RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE
ANALYTICAL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
FOR
LEAD TEST KITS
AND OTHER
ANALYTICAL METHODS
E. E. Williams
E. D. Estes
W. F. Gutknecht
Prepared for
S. S. Shapley
Office of Toxic Substances
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC
EPA Project Officers
M. E. Beard
D. J. von Lehmden
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
EPA Contract No. 68-02-4550
RTI Project No. 91U-4699-066
February 1991
POST Q.FFICE BOX 12194 RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA 27709-2194
-------
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Background 1-1
1.2 Document Design 1-2
2. IMPACT OF LOW LEVEL LEAD EXPOSURE 2-1
2.1 Absorption and Distribution 2-1
2.2 Toxlcological Effects 2-1
2.3 Carcinogenlc Effects 2-6
2.4 Contribution to Body Burden from Environmental Sources 2-6
2.5 Governmental Recommendations 2-14
3. DETECTION METHODS FOR LEAD 3-1
3.1 Introduction 3-1
3.2 Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) and Inductively Coupled Argon
Plasma Emission Spectrometry (ICP) 3-1
3.3 X-ray Fl uorescence 3-2
3.4 Spot Tests 3-2
4. PERFORMANCE CRITERA FOR TEST KITS 4-1
4.1 Relevant Test Kit Performance Criteria 4-1
4.2 Proposed Test Kit Performance Criteria 4-4
5. REFERENCES 5-1
6. LIST OF CONTACTS 6-1
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Minimum Blood Lead Levels Associated with Toxic
Effects 1 n Adul ts 2-5
Table 2-2 Typical Lead Concentrations from Environmental Sources 2-8
Table 2-3 Increments 1n Blood Lead Level as a Function of
Exposure Concentration 2-12
Table 2-4 Minimum Concentration of Lead Causing Elevations in
Bl ood Lead Level 2-13
Table 2-5 Federal Guidelines for Lead Hazards 2-15
Table 2-6 State Guidelines for Lead Hazards 2-16
Table 3-1 Metallic Elements Having at Least One Black Sulfide 3-5
Table 4-1A Proposed Analysis Performance Criteria for Lead-in-Soil 4-6
Table 4-1B Proposed Analysis Performance Criteria for Lead-in-Dust 4-7
Table 4-1C Proposed Analysis Performance Criteria for Lead-in-Paint 4-9
ii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 Environmental Sources for Lead Uptake 2-7
iii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was prepared under the direction of Ms. Sarah S. Shapley,
Office of Toxic Substances, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C.
Special acknowledgement 1s given to Ms. Shapley and to Mr. Michael Beard
and Ms. Sharon Harper, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC for their careful
review. The authors also thank Dr. Mark Farfel and Dr. Julian Chlsolm of the
Kennedy Institute for their helpful discussions during the course of the
document preparation.
1v
-------
DISCLAIMER
This document was prepared by Research Triangle Institute under EPA
Contract No. 68-02-4550, and therefore was wholly funded by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. This document, however, does not necessarily
reflect the views of the Agency; the official endorsement should not be
Inferred.
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
The adverse health effects resulting from exposure of young children to
environmental lead has received Increasing attention 1n recent years. Studies
have shown that chronic exposure even to low levels of lead can result 1n
Impairment of the central nervous system, mental retardation, and behavioral
disorders. Although young children are at the greatest risk, adults may suf-
fer harmful effects as well.
The major sources of exposure to lead 1n housing units are thought to be
paint, dust and soil. Food, water and airborne lead are also potential sour-
ces, but are considered to be less significant avenues of exposure.
Currently, lead-based paint is receiving emphasis as a critical area of
concern and a principal medium for lead contamination and exposure. It is
particularly significant when painted walls, woodwork and furniture are low
enough for children to touch and to chew. Although less consideration has
been given to soil and dust, they are also important routes of exposure.
Soil, which is often contaminated with lead from petroleum additives or from
the leaching of exterior paint (near driplines, etc.), may be tracked into
homes. Like dust, 1t becomes collected on hands, toys and food and is
ingested. Concentrations in paint, dust and soil must be determined 1f a
comprehensive approach to the problem of lead exposure from housing sources is
to be established.
There are two ranges of concentration which are of concern. The first
includes the level of lead in paint that necessitates abatement and levels in
dust and/or soil that necessitate removal. The second includes the levels of
lead in the paint and dust after abatement, and levels in soil and dust after
removal that indicate acceptable levels of cleanliness, i.e., that the
dwelling site meets "clearance" requirements. Both ranges are driven by
health effects, though the abatement level of lead in paint has also been
driven by the ability to measure lead in paint using the portable X-ray
fluorescence spectrometer (XRF). These levels are also being measured by
atomic spectroscopic methods in the laboratory and in the dwelling unit using
chemical spot tests. The spot test and XRF methods are being developed and/or
1-1
-------
Improved at a rapid pace in response to the tremendous Interest 1n lead
exposure. Also, the atomic spectroscopic methods are being evaluated for
their accuracy and precision, and especially for analysis of old hardened
paints. There Is clearly a need for some analytical performance criteria to
be established which are In accord with health effects, abatement, clearance
and other driving forces such as regulations. The intent of this document 1s
to propose such analytical performance criteria as targets for the development
of test kits and other analytical methods.
1.2 DOCUMENT DESIGN
Development of the analytical performance criteria has been performed 1n
stages. First to be Investigated were the health effects. Numerous papers
were located and read, and many personal contacts were made to Identify the
most recent data regarding the relationships between levels of lead in various
matrices and health effects. Next to be investigated were Federal and State
regulations for lead exposure. Third, current performance capabilities for
methods of measurement were reviewed. All those data were then brought
together to arrive at proposed analytical performance standards for lead test
kits and other analytical methods.
1-2
-------
SECTION 2
IMPACT OF LOW LEVEL LEAD EXPOSURE
Any analytical performance criteria should be based on the ultimate use
of the data to be collected, which 1s to decide whether levels of lead present
will or will not cause adverse health effects and/or whether governmental
regulations or standards have been met. Accordingly three areas have been
Investigated - health effects of lead, sources of lead, and Federal and State
regulations. First to be considered are the health, I.e., biological, effects
of lead.
2.1 ABSORPTION AND DISTRIBUTION
The major route of absorption of lead 1s through the gastrointestinal
tract. Zlegler et al. (1983) have estimated that the absorption rate In
adults 1s approximately 5 percent., whereas children absorb lead at a rate of
40 - 50 percent, and retain about 30 percent of Ingested lead. Once lead 1s
absorbed, 1t 1s distributed to the blood, the soft tissues and the bones.
About 95 percent of absorbed lead is bound to erythrocytes for approximately 4
to 6 weeks, and then accumulated 1n calcified tissues, particularly in the
bone marrow, for years. The skeleton system acts as a mineral reservoir by
releasing lead Into the blood when blood levels fall and facilitating deposi-
tion when ingestion exceeds excretion.
Blood lead levels are the most widely used indicator of lead exposure.
Determination of dentine lead 1n deciduous teeth offers the potential of an
appropriate biological marker for chronic lead exposure (Biddle, 1982).
2.2 TOXICOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Chronic lead exposure at high levels usually occurs only in occupational
settings, such as lead smelters, battery plants, house painting or scraping.
Exposure to hazardous levels has been shown to cause peripheral neuropathy in
adults and encephalopathy in children (Goyer, 1986).
There has been Increasing concern about the hazards associated with low
level exposure, especially in vulnerable population groups, such as infants,
children, women of child-bearing age and the elderly. Findings In a study by
2-1
-------
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry, 1988) Identified toxicologlcal effects of
lead as brain or central nervous system (CNS) dysfunctions, Impairment 1n the
heme-forming and vitamin D regulatory systems, cardiovascular effects, and
reproductive disorders.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has defined an "elevated" blood
lead level as 25 /*g/dL for children (Centers for Disease Control, 1985), but
this value is currently undergoing revision. Exposure levels resulting In
adverse effects also vary with susceptibility. It Is believed that levels of
10 - 15 /*g/dL are significant enough to affect development of the fetus
(Marbury, 1990). The lowest blood level associated with adverse biological
effects has been observed to be 10 /ig/dL (Minnesota Department of Health,
1984), but a "safe" lead level has not been established. Individuals may show
similar effects at different blood lead concentrations. The current "action
level" for occupational exposure in the U.S. is 50 /tg/dL (Quinn and Sherlock,
1990).
Results from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
(NHANES-II, 1984) Indicated that during the survey period (1976-1980), 8.5
million children 1n the United States had blood lead levels of >15.0 pg/dL
(Houk et al., 1989). Children are particularly vulnerable to the toxic
effects of lead, likely from an ingestion/absorptlon route, rather than
Inhalation. Reasons for this vulnerability are as follows:
the increased intestinal efficiency of absorption in children, ap-
proximately 40 - 50 percent of the ingested amount as opposed to 10
percent in adults,
increased absorption associated with nutritional deficiencies in
iron, calcium and zinc, often relatively common in childhood,
hand-to-mouth activities and pica habits,
increased metabolic rate in children,
immature enzymatic systems and blood brain barrier, and
the percentage of compact bone for final absorption of the body
burden of lead is lower in children than in adults, leading to a
greater possibility for lead to reach dangerous concentrations in
target organs In children.
