Senator SCHWEIKER. Does the present law, as you interpret it, cover these pigments?

Mr. FINGER. Not for all housing. It does apply in federally assisted housing; but we have a problem in assuring that that element of it is actually followed through.

As the circular that we have issued stated, it would apply to that case as well as for federally assisted housing.

Senator SCHWEIKER. Do we need some legislation here to close the loophole in terms of pigments?

Mr. FINGER. I do not really think so. I think it is more of a matter of how we will continue to monitor the actual operation of the act, and that is something the Food and Drug Administration is examining as part of their responsibility.

Senator SCHWEIKER. As I understand it, lead is used for two purposes: one is as a pigment, and most of the industry has gotten away from using lead as pigmentation; but today you still have other uses for its drying qualities.

let a

Inasmuch as most of the industry has gotten away from using it in pigments, I am just wondering if we should, in essence, custom operator do what a regular manufacturer cannot do.

As I understand what you are saying, I am not so sure this is not a reason for a little tighter law in this regard. Because we let somebody come in and mix pigments in custom-blended paints, and then tell the manufacturer he may not, it seems to me you are giving the custom mixer some advantage here. I think we ought to look into that. I do not know the answer either.

Mr. FINGER. I think it could be a point that has to be flagged and highlighted in some way; but the provision of the act is broad enough, I would think, to cover that as well.

Senator SCHWEIKER. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you.

Senator HUGHES. Senator Dominick.

Senator DOMINICK. Mr. Finger, I have high respect for you since we have worked together on a number of problems, and I enjoyed listening to your statement and your answers to questions.

I have several questions which I think are a little different from those which have been asked up to date.

First of all, do we have any Surgeon General's report or Public Health Service report indicating what degree of usage of 1 percent paint is needed before you get any problems with it?

Mr. FINGER. Not that I know of, Senator Dominick.

Senator DOMINICK. Do we have any health surveys to indicate whether 1 percent paint as required in the act creates a health problem?

Mr. FINGER. That really is the area that the American Academy of Pediatrics is examining. It relates to what they have developed as the daily permissible intake, and there are many assumptions that go from that to ending up with the amount of lead that can be contained within paint.

The 1 percent is, I think, a number that has been developed that combines the medical consideration as well as our capability to meet it. Senator DOMINICK. I am totally ignoring capability at the moment; I just want to find out what the health problems are, which is what we are really dealing with here.

Mr. FINGER. There are many assumptions to arrive at even the 1 percent; but I think the number is clearer on the daily permissible intake. Senator DOMINICK. Let me ask you this: sometimes the health qualities of things vary. If you have a half percent instead of 1 percent, does this have the danger, or does it quarter the danger?

Mr. FINGER. I do not know the answer to that one.

Senator DOMINICK. Do you know anybody in Government or the health people who can tell us this?

Dr. BILLICK. I think the setting of the 1-percent limit was originally done by the panel sponsored by the American Standards Institute that examined all the medical data and came up with the 1-percent level. The same way, the 0.06 percent was proposed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and is based upon examination of the medical data which set the daily permissible intake level.

To get from the medical data which sets how much lead a child should take in its body to how much lead is in the paint in the wall, over what period of years, involved a lot of assumptions.

Whether or not the answer is gospel, I think is open to question. Certainly you can make calculations, and that is what the 0.06 is based

on.

Senator DOMINICK. What I am trying to arrive at is, in the process of setting up a determination, what are we setting it on? I think this is something we ought to know something about.

If we are setting a permissible level at 1 percent now-and I am not sure we are if we are, what we really have to deal with are houses that are beyond old houses that have been built in the past.

In other words, manufacturers who are not complying, or people who built houses in the past.

If the 1-percent level is not a level which is permissible in terms of health standards, then what level is? So that we can concentrate eventually on the older houses and not have to worry about the ones that are being built now; this is my concept of the problem.

