[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 170 (Thursday, September 1, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60304-60329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20955]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

24 CFR Part 35

[Docket No. FR-5816-P-01]
RIN 2501-AD77


Requirements for Notification, Evaluation and Reduction of Lead-
Based Paint Hazards in Federally Owned Residential Property and Housing 
Receiving Federal Assistance; Response to Elevated Blood Lead Levels

AGENCY: Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes, HUD.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would amend HUD's lead-based paint 
regulations on reducing blood lead levels in children under age 6 who 
reside in federally-owned or -assisted pre-1978 housing and formally 
adopt the revised definition of ``elevated blood lead levels'' in 
children under the age of 6 in accordance with guidance of the Centers 
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and establish more 
comprehensive testing and evaluation procedures for the housing where 
such children reside. In 2012, the CDC issued guidance revising its 
definition of elevated blood lead level in children under age 6 to be a 
blood lead level based on the distribution of blood lead levels in the 
national population. Since CDC's revision of its definition, HUD has 
applied the revised definition to funds awarded under its Lead-Based 
Paint Hazard Control grant program and its Lead Hazard Reduction 
Demonstration grant program, and has updated its Guidelines for the 
Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing to 
reflect this definition. CDC is continuing to consider, with respect to 
evolution of scientific and medical understanding, how best to identify 
childhood blood lead levels for which environmental interventions are 
recommended. Through this rule, HUD formally adopts through regulation 
the CDC's approach to the definition of ``elevated blood lead levels'' 
in children under the age of 6 and addresses the additional elements of 
the CDC guidance pertaining to assisted housing.

DATES: Comment Due Date: October 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding 
this proposed rule to the Regulations Division, Office of General 
Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street 
SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Communications must refer 
to the above docket number and title. There are two methods for 
submitting public comments. All submissions must refer to the above 
docket number and title.
    1. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by 
mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department 
of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276, 
Washington, DC 20410-0500.
    2. Electronic Submission of Comments. Interested persons may submit 
comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
http://www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly encourages commenters to 
submit comments electronically. Electronic submission of comments 
allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, 
ensures timely receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make comments 
immediately available to the public. Comments submitted electronically 
through the http://www.regulations.gov Web site can be viewed by other 
commenters and interested members of the public. Commenters should 
follow the instructions provided on that site to submit comments 
electronically.

    Note: To receive consideration as public comments, comments must 
be submitted through one of the two methods specified above. It is 
not acceptable to submit comments by facsimile (fax). Again, all 
submissions must refer to the docket number and title of the rule.

    Public Inspection of Public Comments. All properly submitted 
comments and communications submitted to HUD will be available for 
public inspection and downloading at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Warren Friedman, Office of Lead Hazard 
Control and Healthy Homes, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
451 7th Street SW., Room 8236, Washington, DC 20410-3000, telephone 
number (202) 402-7698 or email your inquiry to 
[email protected]. For legal questions, contact John B. Shumway, 
Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
451 7th Street, Room 9262, Washington, DC 20410-0500; telephone number 
(202) 402-5190. The above telephone numbers are not toll-free numbers. 
Hearing and speech-impaired persons may access the above telephone 
numbers via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 1-
800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

A. HUD's Long-Term and Ongoing Efforts To Reduce Lead Poisoning in 
Children

    Childhood lead poisoning has long been recognized as causing 
reduced intelligence, low attention span, reading and learning 
disabilities, and has been linked to juvenile delinquency, behavioral 
problems, and many other adverse health effects. Current reviews by the 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including by its 
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) and National 
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and by the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and 
Development have described these effects in detail.\1\ The removal of 
lead-based gasoline and paint from commerce has drastically reduced the 
number of children exposed to levels of lead associated with the most 
significant among these problems. Data from CDC's National Center for 
Health Statistics show that mean blood lead levels among children ages 
1 to 5 dropped from 16.0 [mu]g/dL in 1976-1980 to 2.6 [mu]g/dL in 1991-
1994, to 0.97 [mu]g/dL in 2011-2012.\2\ However, national statistics 
mask the fact that blood lead monitoring continues to find some 
children exposed to elevated blood lead levels due to their specific 
housing environment. As sources of lead paint

[[Page 60305]]

sources have decreased, focus has increased on other sources of 
exposures, including legacy water pipes in homes and schools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the following: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
Registry. Toxicological profile for lead. Atlanta: U.S. Department 
of Health and Human Services (HHS), August 2007. www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp13.pdf. HHS, National Institute of Environmental 
Health Sciences, National Toxicology Program. NTP Monograph on 
Health Effects of Low-Level Lead. NIH Publication No. 12-5996. June 
13, 2012. http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/pubhealth/hat/noms/lead/index.html. Office of Research and Development. Integrated Science 
Assessment for Lead. Research Triangle Park, NC. U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA), June 2013. https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=255721. (See esp. pp. lxxxvii-lxxxxviii, and 
1-20--1-24. See also Memo Regarding a Study Assessed in the 2013 ISA 
for Lead--Dated May 9, 2014. http://ofmpub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=518543.)
    \2\ Porter, K. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. 
2015 National Conference on Health Statistics, August 24, 2015, 
www.cdc.gov/nchs/ppt/nchs2015/Porter_Monday_SalonE_A6.pdf. p. 48.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2014, the CDC noted that, ``Lead-based paint and lead 
contaminated dust are the most hazardous sources of lead for U.S. 
children,'' \3\ reaffirming their 2005 Statement on preventing lead 
poisoning in young children that, ``lead-based paint is the most 
important source of lead'' exposure for young children.\4\ Continued 
progress in lead paint abatement and interim control over the last 
decade, such as through HUD's lead hazard control grant programs 
discussed below, and the lead hazard control work required of landlords 
under settlements HUD has reached in enforcing the Lead Disclosure 
Statute and that statute's Rule (42 U.S.C. 4852d; 24 CFR 35, subpart A) 
has meant further significant decreases in lead exposure among 
children.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Lead. 
Prevention Tips. June 19, 2014. Sec. 2, par. 1. www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/tips.htm.
    \4\ CDC. Preventing Lead Poisoning in Young Children. A 
Statement by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. August 
2005. p. 4. www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/PrevLeadPoisoning.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Even so, there are a considerable number of assisted housing units 
that have lead-based paint in which children under age 6 reside. As 
detailed in the regulatory impact assessment accompanying this notice, 
there are about 4.3 million housing units in the assistance programs 
covered by this rulemaking (1.1 million public housing, 1.2 million 
project-based rental assistance, and 2.0 million tenant-based rental 
assistance units), of which about 450,000 are estimated to have been 
built before 1978 and have children under age 6 residing (about 110, 
130, and 210 thousand units, respectively). Of those units, about 
57,000 units are estimated to have lead-based paint hazards (about 14, 
16, and 27 thousand, respectively).
    Health concerns have also been documented for adults exposed to 
high levels of lead from occupational exposures and to some extent from 
hobbies and other product or environmental sources, such as what might 
be associated with workers conducting lead hazard control activities; 
see, e.g., the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) 
Lead standards, one for general industry and one for the construction 
industry (29 CFR 1910.1025 and 1926.62, respectively); see OSHA's 
Safety and Health Topics Web page on the health effects of high lead 
exposure in exposed workers; \5\ the CDC/National Institute for 
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) guides on lead for public health 
officials and researchers,\6\ and for workers; \7\ and the ATSDR 
Toxicological Profile for lead and the EPA Integrated Science 
Assessment for Lead cited above (fn. 1).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ OSHA Salt Lake Technical Center. Lead. Health Effects. 
https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/lead/healtheffects.html.
    \6\ NIOSH. LEAD. Information for Public Health Officials and 
Researchers. www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/lead/publichealth.html.
    \7\ NIOSH. LEAD. Information for Workers. www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/lead/health.html.
    \8\ As discussed below, while the focus of HUD's existing Rule 
(Lead Safe Housing Rule) (24 CFR 35, subparts B-R) proposed to be 
amended by this rulemaking is the protection of the health of 
children under age 6, the currently codified Rule also addresses 
protection of all occupants in dwelling units covered by the Rule 
(see, e.g., Sec.  35.1345), and workers conducting lead-related 
activities in housing covered by the Rule (see, e.g., Sec.  35.145).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Authority for HUD's Lead-Based Paint Regulations

    HUD's Lead-Based Paint regulations designed to reduce lead exposure 
in federally-owned and federally-assisted housing (sometimes, for 
brevity, referred to here as ``assisted housing''), referred to as the 
Lead Safe Housing Rule (LSHR), are found in title 24 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) part 35, subparts B through R. The LSHR 
implements the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 
1992, which is Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1992 (Pub. L. 102-550, approved October 28, 1992), specifically, the 
LSHR implements sections 1012 and 1013 of Title X (42 U.S.C. 4822). One 
of the purposes of the LSHR is to ensure, as far as practicable, that 
federally-owned or federally-assisted housing that may have lead-based 
paint, which is most housing constructed prior to 1978 (called ``target 
housing'') \9\ does not have lead-based paint hazards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ HUD's regulations, at 24 CFR 35.110, based on the Title X 
definition at 42 U.S.C. 4851b (27), define ``target housing'' as 
``any housing constructed prior to 1978, except housing for the 
elderly or persons with disabilities (unless a child of less than 6 
years of age resides or is expected to reside in such housing for 
the elderly or persons with disabilities) or any zero- bedroom 
dwelling. In the case of jurisdictions which banned the sale or use 
of lead-based paint prior to 1978, HUD may designate an earlier 
date.'' (Note that HUD has not made any such designations.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As reflected in the LSHR and consistent with Title X, HUD's primary 
focus is on minimizing childhood lead exposures, rather than on waiting 
until children have elevated blood lead levels (see section I.B, below) 
to undertake actions to eliminate the lead-based paint hazards or the 
lead-based paint. HUD's Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy 
Homes' (OLHCHH's) ongoing efforts in lead poisoning prevention--i.e., 
acting before children are exposed to lead such that they develop an 
elevated blood lead level--were recognized in the HUD's Healthy Homes 
Strategic Plan.\10\ As noted in that document, HUD's OLHCHH has 
administered a successful Lead Hazard Control program since 1993. 
Through robust grants, enforcement efforts, research, and outreach, 
this program has been instrumental in the reduction of 84 percent in 
childhood blood lead levels of 10 [mu]g/dL or more from 1988-1991 to 
1999-2004 \11\ and least an estimated 97 percent through 2014.\12\ The 
success of HUD's OLHCHH comes from taking all actions feasible and 
authorized to reduce lead exposure in children, and these actions 
include providing conditions of funding through the office's notices of 
funding availability, updating guidelines and best practices, and 
working collaboratively with other Federal agencies such as the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), particularly its CDC, 
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to name a few.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ HUD. Leading Our Nation to Healthier Homes: The Healthy 
Homes Strategic Plan. July 9, 2009. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=hhstratplan_7_9_09.pdf.
    \11\ Dropping from 8.6% to 1.4%. Jones, R., et al. Trends in 
Blood Lead Levels and Blood Lead Testing Among U.S. Children Aged 1 
to 5 Years, 1988-2004. Pediatrics Vol. 123 No. 3 March 2009, pp. 
E376-E385. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/123/3/e376.
    \12\ Dropping from 1.4% to an estimated 0.28% or less, based on 
the 2.5% of children with blood lead levels at or above 5 [mu]g/dL 
(see section I.B, below) and data collected by CDC's national 
surveillance program on blood lead testing data, comparing the 
numbers of children with blood lead levels at or above 5 [mu]g/dL 
with those at or above 10 [mu]g/dL in CDC. Number of Children Tested 
and Confirmed BLL's >=10 [mu]g/dL by State, Year, and BLL Group, 
Children < 72 Months Old. www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/data/Web 
site_StateConfirmedByYear_1997_2014_01112016.xlsx.
    \13\ See Advancing Healthy Housing, a Strategy for Action at 
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=stratplan_final_11_13.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CDC has recognized that the ``HUD Lead Hazard Control Program . . . 
is the most easily identifiable and largest source of federal funding 
for lead-hazard remediation.'' \14\ HUD notes that that program, which 
implements section 1011 of Title X (42 U.S.C. 4852) does not address 
all types of housing with which HUD is associated. Specifically, 
section 1011 prohibits housing that is

[[Page 60306]]