2-2
-------
Several of the specific toxic effects of lead are described 1n the
following sections.
2.2.1 Interference with Heme Biosynthesis
Lead has been shown to Interfere with heme biosynthesis by Inhibiting 6-
amlnolevullnlc acid dehydratase (ALA-D), the enzyme that catalyzes the con-
densation of two molecules of 6-amlnolevullnlc add (ALA) to yield one mole-
cule of porphoblUnogen. Lead decreases the activity of ALA-D In erythro-
cytes, and thereby Inhibits the formation of porphoblUnogen. Chisolm Inves-
tigated blood lead levels and ALA-D activity 1n children and determined that a
blood lead (PbB) level of 5 0g/dL was a no-effect level for ALA-D activity
(Chisolm et al., 1985). Roels found a threshold level of 19.9 /jg/dL for Inhi-
bition of this activity In children (Roels et al., 1976). Animal studies
(Azar et al., 1973) have shown that ALA-D activity In rats dosed (feed) with
lead acetate for 2 years decreased at blood lead levels of 18.5 /tg/dL.
Significant decreases In hemoglobin and hematocrlt were noted at blood lead
levels of 98.6 /*g/dL.
Lead also Inhibits ferrochelatase, the enzyme that catalyzes the Incor-
poration of Iron Into the porphyrln ring, the last step of heme formation.
Failure to Insert Iron Into protoporphyrin results In depressed heme forma-
tion. The excess protoporphyrin takes the place of heme In the circulating
red blood cells. Free erythrocyte protoporphyrin (EP) levels are Increased
with Increasing blood concentrations of lead. EP levels have become a biolog-
ical Indicator of lead exposure, although not as commonly used as blood lead
levels. Plomelll estimated the threshold for no adverse health effects from
elevated EP levels In study children to be between 16 and 20 /Kj/dL (Plomelll
et al., 1982). Roels found a no-effect limit of 19.9 pg/dl (Roels et al.,
1976).
2.2.2 Impairment of Vitamin D Biosynthesis
Adverse renal effects have been shown to be caused by lowered levels of
the hormonal form of Vitamin D, 1,25-dlhydroxycholecaldferol (1,25-CC), 1n
the blood. The synthesis of 1,25-CC Is carried out In the renal mitochondria,
known to be a target organ for carcinogenic effects (see Section 2.3). Rosen
found that blood lead levels above_55jtg/dL Interfered with vitamin D
metabolism (Rosen et al., 1980).
2-3
-------
2.2.3 Neurotoxic Effects
The most significant effects of lead on human health and performance are
on the central nervous system (Needleman, 1980). Peripheral neuropathy re-
sults from exposure to toxic amounts of lead 1n adults. Symptoms such as
footdrop and wrlstdrop were associated with exposure to high levels of lead in
occupational settings more than half a century ago (Thomas, 1904). Epidemic-
logical studies have shown a reduction 1n IQ scores for children with blood
lead levels of 30 /ig/dL (Grant and Davis, 1989). These children showed no
other signs of lead toxlclty. Other studies have shown deficiencies 1n cogni-
tive development at blood lead levels of 10 - 15 /ig/dL (USEPA, 1986; USEPA,
1986a; Davis and Svendsgaard, 1987). In general these deficiencies have been
related to prenatal lead exposure, but there are also indications that
correlations between neurological deficiencies and blood lead levels may
involve a lag of months or years (USEPA, 1986a).
At blood lead levels of 80 - 100 /ig/dL, acute lead encephalopathy has
been observed (Boeckx, 1986). The lowest observed adverse effects levels
(LOAELs) for significant behavioral alterations have been detected in primates
whose maximum blood lead was 15 /ig/dL (Rice, 1985). There have not been
extensive studies for comparing human and animal dose-response relationships
for lead exposure, but studies have suggested that rats, and possibly monkeys,
may tolerate a higher exposure level than humans to achieve equivalent blood
levels (Hammond et al.r 1985). The greatest similarities between human and
animal effects Involve cognitive and complex behavioral processes. The
question of comparability In blood levels across species 1s unanswered. The
lowest levels at which neurobehavioral effects have been observed are:
children - 10 - 15 /
-------
Table 2-1. Minimum Blood Lead Levels
Associated with Toxic Effects 1n Adults
Blood Lead
Toxic Effect
5-10 ALA-D inhibition
15 - 20 (women) Increased Erythrocyte
20 - 25 (men) Protoporphyr1 n (EP)
40 Increased urinary ALA
excretion
40 Peripheral neuropathy
50 Minimal brain dysfunction
50 Lowered hemoglobin
>80 Encephalopathy
Sources: Grandjean, 1978; Quinn and Sherlock, 1990
2-5
-------
2.3 CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS
The carcinogenic activity of lead has been investigated in animals and in
humans. Tumorigem'city studies in rats and mice revealed a direct relation-
ship between the Incidence of renal tumors and increasing dosages of lead in
both sexes. These findings are sufficient to establish cardnogenlcity in
experimental animals by criteria given in EPA Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk
Assessment (USEPA, 1986b). Data for cancer mortality in human exposure groups
is equivocal. Carcinogenic potential is suggested, but has not be quan-
titatively established. Therefore, lead is considered a Group 2B carcinogen
by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and 1s classified by
EPA criteria as a B2 carcinogen, a probable carcinogen 1n humans.
2.4 CONTRIBUTION TO BODY BURDEN FROM ENVIRONMENTAL SOURCES
In order to effectively reduce exposure, there has been an Increasing
interest 1n the potential environmental sources of lead exposure (air, drink-
Ing water, soil, dust, paint, and food) and in differentiating the contribu-
tion from each source to the total concentration of lead in the body, usually
expressed as a blood lead level (PbB, pg/dL), and its relationship to overall
health effects.
The most significant sources of lead 1n childhood exposure are lead in
paint, dust, soil and drinking water. Children in an urban environment are
exposed to lead by the air they breathe, the water they drink, and the food
and non-food Ingested. Exposure from these sources may be Intercorrelated as
shown schematically by a source/Intake model given In Figure 2-1.
It is currently believed that children should not be exposed to more than
100 - 150 fig Pb/day (Boeckx, 1986), but many children ingest up to
175 pg Pb/day In food, water and air alone. Typical exposure source levels
are given in Table 2-2.
Boeckx (1986) has estimated that a child exposed to lead In water, air
and food may Ingest 160 fig Pb/day and absorb 74 pg. Pica activities (eating
paint chips or soil) can Increase the total Intake to 2600 pg Pb/day and the
absorption to 550 pg Pb. Lead based paint has the potential to be the most
concentrated source of exposure in children. According to Sayre, "The
2-6
-------
Lead In Soil
Lead In Air
Lead in Paint
Deposition Deterioration
Tracking
Lead in Dust
Pica Activities
Ingested Lead
Hand-to-Mouth Activities
4
Lead in
Food
Lead in
Ceramics
Lead in
Drinking Water
Figure 2-1. Environmental Sources for Lead Uptake
2-7
-------
Table 2-2. Typical Lead Concentrations from Environmental Sources
Range of Typical
Medium Lead Concentrations
A1r (ambient) 0.5-2 /ig/m3
A1r (near heavy traffic) 5-10 pg/m3
Water <1 - 20 pg/L
Typical foods 0.1 - 0.5 /ig/g
Soil (upper few centimeters) <100 - >10,000 /tg/g
Street dust 206 - 20,000 ^g/g
House dust 18 - 11,000 /*g/g
Paint <1 - >5 mg/cm2
Source: Boeckx, 1986
2-8
-------
ingestion of leaded paint chips has been Implicated clearly as the major
mechanism leading to overtly symptomatic childhood lead poisoning and lead
encephalopathy in particular," (Sayre et al., 1974). Contributions of lead
from various sources are described 1n the following sections.
2.4.1 Air
Airborne lead is a primary source for lead found in food and dusts. The
EPA has estimated that blood lead levels will rise 1 /Ğj/dL for every increase
of 1 /jg/rn3 of lead in air inhaled (Snee, 1981). The relative contribution to
body burden 1s approximately 5 to 10 percent of adult blood lead levels (10 -
20 /Kj/dL) because ambient air levels rarely exceed 2 /tg/m3. At a mean air
lead concentration of 0.75 /tg/m3 with an estimation of 40 percent absorption,
Boeckx suggests that a child would absorb 3 /tg/day directly from air. It is
Important to realize that the ultimate fate of airborne lead is deposition as
street and house dust, providing a pathway for more a concentrated intake of
lead.
2.4.2 Drinking Water
Lacey showed a linear relationship between blood lead and water lead
level (Lacey et al., 1985). Houk found that drinking water contributes 22
percent to blood lead at 50 ppb and the mean blood lead increases by 1 ;tg/dL
as the concentration of lead in water increases by 50 ppb (Houk et al., 1989).
Mushak suggested that consumption of 1-2 liters of tap water with lead levels
of 20-40 ppb results in an increase in blood lead of 3.2 - 6.4 /ig/dL 1n
children (Mushak and Crocetti, 1989). The EPA estimated (USEPA, 1979) that a
lead-in-water concentration of 50 ppb would result in an average blood level
concentration 1n children of 15 /ig/dL.