I do not see how we can really move forward very rapidly except on a by guess and by golly unless we have some medical evidence on this. Where is it? You say in the American Association of Pediatrics? Mr. FINGER. Yes, sir; I believe so. I believe Dr. Chisholm is going to be testifying here and may present medical data that has led them to make the determination that 0.06 percent is the level that ought to be established; but, as Dr. Billick mentions, there is an analysis that leads to the conclusion that 300 micrograms of daily lead intake from all sources is a maximum permissible amount.

Senator DOMINICK. But you also have to make some presumptions on this, either a kid is licking paint once an hour or is eating the wall all day long.

Mr. FINGER. That is right. In fact, from the allowable level of the daily permissible intake of lead to the amount of lead allowable in the paint can is where there are a whole host of assumptions outside of the medical area. For example, the allowable lead level depends on how many coats of paint are on the wall, what concentration of lead is it, and they have made some assumptions based on weight of paint chips, how many chips a kid eats, and how frequently he eats it.

There are many of those assumptions along the way, and that is why it is a difficult thing to pin down to that precise a level. That is why I suggested some tradeoff with what can be done.

Senator DOMINICK. In effect, what you are saying is that you do not have the information at the moment, and maybe we can develop it at future hearings; is that right?

Mr. FINGER. Yes, sir.

I think we will be meeting with HEW to discuss further trying to tie in the medical background data.

Senator DOMINICK. First of all, how many paint manufacturers do we have?

Dr. BILLICK. I think it is quite close to 2,000, and they make possibly-many of them-30 or 40 paint brands.

Senator DOMINICK. How many people over and beyond that number of paint manufacturers also make pigments?

Dr. BILLICK. I think the number of pigment manufacturers is quite low, particularly the colored pigment manufacturers.

Mr. FINGER. Then the dispensers of pigments of course are really retailers in the country.

Senator DOMINICK. I understand that.

Suppose we get back to the source.

Is there no way of insuring that the pigment manufacturer and the paint people abide by the standards?

Mr. FINGER. Yes; I think we can do that.

Senator DOMINICK. Have we been doing it?

Mr. FINGER. No. There has been no actual enforcement process set up for policing, inspecting, to insure there was no lead going into the paint.

The point I was making earlier was, it was not until recently that we had even gotten a base line of data, of how much lead there was in paint. We have begun to get that now.

Senator DOMINICK. I gather from your survey that 26 percent of the paint that you analyzed was over 1 percent.

Mr. FINGER. That is right.

Senator DOMINICK. The question is, when were these made? Were they made before or after the act?

Mr. FINGER. We are going back to the manufacturer in each case to determine how that sample relates to present practice; and that is why we have made the point that we should release that information in a responsible way; so that if the manufacturer has stopped making paint that way, we note that as we publish the data.

All the indications we have gotten are that the industry is reducing the amount of lead in paint, substantially, and that 1 percent should not be a problem from a technological point of view.

They should be able to keep the level of lead below that for household use.

Senator DOMINICK. Suppose you have a paint which is 0.9 percent and you have a pigment that is 0.9 percent, and you mix them together. What do you get?

Do you get 1.8?

Mr. FINGER. No. That depends on the amount of pigment that is added to the paint, so that would have to be determined.

Now, development of pigment is something that is going on, as well— and I think we ought to try to get that level down low enough or eliminate lead in those situations-down low enough so even when it is

added to some of the normal paints, it does not exceed the level that is specified.

Senator DOMINICK. Have you had cooperation with the paint people and the pigment people?

Mr. FINGER. Yes; we have. It has been our plan to directly contact all the pigment manufacturers. We think we can do that. Through the association we can do that with the bulk of the producers of paint.

Cooperation has been very good, I think.

Senator HUGHES. Will the Senator yield at that point?

Senator DOMINICK. Yes.

Senator HUGHES. I would like to ask if HUD would want enforcement power?

Mr. FINGER. I do not think that is a function that is appropriate to us. The Food and Drug Administration has these powers, and they are now considering how to go about handling this area.

