Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.



U.S. EPA lowers lead dust exposure levels

by Andrea Widener
June 30, 2018 | APPEARED IN VOLUME 96, ISSUE 27

Credit: Lloyd Fox/TNS/Newscom
The limit on lead dust from windows like this one in Baltimore would be lowered under a new EPA proposal.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wants to lower limits on lead dust on floors and window sills, the agency announced June 25. The new limits apply to pre-1978 housing and any child-occupied facility, such as a daycare or school. The proposed hazard standard for floors would fall from 430 µg/m² to 108 µg/m², and the acceptable level for windows would fall from 2,700 µg/m2 to 1,100 µg/m2. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has said that lead exposure is a priority at the agency, though most of his public statements focus on lead in drinking water rather than childhood exposure though paint. “Lead-contaminated dust from chipped and peeling lead-based paint is one of the most common causes of elevated blood lead levels in children,” Pruitt said in a statement announcing the lower levels. “Strengthening the standards for lead in dust is an important component of EPA’s strategy to curtail childhood lead exposure.” In 1978, EPA banned lead in residential paints, but it is still allowed in industrial paints. Lead is common in paints worldwide, especially in developing countries.



This article has been sent to the following recipient:

Warren Friedman, PhD, CIH, FAIHA (July 4, 2018 1:44 AM)
While the body of this article states, correctly, that the EPA is proposing to lower its dust-lead hazard standards for pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities (83 Fed. Reg. 30889), the headlines in both the online and print versions of this C&EN article incorrectly state, “EPA lowers” the standards, as if the recently published rule were a final rule; instead, the EPA is taking public comments on its proposed rule. An erratum should be published for both versions and the online headline should be corrected.

Leave A Comment

*Required to comment