2.4.3 Paint
Approximately 52 percent of all U.S. housing stock has lead levels in
paint that exceed the concentration considered "positive" for lead by the CDC,
0.7 mg/cm2 (Mushak and Crocetti, 1989). L1n-Fu (1980) studied high lead
concentrations in peeling paint and blood lead levels in children. The study
showed that 50 percent of the homes of children having high blood lead levels
(40 - 70 /tg/dL) had peeling paint with high concentrations of lead. In the
2-9
-------
control group (blood lead levels of £30 /jg/dL), 25 percent of the homes had
paint with high lead levels. Mushak and Crocettl (1989) have estimated that
1.2 million children have sufficient paint lead-based exposure to raise their
lead levels above 15 /tg/dL. For comparison, the authors have estimated that
3.8 million children are exposed to lead 1n tap water at levels that may cause
an Increase In blood lead levels.
2.4.4 Soil
Boeckx (1986) has Indicated that lead from soil and dust are absorbed
with an efficiency of 30 percent, as opposed to an absorption of 50 percent
for dietary lead (food and drinking water). Although the CDC (1985) has Indi-
cated that "the blood lead level in children in general does not begin to
Increase until soil lead levels are In the 500 to 1000 ppm range," Albritti et
al. (1989) suggest that for each increase of 100 ppm (/tg Pb/g) in the lead
content of surface soil, above a level of 500 ppm, there is a mean increase in
blood lead of 1 to 2 /jg/dl_. The U.S. EPA estimates the blood lead/soil slope
to be 0.6 to 0.8 /tg/dL per 1000 ppm of soil lead (USEPA, 1983). Duggan and
Williams (1977) estimated a 5 /ig/dL Increase In blood lead level in children
for every 1000 ppm Increase of lead 1n soil, and indicated that determinations
of a "safe" soil level were precluded by the variation (100-fold) 1n the
amount of soil ingested by children.
2.4.5 Dust
Paint and airborne lead from automobile exhaust and other sources are
considered to be the primary contributors to dust and soil lead levels. The
primary pathway of exposure in children 1s believed to be dust, but the
contribution of paint deterioration to dust lead 1s uncertain. Dr. Robert
Ellas of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, has stated that studies are
now underway to estimate this value. Mechanisms for lead-based paint turning
to dust Include abrasion, and simple shedding of particles at the surface of
the paint. This shedding would occur from degradation of the paint through
oxidation and/or photodecompositlon and expansion and contraction of the paint
with temperature variations.
2-10
-------
Data for blood lead levels from dust are Inconsistent. As a rule,
studies rely on data for exposure of children to high lead concentrations,
such as around smelters. EPA estimates from a summary of studies that the
contribution from dust to the body burden Is 1.8 /tg Pb/dL blood per
1000 pq Pb/g dust (Elwood EPA, 1986). Duggan (1980) estimates a higher
contribution of 5 pg/dl per 1000 fig Pb/g dust. Laxen (1987) estimates an
Increase of 1.9 pg/dl for every 1000 ppm Increase In dust lead concentration.
2.4.6 Food
The uptake of lead 1n food 1s difficult to measure. It 1s believed to be
associated with dietary uptake, as well as with the use of canned food with
soldered seals, ceramic glazes, crystal, and by absorption from water during
cooking. The effects of lead levels in soil are also a consideration.
Gallacher et al. (1984) estimated the contribution to blood lead from vegeta-
bles grown 1n soil contaminated by lead mining operations to be 3 /ig/dL.
Studies have indicated that an increase in gastrointestinal absorption of
lead is associated with deficiencies of calcium, iron and zinc (Mahaffey,
1983). Moreau et al. (1982) found a direct relationship between alcohol con-
sumption and Increases In blood lead. Studies on the synergistlc effects of
alcohol and smoking have been carried out by Shaper who showed that blood lead
levels for men who smoked and consumed alcohol were as much as 44 percent
higher than levels observed for participants who did not smoke or drink
(Shaper et al., 1982).
Although there appears to be a decrease in dietary uptake of lead in
recent years (Solgaard et al., 1979), possibly from the use of fresh and fro-
zen foods, a nationwide survey of preschool children in the U.S. (Bander et
al., 1983) Indicated an average uptake from food of 56 /tg Pb/day. If an
average body weight of 10 kg is assumed, this value exceeds the provisional
tolerable weekly Intake of 25 /tg/kg of body weight established by the Joint
FAO/WHO Expert Committee of Food Additives (WHO, 1987). Most studies have
revealed a dietary uptake of 200 to 300 ^g/day for adults which would lead to
an absorption of 20 to 30 /ig/day (WHO, 1977).
Increase in blood lead levels resulting from exposure to lead from air,
drinking water, paint, dust, soil and food are summarized In Table 2-3. The
minimum concentrations of lead in environmental sources believed to result in
Increases 1n blood lead level are given in Table 2-4.
2-11
-------
Table 2-3. Increments In Blood Lead Level as a
Function of Exposure Concentration
Medium
Air
Drinking
Water
Paint
Soil
Dust
Food
Incremental
Exposure
Concentration
1 /ig/m3
1 /*g/m3
50 ppb
1 ppb
1 ppb
16.8 /tg/Kg
Body Weight
1000 /tg/g
1000 pg/g
5000 pg/g
600 /jg/g
1000 pg/g
1000 fig/g
1000 pg/g
1000 pg/g
1000 pg/g
Vegetables
from contami-
nated soil
Resultant
Incremental
Blood Lead Level
1 /ig/dL
1 ;ig/dL
1 pg/di
0.06 ^g/dL
0.05 /ig/dL
20 - 54 /ig/dL
0.6 - 0.8 /ig/dL
2 pg/dl (adults)
4 /ig/dL (children)
3 /ğg/dL
^ 5 ^ig/dL
0.6 pg/dL
1.9 ^g/dL
1.8 ^g/dL (overall)
5 ^g/dL
4.0 /ig/dL
3 /Ğg/dL
References
USEPA, 1972
Snee, 1981
Houk et al., 1989
Pocock et al., 1983
USEPA, 1986
El wood, 1984
National Academy of Sciences,
1976
USEPA, 1983
Gallacher et al., 1984
El wood, 1986
Madhavan et al., 1989
Barltrop et al., 1975
Laxen et al., 1987
USEPA, Elwood, 1986
Duggan, 1980
Barltrop et al., 1975
Gallacher et al., 1984
2-12
-------
Table 2-4. Minimum Concentration of Lead Causing
Elevations 1n Blood Lead Level
Medium
Minimum Concentration
Reference
Air
2 pq/rtfl
Yankel et al., 1977
Drinking
Water
50 ppb
WHO (1984)
USEPA (1977)
Paint
0.06% = 600 ppm*
Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC)
Soil
1000 ppm
600 ppm
Yankel et al., 1977
Madhavan et al., 1989
Dust
123
1000 - 2000 /tg/g
114
Charney et al., 1980
Laxen et al., 1987
Sayre et al., 1974
Farfel and Chi solm, 1990
*The concentration of lead 1n paint associated with an elevation in blood lead
level has not been established. The value of 0.06% was recommended by the
CPSC as the highest allowable concentration of lead In paint formulations.
2-13
-------
2.5 GOVERNMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS
There Is not a concentration for lead that 1s considered "safe" from an
environmental standpoint. OSHA has regulations in place for lead 1n air and
medical action levels, and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has defined
an "elevated" blood lead level of 25 /ig/dL for children. This level is
currently under review. A number of states have regulations in place and/or
have adopted "recommended levels" of lead in environmental media. For the
most part, states are establishing recommended levels based on the Maryland
and HUD guidelines, and to some extent on CDC findings.
2.5.1 Paint
Guidelines for threshold levels of lead-based paint have been established
by HUD and by a number of states. These guidelines have been based primarily
upon measurement limitations, a level of lead that is detectable by X-ray
fluorescence. HUD has recommended that a level of 1.0 mg/cm2 be considered
"positive" for lead; the Centers for Disease Control has suggested a level of
0.7 mg/cm2 as "positive." States have adopted guidelines accordingly.
Federal and State permissible levels are presented 1n Tables 2-5 and 2-6.
Currently, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has established a limit
of 0.06 percent by weight for lead 1n paint, compared to a previous limit of
0.5 percent. These levels correlate with concentrations of 600 and 5000 ppm
for atomic absorption spectrometric (AAS) measurements. A number of states
have accepted these values as limiting AAS concentrations. (See Table 2-6.)
Spot tests are recognized as a confirmation of lead in paint by Massachu-
setts. Massachusetts regulations establish a dangerous level of lead in paint
as "a positive reaction with 6 to 8 percent sodium sulfide solution indicative
of more that 0.5 percent lead by dry weight (Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
1990)."
2.5.2 Soil
At the present time there are no Federal regulations for hazardous levels
of lead in soil. A number of states have adopted a level that CDC has con-
sidered protective, 500 - 1000 ppm. According to CDC (1985), "In general,
lead in soil and dust appears to be responsible for blood lead levels in chil-
2-14
-------
Table 2-5. Federal Guidelines for Lead Hazards
Concentration of Lead
Agency
ACGIH
CDC
HUD
NIOSH
OSHA
USEPA
USCPSC
Paint
NE
NE
0.5% (w/w)
NE
NE
NE
0.06% (w/w)
NE
NE
1.0 mg/cm2
NE
NE
NE
NE
Soil
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
Dust
Floor
NE
NE
200 /jg/ft2
NE
NE
NE
NE
Window Sill
NE
NE
500 /tg/ft?
