Court orders EPA to take quick action on lead paint

[DonViejo]

Source: The Hill




BY TIMOTHY CAMA - 12/27/17 02:01 PM EST

A federal appeals court is ordering the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take action within 90 days to revise standards meant to protect children from lead-based paint.

The San Francisco-based Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled Wednesday that the EPA has taken too long to act on a 2009 petition from health and environmental groups who want the agency to further restrict lead paint limitations.

The judges issued a “writ of mandamus,” a rare, extraordinary move from a federal court that requires a litigant to take action. The EPA told the court that it would take another six years to develop a lead paint rule, which the judges did not accept.

“EPA fails to identify a single case where a court has upheld an eight year delay as reasonable, let alone a fourteen year delay, if we take into account the six more years EPA asserts it needs to take action,” Judge Mary Schroeder, nominated by former President Jimmy Carter, wrote on behalf of herself and Judge Randy Smith, a George W. Bush nominee.

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/366598-court-orders-epa-to-take-quick-action-on-lead-paint

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. EPA is now officially an enemy of the human race and Americans.

Now I know that is scary and bad, but surely this EPA and administration is better than ...


oops

I almost went there again.

No, I will NEVER FUCKING let this go!

This was fucking AVOIDABLE

[Igel]

3. It was avoidable.

But only in housing built in or before 1977. After that, pretty much no lead. Even by then, very, very little lead. It's fairly unlikely that a building put in in 1965 had any lead. So it's been 40 years. In the meantime, almost every house or privately-owned building has changed hands and therefore been subject to the EPA's lead notification.

It's unlikely that the lead found in a house was important enough to be mentioned under more recent proposed standards but so low as to not be included in the original one. The paint had a decent amount of lead in it. What's left are buildings that were partly or incompetely remediated, but which met the older standards. "I came into compliance." "Sorry, goalpost's changed. We get to have a whole new generation of regulators and inspectors earn their retirement. And yes, we take Visa, MC, and left kidneys."

But seriously, the main point of the old regulation was notification. It's likely that advocates will push for enforced remediation this time around, with the assumption that in somes the government pick up the tab--Indian reservations, schools, social service organizations, etc., but not rentals or private housing. That will disproportionately affect older, less affluent cities.

[Crash2Parties]

5. More detailed info about lead in paint

About 75% of homes built before 1978 contain some lead-based paint. The older the home, the more likely it is to contain lead-based paint. You should assume that any home built before 1978 contains some lead.

[link:http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/lead/homes/|]

Far more detailed info here:
[link:https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/books/plpyc/chapter3.htm|]

[Turbineguy]

2. Eat lead paint today while you're young,

vote republican when you turn 18.

It's the republican idea of a long-term investment.

[sl8]

4. PDF of opinion

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/12/27/16-72816.pdf