``federally assisted housing, federally owned housing, or public 
housing'' from being enrolled under the section's grants. Indeed, 
Congress required lead hazard evaluation and control in precisely those 
three categories of housing when it enacted sections 1012 and 1013 of 
Title X, under which the LSHR was issued, so that the lead hazard 
control grants and the LSHR complement each other in the housing stock 
they address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ CDC. CDC Response to Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead 
Poisoning Prevention Recommendations in ``Low Level Lead Exposure 
Harms Children: A Renewed Call of Primary Prevention.'' (CDC 
Response.) Atlanta, June 7, 2012. (Corrected from initial release 
May 13, 2012) www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/acclpp/cdc_response_lead_exposure_recs.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HUD emphasizes that the scope of its authority under Title X is 
limited to lead-based paint hazard reduction in housing, and the scope 
of this rule is further limited to the reduction of those hazards in 
HUD-assisted housing. HUD is authorized by Title X to control lead-
based paint and lead-based paint hazards in certain HUD-assisted target 
housing. Lead-based paint hazards are lead-based paint and all 
residential lead-containing dusts and soils regardless of the source of 
the lead, which, due to their condition and location, would result in 
adverse human health effects. Title X required the EPA to promulgate 
standards for lead-based paint hazards, specifically, paint-lead 
hazards, dust-lead hazards, and soil-lead hazards, which it did through 
rulemaking.\15\ HUD has incorporated the EPA's lead-based paint hazard 
standards in the LSHR.\16\ Controlling exposures to lead from water is 
outside of HUD's authority under Title X. The EPA also has 
responsibilities regarding lead-based paint under Title X, and the EPA 
administers other laws regulating lead, including the Clean Air Act, 
Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act, and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 
and Liability Act, among others.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 2683, implemented by EPA at 40 CFR 745.65 and 
745.227(e)(8)(vii).
    \16\ 24 CFR 35.110, 35.1315, 35.1320(b)(2), and 35.1325.
    \17\ See https://www.epa.gov/lead/lead-laws-and-regulations for 
more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. CDC's Revised Guidance on Elevated Blood Lead Levels

    Until 2012, children were identified by CDC as having a blood lead 
``level of concern'' if testing found 10 or more micrograms per 
deciliter of lead in the blood (10 [mu]g/dL). In 2012, CDC revised its 
guidance on childhood lead poisoning in response to recommendations by 
CDC's Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention 
(ACCLPP), which concluded that a growing number of scientific studies 
show that even low blood lead levels can cause lifelong health effects. 
CDC accepted the recommendation of the ACCLPP to eliminate its use of 
the term and concept of ``blood lead level of concern.'' \18\ CDC is 
instead using a ``reference range value'' to identify children who have 
been exposed to lead and who require case management. CDC uses the 
phrase, ``to identify persons whose exposure to a toxic substance is 
higher than that of most persons in the population and useful in 
instances when no clear threshold for effects has been identified,'' as 
is the case for childhood blood lead levels.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning 
Prevention. Low Level Lead Exposure Harms Children: A Renewed Call 
for Primary Prevention. Atlanta, January 4, 2012. www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/acclpp/final_document_030712.pdf. The ACCLPP's charter expired 
in October 2013. Activities in the Committee's field of interest are 
now conducted by the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention 
Subcommittee of the CDC's Board of Scientific Counselors, National 
Center for Environmental Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry (NCEH/ATSDR). See, e.g., www.atsdr.cdc.gov/science/docs/BSC_MINUTES_MAY_2014.pdf.
    \19\ Raymond J., Wheeler W., Brown, M.J. Lead Screening and 
Prevalence of Blood Lead Levels in Children Aged 1-2 Years--Child 
Blood Lead Surveillance System, United States, 2002-2010 and 
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, United States, 
1999-2010. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. v. 63, n. 2, p. 
36-42. September 12, 2014. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/su6302a6.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the ACCLPP recommendation II that CDC link lead 
levels in its guidance to results from CDC's National Health and 
Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES),\20\ the CDC's ``reference 
range value'' method for defining elevated blood lead levels (EBLLs) is 
based on the blood lead level equaled or exceeded by 2.5 percent of 
U.S. children aged 1-5 years as determined by NHANES. CDC's current 
reference range level is 5 [mu]g/dL (5 micrograms of lead per 
deciliter). This level, established in 2012 as part of CDC's response 
to ACCLPP, is lower than CDC's former blood lead level of concern, 
established in its 1991 Statement,\21\ which had been 10 [mu]g/dL, and 
its level for recommending environmental intervention for children, 20 
[mu]g/dL, or 15 [mu]g/dL if that level persists, levels that it 
reaffirmed in its 2005 Statement.\22\ This new lower value means that 
more children will likely be identified as having lead exposure, 
allowing parents, doctors, public health officials and communities to 
take action earlier to reduce the child's future exposure. It is 
important to note that by CDC's tying its reference value to the 
national distribution of blood lead levels, the reference level will 
continue to decrease whenever progress is made on reducing childhood 
lead exposure. For instance, if the 97.5 percentile drops to 2 [mu]g/dL 
due to reductions in exposure to lead paint exposure, the number of 
children who have lead exposures above the new reference value would 
change only slightly, based on the growth of the national population of 
children under age 6, which would be about 2 percent over CDC's four-
year reference range value updating period.\23\ CDC concurred in 
principle with the ACCLPP recommendation to adopt a reference range 
that is tied to the national distribution of blood lead levels (CDC 
Response to ACCLPP recommendation II.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ CDC National Center for Health Statistics, National Health 
and Nutrition Examination Survey. Homepage at www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm.
    \21\ CDC. Preventing Lead Poisoning in Young Children. A 
Statement by the Centers for Disease Control, chap. 8. October 1991. 
www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/books/plpyc/contents.htm.
    \22\ CDC. Preventing Lead Poisoning in Young Children. A 
Statement by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. August 
2005. p. 2. www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/PrevLeadPoisoning.pdf.
    \23\ Calculated based on Table 1, Population by Sex and Selected 
Age Groups: 2000 and 2010, in Howden L.M. and Meyer J.A. U.S. Census 
Bureau. Age and Sex Composition 2010. 2010 Census Briefs. C2010BR-
03. May 2011. Page 2. www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HUD's currently codified LSHR, at 24 CFR 35.110 (the definition 
section), uses the term ``environmental intervention blood lead level'' 
(EIBLL). EIBLL is the blood lead level at which an evaluation for lead-
based paint hazards and interim controls of such hazards identified 
(i.e., a type of environmental intervention) are to be conducted in 
certain housing covered by the LSHR. Specifically, HUD defined EIBLL as 
``a confirmed concentration of lead in whole blood equal to or greater 
than 20 [mu]g/dL for a single test or 15-19 [mu]g/dL in two tests taken 
at least 3 months apart.'' HUD's definition is consistent with the 
guidance issued by CDC in November 1997, i.e., shortly before the LSHR 
was published on September 15, 1999, at 64 FR 50139-50231. CDC's 1997 
guidance was that a blood lead level of 10-14 [mu]g/dL should trigger 
monitoring, certain parental actions, and perhaps community-wide 
education, but not lead hazard control in an individual child's 
home.\24\ At the time that HUD was developing the LSHR, CDC did not 
recommend a full home inspection or assessment in response to blood 
lead levels below 15 [mu]g/dL. CDC's revised guidance uses a reference 
range value to trigger the identification of conditions in the 
environment associated with

[[Page 60307]]

lead-exposure hazards. CDC's revised guidance recommends that children 
under age 6 should not live or spend significant time in homes with 
lead-exposure hazards (CDC Response to ACCLPP recommendations II and 
III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ CDC. Screening Young Children for Lead Poisoning: Guidance 
for State and Local Public Health Officials. Chapter 4. Role of 
Child Health-Care Providers in Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention. 
Atlanta. November 1997. www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/screening.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although HUD has not yet conformed the LSHR to reflect the CDC's 
2012 revised approach for establishing the definition of EBLL, HUD's 
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards 
in Housing (HUD Guidelines) second edition (2012), which provide 
guidance information regarding evaluation and hazard reduction 
activities described in the LSHR (24 CFR 35.1310(a)), adopted CDC's 
reference range value method for defining an EBLL.\25\ In addition, HUD 
has implemented use of CDC's revised definition in both of its lead 
hazard control grant programs--the Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control 
grant program and the Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration grant 
program--in the annual notices of funding availability (NOFAs) issued 
for these programs commencing in fiscal year 2013,\26\ the first NOFAs 
issued after CDC revised its guidance, advising the grantees of grants 
awarded under those NOFAs to use the definition to prioritize 
enrollment of housing units for lead hazard control work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/healthy_homes/lbp/hudguidelines, HUD Guidelines, 
esp. chapter 16, Investigation and Treatment of Dwellings that House 
Children with Elevated Blood Lead Levels.
    \26\ HUD Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes. Notice 
of Funding Availability for HUD's Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 Lead-Based 
Paint Hazard Control Grant Program and Lead Hazard Reduction 
Demonstration Grant Program. December 3, 2012. http://portal.hud.gov/huddoc/2013leadcombonofa.pdf. FY 2014 Lead-Based 
Paint Hazard Control (LBPHC) Grant Program and Lead Hazard Reduction 
Demonstration (LHRD) Grant Program. May 13, 2014. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=2014leadcombonofa.pdf. 
FY 2015 Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control (LBPHC) Grant Program. May 
7, 2015. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=2015lbphcnofa.pdf. FY 2015 Lead Hazard Reduction 
Demonstration (LHRD) Grant Program. May 7, 2015. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=2015lhrdnofa.pdf. Lead-
Based Paint Hazard Control (LBPHC) Grant Program for FY 2016. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/administration/grants/fundsavail/nofa16/lbphc. Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration 
(LHRD) Grant Program for FY 2016. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/administration/grants/fundsavail/nofa16/lhrd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ACCLPP recommendation X was that CDC adopt prevention strategies to 
reduce environmental lead exposures in soil, dust, paint, and water 
before children are exposed. As part of its response, CDC noted that it 
would continue to emphasize the importance of environmental assessment 
and mitigation of lead hazards before children are exposed (CDC 
Response to ACCLPP recommendation X).
    ACCLPP recommendation XI was that, ``If lead hazards trigger a 
response in any unit in a multi-family housing complex, the same 
response action should be applied to all similar untested units in the 
housing complex, unless a risk assessment demonstrates that no lead 
hazards are present in the other units.'' In response, CDC concurred 
with the evidence suggesting that a building that houses one child with 
lead poisoning is an indication that other children in that building 
are likely at risk (CDC Response to ACCLPP recommendation XI).

D. Response to CDC Guidance

    HUD has been implementing primary prevention--the strategy of 
emphasizing preventing exposure rather than responding after the 
exposure has taken place \27\--since before CDC responded to the ACCLPP 
recommendations, specifically, implementing most of those 
recommendations that pertain to HUD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ CDC Response. op. cit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the CDC Response to ACCLPP recommendation II, on using 
the reference range value, as noted above, HUD issued the second 
edition of its Guidelines, which included information on environmental 
interventions based on CDC's revised approach to EBLL,\28\ and used the 
revised definition in its NOFAs for its Lead Hazard Control Grant 
Programs starting with the first NOFA after the CDC Response was 
published.
    Regarding the CDC Response to ACCLPP recommendation III, on primary 
prevention, one of the purposes of the LSHR, as noted above, is to 
ensure, as far as practicable, that federally-owned or federally-
assisted target housing does not have lead-based paint hazards. 
Assisted target housing covered by the rule is assessed for hazards 
before the assisted occupants move in; controls before occupancy are 
required when hazards are identified; when the assistance is ongoing, 
ongoing lead-based paint maintenance is required, periodic re-
evaluations for the presence of lead hazards are conducted, and hazards 
are controlled, and occupants are notified of the results--all of these 
actions are independent of, and precede, children's blood lead levels 
increasing as a result of lead-based paint hazards in their housing.
    Regarding the CDC Response to ACCLPP recommendation VI, that 
clinicians report EBLL cases to local and state health and/or housing 
departments, the LSHR includes, in the subparts pertaining to ongoing 
assistance for target housing, the requirement that the owner (or other 
``designated party'' responsible for the assistance under the rule) 
promptly report the name and address of a child identified as having an 
EIBLL to the public health department within 5 business days of being 
so notified by any other medical health care professional.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 24 CFR 35.730(e), 830(d), 1130(e), 1225(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the CDC Response to ACCLPP recommendation VII, HUD has 
long been engaged in educating families, service providers, advocates, 
and public officials on primary prevention of lead exposure in homes, 
through outreach campaigns, development, publication and distribution 
of brochures, flyers, manuals, and guidance documents, training of 
housing sector stakeholders, and supporting the EPA's National Lead 
Information Center, which provides the general public and professionals 
with information about lead, lead hazards, and their prevention.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See, e.g., EPA. Lead Hotline--The National Lead Information 
Center. https://www.epa.gov/lead/forms/lead-hotline-national-lead-information-center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the CDC Response to ACCLPP recommendation VIII, HUD has 
long facilitated data-sharing between health and housing agencies, 
promoted preventive lead-safe housing standards for target housing, 
identifying financing for lead hazard remediation, and provided 
families with the information needed to protect their children from 
hazards in the home. For example, as far back as 1990, in its Interim 
Guidelines on addressing lead hazards in public and Indian housing, HUD 
encouraged public housing agencies to collaborate with health 
departments on, e.g., encouraging blood lead screening and development 
of outreach materials, sharing data about cases of high blood lead 
levels in children, then called ``lead poisoning'' or elevated blood 
lead level (albeit with the different quantitative meaning at that 
time), referring children to a lead hazard control program,\31\ and the 
Department has continued these efforts since then.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ HUD Office of Public and Indian Housing. Lead-Based Paint: 
lnterim Guidelines for Hazard ldentification and Abatement in Public 
and Indian Housing. September 1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the CDC Response to ACCLPP recommendation X, which 
emphasizes the importance of environmental assessments to identify and 
mitigate lead hazards as a primary prevention technique, as noted 
above, the LSHR requires this of all of the assisted housing covered by 
the rule.

