA, Oregon Home Builders Association, Portland Home Builders Association, Oregon Remodelers Association, Painting and Decorating Contractors of America and Western Regional Lead Training Center all offer RRP training courses.

For more information, or to obtain a license application, visit or call CCB at 503-378-4621. 

The post License requirements for work handling lead-based paint appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.