We have been meeting with them; and that is one of the groups that we would meet with when I mentioned HEW.

Senator HUGHES. You think it ought to be the FDA that handles this?

Mr. FINGER. They have the authority under the Hazardous Substances Act, and it is a very appropriate kind of authority.

Senator DOMINICK. It strikes me that we have a number of presently unknown factors. We have a question of what the health hazard really is in these paints.

Second, we have the problem of how many paints are now out which really ought to be recalled, and that exceed the standards that are there now.

The third thing that we have to do is determine whether or not FDA is doing any enforcement; and, if they are not, why not. Do they need any additional power?

Mr. FINGER. Senator Dominick, we are actively working on that second point, through the surveys that we are doing-what paints have levels above the 1 percent specified by brand name.

The preliminary screening we have been doing of 400 samples is intended to be extended to a nationwide survey in that area; and we will in each case contact the manufacturer to see where he stands. So I think we can get to a point of at least determining who is producing paint above 1 percent.

The FDA has proposals before it now, so that your final point is, I know, being considered; and there should be conclusions coming out of that consideration.

I also agree fully with your analysis of the problem and how to eliminate it; that is, let us make sure no new paint goes on above the hazard level, so we know we only have to worry about the older units and can assure that no new hazard will be developed over the

years.

Senator DOMINICK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator HUGHES. Thank you, Senator Dominick.

I would like to ask again, just to follow through, are you making recommendations to FDA where you find this? Do you recomemnd doing research?

Mr. FINGER. We have been meeting with them continuously-to keep them in touch with the results we are getting in our screening

program, the inconsistencies of the labeling, the amount of lead we are finding in paints, and the amount that is above 1 percent; and, in fact, working with them on the final point that Senator Dominick mentioned of trying to find a way of controlling it.

Senator HUGHES. I take it you have excellent cooperation between the agencies. You have no problems with it.

Mr. FINGER. Oh, yes.

Senator HUGHES. You do not think you need any additional legislation in this field of enforcement?

Mr. FINGER. I think that we have the authority within the acts that are available to each of the departments; and I do believe very strongly that the cooperation in this program has been excellent right from its start.

Senator HUGHES. May I ask you, then, in conclusion, to turn to your prepared statement, if you would, where it starts out: "19 samples, or 10 percent were in the range between 0.1 to 0.5 lead; four or 2 percent, were in the range of 0.5 to 1 percent lead; and the remaining five, or 26 percent, contained over 1 percent lead in the dried solids."

Are you making any recommendations to keep these paints off the market?

Mr. FINGER. So far as I know, our only control can be if the paint is used in our federally assisted projects. That is the authority that we can exercise.

Senator HUGHES. Do you notify the manufacturers that they are in violation of Federal standards?

Mr. FINGER. Yes.

As we examine these paints, we have been analyzing them by brand name and manufacturer. We are notifying the manufacturer of the content of the paint and making the point that that paint could not be used in any federally assisted project, which includes federally insured housing developments.

Senator HUGHES. Do you also try to get them to comply, whether the project is Federal or private, even though there may not be Federal dollars involved?

Mr. FINGER. Mr. Chairman, that is part of the authority, the policing authority, if you will, the control authority, that the FDA has.

They can go beyond our use in housing, and they do have the authority under the Hazardous Substances Act to carry out that kind of warning and control.

Senator HUGHES. As a result of your survey, could you tell me of anything you specifically have done when you found 26 percent containing 1 percent lead in dried solids?

What have you done to follow up on that with the manufacturer? Mr. FINGER. We are writing to each one of them, notifying them of the analysis that we have made, and asking them whether this is representative of their current practice, both from a composition point of view and from a labeling point of view, and what corrective actions they are proposing to take to get the level of lead down, or to correct the labeling inconsistency, some of which I have indicated here, in order to permit their paints to be used in federally insured or federally assisted housing.

Without such provisions their paint could not be so used.