EPA failed to adequately oversee state-run lead paint programs, report says

This story is part of the WHYY News Climate Desk, bringing you news and solutions for our changing region.

From the Poconos to the Jersey Shore to the mouth of the Delaware Bay, what do you want to know about climate change? What would you like us to cover? Get in touch.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has failed to adequately oversee state-run programs that aim to protect kids from lead paint, according to a new report from the agency’s independent Office of Inspector General.

The report finds the EPA has not consistently verified that certain programs meet regulatory requirements and uphold human health standards.

Without changes to the agency’s oversight procedures, the Office of Inspector General said, children could suffer adverse health effects.

“Those periodic evaluations are crucial,” said Paul Bergstrand, Assistant Inspector General, during an interview on an EPA podcast. “Without them, the EPA doesn’t have the information it needs to verify that state lead-based paint programs remain protective of human health and the environment, or to verify the programs continue to provide adequate enforcement after they are initially authorized.”

Lead-based paint is the most common way children are exposed to lead. No level of lead is safe, according to the EPA, and exposure can cause serious health problems, including organ damage and cognitive impairment among children.

Though lead paint was banned in 1978, about 40% of housing units in the U.S. are estimated to contain the contaminant, according to the EPA. Kids can be exposed to lead paint by inhaling lead dust when paint chips are disturbed, eating paint chips or by touching their mouths after coming into contact with lead paint or dust.

The number of kids in the Philadelphia region who have elevated lead levels in their blood has decreased over the years, though disparities for children of color remain.

The EPA oversees multiple state-run programs aimed at reducing or eliminating lead paint exposure in buildings constructed before 1978. The OIG investigated three of those programs after receiving an anonymous complaint about the operation of one of them. The report involved an extensive review of several offices within the EPA, including interviewing EPA staff members in the Philadelphia area and other parts of the U.S.

According to the report, the EPA does not collect enough information as required to evaluate the implementation and enforcement of state-run lead paint programs. In addition, the agency has failed to develop policies and procedures for evaluating the programs, and for withdrawing federal authorization when a program does not comply with regulations.

“Without a process in place for those evaluations, the EPA may not have enough evidence to determine when withdrawal of a program is warranted,” Bergstrand said. “Several of these state lead-based paint programs have been authorized for decades, and since the EPA has not conducted periodic adequacy evaluations, there’s a risk that states can’t demonstrate that their programs and enforcement are still adequate.”

The report lays out recommendations to improve the EPA’s oversight, including to direct regional offices to conduct periodic adequacy evaluations and to clarify their oversight roles and responsibilities. Bergstrand said the EPA is moving forward with corrective actions to address the recommendations.