realproject.html

Laws & Regulations

Local Law 38: The Current Law

The current law concerning lead poisoning in New York City is Local Law 38. Local Law 38, enacted in 1999, aims at protecting children under the age of 6 from becoming poisoned by lead paint.Under this law the landlord of a multiple dwelling building, built before 1960 (the year lead paint was outlawed in New York City), must take precautionary measures to ensure that tenants are not poisoned. These measures include:

Sending yearly notices inquiring if there are children age 6 or younger who reside in the apartment

Inspecting the apartment once a year for peeling lead based paint (1.0 milligrams per square centimeter) if a child resides in the apartment

Safely removing the peeling paint and other deteriorating lead-based paint according to safe work practices (See Interim Controls and New York City Health Code Section 173.14)

Reinspecting the apartment after lead abatement to ensure the tenant's safety

View Local Law 38

Local Law 1: The Preceding Lead Poisoning Prevention Law
and the Ensuing War

When Local Law 38 was passed in 1999 it sparked debate by replacing the preceding lead poisoning prevention law, Local Law 1. Local Law 1 was an ambitious lead poisoning prevention law passed in 1982. Before it was enacted, lead paint would be removed only after a child had already been poisoned. Under the new strict terms of this law all multiple dwellings (three apartments or more) built before 1960 were immediately assumed to have lead paint with levels of at least .7 milligrams per square centimeter. Landlords were expected to actively investigate the presence of children in these apartments, and were directly responsible for inspecting and improving the lead conditions in apartments with children. Any child under the age of 7 who resided in a home with lead paint was considered in immediate danger and landlords were issued a "class C immediately hazardous violation". Landlords were then given 24 hours to remove all lead paint from the apartment.

The instatement of Local Law 38 caused bitterness from coalitions attempting to end lead poisoning. They believe the new law, which requires only partial lead paint abatement, is inadequate, and was hastily approved by the City Council due to pressure from real estate and business lobbies. The coalitions accuses lawmakers of writing a law that would, in many ways, protect landlords rather than children. The City Council claims that partial lead abatement will adequately protect children from poisoning, whereas complete lead abatement is simply dangerous as it increases lead dust in the air, leading to lead poisoning. The case of NYC Coalition to End Lead Poisoning vs. Peter Vallone (then speaker of the New York City Council) went all the way up to the Supreme Court (See Judicial Page) and was appealed twice in an effort to determine which really would protect children.

Local Law 1 vs. Local Law 38

Issues	Local Law 1	Local Law 38
Lead Hazard:	any lead based paint (.7 milligram per square centimeter) and lead dust	deteriorating lead paint (1.0 milligram per square centimeter)
Removal:	all paint	peeling paint
Landlord Inspection:	required to inquire on aconstant basis whether children are in the house and whether there is lead paint	required to inquire once a year whether children are in the house and whether ther is peeling lead paint
Age of concern:	7 years old	6 years old
Responsibility:	landlord is responsible for inspection and removal of lead, and can be found at fault if a child is poisoned	tenant responsible for reporting the presence of children under the age of 6 and peeling lead paint between yearly inspection
Time period between detection of lead and removal:	24 hours	between 10- 220 days (includes inspection, abatement of peeling paint, and reinspection by HPD)

Deficiencies

Local Law 1

Local Law 38

Some may argue that complete lead abatement is not only unecessary, it can also be dangerous. Removing lead that is not deteriorating can increase the lead dust in the air. Lead dust is one of the main causes of lead poisoning.
Total lead abatement is expensive.
Local Law 1 was not being enforced.

higher levels of lead need to be in the paint in order for it to qualify for removal

rare inspections by landlord with no follow-up inquiries required

reponsibility for identifying and reporting peeling paint placed on tenants, who may not be aware of the importance of reporting peeling paint

if reports are made landlord can easily deny such reports as it is not required that any written report be filed

long wait time for removal
if landlords can take care of the peeling paint within three weeks the law allows them to use less stringent safety measures during lead abatement, thus putting children in danger

Intro 101: Hope for the Future

Due to strong deficiencies in both laws, many groups concerned with lead poisoning are turning to a newly proposed law, Intro 101. Intro 101 promises to be practical yet firm in it's crusade to erradicate lead poisoning for good. It will use preventative measures rather than full lead abatement as in Local Law 1, but it will be more stringent than Local Law 38. It will bring back some of the standards from Local Law 1, as well as a few of its own original demands.

Returning Standards:

raise the age back to 7 years old

lower the levels required for paint to qualify as lead-based back to .7 milligrams per centimeter

re-encorporate dust into definition of lead hazards

all paint in houses built before 1960 will be presumed to be lead paint

require landlords to actively prevent lead poisoning through frequent inspections

New Standards:

a yearly notice will be distributed by the landlord to inform him/her of the children present in the building (landlord will be required to actively pursue this information if these forms are not returned)

inspection results must be written up and one copy must be given to the tenant

all commonn areas in the building must be free of lead dust and paint (not just the private apartments)

landlord must correct problems that cause paint to peel (such as dripping pipes)

landlord must use federal standards for lead paint abatement in all circumstances

Housing Preservation and Development (HPD)who control lead paint inspections will be required to inform the Department of Health of lead paint violations so that children from these households are tested for poisoning.

Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) will have to respond within 5 days of the complaint rather than 10, serve a violation notice to the landlord within 5 days instead of 20, and the owner will have 21-60 days to properly remove lead paint, thus shortening the process of lead abatement from up to 220 days to a maximum of 82 days Timetable between tenant complaint and lead paint removal

Other Pending New York State Lead Poisoning Proposals

For more information on court rulings concerning lead poisoning and our conclusion, see Justice&Conclusion.

Home Basics Data Resources

--Chasya Milgrom