[[Page 60308]]

Similarly, on the item that CDC adopt prevention strategies to reduce 
environmental lead exposures in soil, dust, paint, and water before 
children are exposed, under the LSHR, as noted above, HUD has been 
implementing the prevention strategy to reduce environmental lead 
exposures in soil, dust, and paint, the media for which it has 
authority to do so under Title X. Regarding lead exposures from water, 
see the EPA Integrated Science Assessment for Lead.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ EPA. Integrated Science Assessment for Lead. See fn. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding several additional ACCLPP recommendations, HUD has been 
implementing the CDC response since the issuance of the CDC Response.
    Regarding the recommendation XIII, specifically, the element of the 
recommendation that has a housing connection, on CDC improving the use 
of data from screening programs, HUD and CDC collaborated on matching 
addresses of HUD-assisted residents with national health survey data to 
develop a method for improving the targeting of lead hazard control 
efforts and resources.\33\ HUD will continue seeking ways it can 
contribute to CDC's efforts in this regard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The abstract from this research will be published in the 
conference program for the Epidemiology Congress of the Americas' 
conference, June 21-24, 2016 (https://epiresearch.org/2016-meeting/
). The full abstract citation will be inserted here at that time, 
and when the article is published, that article's citation will be 
inserted here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Regulatory Approach

    Although HUD is already applying the CDC's 2012 revised definition 
of EBLL in its lead hazard control NOFAs and in its Guidelines, the 
LSHR has not yet been updated to reflect the CDC's revised definition 
of EBL. During this time, federal agencies involved with reducing 
childhood lead exposures, including HUD, CDC, EPA and NIEHS, have 
continued to explore how best to use scientific and medical information 
to approach the problem of childhood lead exposures and develop 
approaches for prioritizing action within the limits of available 
resources. To keep HUD's criterion for requiring environmental 
intervention in response to a child having a sufficiently high blood 
lead level to warrant such action in synchrony with CDC's approach for 
determining when environmental intervention is recommended, this rule 
therefore proposes to revise the LSHR to adopt the CDC's approach to 
establishing a blood lead level for which CDC recommends environmental 
intervention, i.e., a trigger level for environmental intervention as 
the definition of EBLL in the LSHR, and apply it to determining when 
environmental interventions in federally-assisted and federally-owned 
target housing covered by the rule are to be conducted. In addition, 
this rule proposes to change the LSHR to reflect other CDC guidance 
responding to the ACCLPP recommendations, and to make additional 
improvements based on HUD's experience with implementing the LSHR in 
order to further strengthen prevention strategies in federally-assisted 
and federally-owned target housing.
    Specifically, HUD is proposing to revise the LSHR regarding target 
housing covered by the five subparts of the LSHR that are related to 
children under age 6 exposed to lead in housing where the Federal 
Government maintains a continuing financial or ownership relationship. 
HUD proposes to implement the recommendations of the CDC, within the 
scope of HUD's authority, and in consideration of available federal 
resources. The five subparts currently use the EIBLL threshold for 
undertaking an environmental response.
    HUD is proposing to revise these subparts to use the CDC's approach 
for determining when a child's blood lead level triggers the 
environmental response. The following types of federal housing 
assistance are covered in 24 CFR part 35 subparts for which an 
environmental intervention may be required:

D--Project-Based Assistance Provided by a Federal Agency other than HUD
H--Project-Based Assistance
I--HUD-Owned and Mortgagee-in-Possession Multifamily Property
L--Public Housing Programs
M--Tenant-Based Rental Assistance

    Provisions proposed to be revised within the individual subparts 
are described below.
    In regard to housing for which the current rule requires response 
to EIBLL cases and this proposed rule would require response to EBL 
cases, the following types of hazard evaluation and reduction 
activities are required, whether or not a child with an EIBLL resides 
or is expected to reside in a unit covered by the LSHR:
    Lead-based paint inspection: Subparts I and L. This is a surface-
by-surface investigation to determine the presence (including the 
location) of lead-based paint and providing a report explaining the 
results of the investigation.
    Hazard Evaluation:
     Risk Assessment: Subparts D, H (assistance over $5,000 per 
unit per year), and I. Lead risk assessments involve visual assessment 
for deteriorated paint, testing of deteriorated paint to determine if 
it is lead-based paint (and thus, a lead-based paint hazard because of 
the deterioration), dust wipe sampling of window sills and floors, and 
sampling of bare soil.
     Visual assessment for deteriorated paint: Subparts H 
(assistance up to $5,000 per unit per year), M
     Reevaluation: Subparts D, H (assistance over $5,000 per 
unit per year), I and L. Reevaluations involve a visual assessment of 
painted surfaces and limited dust and soil sampling conducted 
periodically following lead-based paint hazard reduction where lead-
based paint is still present.
     Periodic inspection for deteriorated paint: Subpart M: 
These periodic inspections are conducted as part of the inspection of 
the assisted housing.
    Hazard Reduction:
     Abatement of LBP hazards: L (during comprehensive 
modernization). Abatement is set of measures designed to permanently 
(for an expected design life of at least 20 years) eliminate lead-based 
paint or lead-based paint hazards Abatement includes: Removing lead-
based paint and dust-lead hazards, permanently enclosing or 
encapsulating lead-based paint, replacing components or fixtures 
painted with lead-based paint, and removing permanently covering soil-
lead hazards; along with all the preparation, cleanup, disposal, and 
post-abatement reoccupancy clearance testing activities associated with 
those measures.
    Interim controls of LBP hazards: Subparts D, I, and L (pending 
abatement during comprehensive modernization). Interim controls are 
measures designed to reduce temporarily human exposure or likely 
exposure to lead-based paint hazards. They include, but are not limited 
to, repairs, painting, temporary containment, specialized cleaning, 
clearance for tenant reoccupancy after projects that involve paint 
disturbance larger than the de minimis amounts specified in the 
rule,\34\ ongoing lead-based paint maintenance activities, and the 
establishment and operation of management and resident education 
programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 24 CFR 35.1350(d): 20 square feet on exterior surfaces, 2 
square feet in any one interior room or space, or 10 percent of the 
total surface area on an interior or exterior type of component with 
a small surface area (e.g., window sills, baseboards, and trim).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paint stabilization: Subparts H (assistance up to $5,000 per unit 
per year), M. Paint stabilization involves repairing any physical 
defect in the substrate of a painted surface that is

[[Page 60309]]

causing paint deterioration, removing loose paint and other material 
from the surface to be treated, and applying a new protective coating 
or paint.
    Lead hazard evaluation and control activities in HUD-assisted and 
HUD-owned housing are subject to the requirements of the applicable 
civil rights laws, including the Fair Housing Act as amended (for 
example, by the Fair Housing Amendments Act), and its prohibition of 
discrimination on the basis of disability or familial status (including 
the presence of a child under age of 18, or of a pregnant woman), Title 
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (prohibiting discrimination on the 
basis of race, color, and national origin), Title IX of the Education 
Amendments of 1972 (prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex), 
and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (prohibiting 
discrimination on the basis of disability). These laws, and their 
associated HUD regulations \35\ and guidance \36\ are incorporated into 
the LSHR through its Sec.  35.145, Compliance with Federal laws and 
authorities. The applicability of the fair housing laws, regulations, 
and guidance to these activities would continue without change by this 
proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See 24 CFR parts 100-180, especially parts 135 and 146.
    \36\ See the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity's FHEO 
Library at http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/library#Guidance for links to a set of Policy 
and Guidance documents. The FHEO Library also contains links to sets 
of documents on Decrees and Conciliation Agreements, Marketing 
Materials, Memorandums of Understanding (MOU), Publications, 
Studies, Voluntary Compliance Agreements, and Annual Reports. The 
Office's homepage is at http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Response to Young Children With Elevated Blood Lead Levels

    In updating the LSHR to reflect the CDC's approach to defining EBL, 
within the scope of HUD's authority, HUD is proposing to shift its 
threshold for environmental intervention from the environmental 
intervention blood lead level (EIBLL), as described above, to the 
elevated blood lead level (EBLL) that is identified in CDC's guidance 
for recommending a childhood blood lead level such that an 
environmental intervention should be conducted, at any given point in 
time. In 2012, CDC's guidance used the reference range value, which had 
the numerical value of 5 [mu]g/dL; HUD would continue to rely on CDC's 
guidance, whether CDC's approach continued to use the reference range 
value or used another criterion. In addition, this rule proposes to 
revise the type of hazard control undertaken when lead-based paint or 
other hazards are identified and, in the case of housing projects with 
more than one unit, address lead-based paint hazards in those other 
units in which children under age 6 reside.
    The approach to implementing the regulatory protocol under this 
proposed rulemaking is founded on the currently codified LSHR, the CDC 
guidance on blood lead reference levels, the HUD Guidelines, and HUD's 
experience implementing the LSHR since its 1999 promulgation. Figure 1 
provides an overview of the proposed protocol for addressing elevated 
blood lead level cases in assisted housing covered by the LSHR; its 
details are discussed below.
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P

[[Page 60310]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01SE16.127

BILLING CODE 4210-67-C

[[Page 60311]]