NE
NE
NE
NE
Window Well
NE
NE
800 /ig/ft2
NE
NE
NE
NE
Drinking
Water
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE'
50 ppb
NE
Air
150 /ig/m3
NE
NE
100 /Jg/m3
50 /Kj/m3
NE
NE
Blood
NE
Children:
25 /ig/dL
NE
60 ftg/AL
50 ^g/dL
NE
NE
no
>-
in
NE - Not Established
-------
Table 2-6. State Guidelines for Lead Hazards
Concentration of Lead
State
CA
CT
MA
HD
UN
NC
NJ
SC
WI
Paint
AAS
% w/w (dry)
0.5
0.5
0.06
0.5
Before 1/1/90:
0.5
After 1/1/90:
0.06
0.5
1.0
0.06
0.5
XRF
(mg/cm2)
revising
1.2
0.7
Confirm:
0.5 - 2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.7
1.0
Soil
(ppm)
1000
1000
500
500
500
250
(recommended)
2500 - 5000
Oust
Floor
(/*9/ft2)
200
200
200
200"
Window Sill
C>g/ft2)
500
500
inn
500
500**
innn
Window Well
(/*9/ft2)
800
800
800
800**
Drinking
Water
(ppb)
50 ppb*
50
50
50
Air
(/ig/m3)
Blood
(/
-------
dren Increasing above background level when the concentration 1n the soil or
dust exceeds 500-1000 ppm." Wisconsin and North Carolina evaluate each site
Individually with respect to location, proximity to children's play and other
health hazards as an assessment for possible abatement.
The New Jersey Department of Health has established maximum permissible
levels for lead In soil on the basis of the dose-response relationship of soil
lead levels and blood lead levels 1n children (Madhavan et al., 1989). The
guidelines are as follows:
1. A maximum permissible level of 250 ppm of lead in soil is recommended
In areas without grass cover and repeatedly used by children below 5
years of age among whom mouthing objects is highly prevalent. This
level may add at the most about 2 /tg/dL to the blood level of chil-
dren.
2. A maximum permissible level of 600 ppm of lead 1n soil Is recommended
1n areas repeatedly used by children below 12 years of age. This
level may add at the most 5 /tg/dL to blood lead level of children.
3. A maximum permissible level of 1000 ppm of lead in soil 1s recommend-
ed In areas such as industrial parks or along streets and highways or
1n other areas Infrequented by children. Although these areas are
not expected to be places where children play, we do not feel that
this can always be assured. Additionally, we are concerned about
migration of lead off these sites on the footwear or clothes of
adults.
EPA Superfund Is developing a Biokinetlc Uptake Model for lead in soil at
Superfund sites. This model will allow sites to be evaluated for hazardous
lead levels and subsequent abatement on a site-specific basis. Parameters for
the model will Include factors such as the geographic location of the site and
the concentration of lead In the soil and water.
2.5.3 Dust
Studies (Sayre et al., 1974; Charney et al., 1980; Charney et al., 1983;
Farfel and Chlsolm, 1990) have shown that lead in dust in new, "lead-free,"
suburban homes to be 1n the range of 100 to 120 /tg/ft2. Maryland has used the
data from these studies In conjunction with the practicality of abatement
techniques to establish guidelines for clearance of surface dust after abate-
ment. Massachusetts and North Carolina, as well as HUD, have adopted the
Maryland guidelines of 200 /Ğg/ft2 for floor dust, 500 /*g/ft2 for window sill
2-17
-------
dust, and 800 /Kj/ft2 for dust 1n window wells. The differentiation between
site specific dust levels 1s not only concentration dependent (window wells
collect higher concentration of paint chips), but also a function of
effectiveness of clearance. (Floor dust 1s easily cleared.)
As a rule, programs and regulations at the State level are at an early
stage. A listing of guidelines for a number of states 1s given In Table 2-6.
2-18
-------
SECTION 3
DETECTION METHODS FOR LEAD
3.1 INTRODUCTION
Even though the lead test kit 1s the primary focus of this document, the
analytical performance criteria may also be used as guides in evaluation
and/or development of other methods currently used for measurement including
the atomic spectroscopic methods, atomic absorption spectroscopy and
Inductively coupled argon plasma emission spectrometry, and X-ray
fluorescence.
3.2 ATOMIC ABSORPTION SPECTROSCOPY (AAS) AND INDUCTIVELY COUPLED ARGON PLASMA
EMISSION SPECTROMETRY (ICP)
Lead 1n all sample types including paint, dust, soil, water, food and air
can be measured in digested or dissolved form using AAS or ICP. Typical
solution detection limits for lead are 0.5 /jg/mL using flame atomic absorption
(FAAS), 0.05 ftg/ml using plasma emission spectrometry (ICP) and 0.001 /ig/mL
using graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrophotometry (GFAA). The lower
levels of concern 1n paint (0.06%, 600 ppm) will not present a detection
problem for any of these measurement techniques once the sample 1s
sol utilized. That 1s, a 100 mg paint sample at 600 ppm dissolved in 25 mL of
solution will yield a >2 /jg/mL solution, which 1s well above the detection
limit for ICP and GFAA. Precision at these levels is better than + 10%. The
same 1s true for soil, but it 1s not true for dust because of the small
quantities of dust that are typically collected. High-volume dust samplers
are being tested by EPA at this time and, thus collection of sufficient dust
for analysis should not be a problem 1n the future. The difficulty
encountered is getting the sample Into solution such that a representative
solution is obtained for the measurement step. Add digestion methods are
recommended in the HUD Guidelines, though the efficacy of these with old
paints has not been fully substantiated. It has been determined 1n the RTI
laboratories that these acid extraction procedures leave some undlssolved lead
1n the digestion residue. Digestion efficiencies for the recommended methods
are being determined at this time.
3-1
-------
3.3 X-RAY FLUORESCENCE
X-ray fluorescence 1s being used in the field and in the laboratory for
analysis.
3.3.1 Portable XRF for Field Analysis
The portable XRF allows for measurement of lead in paint in the field.
These devices utilize a radioactive source to provide the excitation X-rays;
the lead fluorescent X-rays from the sample are detected with a solid-state,
room temperature detector. The direct reading, lead-specific instruments such
as the Warrington and Princeton Gamma-Tech have detection limits in the range
of 0.3 - 0.5 mg/cm2. The SCITEC instrument, which utilizes actual spectrum
analysis and software-driven matrix correction, has a detection limit of
approximately 0.1 mg/cm2. The best estimate of precision of a measurement
made with this latter instrument over wood or plaster is 0.3 mg/cm2.
(McKnight et al., 1990). The estimated systematic error of the procedure is
0.1 mg/cm2 which indicates an overall confidence limit of + 0.7 mg/cm2. The
precision of a result obtained using the SCITEC spectrum analyzer is expected
to be about twice as good as that of the direct-reading Warrington or
Princeton Gamma-Tech instruments, though it is expected that all of these
instruments will be improved with time.
3.3.2 Laboratory XRF
The laboratory XRF is different from the portable XRF in several ways.
The excitation X-rays are a result of bombardment of a metal cathode by a high
voltage electron beam; the lead fluorescent X-rays produced by the sample are
detected using a cryogenically-cooled solid state detector. The high inten-
sity of the X-ray excitation beam and the sensitivity of the detector allow
measurement of lead in dust and soil at concentrations as low as approximately
20 pg/q (ppm).
3.4 SPOT TESTS
The spot test has great potential to serve as a complement to these other
laboratory and field methods currently in use and described above. Spot tests
are presently being used as a qualitative test for the "presence" of lead,
3-2
-------
though the accuracy and reliability of the tests remain uncertain. Spot tests
of adequate and known accuracy and reliability could be used for direct
determination of lead in paint, either to confirm portable XRF results or to
replace the XRF totally. Appropriately designed spot tests could also be used
to measure lead in soil and dust and to measure lead in these same media after
abatement or cleanup. Spot tests are especially attractive because they offer
the potential of providing a means of performing the tens of thousands of
onsite analyses required in the near future. These analyses cannot be
performed by XRF because of the limited availability of such devices. Finally
spot tests offer the potential of providing inexpensive, safe and reliable
detection of lead by consumers. In general, limitations of the spot tests
include the following:
The technique is qualitative; therefore no standards for accuracy
and precision are available.
The presence of ions other than lead, for example, barium, can give
rise to positive results, and thus, there 1s a "built 1n" false
positive factor.
Detection is by visual comparison of color changes; results are
subjective, and may be inconsistent.
Results for colored paints may be difficult to interpret. An
observed darkening may be the result of wetting with the solution,
rather than the formation of a colored precipitate.
Detection in layers below the surface may be affected by the
briskness of application and thus extraction. This effort may not
be reproducible.
Interpretation is often a function of available lighting.
These are two principle chemistries currently used for lead spot tests,
reaction with sodium sulflde to form the dark colored or black lead sulfide
precipitate, and reaction with rhodizonate to form a pink complex.
3.4.1 Sodium Sulfide
3.4.1.1 Detection
In the sodium sulfide test, a drop of sodium sulfide is placed on exposed
layers of paint. Layers that contain lead will turn gray or black as a lead
3-3
-------
sulfide precipitate Is formed. In a test of this method at the Civil
Engineering Laboratory (VInd and Mathews, 1976) positive results for lead were
observed at a minimum concentration of 0.5% (w/w). Interference from a few
blocldes and driers was noted (see 3.4.1.2 Selectivity) which gave rise to
some "false positive" results.
The authors noted that even though the detection limit of the test was
approximately the regulatory limit, 0.5% (w/w), detection of lead at this
level 1n darker paints would not be possible.
Studies by MeKnight et al. (1989) and Blackburn (1990) have shown
Inconsistencies In the detection limit of the spot test. Blackburn tested 377
paired paint chips. The concentration of lead for one chip In each pair was
determined by atomic absorption spectroscopy (FAAS) and converted to mg/cm2.
The concentration of the other chip in the pair was determined using the spot
test method. The author found variations 1n the color of the precipitates:
black, gray, green, blue, brown, copper and orange. The observation of black
of gray precipitates was correlated with 96 percent of the "positive results."
Blackburn observed positive results (black coloration) to Increase with lead
concentration from 28.3 percent at a concentration of 0.7 - 0.9 mg/cm2 to 80.4
percent at FAAS concentrations of ^10.0 mg/cm2. The frequency of negative
results was found to be technician dependent. On wood substrates only,
negative test results at 0.7 mg/cm2 - 0.9 mg/cm2 were 51.1 percent; whereas
negative results at concentrations of ^10.0 mg/cm2 decreased to 20.5 percent.
Blackburn (1990) concluded that the overall false negative results on
wood were 25.0 percent. This was Inconsistent with the findings of McKnight
et al. (1989) who estimated the false negative results of sodium sulfide spot
tests to be about 10 percent. Blackburn questioned the statistical validity
of the McKnight results on the basis of the the magnitude of the 95 percent
confidence interval (0 - 23 percent) reported, and the background and training
of the testers In the NIST study.
3.4.1.2 Selectivity
A number of inorganic compounds contain metals whose sulfides are dark.
A list is given in Table 3-1. Vind and Mathews (1976) and MRI studies (Mid-
west Research Institute, 1990) evaluated the formation of colored precipitates
with sodium sulfide solution for Inorganic materials having potential uses 1n
3-4
-------
Table 3-1. Metallic Elements Having at Least One Black Sulflde.
Element
Actinium
Antimony
Bismuth
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Silver
Tin
Colors of Sul fides
Black
Black, Red
Black, Brown, Gray
Black, Brown, Gray
Black, Gray, Red
Black
Black, Green, Yellow
Black
Black, Green, P1nk
Black, Red
Black, Brown, Gray
Black, Gray, Yellow
Black, Gray
Black, Gold, Gray
Some Uses of Compounds in Paints
None
Pigment
Pigment
Pigment,
Pigment,
Bioddal
Corrosion Inhibitor
Drier
Pigment
Pigment
Pigment,
Pigment,
Pigment,
Pigment,
Drier, Corrosion Inhibitor
Drier
Biocide
Corrosion Inhibitor
Pigment
None
Gliding
Agent
Source: VInd and Mathews (1976)
3-5
-------
paint formulations (biocides or pigments). The authors observed positive
results for mercuric oxide, mercuric Iodide and phenylmercuric oleate, all
used as biocides. Cobalt napthenate and manganese naphthenate, used as curing
agents, also turned black with the application of sodium sulflde solution.
Bismuth trloxide changed from greenish-white to light brown In the presence of
the sodium sulflde solution.
3.4.2 Sodium Rhodlzonate
Sodium rhodlzonate forms a pink complex with lead In acidic solutions
(Felgl and Suter, 1942). It may be used to detect lead In:
paint,
dust,
sol 1,
dilute solutions,
the presence of interferent ions,
ores and minerals,
alloys, and
pigments and glass.
The test Is rapid and sensitive. In evaluation studies now being
performed at the Research Triangle Institute, four commercially available
rhodlzonate-based kits have a positive reaction to lead ranging from about 0.5
pq Pb (absolute 1n solution) to 5 pg Pb, with the reproducibility being + 0.05
pg to + 0.5 fig, respectively. A final report of these and other evaluation
results will be available 1n early 1991.
3-6
-------
SECTION 4
PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR TEST KITS
As stated In Section 3, there Is a great need for spot tests which may
complement and/or take the place of measurements now performed with a portable
XRF, and also measure lead In soil and dust before and after removal or
cleanup. Because, as also noted In Section 3, there are many uncertainties in
the performance of test kits currently available, criteria are needed which
will serve as guides for Improvement of existing kits and development of new
kits. First to be considered are these performance criteria.
4.1 RELEVANT TEST KIT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
There are a number of criteria which must be considered. These include
accuracy, precision, selectivity, sensitivity, response time, safety,
appearance, reproducibility, and stability.
4.1.1 Accuracy
As a rule, accuracy (bias) and precision are expressed for quantitative
determinations. Accuracy is a comparison of an observed value to a "true"
value usually determined from a reference standard. Because results of test
kit determinations are qualitative, calculation of bias is not possible. In
this case, an approximate expression of accuracy would be the ratio of a
number of "correct" determinations, n1, to the total number of measurements,
using a standard whose concentration was detectable at a level previously
determined by a quantitative method, I.e., AAS. For example, if a spot test
was checked for N samples known to have a concentration of 1200 ppm, the
accuracy, A, might be expressed as:
A = n'/N x 100.
Another method for estimating accuracy of the method is by using dupli-
cate real world samples. The concentration of one sample Is determined by a
quantitative method and lead in the second sample detected by the spot test.
A negative or positive spot test result would be evaluated relative to the
concentration determined quantitatively, with concentrations above the
4-1
-------
abatement concentration considered as positive spot test results. Blackburn
(1990) has used this approach to estimate the accuracy of the sodium sulfide
method for a series of paint samples. His findings show that the accuracy of
the method varies with the analyst and with the concentration of the lead in
paint. He indicates that an average of approximately 25 percent of the re-
sults of the spot tests were inconsistent with the concentration of lead
determined by AAS.
4.1.2 Precision
Precision for a quantitative method is usually expressed as the relative
standard deviation for replicate analyses. For qualitative analyses, a mean
value cannot be determined. Therefore, precision cannot be expressed in this
way.
4.1.3 Selectivity
Selectivity is a measure of the responsiveness of the test kits to lead
relative to their responsiveness to other materials present in paint, soil and
dust. These have been investigated for both the sulfide and rhodizonate-based
test kits.
Sodium Sulfide According to Vind and Mathews (1976) and MRI findings
(Midwest Research Institute, 1990), a number of elements other than lead have
a least one dark sulfide. These elements are potential interferents in the
spot test results and would contribute to false positives. Copper, iron and
zinc pigments in paint formulations are common interferents. Titanium
dioxide, another common pigment, acts as an interferent in test results by
masking color changes.
Sodium Rhodizonate A number of metals used as pigments and biocides in
paint also produce complexes with sodium rhodizonate under neutral conditions.
Examples are barium, mercury, copper, bismuth, and zinc. The presence of
these ions would result in "false positive" results in neutral solution, but
should have no effect under acidic conditions, the pH of choice for test kits.
Chloride (Cl~) and sulfate (SCty2') anions will interfere with accurate
detection of lead by competing with the rhodizonate for complexation of the
lead. As a result of the competitive reactions, the detectable lead level
appears lower than the actual lead level.
4-2
-------
4.1.4 Sensitivity
Detection limits are critically Important and should be specific to the
Intended purpose of the test kit, for example, testing for the need for
abatement. The optimum criteria for spot test sensitivity 1s to establish a
detection limit pertinent to the health effects associated with hazardous
levels of lead in different media. While governmental agencies have addressed
guidelines, recommendations, and regulations for abatement and clearance, the
correlation between these recommended levels and NOAELs are unclear. For
example, the HUD guidelines for abatement of lead in paint as determined by
XRF (1.0 mg/cm2) are based upon the instrumental sensitivity, i.e., confidence
of detectablllty of lead by the technique. (CDC considers a value of 0.7
mg/cm2 as positive for lead.)
Because there are risks associated with environmental exposure and
exposure during abatement, it is desirable to detect lead at levels that are
Indicative of hazards. Optimally, detection criteria for all media - paint,
soil, dust, water and ceramics - would ensure a 95 percent confidence level at
concentrations determined to produce adverse health effects In vulnerable
population groups.
In the case of soil lead, a Blokinetic Uptake Model Is being developed to
evaluate the lead levels at Superfund sites in order to determine levels
requiring abatement at specific sites. The State of Maryland has developed
guidelines for post-abatement clearance of dust lead by determining a concen-
tration 1n dust that 1s both relevant to health effects and achievable to
clear from a practical standpoint.
4.1.5 Response Time
The response time required for detection using the test kit and the time
stability of the response are Important to accuracy and reproduclblllty.