    In broad terms, HUD's proposed protocol for responding to a case of 
a child under age 6 with an EBLL would include the ``designated party'' 
undertaking certain actions. The designated party is the owner or other 
entity (e.g., federal agency, public housing agency, tribally 
designated housing entity, sponsor, etc.) designated under the LSHR as 
responsible for complying with applicable requirements of the LSHR for 
the residential property or dwelling unit, as applicable (see Sec.  
35.110). As described below, the protocol is the same for each of the 
four applicable HUD subparts (H, I, L, M), and slightly narrower for 
the other agencies' subpart (D), for which the agencies would decide 
how to deal with other housing units in multi-unit properties than the 
unit in which the child with an EBLL resides.
    The protocol would include the designated party:
     Conducting an environmental investigation \37\ of the 
dwelling unit in which the child lived at the time the blood was last 
sampled (the ``index'' unit \38\) and of common areas servicing the 
index unit.\39\ (The procedure for conducting the environmental 
investigation is described below.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ This rule proposes to defined this term as the process of 
determining the source of lead exposure for a child under age 6 with 
an elevated blood lead level, consisting of administration of a 
questionnaire, comprehensive environmental sampling, case 
management, and other measures., in accordance with chapter 16 of 
the HUD Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based 
Paint Hazards in Housing (``Guidelines'').
    \38\ Terminology adapted from the traditional epidemiology term 
``index case, the case that is first reported to public health 
authorities.'' CDC. Guidelines for the Control of Pertussis 
Outbreaks. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Atlanta, GA, 
2000. Chapter 11, Definitions. www.cdc.gov/pertussis/outbreaks/guide/downloads/chapter-11.pdf.
    \39\ However, if the designated party conducted a risk 
assessment of the unit and common areas servicing the unit between 
the time the child's blood was last sampled and when the designated 
party received notification of the EBLL, the designated party need 
only conduct the elements of an environmental investigation not 
already conducted during the risk assessment. See below for the 
discussion of environmental investigations vs. risk assessments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Conducting interim control \40\ of lead-based paint 
hazards identified in the index unit and, in the unlikely case that the 
work duration exceeds thresholds in the LSHR \41\ (the most applicable 
threshold, of 5 calendar days, with the worksite contained and it and 
the area within 10 feet cleaned so that the family can return each day, 
is not expected to be exceeded), temporarily relocating the family to a 
suitable, decent, safe, and similarly accessible dwelling unit that 
does not have lead-based paint hazards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Interim control refers to actions that reduce temporarily 
human exposure or likely exposure to lead-based paint hazards 
including specialized cleaning, repairs, maintenance, painting, 
temporary containment.
    \41\ 24 CFR 35.1345(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Controlling other housing-related sources of lead exposure 
in the building, such as lead-contaminated debris.
     Being encouraged to gain the collaboration of the 
occupants in addressing the presence and use of sources of lead 
exposure that are not housing-related. Non-housing items (such as lead-
containing cosmetics, pottery, folk remedies,\42\ take-home exposures 
from the workplace, etc.) owned or used by the occupants are outside of 
the scope of Title X and, as a result, the LSHR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Lead has been found in some traditional (folk) medicines 
used by, for example, East Indian, Indian, Middle Eastern, West 
Asian, and Hispanic cultures. Folk medicines can contain herbs, 
minerals, metals, or animal products. Lead and other heavy metals 
are put into certain folk medicines because these metals are thought 
to be useful in treating some ailments. Sometimes lead accidentally 
gets into the folk medicine during grinding, during coloring, or 
from the package. See www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/tips/folkmedicine.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed procedure for conducting an environmental 
investigation, including procedures for investigating sources of lead 
exposure other than lead-based paint hazards, as presently found is 
found in Chapter 16 of the HUD Guidelines.\43\ The protocol includes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Chapter 16 of the HUD Guidelines for the Evaluation and 
Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing notes that, ``The 
purpose of the [environmental] investigation is to identify lead 
hazards in the environment of a child. An ordinary risk assessment 
attempts to uncover lead-based paint hazards in a dwelling, 
regardless of whether a child has an EBLL. The investigator is 
obligated to conduct a comprehensive investigation of all sources of 
lead in the child's environment, not just those lead exposures 
directly related to the child's residence. This investigation 
includes studying less-common sources of lead, such as glazed 
pottery and folk medicines or remedies, etc., and other dwellings or 
areas frequented by the child. Some of these sources may be 
discovered by the results of the questionnaire. The investigator 
tests deteriorated paint on furniture identified as a potential 
hazard to the environmental intervention blood lead (EIBLL) child, 
regardless of who owns the furniture.'' (Paragraphs merged.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Reviewing the findings of any previous lead-based paint 
inspection, risk assessment, environmental investigation, or 
reevaluation for the property.
     Conducting a comprehensive interview of the family of the 
child, based on the CDC EBLL environmental investigation checklist or 
HUD EBLL questionnaire (both are in the chapter), or a comparable 
questionnaire (such as one from the public health department).
     Conducting a risk assessment.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ A risk assessment is (per Sec.  35.110), an on-site 
investigation to determine the existence, nature, severity, and 
location of lead-based paint hazards; and the provision of a report 
by the individual or firm conducting the risk assessment explaining 
the results of the investigation and options for reducing lead-based 
paint hazards. As such, it is narrower in scope than an 
environmental investigation, as described here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Augmenting the risk assessment, in consultation with the 
public health department managing the child's EBLL case, if that public 
health department chooses to cooperate with the designated party, to 
determine what, if any, other possible sources of exposure should be 
investigated, including, but not limited to:
    [cir] Drinking water.
    [cir] Glazed pottery or tableware that may contain lead glazes.
    [cir] Work clothes or vehicle that may have been contaminated from 
a parent's or guardian's work place.
    [cir] Imported cosmetics, hobbies, folk remedies, and candies. 
(Hobby contamination involving lead (e.g., hunting, fishing, furniture 
refinishing, stained glass making, etc.) has been recognized as a lead 
exposure source in, e.g., CDC guidance and EPA guidance).
     Providing to the HUD field office documentation that the 
designated party has conducted the activities above, within 10 business 
days of the deadline for each activity. In accordance with the 
Government Paperwork Elimination Act, which encourages electronic 
submission of information as a substitute for paper,\45\ the designated 
party may submit the documentation of compliance with the LSHR 
regarding the affected units electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 44 U.S.C. 3504(a)(1)(B)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The designated party or public health department may have conducted 
an environmental investigation of the index unit and common areas 
servicing it between the dates the child's blood was last sampled and 
the designated party received the EBLL notification. If so, the 
designated party would not need to conduct another environmental 
investigation. Similarly, if the designated party had conducted a risk 
assessment of the index unit and common areas servicing the unit during 
that period, it would not need to conduct another risk assessment, it 
would need to conduct only the additional elements of an environmental 
investigation.
    A key part of the response to the case of a child with an elevated 
blood lead level is the environmental investigation of the unit in 
which the child resided, i.e., the index unit. The index unit may be in 
a building or project with other assisted dwelling units covered by the 
LSHR in which children under age 6 reside or are expected to reside 
(see the

[[Page 60312]]

discussion of ``expected to reside'' in section II.A.2). If so, the 
protocol would include the designated party either:
     Providing to the HUD field office \46\ documentation that 
the designated party has complied with required evaluation (with the 
type of evaluation, i.e., lead-based paint inspection, risk assessment, 
or visual assessment for deteriorated paint, in accordance with the 
Rule's subpart regarding the type of assistance), notification, lead 
disclosure, ongoing lead-based paint maintenance, and lead-based paint 
management in those units; or,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See the HUD Field Office listing Web page at http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/field_policy_mgt/localoffices. For Multifamily Housing assistance, designated parties 
may also contact the respective Regional Center, Regional Satellite 
Office, Hub or Program Center directly; see the Multifamily Regional 
Centers and Satellite Offices Web page at http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/housing/mfh/hsgmfbus/abouthubspcs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the designated party does not provide such 
documentation of compliance to date, conducting a risk assessment of 
the non-compliant other units within the building or project covered by 
the LSHR and the common areas that service them, and conducting interim 
controls of lead-based paint hazards identified, or in the case of 
tenant-based rental assisted units and project-based rental assisted 
units receiving under $5,000 per unit per year or being single family 
housing, conducting visual assessment and stabilization of deteriorated 
paint,\47\ and providing to the HUD field office documentation that the 
designated party has conducted the evaluation (i.e., risk assessment or 
visual assessment, as applicable) and hazard control (i.e., interim 
controls or paint stabilization, as applicable) within 10 business days 
of the deadline for the respective activities.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Paint stabilization is ``repairing any physical defect in 
the substrate of a painted surface that is causing paint 
deterioration, removing loose paint and other material from the 
surface to be treated, and applying a new protective coating or 
paint.'' (Sec.  35.110)
    \48\ Paint stabilization is ``repairing any physical defect in 
the substrate of a painted surface that is causing paint 
deterioration, removing loose paint and other material from the 
surface to be treated, and applying a new protective coating or 
paint.'' (Sec.  35.110)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above in regard to the Government Paperwork Elimination 
Act, the designated party may submit the documentation of compliance 
with the LSHR regarding the affected units electronically.
    Consistent with CDC's response to the ACCLPP recommendations, 
chapter 16 of the HUD Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of 
Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing (HUD Guidelines) \49\ recommends 
control of sources of lead exposure identified during an environmental 
investigation or risk assessment. These sources of lead exposure 
include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ HUD. Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-
Based Paint Hazards in Housing. Washington, 2014. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/healthy_homes/lbp/hudguidelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Lead-based paint hazards (i.e., paint-lead hazards, dust-
lead hazards, or soil-lead hazards, as defined and given quantitative 
measure by EPA at 40 CFR 745.63 and 745.65, respectively), which are 
identified by a lead risk assessment. A risk assessment is defined in 
the LSHR at Sec.  35.110 (see footnote 45, above), and given 
operational meaning for the LSHR incorporation of EPA's Lead-Based 
Paint Hazards, Lead-Based Paint Activities, and State and Indian Tribal 
Programs rules (40 CFR part 745, parts D, E, and Q, respectively, by 
the LSHR at 24 CFR 35.1320, Lead-based paint inspections and risk 
assessments), and
     Other housing-related sources of lead exposure that are 
outside of the scope of lead risk assessments. The procedure for 
environmental investigations, as provided in chapter 16 of the 
Guidelines, is summarized above.
    HUD notes that reevaluation is not part of the response to an EBLL. 
Reevaluations (or, for tenant-based rental assistance, periodic housing 
quality standard inspections) are already part of the regular ongoing 
lead-based paint management required in the subparts this proposed rule 
would amend, so they are not part of this amendment.
    HUD's statutory authority to require controls of lead exposure 
sources, in contrast to recommending control of them, is limited to 
housing hazards under the United States Housing Act of 1937 (1937 Act) 
42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq., as amended \50\ (e.g., on public housing 
meeting housing quality standards \51\ through lease contracts 
obligating public housing agencies to maintain housing projects in safe 
condition,\52\ and on safety requirements for housing assistance 
programs for lower-income families \53\). In this context, the controls 
are limited to lead-based paint hazards, rather than lead exposures 
from the personal contents of the housing residents and visitors, the 
public water supply, ambient air levels or industrial emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Public Law 93-383, 88 Stat. 633, approved August 22, 1974. 
(The codified version can be searched on www.fdsys.gov; the text of 
the United States Code's subchapter, General Program of Assisted 
Housing (42 U.S.C. 1437-1437z-8) can be downloaded from www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2012-title42/html/USCODE-2012-title42-chap8-subchapI.htm.).
    \51\ Section 6(f)(2); 42 U.S.C. 1437d(f)(2).
    \52\ Section 6(l)(3); 42 U.S.C. 1437d(l)(3).
    \53\ Section 8(c)(4); 42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As seen in numerous HUD regulations from its various program 
offices,\54\ HUD can encourage activities even if it does not require 
them. Accordingly, through this rulemaking, HUD encourages (in 
Sec. Sec.  35.730(f)(3)(iv), 35.1130(f)(4), and 35.1225(f)(3)) 
designated parties to identify and control lead-based paint hazards in 
locations not covered by the LSHR (i.e., unassisted housing units), and 
lead exposure sources other than lead-based paint hazards, even if 
doing so is not required by the LSHR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ E.g., 24 CFR 8.28(a)(2), 50.3(a), 51.101(a)(5), 
51.106(a)(4), 91.105(a)(2)(i)(ii)(iii), 200.857(g)(4), 570.466, 
902.75(f), 964.15, and 984.201(d)(5), etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described below, across the different subparts of the LSHR, 
there are some differences in terminology, scoping, and exceptions, 
based on the specifics of the housing assistance.
1. Dwelling Unit in Which the Child Resided
    HUD is proposing that, when a child under age 6 residing in target 
housing where the Federal government maintains a continuing financial 
or ownership relationship is reported to have an EBLL, the designated 
party must complete an environmental investigation of the index unit, 
and of common areas servicing the index unit, within 15 calendar days 
of the designated party being notified.
    As noted above, several types of federal housing assistance, 
covered by 24 CFR part 35 subparts D, H, I, L, and M, identified above, 
have provisions that address lead safety in regard to children under 
age 6. The subparts apply when the Federal government maintains a 
continuing financial or ownership relationship to the target housing 
(vs. the short-term relationship in most rehabilitation projects, which 
ends when the construction work is completed, if there is no other 
long-term assistance relationship).
    Similarly to the process under the currently codified rule, if the 
notification of an EBLL case is received from a person who is not a 
medical health care provider, the requirement to conduct an 
environmental investigation would be conditioned on verification of the 
case information, including the child's blood lead level information 
with the public health department or other medical health care 
provider. However, the threshold for such verification would be changed 
from EIBLL to EBLL as defined under this proposal.