These times should be well-suited to normal work operations and consistent
from test to test for a particular kit.
4.1.6 Safety
Both consumers and trained technicians are potential users of test kits.
Safety criteria are Important considerations in both cases. In the case of
4-3
-------
consumers, safety of use, child safety and disposal must be addressed, whereas
for trained technicians, only handling and disposal criteria must be met.
4.1.7 Appearance
Statements should be made in the package insert about physical
properties, such as appearance, which may or may not have any effect on the
accuracy of detection. Variations in appearance may include the following:
suspensions or discolorations in reagent solutions, and
discoloration of test strips.
4.1.8 Reprodudbility
Because the detection of lead using qualitative test kits is based upon
color changes, the reproducibility of color is essential to the effectiveness
of the method. It would be desirable to include references so that the user
could compare color changes. Options for references include the following:
standard solutions for lead at varying concentrations,
blank solutions, or
color chart for correlations between color intensity and lead con-
centration.
Reproducibility in color changes should be determined for variations in
production lots. An option is to require the manufacturer to ensure colorl-
metric precision of + 10 percent for solutions and test papers by quality
assurance checks of production lots with standard reference materials.
4.1.9 Stability
Consideration must be given to stability of the detection kits. In the
short term, the effects of temperature changes, exposure to UV light and air
should be evaluated and minimized. Long term stability of the test kit
materials may be designated as an expiration date.
4.2 PROPOSED TEST KIT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
Consideration has been given to the levels of lead that yield adverse
health effects, Federal and State regulations, and desired performance
4-4
-------
criteria for test kits. On the basis of these considerations the following
are proposed.
4.2.1 Sensitivity
The optimum criteria for test kit sensitivity 1s the detection of lead at
the lowest concentration associated with adverse health effects; I.e.,
Increases 1n blood lead levels. Criteria are proposed In Tables 4-1A, 4-1B
and 4-1C for lead In soil, dust and paint.
The proposed test kit sensitivity for lead in soil and dust is more
conservative than levels given In Table 2-4. Because of the expected lowering
of the CDC "protective" levels from 500-1000 ppm to 300-500 ppm for lead in
soil, a concentration range of 150 - 450 ppm 1s proposed for positive
detection of lead In soil. Selection of sensitivity criteria for lead in dust
1s also based upon health effect findings. Because a concentration of 300 ppm
in dust 1s considered to be clearly unacceptable (Chaney, 1990), detection at
levels greater than 150 ppm, with 95% of results positive at 450 ppm 1s
proposed. Dust loading levels greater than 75 /*g/ft2 are believed to be
appropriate for detection with 95% of results positive at 225 /
-------
Table 4-1A
PROPOSED ANALYSIS PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR
LEAD-IN-SOIL
Normal and/or Acceptable Lead Levels
Reference Concentration
Madhaven et al., 1989 For Children <5 years: <250 ppm
For Children >5, <12 years: <600 ppm
CDC 500 - 1000 ppm
Charney et al., 1980. mean: 1000 ppm
(Rochester study) medium: 633 ppm
Unacceptable Lead Levels
Yankel et al., 1977. 1000 ppm
Proposed Performance Criteria
Concentration Level of Concern: 300 ppm
95% of results positive ^ 450 ppm
95% of results negative £ 150 ppm
Comments:
CDC presently considers 500 - 1000 ppm "protective."
CDC will change "protective" level to 300 - 500 ppm sometime in the
future according to Chancy.
EPA developing BioKinetic Uptake Model for lead in soil.
4-6
-------
Table 4-1B
Reference
PROPOSED ANALYSIS PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
FOR LEAD-IN-DUST
Normal (clean) Lead Levels
Technique Loading
Clark et al., 1985 vacuuming mean: 19/ig/ft2
(Univ. of Cincinnati)
Chlsolm, personal wipe
communication
(Baltimore study)
Sayre et al., 1974 wipe
(Rochester study)
Charney et al., 1980 wipe
(Rochester study
Ellas, personal
communication
Chaney, personal
communication
range: 4-111 0g/ft2
mean: 20 - 30 / 300 ppm, 1000
ppm 1s clearly
unacceptable
4-7
-------
Table 4-1B (continued)
Loading Level of Concern: 150 /ğg/ft2
95% of results positive ^ 225 fğg/ft2
95% of results negative £ 75 /ig/ft2
Concentration Level of Concern: 300 ppm
95% of results positive ^ 450 ppm
95% of results negative £ 150 ppm
Comments:
Loading (area concentration) 1s determined by wipe type kits or area
vacuuming onto filter for direct analysis.
Concentration (gravimetric) is determined by vacuuming techniques
and extraction of weighed bulk or weighed filter samples.
"The correlation of blood lead concentrations with lead loading
(r=0.46) was much higher than for lead concentrations (r=0.21). For
a given loading, the concentration could range from being high where
there was very little dust and hence very little lead) to, converse-
ly, low where there was a larger volume of dust (and hence much
available lead)." Davies et al., 1990.
Loading 1s a more appropriate means of indicating the presence of
lead. Reductions In amounts of dust, i.e., improved housekeeping,
result In decreases In loading, yet concentration of lead in dust
may remain unchanged: J. Chisolm, personal communication.
"In general, lead in soil and dust appears to be responsible for
blood lead levels In children Increasing above background level when
the concentration 1n the soil or dust exceeds 500 - 1000 ppm." CDC,
1985.
CDC "Levels of Concern" may be lowered In the future: R. Chancy,
personal communication.
"Dust lead concentration Is a more useful predictor of blood lead
than lead loading...Lead concentration is thus the more useful mea-
sure of exposure, since there is no standardized way to measure lead
loading, preventing comparison between studies." Laxen et al.,
1987.
4-8
-------
Table 4-1C
PROPOSED ANALYSIS PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
FOR LEAD-IN-PAINT
Standards for New/Replacement Paint
Reference Concentrations
CPSC, FDA 600 ppm, 0.12 mg/cm2
Proposed Performance Criteria
Concentration Level of Concern: 0.06% (w/w), 600 ppm
95% of results positive £ 0.045% (w/w), 450 ppm
95% of results negative £ 0.015% (w/w), 150 ppm
Standards of Abatement
Reference Concentration
HUD 1.0 mg/cm2
State of Maryland 0.7 mg/cm2
Proposed Performance Criteria
Concentration Level of Concern: 0.7 mg/cm2
95% of results positive ^1.0 mg/cm2
95% of results negative £0.1 mg/cm2
Comments:
No quantitative relationship between lead level 1n paint and health
effects has been established.
With pica activities, difficulty arises In transforming XRF values to
average dally Intake.
HUD considers 1.0 mg/cm2 (5000 ppm) a "positive" XRF measurement for
lead and requires abatement at this concentration.
CDC considers 0.7 mg Pb/cm2 paint a "positive" XRF measurement for
lead.
The CPSC level of concern for new paint 1s 0.06% (600 ppm). This
level may be decreased to 100 ppm 1n the future.
4-9
-------
Accordingly, clearance performance criteria are proposed to show 95% positive
results at 450 ppm and 95% negative results at 150 ppm.
Results of evaluations of test kits have shown that a three-fold range
from clearly negative to clearly positive results Is achievable for total lead
in solution (Research Triangle Institute, 1990). Test kit sensitivity 1s
limited by the ability to extract lead from the medium.
4.2.2 Selectivity
The test kits shall be selective for lead over potential interferences.
Through selection of the primary color-forming reagent, use of chemical agents
to mask interferences and other chemical parameters such as pH, the
selectivity ratio for lead to any other potential interferences shall be 100
to 1.
4.2.3 Accuracy
Test kits on the market were shown to have poor accuracy. Results were
found to depend on the ability to extract lead from the matrix, a function of
the lead species and the physical form of the matrix, rather than the
concentration of lead in the matrix.
Criteria for accuracy, 95 percent of the results positive at a specified
sensitivity, are believed to be achievable for concentrations proposed if test
kit solutions extract lead quantitatively.
4.2.4 Response Time
The test kits shall develop full color or change within 30 seconds and be
stable for a minimum of one (1) hour.
4.2.5 Safety
Hazard evaluations of materials, i.e., sodium rhodizonate, should be
carried out. Information on dermal effects, toxicity, etc. shall be
Indicated, If necessary, on enclosures similar to package Inserts for
medications or Material Safety Data Sheets for chemicals. Precautions and
personal protection, i.e., gloves, shall be included if special handling needs
are required.
4-10
-------
The use of fracture- or splatter-resistant containers 1s Important. The
design of containers Is particularly Important when kits contain solutions.
Special considerations for child safety, such as child-proof containers and
vials, must be given to kits used by homeowners. Testing solutions, strips,
etc. shall be sealed so that they are inaccessible to children.
Disposal instructions for solutions, paper strips, test ware (vials,
cups, wands, etc.) shall be included in the test kit. Options, Including
flushing Into the sanitary sewer or wrapping in newspaper for disposal in a
landfill, shall be specified.
4.2.6 Appearance
Warnings shall be Included in the test kit about physical properties
which may affect accuracy and reproducibility of the test kit, including
change 1n color or reagents, precipitates, etc.