[[Page 60313]]

    Under the currently codified rule, the blood lead threshold for 
conducting the environmental investigation is fixed. Under this 
proposed rule, the threshold for the EBLL would change when CDC updates 
its guidance for a childhood blood lead level such that an 
environmental intervention should be conducted. As of 2012, this was 
the reference range level for children under age 6 (i.e., the blood 
lead level at or above which the top 2.5th percentile of U.S. 
children's blood lead levels are to be found, per CDC's NHANES). CDC 
announced that it plans to update the reference range value every 4 
years (CDC response to ACCLPP Recommendation II).\55\ Thus, CDC's 
recommendation on a childhood blood lead level for recommending an 
environmental intervention would be updated at least that often.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ HUD recognizes that, if the EBLL threshold continues to 
decrease over time, the measurement variability (sampling and 
analytical variability) will represent a larger fraction of the 
threshold value. It would therefore, be likely that, at some point, 
the percentile approach of the reference range value might not be 
correlated as tightly with determinable lead exposure sources, i.e., 
a smaller fraction of cases may be attributable to lead-based paint 
hazards. The environmental investigation will make that 
determination in individual cases. Should a statistically 
significant substantial trend toward low fractions of EBLL cases 
being attributable to lead-based paint hazards be identified, HUD 
would consider further LSHR rulemaking based on the evidence 
available at that future point.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the proposed rule is adopted, after CDC publishes an update to 
the EBL guidance, HUD would issue a notice on the applicability of that 
updated threshold to the LSHR going forward after a preparatory 
transition period. HUD's notice would, in order to provide regulatory 
and programmatic clarity, and to avoid unnecessary retroactive program 
changes, specify that the change would be prospective, not retroactive. 
Thus, the status of housing of children with blood lead levels based on 
measurements taken before the transition period ends that are in the 
range between the earlier and newer reference range values would not be 
affected by the change. (For example, if the earlier reference range 
value was 5.0 [mu]g/dL, and a 4-year old child's blood lead level 
measured before the end of the transition period were 3.7 [mu]g/dL, the 
child's dwelling unit would not need to be subject to an environmental 
investigation, even if the updated EBL value published after the 
child's blood were tested is 3.7 [mu]g/dL or less. If the child 
continues to reside in federally-owned or -assisted housing covered by 
the environmental intervention requirement, and the child's blood, as 
retested after the transition period has ended is at or above the 
updated EBL value (in this example, at or above 3.7 [mu]g/dL), the 
environmental intervention would then be required.)
    Similarly, the blood lead level that would prompt notification to 
the public health department would be an EBLL rather than an EIBLL.
    In order that HUD be able to promptly monitor implementation of the 
evaluation and hazard control procedures when an EBLL case has occurred 
in HUD-assisted or HUD-owned target housing, HUD is proposing that the 
designated party notify within 5 business days of being notified of the 
EBLL case by a public health department or any other medical health 
care professional both the HUD field office (as the currently codified 
rule requires for public housing, under Sec.  35.1130(e)) and HUD's 
OLHCHH, which has been delegated authority for oversight of the Lead 
Safe Housing Rule.\56\ The OLHCHH, which is functioning as a public 
health authority as defined by the Privacy Rule (45 CFR parts 160 and 
164) promulgated under the federal Health Insurance Portability and 
Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) (Pub. L. 104-191, 110 Stat. 1936, 
approved August 21, 1996, as amended),\57\ is developing an electronic 
portal for submitting the case information, in order to minimize the 
reporting burden on designated parties, and will announce the 
availability of the portal and instructions for its use in a Federal 
Register notice. If, and so long as there is sufficient demand for 
notifications to be sent by mail or fax, the OLHCHH will make those 
submittal pathways available. Should it determine that there is 
insufficient demand; the OLHCHH will post a Federal Register notice to 
that effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ HUD. Delegation of Authority for the Office of Healthy 
Homes and Lead Hazard Control. 76 FR 45592. July 29, 2011. https://federalregister.gov/a/2011-19279.
    \57\ HUD-CDC memorandum, March 9, 2004. www.hud.gov/offices/lead.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 15-day period for conducting environmental investigation would 
be the same period as the current LSHR requires in EIBLL cases.
    If the investigation identified lead-based paint hazards in these 
areas, the designated party (or the owner, as applicable) would be 
required to conduct interim controls of the hazards within 30 calendar 
days of receiving the report of the investigation, as in the current 
rule.
    Similarly, as part of this rulemaking, HUD encourages the 
designated party to address sources of lead exposure other than lead-
based paint hazards. If those sources are housing-related, e.g., 
airborne emissions from housing activities conducted by the designated 
party (or the owner, as applicable), such as uncontrolled emissions 
from welding or soldering operations in the property's machine shop, 
the designated party (or the owner, as applicable) is encouraged by HUD 
to address the hazards. The public health department may issue an 
abatement order in regard to those sources; compliance with such an 
order is a requirement of state, tribal or local law, as applicable. 
Some or all of the sources of lead exposure may be outside of the scope 
of Title X and the LSHR because they are not housing-related sources. 
For example, the sources may be non-housing items, such as lead-
containing cosmetics, pottery, folk remedies, etc. owned or used by the 
occupants that produce exposures, lead contamination on clothing or 
skin and in vehicles from the workplace, out-of-home hobbies, or in-
home hobbies. Chapter 16 of the HUD Guidelines includes a set of links 
to the CDC lead Web page on such sources.\58\ That chapter also refers 
to the CDC lead Web page on at-risk populations (including children who 
are poor, are members of racial-ethnic minority groups, are recent 
immigrants, live in older, poorly maintained rental properties, or have 
parents who are exposed to lead at work; pregnant women; refugee 
children; and internationally adopted children),\59\ which is of 
particular interest when no probable source of lead may be identified. 
Both of those Web pages have further links to Web pages on specific 
topics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/tips/sources.htm.
    \59\ www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/tips/populations.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding these sources, HUD encourages the designated party to 
gain the cooperation of the occupants in addressing the presence and 
use of non-housing-related sources of lead exposures. Similarly, some 
of these sources may be ambient, such as hazardous waste facility 
siting, or industrial emissions, regarding which, by this rulemaking, 
HUD is indicating that it is important that the designated party inform 
or even engage with local, state, and/or federal public health and/or 
environmental officials in addressing the problem.
    Hazard reduction would be considered complete when either:
     Clearance of the unit and common areas servicing the unit 
is achieved and the clearance report from the risk assessor states that 
the control measures have been completed; or
     The public health department certifies that the lead-based 
paint hazard reduction and the control of other

[[Page 60314]]

housing-related lead hazards are complete.
    The designated party may have, between the date the child's blood 
was last sampled and when the designated party received the 
notification, conducted hazard reduction of the unit and common areas 
servicing the unit as described above, including passing clearance. If 
so, it need not redo the hazard reduction.
2. Other Assisted Dwelling Units in the Building or Project
    ACCLPP's recommendation XI was that, ``If lead hazards trigger a 
response in any unit in a multi-family housing project, the same 
response action should be applied to all similar untested units in the 
housing project, unless a risk assessment demonstrates that no lead 
hazards are present in the other units.''
    HUD is proposing that if, (a) the dwelling unit in which the child 
under age 6 resided when she or he was reported as having an EBLL, 
i.e., the index unit, is part of a residential property or project that 
has other units of housing covered by the LSHR, and (b) the index unit 
has been confirmed to have lead-based paint hazards, then the occupancy 
and lead management of other units covered by the LSHR with a child 
under age 6 residing or expected to reside would be examined to 
determine whether the designated party must conduct a risk assessment 
or visual assessment (as described in the bulleted paragraphs above). 
If so, and if lead-based paint hazards (or deteriorated paint) are 
found in those other units, then interim controls or paint 
stabilization,\60\ as applicable must be conducted, and clearance 
passed. On the other hand, if the index unit has been found not to have 
lead-based paint hazards, HUD is proposing that no risk assessment or 
visual assessment, as applicable, be required in other assisted units 
in the building or project. This approach is based on the predicate in 
the CDC response to ACCLPP recommendation XI, namely, that a response 
in other units is based on having ``lead hazards trigger a response in 
any unit in a multi-family housing complex.'' If the index unit does 
not have lead-based paint hazards, the CDC guidance does not recommend 
actions in other units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Paint stabilization refers to repairing any physical defect 
in a painted surface that is causing paint deterioration, removing 
loose paint and other material from the surface to be treated, and 
applying a new protective coating or paint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If index unit has any lead-based paint hazards, HUD is proposing 
that the types of action required depend on whether a child under age 6 
resides or is expected to reside in one or more other assisted units in 
the building or project, and the documented degree of compliance with 
the LSHR by the designated party in regard to the residential property, 
as reviewed by HUD if the designated party wishes to use its 
performance record as demonstrating that no lead-based paint hazards 
are likely to be present in other units. This prioritization is 
intended to focus limited federal resources on the situations of the 
highest risk to children under age 6 in other assisted units in the 
building or project where exposure to lead hazards may have occurred. 
HUD has, of course, no jurisdiction under sections 1012 or 1013 of 
Title X over unassisted units, but it encourages the use of the 
protocol below in unassisted units, even if it cannot require its 
application to those units. Similarly, regarding lead safety in 
situations not covered by the Rule, HUD encourages housing owners 
(occupant owners and landlords), housing maintenance, management, and 
renovation firms, and others to be aware of its hazards, and to work 
safely with lead-containing building materials, for the protection of 
the health of occupants, visitors and workers, and their families.
    In general, when the index unit has been found to have lead-based 
paint hazards, and a child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside 
in one or more other assisted units in the building or project, HUD is 
proposing certain actions be undertaken, based on the type of 
assistance. Specifically, the designated party would be required to 
(with exceptions as noted below):
     Conduct a risk assessment of those other units in public 
housing, project-based rental assisted multifamily properties receiving 
$5,000 or more per unit per year in HUD assistance, or HUD-owned and 
mortgagee-in-possession multifamily properties with unit selection as 
described in the statistically valid random sampling protocol in 
Chapter 7, Section V, Inspections in Multi-family Housing, of the HUD 
Guidelines (as discussed below), or sample all of those other units.
     Conduct a visual assessment for deteriorated paint in 
those other units in tenant-based rental assisted units, project-based 
rental assisted properties receiving under $5,000 per unit per year in 
HUD assistance, or project-based rental assisted single family housing 
in the same project receiving HUD assistance. Again, when there are a 
sufficient number of those other units, the random sampling protocol in 
Chapter 7, Section V, of the HUD Guidelines may be used (as discussed 
below) for unit selection.
    The occupancy of the other assisted units in the building or 
project would be examined to determine in which of them, if any, 
children under age 6 resided or were expected to reside as of the date 
when, regarding the index unit and common areas servicing that unit:
     If lead-based paint hazards were identified, the date the 
lead hazard control work passed clearance, that is, the unit (and/or 
common area) where the work was done is completed, and the residents 
can move into their unit (and/or pass through the common area) based on 
a successful visual inspection for completion of the work and 
cleanliness is passed and, for work that would disturb painted surfaces 
that total more than a small (``de minimis'') amount (defined for the 
LSHR in 24 CFR 35.1350(d)), passing a residual dust-lead level test; or
     If no lead-based paint hazards were identified, the date 
the environmental investigation in regard to the child in the index 
unit was completed.
    The ``expected to reside'' wording is used because it is in the 
statutory and regulatory definitions of target housing as the exception 
to the exemption of housing for persons with disabilities or the 
elderly from target housing. Thus, housing for persons with 
disabilities or the elderly in which a child under age 6 resides or is 
expected to reside is covered by the scope of the LSHR.\61\ As detailed 
in the definition section (Sec.  35.110) of the LSHR, as proposed to be 
amended by this rule:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ 42 U.S.C. 4822(e)(1), 4851b(27); 24 CFR 35.110, 35.115.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ``Expected to reside means there is actual knowledge that a child 
will reside in a dwelling unit reserved or designated exclusively for 
the elderly or reserved or designated exclusively for persons with 
disabilities. If a resident woman is known to be pregnant, there is 
actual knowledge that a child will reside in the dwelling unit.''
    It is important to note that a ``dwelling unit reserved for the 
elderly,'' or a ``dwelling unit . . . designated exclusively for 
persons with disabilities'' differs from a unit's happening to be 
occupied by the elderly or by persons with disabilities. A child may be 
``expected to reside'' in family housing (i.e., housing available for 
general occupancy, meaning that there are no restrictions on the types 
of people who may occupy the unit, or, in other words, the unit is 
available for occupancy in general to all individuals and families and 
is not designated or reserved for any particular category)