4.2.7 Reproducibility
The test kits shall Include some reference device or material to assure
the reproducibility of the test kit. Options for this materials include:
A standard test solution or lead-impregnated strip
A color chart or wheel
Reproducibility shall be + 10 percent between individual test kits and
between production lots.
4.2.8 Stability
Test kits shall be labeled with a production lot number and an expiration
date. Test kits shall have a shelf life of a minimum of six (6) months.
4-11
-------
SECTION 5
REFERENCES
Abbrlttl, G., Muz1, G., C1c1on1, C., Accattoll, M. P., Flordl, T., and
Morucd, P. 1989. Effects of Low Doses of Lead on Children's Health.
In: Caroll, S., lyenzar, G. V. and Muntau, H., eds., Bloelements:
Health Aspects, Ann. Inst. Super. Sanlta. 25(3): 437-448.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1988. The Nature and
Extent of Lead Poisoning 1n Children 1n the United States: A Report to
Congress, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Azar, A., TrocMmowIcz, H. J., and Maxfleld, M. E. 1973. Review of Lead
Studies Carried out at Hasklll Laboratory - Two Year Feeding Study and
Response to Hemorrhage Study. In: Aspects of Lead, Proceedings
International Symposium on Environmental Health, Amsterdam, October 2-6,
1972. Committee European Community, Luxembourg: 199-210.
Bander, L. K., Morgan, K. J., and Zablk, M. E. 1983. Dietary Lead Intake
of Pre-school Children. Am. J. Public Health 73: 789-794.
Barltrop, D., Strehlow, C. D., Thornton, I. and Webb, J. S. 1975.
Postgrad. Med. J. 51:801.
Blddle, G. N., 1982. Toxicology of Lead: Primer for Analytical
Chemists. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 65(4): 947-952.
Blackburn, A. J. 1990. A Comparison of the Results of In-sltu Spot Tests
for the Presence of Lead 1n Paint Films Using Sodium Sulflde with the
Results of Laboratory Measurement of Lead Concentrations 1n Paint Films
Using Flame Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy, Dewberry and Davis, Contract
HC-5831, U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Boeckx, R. L. 1986. Lead Poisoning 1n Children. Anal. Chem. 58(2):
274A-287A.
Centers for Disease Control, 1985. Preventing Lead Poisoning In Young
Children, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Chaney, R., Personal Communication, December 1990.
Charney, E., Sayre, J., and Coulter, M. 1980. Increased Lead Absorption
In Inner City Children: Where Does The Lead Come From? Pediatrics 65(2):
226-231.
Charney, E., Kessler, B., Farfel, M., and Jackson, D. 1983. Childhood
Lead Poisoning. A Controlled Trial of the Effect of Dust-Control
Measures on Blood Lead Levels. New Eng. J. Med. 309(18): 1089-1093.
5-1
-------
Chisolm, J. et al. 1985. Erythrocyte Porphobilogen Synthase Activity as
an Indicator of Lead Exposure In Children. Clinical Chemistry 31: 601-
605.
Clark, C. S., Bornschein, R. L. Succop, P., Que Hee, S. S. Hammond,
P. EL, and Peace, B. 1985. Condition and Type of Housing as an
Indication of Potential Environmental Lead Exposure and Pediatrlc Blood
Lead Levels. Env. Res. 38:46-53.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 1990. 105 CMR 460.000, Lead Poisoning
Prevention and Control, Effective Date, March 1, 1990.
Davies, D.J.A., Thornton, I., Watt, J. M., Culbard, E. B., Harvey, P. G.,
Delves, H. T., Sherlock, J. C., Smart, G. A., Thomas, J. F. A., and
Qulnn, H. A. 1990. Lead Intake and Blood Lead In Two-Year-Old U.K.
Urban Children. The Science of the Total Environment 90:13-29.
Davis, J. M. and Svendsgaard, D. J. 1987. Lead and Child Development.
Nature 329:297-300.
Duggan, M. J., and Williams, S. 1977. Lead-in-Dust In City Streets. The
Science of the Total Environment. 7:91-97.
Duggan, M. J. 1980. Lead In Urban Dust: An Assessment. Water, Air, Soil
Pollut. 14:309-321.
Ellas, R., Personal Communication, December 1990.
Elwood, P. C., Gallacher, J. E. J., Phillips, K. M., et al. 1984.
Greater Contribution to Blood Lead from Water than from Air. Nature 310:
138-140.
Elwood, P. C., 1986. The Sources of Lead 1n Blood: A Critical Review.
The Science of the Total Environment. 52:1-23.
Farfel, M. R. and Chisolm, J. J. 1990. Health and Environmental Outcomes
of Traditional and Modified Practices for Abatement of Residential Lead-
Based Paint. Am. J. Public Health 80(10):1240-1245.
Felgl, F. and Suter, H. A. 1942. Analytical Use of Sodium Rhodizonate.
Indus, and Eng. Chem. 14(10):840-842.
Galke, W. A., Hammer D. I., Keil, J. E. and Lawrence, S. W. 1975.
International Conference on Heavy Metals in the Environment, Ontario,
Canada. Inst. Environ. Studies, Toronto. Vol. Ill p. 53.
Gallacher, J. E. J., Elwood, P. C., and Phillips, K. M. 1984. Vegetable
Consumption and Blood Lead Concentrations. J. Epidemiol. Community
Health 38:173-176.
5-2
-------
Goyer, R. A. 1986. Toxic Effects of Metals. In: Klassen, C. D., Amdur,
M. 0., and Doull, J., eds., Casarett and Doull's Toxicology, Third
Edition, Macmillan, New York.
Grant, L. D. and Davis, J. M. 1989. Effects of Low Level Lead Exposure
on Pedlatric Neurobehavioral Development: Current Findings and Future
Directions. In: Smith, M. A., Grant, L. D., and Sors, A. I., eds. Lead
Exposure and Child Development: An International Assessment. London.
Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 49-115.
Hammond, P. B., Bornscheln, R. L., Succop, P. 1985. Dose-effect and
Dose-response Relationships of Blood Lead to Erythrocyte Protoporphynln
In Young Children. In: Bornscheln, R. L., Rablnowitz, M. B., eds. The
Second International Conference on Prospective Studies of Lead. April,
1984. Cincinnati, OH. Environ. Res. 38:187-196.
Houk, V. N., Ing, R. T., and Falk, H. 1989. Assessing Lead Exposure from
Drinking Water. Am. J. Pub. Health. 79(7):823-824.
Lacey, R. F., Moore, M. R., and Richards, W. N. 1985. Lead in Water,
Infant Diet and Blood: The Glasgow Duplicate Diet Study. Science of the
Total Environment 41:235-257.
Laxen, D.P.H., Raab, G. M., and Fulton, M. 1987. Children's Blood Lead
and Exposure to Lead in Household Dust and Water - A Basis for an
Environmental Standard for Lead 1n Dust. The Science of the Total
Environment 66:235-244.
L1n-Fu, J. S. 1980. Lead Poisoning and Undue Lead Exposure in Children:
History and Current Status. In: Needleman, H. L., ed. Low-Level Lead
Exposure: The Clinical Implications of Current Research. Raven Press.
New York, pp. 5-16.
Madhaven, S., Rosenman, K. D., and Shehata, T. 1989. Lead in Soil:
Recommended Maximum Permissible Levels. Env. Research 149:136-142.
Mahaffey, K. R. 1983. Biotoxiclty of Lead: Influence of Various
Factors. Fed. Proc., Fed. Am. Soc. Exp. Blol. 42:1730-1734.
Marbury, M. 1990. Reproductive Hazards: How Much Do We Know? Health and
Environmental Digest. 4(6):l-5.
McKnlght, M. E., Byrd, W. E., Roberts, W. E., and Lagergren, E. S. 1989.
Methods for Measuring Lead Concentrations 1n Paint. NISTR 89-4209.
National Institute of Standards and Technology. October, 1989.
McKnlght, M. E., Byrd, W. E., Roberts, W. E. 1990. Measuring Lead
Concentration in Paint Using a Portable Spectrum Analyzer X-Ray
Fluorescence Device. National Institute of Standards and Technology
Report NISTIR W90-650, May, 1990.
5-3
-------
Midwest Research Institute. 1990. Review and Recommendation for HUD Lead-
Based Paint Abatement Guidelines: Lab Accreditation and Analysis.
Preliminary Draft Report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Toxic Substances. February 1, 1990.
Minnesota Department of Health, Division of Maternal and Child Health
Services. 1984. Lead Exposure and the Health Effects on Children. Report
to the Minnesota Legislature.
Moreau, T., Lei lough, J., Orssaud, G. et al. 1982. Effect of Alcohol and
Smoking on Blood Lead In Middle Aged British Men. Br1. Med. J. 284:
1046-1047.
Mushak, P., and Crocettl, A. F. 1989. Determination of Numbers of Lead-
exposed American Children as a Function of Lead Source. Environ. Res.
50(2):210-229.
National Academy of Sciences: National Research Council; 1976.
Recommendation for the Prevention of Lead Poisoning In Children.
Washington, D.C.
Needleman, H. 1980. Low Level Lead Exposure; The Clinical Implications
of Current Research. Raven Press, New York.