[[Page 60315]]

even if there is no child living there at a particular time or even if 
an elderly family or a family with one or more persons with 
disabilities are the occupants.
    When the designated party has this actual knowledge about another 
assisted unit in the building or project, that unit would be included 
among those that are assessed (unless the designated party had 
documented to HUD's satisfaction, compliance with the LSHR 
demonstrating that no lead-based paint hazards were likely to be 
present in other units) and, if lead-based paint hazards or 
deteriorated paint (as applicable) are identified, treated.
    The date clearance has passed is used in establishing the deadline 
for conducting the evaluation of the other units and the control of 
hazards identified, so that the designated party will focus its initial 
efforts on the index unit and its associated common areas, in order to 
expedite evaluating and, if necessary, controlling lead-based paint 
hazards there.
    If a family with a child under age 6 moves in to a unit formerly 
designated as one in which no children under age 6 were residing or 
expected to reside, a risk assessment or visual assessment (as 
applicable, based on the type of assistance) must be conducted in 
accordance with the current rule. If lead-based paint hazards or 
deteriorated paint (as applicable) are found, then, under the current 
rule, lead hazard control will be conducted to protect the child's 
health.
    If the index unit has been found to have lead-based paint hazards, 
it is possible that the designated party may not have met the proposed 
certain performance requirements under the LSHR. Specifically, under 
the LSHR, the designated party is responsible for conducting and 
documenting current evaluation, notifications, and disclosure, and, 
depending on the type of assistance, may be responsible for conducting 
and documenting ongoing lead-based paint maintenance and management 
(see Sections II.A.3 and 4, respectively, below).
    If the designated party has not met the applicable performance 
requirements above, and a child under age 6 with an EBLL resides in a 
unit covered by the LSHR that has lead-based paint hazards, HUD is 
proposing that the designated party conduct a risk assessment (or 
visual assessment, as applicable) in other dwelling units covered by 
the LSHR in which children under age 6 reside or are expected to 
reside, and the common areas servicing those units. If lead-based paint 
hazards or deteriorated paint, as applicable, are found in those other 
units, then interim controls or paint stabilization, as applicable must 
be conducted, and clearance passed.
    If the designated party has met the applicable performance 
requirements above, and a child under age 6 with an EBLL resides in a 
unit covered by the LSHR, the designated party is encouraged by HUD to 
conduct a risk assessment (or visual assessment, as applicable) in 
other dwelling units covered by the LSHR, although it would not be 
required to do so. When the set of units with children under age 6 has 
been identified, if a risk assessment is to be conducted, the 
designated party (in typical practice, through its risk assessment 
staff or contractor) would select either all of these units (and the 
common areas that service them) to assess, or, if the number of units 
is large enough (over 20, in pre-1960 housing, and over 10 in 1960-1977 
housing), a random sample of units (and of the common areas that 
service them) in accordance with the HUD Guidelines, Chapter 7, Section 
V.B, Selection of Housing Units, Common Areas, and Exterior Site Areas. 
Random sampling for risk assessments is appropriate in the context of 
an elevated blood lead level response because it provides ``a 
statistically significant degree of confidence about the existence of 
lead-based paint hazards,'' in multifamily housing, and ``avoids 
questions about the quality of the criteria used for targeting or worst 
case sample selection,'' according to the HUD Guidelines, Chapter 5, 
Section III.B.1, Targeted, Worst Case, and Random Sampling. This level 
of programmatic confidence is particularly important in addressing 
housing in which a child has an EBLL.
    When the set of units with children under age 6 has been 
identified, if visual assessment is to be conducted, the designated 
party (in typical practice, through its risk assessment staff or 
contractor) would select all of these units (and the common areas that 
service them) to assess. The visual assessment procedure is much faster 
than the risk assessment procedure, with the trade-off that it provides 
less information. Accordingly, conducting a random sample of units and 
of common areas is not appropriate in this context of a child under age 
6 with an EBLL in the building or project.
    However, as under the current LSHR, if the designated party were to 
choose not to evaluate the other units covered by the LSHR for lead-
based paint hazards (or deteriorated paint, as applicable), the 
designated party would have to presume that lead-based paint hazards 
are present in these other units and common areas. This is allowable 
because the current LSHR provides, in Sec. Sec.  35.120(a) and (b), for 
risk assessments not to be conducted if ``the designated party . . . 
presume[s] that lead-based paint or lead-based paint hazards or both 
are present throughout the residential property,'' and use standard 
treatments on the painted building components and horizontal surfaces, 
and HUD is continuing to allow the designated party to use this option. 
A designated party may, for example, have staff or contracts in place 
to control presumed lead-based paint hazards, if it does not wish to 
delay undertaking the control activities.
    For target housing units receiving tenant-based rental assistance 
in which children under age 6 reside (which are covered by LSHR subpart 
M), the legislative history of Title X, as described in the preamble to 
the LSHR (64 FR 50139, at 50146), supports that, ``Congress did not 
intend for HUD to apply the new minimum procedures set out in section 
1012(a) of Title X,'' in particular, risk assessments. However, HUD 
does not accept the assumption that ``Congress intended to abolish 
HUD's [then] current procedures'' for lead safety evaluation, and those 
procedures serve as LSHR's basis for requiring a visual assessment for 
deteriorated paint in this housing. Accordingly, HUD is continuing to 
allow the approach of using a visual assessment for this housing in the 
context of assessing units and common areas other than the index unit 
and common areas servicing the index unit.
    HUD is proposing that if a risk assessment or a visual assessment 
(as applicable) finds lead-based paint hazards or deteriorated paint 
(as applicable), or if these hazards or deterioration are presumed to 
exist in the other dwelling units with children under age 6 residing or 
expected to reside and the common areas servicing those units, then the 
approach to controlling them should be the same as for the index unit 
and common areas servicing the index unit. For all subparts covered by 
this rulemaking the control approach would be interim controls, except 
for subpart M on tenant-based rental assistance, and a portion of 
subpart H on project-based rental assistance (to units receiving under 
$5,000 per unit per year or being single family housing) for which the 
approach is paint stabilization. For both, interim controls and paint 
stabilization, the control measure would be followed by clearance if 
the amount of deteriorated

[[Page 60316]]

paint is above the LSHR's de minimis threshold.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ HUD. Lead Safe Housing Rule. 24 CFR 35.1350(d). The de 
minimis threshold is either: (1) 20 square feet (2 square meters) on 
exterior surfaces; 2 square feet (0.2 square meters) in any one 
interior room or space; or 10 percent of the total surface area on 
an interior or exterior type of component with a small surface area. 
Examples include window sills, baseboards, and trim.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As in the current rule, the designated party would be required to 
implement lead hazard control measures promptly, with the period 
specified in the applicable subpart of the rule. In housing covered by 
the LSHR, for index units, the period for interim controls would be 30 
calendar days of receiving the report of the investigation. For other 
units covered by the LSHR with children under age 6 residing or 
expected to reside, the period would be 30 calendar days for paint 
stabilization (as in the current rule at Sec. Sec.  35.720(a)(2) and 
35.1215(b)), and a schedule based on the main threshold for multifamily 
unit sampling in the HUD Guidelines' chapter 7 as a means of 
characterizing a large hazard control project: \63\ Within 30 calendar 
days, or within 90 calendar days if more than 20 units each require 
lead hazard control work that would disturb painted surfaces that total 
more than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350, Safe work 
practices, paragraph (d), De minimis levels,\64\ and, therefore, would 
require the work to be done using lead safe work practices and 
certified renovation or abatement firms.\65\ Basing the schedule on the 
amount of hazard control work to be done recognizes resource 
availability limitations when large numbers of units require work. HUD 
encourages owners to conduct hazard control work expeditiously, 
especially if there are few other units in which work is to be done.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ Formally, the number of units for which random sampling 
provides 95 percent confidence that fewer than 5 percent of units 
(or 50 units, for projects of over 1000 units) have lead-based 
paint, for lead-based paint inspections, or lead-based paint 
hazards, for risk assessments. For up to 20 units, all units are 
sampled; for larger numbers of units, only a fraction need be 
sampled. (For routine inspections and risk assessments, this 
criterion is applied to pre-1960 housing, but that year-of-
construction distinction need not be made in this case, because of 
the essential difference that the index unit is known to have lead-
based paint hazards.) See the Guidelines, chapter 7, section V.B.
    \64\ ``Safe work practices are not required when maintenance or 
hazard reduction activities do not disturb painted surfaces that 
total more than: (1) 20 square feet (2 square meters) on exterior 
surfaces; (2) 2 square feet (0.2 square meters) in any one interior 
room or space; or (3) 10 percent of the total surface area on an 
interior or exterior type of component with a small surface area. 
Examples include window sills, baseboards, and trim.'' (Reformatted 
here.)
    \65\ The landlord may be a certified firm. For example, EPA's 
Renovation, Repair and Painting Program: Property Managers page 
(www.epa.gov/lead/renovation-repair-and-painting-program-property-managers) has the following questions and answers (reformatted 
here): ``How can property managers comply with the RRP rule? Do you 
or your employees conduct renovation, repair, or painting activities 
in a pre-1978 residential building? If yes, then you must become a 
Lead-Safe Certified Firm. If no, then hire only a Lead-Safe 
Certified firm for building maintenance, repair, or painting 
activities that could disturb lead-based paint.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    See the description of the evaluation and lead-based paint hazard 
control approach in Section II.A.1, above, along with the approach to 
addressing sources of lead exposure other than lead-based paint 
hazards.
3. Documentation of Current Evaluation, Notifications, Disclosure
    The LSHR requires, in the applicable subparts of title 24 CFR part 
35, that evaluations be conducted for lead-based paint, deteriorated 
paint, and/or lead-based paint hazards, i.e., paint-lead, dust-lead and 
soil-lead hazards, as applicable to the subpart, and that occupants be 
notified of the results of evaluations and hazard reduction activities.
    This proposed rule would retain the requirement of notification of 
evaluations and hazard reduction activities in accordance with Sec.  
35.125, Notice of evaluation and hazard reduction activities, of the 
LSHR. That section requires notification within 15 calendar days of 
when the designated party receives the evaluation report or the hazard 
reduction activities have been completed, to each occupied dwelling 
unit affected by the evaluation, presumption, or hazard reduction 
activity or serviced by common areas in which it took place.
    The implementing provisions in other parts of title 24 CFR 
incorporate part 35 by reference, including both the LSHR, in subparts 
B-R, and the Lead Disclosure Rule, in subpart A. Disclosure is required 
in addition to notification. Note that any lead-based paint hazards 
identified by a risk assessment or environmental investigation, and the 
results of any lead hazard control work, must, under the Lead 
Disclosure Rule, be disclosed to prospective tenants and buyers, and to 
current tenants before lease renewal. See HUD's Lead Disclosure Rule 
Web site at www.hud.gov/lead. Note also that HUD's Lead Disclosure Rule 
is substantively identical to EPA's Lead Disclosure Rule at 40 CFR part 
745 subpart F; see EPA's Real Estate Disclosure Web site at http://www2.epa.gov/lead/real-estate-disclosure/.
    HUD is proposing that, if the designated party has not complied 
with these requirements in the 12 months ending on the date the owner 
received the environmental investigation report, or if it has not 
provided the HUD field office documentation demonstrating compliance, 
the designated party must conduct the evaluation and, if applicable, 
hazard reduction requirements in the other assisted dwelling units with 
children under age 6 and common areas serving them, as described in 
Section II.A.2, above. Note that, under rules pertaining to the type of 
assistance, HUD may consider taking remedial action under the 
assistance contract or agreement as a result of the noncompliance.
4. Documentation of Ongoing Lead-Based Paint Maintenance and Management
    Implementation of ongoing lead-based paint management and 
maintenance is important in ensuring that, between evaluations, lead-
based paint is maintained properly (such as during day-to-day occupancy 
and, in particular, renovation, repair and painting (RRP) work) and 
managed properly (such as during rehabilitation and modernization 
activities) so that lead-based paint hazards are unlikely to occur. 
Each of the five LSHR subparts covering HUD-assisted housing for which 
the current rule has an EIBLL requirement also requires ongoing lead-
based paint maintenance. Similarly, when rehabilitation, under subpart 
J, Rehabilitation, is conducted in such housing, appropriate lead 
hazard control is required, as is the use of properly certified firms 
and workers in these activities. Specifically, the LSHR requires 
compliance with Federal laws and authorities for all lead-based paint 
activities (24 CFR 35.145). This includes the Environmental Protection 
Agency's lead-based paint regulations at 40 CFR part 745, such as its 
RRP Rule.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ See, especially, 40 CFR part 745 subpart E, on certified 
RRP work practices, and renovation firm and renovator 
certifications; subpart L, including conducting certified lead-based 
paint inspection, risk assessment and abatement activities, 
including clearance examinations when required; and subpart Q, on 
State and Indian Tribal certification programs that complement EPA's 
certification programs in other parts of the Nation in which EPA 
implements the certification program.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The designated party may have complied with the evaluation, 
notification and disclosure requirements described in Section II.A.3, 
above, but not properly maintained and managed lead-based paint, lead 
in dust, and lead in soil, or not documented compliance. (Proper 
management in this context includes using lead-certified firms and 
workers in maintenance and management activities, and achieving

[[Page 60317]]

successful clearances for such activities conducted in accordance with 
the LSHR throughout the 12 months ending on the date the owner received 
the environmental investigation report.) In such a case of inadequate 
or absent documentation, or the designated party's not having provided 
the documentation to the HUD field office, HUD is proposing that the 
designated party must conduct the evaluation and, if applicable, hazard 
reduction requirements in the other dwelling units with children under 
age 6 and common areas serving them, as described in Section II.A.3, 
above.

B. Effective Date

    HUD is proposing a delayed effective date for these regulations 
that would be one or more months after the date of publication of the 
final rule in the Federal Register. In determining an appropriate 
delayed effective date, HUD considered three options: 1 month, 6 
months, and 12 months after publication of the final rule.
    The argument in favor of a 1 month delayed effective date is based 
on Title X (sections 1012 and 1013) requiring the evaluation and 
reduction of lead-based paint hazards in housing receiving Federal 
assistance and residential property owned by the Federal government. 
Under one line of argumentation, any delay beyond the mandatory 30 day 
delayed effective date (42 U.S.C. 3535(o)(3)) in implementing 
requirements based on the guidance of the federal public health agency 
would pose an undue risk to the health of children. The argument for a 
longer delayed effective date is that program administrators at all 
levels of government, as well as property owners and contractors 
performing lead-based paint activities, would not have adequate 
education and training time to implement the new criterion and the 
associated requirements and procedures required under the proposed 
regulation.
    Further, the Department recognizes that HUD clients conducting 
ongoing program activities will need time to incorporate the revised 
requirements for responding to cases of children with elevated blood 
lead levels into their programs. As a result, HUD is proposing to delay 
the effective date of the final rule for 6 months after publication of 
the final rule as a way to allow all parties--lead-based paint 
professionals, housing agencies, state and local government agencies, 
and private property owners--time to prepare for proper implementation 
of the revised requirements. The Department shares the concern of the 
public health community that delays in implementing these requirements 
may have young children with EBLLs living in certain HUD-assisted 
housing where no environmental intervention has taken place spend a 
longer amount of time in that housing than the time it takes to control 
the lead-based hazard. At the same time, however, it would be 
impractical for HUD to establish a 30 day delayed effective date 
knowing that the organizational infrastructure necessary to carry it 
out would not be fully in place.
    Because most of the LSHR went into effect 12 months after its 
publication,\67\ and this rulemaking would affect only a small fraction 
of the housing covered by the whole LSHR, HUD is proposing that this 
rulemaking go into effect sooner than 12 months. More specifically, HUD 
believes that a 6 month delayed effective date is sufficient for 
designated parties to be informed of the rule's becoming final and to 
prepare for taking action if a child residing in the assisted units has 
an EIBLL. Most designated parties would not need to take any action in 
response to this proposed rule, if adopted, because they will not have 
any children under age 6 in programs covered by this rulemaking who 
have EBLLs, and those that will need to take action will do so on an 
occurrence basis, rather than in the anticipation of a likely EBLL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ HUD Lead Safe Housing Rule. 24 CFR 35.105 Effective dates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HUD welcomes comments on the length of the proposed delayed 
effective date for this rule.

C. Subparts

    1. Subpart B--General Lead-Based Paint Requirements and Definitions 
for All Programs. This subpart sets out general requirements for 
federally owned residential property and housing receiving Federal 
assistance.
    a. Definitions. HUD is proposing to add two new terms, delete one 
term, and revise two terms, in Sec.  35.110, Definitions:
    Elevated blood lead level. In this rule, HUD proposes to replace 
the EIBLL threshold with the EBLL threshold that is the blood lead 
level in children under 6 years of age for which CDC guidance says that 
an environmental intervention should be conducted. The EBLL will be 
used for determining when environmental interventions are to be taken 
under the LSHR.
    As discussed in Section I, above, in 2013, CDC revised its guidance 
to provide an operational definition of EBLL based on data from NHANES, 
and committed to update that definition every four years. Accordingly, 
HUD is proposing to add a definition of EBLL so that the term can be 
used in the program subparts instead of writing out the full wording of 
the definition in each applicable section.
    Specifically, elevated blood lead level means a confirmed 
concentration of lead in whole blood of a child under age 6 equal to or 
greater than the concentration in guidance published by the Department 
of Health and Human Services for recommending that an environmental 
intervention be conducted.
    The entity mentioned in the definition is the Department of Health 
and Human Services, rather than CDC, in order to accommodate the 
possibility that that Department could choose to have another 
organizational unit than CDC announce the updated EBL value, without 
HUD having to amend this Rule to reflect that updated value.
    HUD is proposing to add a definition that elevated blood lead level 
means a confirmed concentration of lead in whole blood of a child under 
age 6 equal to or greater than the concentration in the most recent 
guidance published by the Department of Health and Human Services on 
recommending that an environmental intervention be conducted.
    ii. Environmental intervention blood lead level. For the reasons 
discussed above in regard to adding the definition of elevated blood 
lead level, the term environmental intervention blood lead level is no 
longer needed in the program subparts of the LSHR, so HUD is proposing 
to delete the definition of environmental intervention blood lead 
level. This proposed rule replaces the term environmental intervention 
blood lead level with the term elevated blood level throughout the 
LSHR.
    iii. Environmental investigation. For purposes of clarity, brevity, 
and consistency with CDC's response to ACCLPP, the term environmental 
investigation is defined in this proposed regulation the way it is 
defined in the HUD Guidelines. Specifically, an environmental 
investigation would be defined to mean the process of determining the 
source of lead exposure for a child under age 6 with an elevated blood 
lead level, consisting of administration of a questionnaire, 
comprehensive environmental sampling, case management, and other 
measures, in accordance with chapter 16 of the HUD Guidelines for the 
Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing 
(``Guidelines''). With HUD proposing that an environmental 
investigation in response to EBLL cases be included in the program 
subparts of the LSHR, HUD

[[Page 60318]]

proposes to define the term rather than having to write out its 
substance in each applicable section. Accordingly, HUD is proposing to 
add a definition that environmental investigation means the process of 
determining the source of lead exposure for a child under age 6 with an 
elevated blood lead level, consisting of administration of a 
questionnaire, comprehensive environmental sampling, case management, 
and other measures, as all of these elements are conducted in 
accordance with chapter 16 of the HUD Guidelines for the Evaluation and 
Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing (``Guidelines''). See 
preamble Section II.A.1, above, for a summary of the environmental 
investigation protocol.
    iv. Evaluation. In the current LSHR, an evaluation is a risk 
assessment, a lead hazard screen, a lead-based paint inspection, paint 
testing, or a combination of these to determine the presence of lead-
based paint hazards or lead-based paint. This proposed rule would add 
the term environmental investigation, as discussed above, to the list 
of activities that are evaluations. As a result, in accordance with the 
LSHR, Sec.  35.125(a), Notice of evaluation or presumption, when an 
environmental investigation is conducted in a housing unit or common 
area servicing the units, the tenants will be notified of the results. 
However, a prohibition against posting a notice of environmental 
investigation in centrally located common areas is added to Sec.  
35.125(d) for the protection of the privacy of the child and the 
child's family or guardians, in accordance with the Health Insurance 
Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ See the HIPAA in regard to privacy of children and their 
families regarding individually identifiable health information. 
See, especially HIPAA Sec.  1171, creating 42 U.S.C. 1320d-6, 
Wrongful disclosure of individually identifiable health information, 
with the definition of the term created at 42 U.S.C. 1320d(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    v. Expected to reside. For purposes of clarity, the phrases 
``reserved for'' and ``designated exclusively for'' in the current LSHR 
are being unified into the single term ``reserved or designated 
exclusively for.'' Specifically, ``reserved for the elderly'' in regard 
to whether pre-1978 housing is target housing is being revised to 
``reserved or designated exclusively for the elderly,'' and 
``designated exclusively for persons with disabilities'' is being 
revised to ``reserved or designated exclusively for persons with 
disabilities.'' Certain housing laws and HUD regulations use one or the 
other phrase.\69\ Using a unified term eliminates possible confusion 
about the applicability of the exemption based on the statutory or 
regulatory history of the type of assistance to a property, allowing 
HUD and designated parties to focus on the current status of the 
assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. 1437e, Designated housing for elderly 
and disabled families, 24 CFR 880.612a(d)(1), which mentions vacant 
units ``reserved for elderly families;'' and 24 CFR 945.105, in 
which ``Mixed population project means a public housing project 
reserved for elderly families and disabled families.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Subpart D--Project-Based Assistance Provided by a Federal Agency 
Other Than HUD. This subpart sets out minimum requirements, consistent 
with section 1012 of Title X, for Federal agencies other than HUD that 
have housing programs that provide more than $5,000 of project-based 
assistance per unit per year to a target housing property.
    This subpart currently requires specific actions in response to a 
child with an environmental intervention blood lead level in Sec.  
35.325. In addition to revising this section to refer to an elevated 
blood lead level, HUD proposes that the change in evaluation method be 
updated to reflect the change from risk assessment to environmental 
investigation.
    HUD is proposing that children under age 6 in this housing be 
covered when they live in other units in the building or project. 
Specifically, if the environmental investigation of the index unit 
identifies any lead-based paint hazards, the owner would generally, as 
described below, conduct a risk assessment for other assisted dwelling 
units in which a child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside on 
the date interim controls are complete, and for the common areas 
serving those units. Risk assessments would be conducted within 30 
calendar days after receipt of the environmental investigation report 
on the index unit if there are 20 or fewer such units, or 60 calendar 
days for risk assessments if there are more than 20 such units. If the 
risk assessment were to identify lead-based paint hazards, the owner 
would have to control the hazards in those units and common areas. The 
control work would have to be done within 30 calendar days, or within 
90 calendar days if more than 20 units have lead-based paint hazards 
such that the control work would disturb painted surfaces that total 
more than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350(d), as discussed in 
Section I.A.2, above. These requirements for other units would not 
apply if either the owner conducted a risk assessment and conducted 
interim controls of identified lead-based paint hazards between the 
date the child's blood was last sampled and the date the owner received 
the notification of the elevated blood lead level; or if the owner has 
documentation of compliance with evaluation, notification, lead 
disclosure, ongoing lead-based paint maintenance, and lead-based paint 
management requirements under this part throughout the 12 months 
preceding the date the owner received the environmental investigation 
report, Federal agencies other than HUD would be responsible for 
updating their policies under this subpart and implementing them.
    3. Subpart H--Project-Based Assistance. This subpart establishes 
procedures to eliminate as far as practicable lead-based paint hazards 
in residential properties receiving project-based assistance under a 
HUD program.
    This subpart covers several categories of project-based assistance 
programs. Section 35.715 covers project-based assistance to multifamily 
properties receiving more than $5,000 per unit per year, and includes a 
paragraph (d) on properties that have not yet had a risk assessment 
conducted in accordance with paragraph (a). Section 35.720 covers 
multifamily properties receiving up to $5,000 per unit per year, and 
single family properties. Both sections incorporate the same Sec.  
35.730, about a child with an environmental intervention blood lead 
level, by reference. HUD is proposing that Sec.  35.730, be revised to 
reflect the protocol for addressing elevated blood level cases as 
described above.
    Regarding other dwelling units in the property covered by this 
subpart other than the index unit, HUD is proposing that, if the 
environmental investigation report on the index unit identifies lead-
based paint hazards, then, for units in which a child under age 6 
resides:
     Evaluation (risk assessment (per Sec.  35.715(a)) or 
visual assessment (per Sec.  35.720(a)(1)), as applicable) would be 
conducted within 30 calendar days after receipt of the environmental 
investigation report on the index unit for visual assessments, 30 
calendar days for risk assessments if there are 20 or fewer such units, 
or 60 calendar days for risk assessments if there are more than 20 such 
units. These periods provide promptness while recognizing that more 
than one unit may have to be assessed, and the limited availability of 
certified risk assessors in some jurisdictions, so that the 15-day 
period used in Sec.  35.730(a) for conducting an evaluation on that 
one, index, unit may not be sufficient for the owner to arrange for