NHANES-II, 1984. National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS): Blood
Lead Levels for Persons Ages 6 months - 74 years: United States, 1976-80.
U. S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), 1984.
Plomelll, S., Seaman, C., Zullow, D., Curran, A. and Davldow, B. 1982.
Threshold for Lead Damage to Heme Synthesis 1n Urban Children.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U. S. A. 79:3335-3339.
Pocock, S. J., Shaper, A. G., Walker, M. et al. 1983. Effects of Tap
Water Lead, Water Hardness, Alcohol and Cigarettes In Blood Lead
Concentrations. J. Epldemiol. Community Health 37:1-7.
Qulnn, M. J., and Sherlock, J. C., 1990. The Correspondence between U.K.
Action Levels for Lead In Blood and 1n Water. Food Additives and
Contaminants. 7(3):387-424.
Research Triangle Institute. 1990. Evaluation of Lead Test Kits.
Preliminary Draft Report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Toxic Substances. December 1990.
R1ce, D. C. 1985. Chronic Low-Lead Exposure from Birth Produces Deficits
1n Discrimination Reversal 1n Monkeys. Toxlcol. Appl. Pharmacol. 77:201-
210.
Roels, H. A., Bucket, J. P., Lauwerys, R., Hubermont, G., Bruaux, P.,
Claeys-Thoreau, F., Lafontalne, A., and van Overschelde, J. 1976. Impact
of Air Pollution by Lead In the Heme Blosynthetlc Pathway 1n School-age
Children. Archives of Environmental Health 31:310-316.
5-4
-------
Rosen, J. et. al. 1980. Reduction 1n l,25-D1hydroxyvitamin D 1n Children
with Increased Lead Absorption. New Eng. J. Med. 302:1128-1131.
Sayre, J. W., Charney, E. and Vostal, J. 1974. Am. J. D1s. Child,
127:167-170.
Shaper, A. G., Pocock, S. J., Walker, M. et al. 1982. Effects of Alcohol
and Smoking on Blood Lead 1n Middle-aged British Men. Bri. Med. J.
284:299-302.
Snee, R. D. 1981. Evaluation of Studies of the Relationship between Blood
Lead and Air Lead. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 48:219-242.
Solgaard, P., Aarkrog, A, Fenzer, J. et al. 1979. Lead in Danish Food-
stuffs. Evidence of Dressing Concentrations. Dan. Med. Bull. 26:179-182.
Thomas, H. M. 1904. A Case of Generalized Lead Paralysis, A Review of
the Cases of Lead Palsey Seen in the Hospital. Bull. Johns Hopkins Hosp.
15:209-212.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1972. EPA Environmental Criteria
and A: Lead: Airborne Lead in Perspective. National Academy of Sciences.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. National Secondary
Drinking Water Regulations. 42 Federal Register 17143 et seq.
(Washington, D.C: EPA).
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Water Quality Criteria. 44
Federal Register 5956 et seq.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1986. Air Quality Criteria for
Lead. Research Triangle Park, NC. Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment, Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office. EPA Report No.
EPA-600/8-83/028 aF-dF. 4v.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986a. Supplement to the 1986 Air
Quality Criteria for Lead. Volume I Addendum (pages Al-67). Washington,
D.C. Office of Research and Development, Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment. EPA Report No. EPA/600/8-89/049A.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1986b. Guidelines for
Carcinogen Risk Assessment. Federal Register 51(185):33992-34003.
V1nd, H. P., and Mathews, C. W. 1976. Field Test for Detecting Lead-
Based Paint. Civil Engineering Laboratory. Naval Construction Battalion
Center. Port Hueneme, CA.
World Health Organization. 1977. Environmental Health Criteria, 3. Lead.
Geneva.
World Health Organization. 1984. Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality,
Vol. 1: Recommendations (Geneva: WHO).
5-5
-------
World Health Organization, 1987. Thirtieth Report of the Joint FOS/WHO
Expert Committee on Food Additives. Geneva.
Yankel, A. J., von Llndern, I. H., and Walter, S. D. 1977. The Silver
Valley Lead Study: The Relationship between Childhood Blood Lead Levels
and Environmental Exposure. J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc. 27:763-767.
Zlegler, E. E., Edwards, B. B., Jensen R. L., Mahaffey, K. R., Foman, S.
J. 1983. Absorption and Retention of Dietary Lead. Journal of Nutrition
113:365-378.
5-6
-------
SECTION 6
LIST OF CONTACTS
The following list includes names of professionals involved in environ-
mental lead programs. Names of persons who were contacted and responded are
given in Table 6-1; attempts were made to reach those listed in Table 6-2.
Potential contacts are given in Table 6-3.
6-1
-------
Table 6-1. Telephone Contacts
o>
i
ro
Name
Beale, Allison
Environmental
Technology and
Water Advisor
Berg, Marlene
USEPA
Binder, Suzanne, MD
CDC
Bolden, Verdell
Program Manager
State of CT
Chlsolm, Julian, MD
Kennedy Institute
Eberle, Sandra
Program Manager
Chemical Hazards
Address
University of CA
Cooperative Extension
Toxics Integration Branch
U.S. EPA, OS-230
401 M. Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Centers for Disease Control
Atlanta, GA 30333
Department of Health Services
Maternal and Child Health Section
150 Washington Street
Hartford, CT 06106
Kennedy Institute for Handicapped
Children
Johns Hopkins University
707 N. Broadway
Baltimore, MD 21205
U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission
Bethesda, MD 20207
Telephone
Number
(916) 366-2013
(202) 475-9493
(404) 488-4880
(203) 566-3186
(301) 550-9035
(301) 492-6550
-------
Table 6-1. (continued)
Of
CO
Name
Farfel, Mark Sc.D.
Kennedy Institute
Goldman, Lynn MD
State of CA
Guyaux, Susan
State of MD
Hunter, Paul
State of MA
Marcus, Allan, PhD
Battelle
Jesneck, Charlotte
State of NC
Address
Kennedy Institute for Handicapped
Children
707 N. Broadway
Baltimore, MD 21205
Department of Health Services
2151 Berkeley Way, Room 515
Berkeley, CA 94704
Coordinator, Envlromental Program
Lead Poisoning Prevention Division
2500 Broenlng Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
Department of Public Health
Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention
Program
State Laboratory Institute
305 South Street
Jamaica Plain, MA 02130
Battelle Applied Statistics
P. 0. Box 13758
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Department of Envlromental Health
and Natural Resources
Dlvlson of Solid Waste Mangement
Superfund Section
401 Oberlin Road, P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
Telephone
Number
(301) 955-3864
(415) 526-6693
(301) 631-3859
(617) 522-3700
Ext. 187
(919) 549-8970
(919) 733-2801
-------
Table 6-1. (continued)
Name
Address
Telephone
Number
McCreary, Charlotte
RN, MPH
State of SC
Division of Children's Health
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
(803) 737-4054
McNutt, Sam
State of SC
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
Bureau of Environmental Health
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
(803) 737-5072
Miller, Colleen
MT, ASCP
State of NC
Department of Environmental Health
and Natural Resources
Envlromental Epidemiology Section
P. 0. BOX 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919) 733-3410
Murphy, Nancy, RN
State of NJ
Department of Health
Accident Prevention and
Poison Control Program
CN 363
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 292-5666
Papanek, Paul MD
State of CA
Toxics Epidemiology Program
2615 South Grand Avenue, Sixth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90007
(213) 744-3235
-------
Table 6-1. (continued)
Oğ
en
Name
Schlffman, Carole
USFDA
Schlrmer, Joe
State of WI
Sides, Steve
Director of Health
and Safety
Van Benthysen, Gene
State of NJ
Address
Consumer Affairs
US Food and Drug Administration
Department of Health and
Social Services
Division of Health
ECDE-DOH
P. 0. Box 309
Madison, WI 53701
National Paint and Coatings Assoc.
1500 Rhode Island AVe., NW
Washington, DC 20005
Department of Health
Accident Prevention and
Poison Control Program
CN 363
Trenton, NJ 08625
Telephone
Number
(202) 245-1317
(608) 266-2670
(202) 462-6272
(609) 292-5666
-------
Table 6-2. Contacts Attempted
Name
M1ele, Mary
State of NY
Turner, Martha
State of NH
at
i
Ol
Address
Health Department
Childhood Lead Poisoning
Prevention Program
Corning Tower, Room 7880
Albany, NY 12237
Department of Health and
Human Services
Childhood Lead Poisoning
Prevention Program
Division of Public Health Services
Six Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301
Telephone
Number
(518) 474-2749
(603) 271-4507
-------
Table 6-3. Potential Contacts
Name
Address
Telephone
Number
Crosby, Lee
State of NC
Department of Envlromental Health
and Natural Resources
Division of Solid Waste Management
Section Chief, Superfund Section
401 Oberlin Road
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
McClanahan, Mark
ATSDR
Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry (ATSDR)
(404) 488-4100
Petros1v1ch, Chuck
ATSDR
ATSDR
(404) 488-4100
Simpson, J1m
CDC
Centers for Disease Control
Center for Envlromental Health
Blood Lead Proficiency Testing
Childhood Lead Program
Koger Center F-37
1600 Clifton Road
Atlanta, GA 30338
(404) 488-4780
------- |