[[Page 60319]]

identifying other units where a child under 6 resides or is expected to 
reside, and having the evaluation of those other units conducted. HUD 
encourages owners to conduct these evaluations expeditiously, 
especially if there are a small number of other units to be evaluated.
     Hazard control work be completed in these other units on a 
schedule described above: within 30 calendar days, or within 90 
calendar days if more than 20 units have lead-based paint hazards such 
that the control work would disturb painted surfaces that total more 
than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350(d). HUD encourages 
owners to conduct hazard control work expeditiously, especially if 
there are few other units in which work is to be done.
    As noted above, to enable prompt HUD monitoring of implementation 
of the evaluation and hazard control procedures under this subpart when 
an EBLL case has occurred, HUD is proposing that the designated party 
notify the HUD field office and HUD's OLHCHH within 5 business days of 
being so notified by the public health department or medical health 
care professional.
    It should be noted that CDC used the terms ``multi-family housing'' 
and ``housing complex'' in its Response to ACCLPP recommendation XI to 
refer to a group of buildings, apartments, etc., that are located near 
each other and used for a particular purpose, as ``complex'' is 
commonly defined in the building context. HUD regulations and program 
documents use several terms to refer to such a similar group of 
residential buildings, including ``complex,'' ``buildings,'' 
``apartments,'' and ``project.'' For the sake of uniformity, and to 
provide clarity for HUD stakeholders, the HUD synonym ``project'' is 
used in this and other subparts of the LSHR outside of quotations from 
CDC that use ``complex.''
    HUD proposes to make a technical correction to Sec.  35.715, to 
redesignate paragraph (d)(4), on blood lead level response, which 
requires the response until a risk assessment of a property is 
conducted, but does not require a blood lead level response after the 
risk assessment is done, as paragraph (e). The current paragraph 
numbering inadvertently makes the requirement for the higher level of 
assistance in this section less stringent than the requirement for the 
lower level of assistance covered by Sec.  35.720. As a result of 
correcting this inconsistency, the redesignation would have the 
requirement apply to multifamily properties receiving more than $5,000 
per unit, whether before or after the risk assessment has been 
conducted.
    4. Subpart I--HUD-Owned and Mortgagee-in-Possession Multifamily 
Property. The purpose of this subpart is to establish procedures to 
eliminate, as far as practicable, lead-based paint hazards in a HUD-
owned multifamily residential property or a multifamily residential 
property for which HUD is identified as mortgagee-in-possession.
    This subpart currently requires specific actions in response to a 
child with an environmental intervention blood lead level in Sec.  
35.830; the requirements are generally the same with respect to risk 
assessment, verification, hazard reduction, and reporting requirement 
as those for housing receiving project-based rental assistance in Sec.  
35.730, discussed in Section II.C.3. The difference is that, because 
HUD is the owner of these properties covered by Sec.  35.830, the term 
``HUD'' is used here where the wording ``the owner'' is used in Sec.  
35.730.
    HUD is proposing that Sec.  35.830 be revised to reflect the 
protocol for addressing EBLL cases as described above, with the 
difference that, because HUD is the owner of these properties, for 
specificity, ``HUD'' would be used in Sec.  35.830 rather than the 
phrase ``the owner'' that would be used in Sec.  35.730.
    As noted above, to enable prompt HUD OLHCHH monitoring of 
implementation of the evaluation and hazard control procedures under 
this subpart when an EBLL case has occurred, HUD is proposing that the 
HUD office managing the property notify the HUD field office and the 
OLHCHH within 5 business days of being so notified by the public health 
department or medical health care professional.
    5. Subpart L--Public Housing Programs. The purpose of this subpart 
L is to establish procedures to eliminate, as far as practicable, lead-
based paint hazards in public housing. More formally, public housing is 
residential property assisted under the 1937 Act, excluding housing 
assisted under section 8 of the 1937 Act. Target housing assisted under 
section 8 is covered by subparts D, H, and M of the LSHR, rather than 
this subpart L.
    This subpart currently requires specific actions in response to a 
child with an environmental intervention blood lead level in Sec.  
35.1130, which are generally the same as those for housing receiving 
project-based rental assistance in Sec.  35.730 of subpart H, discussed 
in Section II.C.3, with a difference in terminology and some additional 
requirements.
    Regarding the terminology, because the public housing agency (PHA) 
carries out the lead-based paint functions of owner of the properties 
covered by Sec.  35.1130, the term ``PHA'' is used where the term 
``owner'' is used in Sec.  35.730. Similarly, ``public housing 
development'' is used in this section, where ``dwelling unit to which 
this subpart applies'' is used in Sec.  35.730.
    HUD is proposing that Sec.  35.1130(e) require that PHAs report 
each confirmed (previously labelled ``known,'' and revised to follow 
CDC terminology more closely) case of a child with an EBLL to the HUD 
field office; in the currently codified rule such reporting is required 
for EIBLL cases. As noted above, to enable prompt HUD monitoring of 
implementation of the evaluation and hazard control procedures under 
this subpart when an EBLL case has occurred, HUD is proposing that the 
designated party also notify the OLHCHH within 5 business days of being 
so notified by the public health department or medical health care 
professional of an EBLL case.
    The case of the PHA not completing the hazard reduction required by 
Sec.  35.1130, which was not addressed in the original rule, is 
addressed here by noting the linkage between the LSHR and the Uniform 
Physical Condition Standards (UPCS) at Sec.  5.703, which are 
incorporated by reference into the public housing regulations at 24 CFR 
part 965. In particular, if the hazard reduction is not completed, the 
dwelling unit is not free of lead-based paint hazards, so it is in 
violation of Sec.  5.703(f), which among other things, requires that 
the housing be free of lead-based paint hazards. The UPCS are 
incorporated by reference into the public housing physical condition 
standards at Sec.  965.601. The LSHR, including its subpart L, Public 
Housing, is also incorporated by reference into the public housing 
standards at Sec.  965.701.
    Most significantly, current Sec.  35.1130(f) establishes 
requirements for PHAs regarding other units in the building with the 
index unit if the risk assessment of the index unit and common areas 
servicing the index unit identifies lead-based paint hazards but 
previous evaluations of the building did not identify lead-based paint 
or lead-based paint hazards. In such a case, the PHA is required to 
conduct a risk assessment of other units covered by the LSHR in the 
building, and interim controls of identified hazards.
    HUD is proposing that, generally, if previous evaluations of the 
building did identify lead-based paint or lead-based paint hazards, and 
the risk assessment

[[Page 60320]]

of the index unit and common areas servicing the index unit identifies 
lead-based paint hazards, then, generally, the PHA would conduct a risk 
assessment in other dwelling units covered by the LSHR in which a child 
under age 6 resides or is expected to reside (and the common areas that 
service those units). The risk assessments would have to be conducted 
on a schedule described above, within 30 calendar days after receipt of 
the environmental investigation report if there are 20 or fewer such 
units, or 60 calendar days if there are more such units. If lead-based 
paint hazards are found in any of these other units, they would have to 
be controlled on a schedule described above, within 30 calendar days, 
or within 90 calendar days if more than 20 units have lead-based paint 
hazards such that the control work would disturb painted surfaces that 
total more than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350(d). However, 
if the PHA has met the applicable performance requirements in Section 
II.A.2, above, for conducting current evaluations, notifications, 
disclosure, and ongoing lead-based paint maintenance and management in 
the 12 months before receiving the report of a child with EBLL in the 
index unit, and provides the HUD field office with documentation of its 
regulatory compliance, HUD would encourage the PHA to conduct a risk 
assessment in other dwelling units covered by the LSHR in which a child 
under age 6 resides (and the common areas that service them), although 
it would not be required to do so.
    HUD is proposing that Sec.  35.1130 be revised to refer to an 
elevated blood lead level, and that the section be updated to reflect 
the protocol for addressing EBLL cases as described above, with the 
differences that, because the PHA is the owner of these properties, for 
specificity, ``PHA'' would be used in Sec.  35.1130 rather than the 
phrase ``the owner'' that would be used in Sec.  35.730.
    HUD is proposing to make a technical correction to Sec.  
35.1130(f). The first sentence (which HUD is proposing to redesignate 
as Sec.  35.1130(f)(1)) discusses the requirement for the PHA to 
conduct interim controls of identified hazards in accordance with the 
schedule provided in, according to the currently codified rule, Sec.  
35.1120(c). The pertinent schedule in Sec.  35.1120 is, however, in 
paragraph (b), not paragraph (c), so HUD proposes to correct the 
citation.
    6. Subpart M--Tenant-Based Rental Assistance. The purpose of this 
subpart is to establish procedures to eliminate as far as practicable 
lead-based paint hazards in housing occupied by families receiving 
tenant-based rental assistance.
    This subpart currently requires specific actions in response to a 
child with an environmental intervention blood lead level in Sec.  
35.1225, Child with an environmental intervention blood lead level; 
similar to those for housing receiving project-based rental assistance 
in Sec.  35.730 of subpart H, discussed in Section II.C.3, with a 
difference in terminology and some variations in requirements.
    Regarding the terminology, because of the variety of HUD assistance 
programs covered by this subpart (see Sec.  35.1200(a)), the generic 
term ``designated party'' is used where the term ``owner'' is used in 
Sec.  35.730 for project-based assisted housing.
    As noted above, to enable prompt HUD monitoring of implementation 
of the evaluation and hazard control procedures under this subpart when 
an EBLL case has occurred, HUD is proposing that the designated party 
notify the HUD field office and the OLHCHH within 5 business days of 
being so notified by the public health department or medical health 
care professional.
    Regarding the other tenant-based rental assisted units where a 
child less than 6 years is residing or expected to reside in a building 
with a tenant-based rental assisted unit with a child less than 6 years 
who has an EBLL, as noted in Section II.C.2, above, HUD is proposing 
that those other units and common areas servicing them receive a visual 
assessment for deteriorated paint. (As noted above, HUD does not have 
the discretion to require risk assessments in those other units and 
common areas servicing those other units.) The visual assessments would 
have to be conducted within 30 calendar days after receipt of the 
environmental investigation report. Similarly, the response action, 
should deteriorated paint be identified, would be paint stabilization, 
a treatment that does not require the quantitative information about 
dust-lead and soil-lead levels needed for the full set of interim 
control activities that a risk assessment provides. If deteriorated 
paint is found in any of these other units, the paint would have to be 
stabilized on a schedule described above, within 30 calendar days, or 
within 90 calendar days if more than 20 units have deteriorated paint 
such that the control work would disturb painted surfaces that total 
more than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350(d). Of course, a 
designated party may choose to conduct a risk assessment or 
environmental investigation of those other units and common areas, and 
conduct interim controls if lead-based paint hazards are identified, 
and even conduct that evaluation and hazard control in unassisted units 
with children under age 6, and HUD encourages them to do so.
    For the sake of clarity regarding target housing occupied by 
families receiving tenant-based rental assistance with children under 
age 6 in which deteriorated paint has been identified by a visual 
assessment, HUD proposes to add a sentence to the end of Sec.  
35.1215(b). Regarding a subsequent housing assistance payment (HAP) 
contract for the unit (i.e., after the unit is no longer under the 
original HAP contract), the added sentence would provide that paint 
stabilization must be completed for a family with a child under age 6 
to occupy that unit. This would reaffirm the first sentence of 
paragraph (b), that, for units to be occupied by a child under age 6, 
the owner shall stabilize each deteriorated paint surface before 
commencement of assisted occupancy. The placement of this sentence will 
strengthening the protection against children under age 6 being lead 
poisoned by clarifying the need for paint stabilization before the unit 
is occupied by a child under age 6 under a HAP contract.

D. Specific Questions for Comments

    While HUD welcomes comments on all aspects of this proposed rule, 
HUD is seeking specific comment on the following questions:
    1. To facilitate effective HUD monitoring of responses to a case of 
an elevated blood lead level, the proposed rule would have designated 
parties provide documentation to HUD that the response actions have 
been conducted in the child's unit and in all other assisted units with 
a child under age 6, or if there are such other units, that the 
designated party has been complying with the LSHR for the past 12 
months, and need not evaluate those other units.
    a. Is this approach sufficient for HUD to effectively monitor 
response actions in these cases, and why? Are there areas in which 
reporting and oversight could be strengthened?
    b. Can the approach to monitoring response actions in these cases 
be streamlined while maintaining its effectiveness, and if so, how?
    2. Regarding the definition of elevated blood lead level in the 
proposed rule, is the definition appropriately protective of the health 
of children in assisted housing covered by the rule? Too protective? 
Not protective enough? Why?

[[Page 60321]]

    3. Regarding the set of types of housing assistance covered by the 
proposed rule (i.e., in the covered subparts D, H, I, L, and M), is 
this set appropriately protective of the health of children in assisted 
housing?
    a. If it is too protective, why, and which types of housing 
assistance should be removed from the proposed rule?
    b. If it is not protective enough, why, which additional type or 
types of housing assistance should be included, and how would 
sufficient resources be provided to ensure implementation and 
monitoring of the rule in that additional assisted housing?
    4. If interim controls or abatement in a housing unit takes longer 
than 5 calendar days, or if other occupant protection requirements of 
24 CFR 35.1345(a)(2) are not met, the occupants of the unit shall be 
shall be temporarily relocated before and during hazard reduction 
activities.
    a. HUD is seeking data on the fraction of lead hazard control 
activities that take longer than 5 calendar days, including the type of 
activity (e.g., interim control or abatement; the hazard control method 
used (e.g., if abatement, component removal, paint stripping, 
enclosure, encapsulation, etc.), the extent of the work, the reason 
that the activities cannot be completed within 5 calendar days, whether 
the housing is a single family, duplex, triplex, quad, or multifamily 
housing, whether it is located in an urban, suburban, or rural area, 
whether the EPA has authorized the state to administer the applicable 
lead certification program (i.e., renovation or abatement), and other 
factors that are causing temporary relocation to be required under the 
rule.
    b. HUD is seeking information on the costs of temporary relocation, 
on a per day basis (average amount or day-specific amounts, as is 
available), including breakouts of expenses for such categories as 
lodging, transportation, meals, and incidental expense amounts, if the 
information is available that way, or as lump sum per-day or per 
relocation period amounts.

III. Findings and Certifications

Regulatory Review--Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), a 
determination must be made whether a regulatory action is significant 
and, therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) in accordance with the requirements of the order. 
Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review) 
directs executive agencies to analyze regulations that are ``outmoded, 
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify, 
streamline, expand, or repeal them in accordance with what has been 
learned. Executive Order 13563 also directs that, where relevant, 
feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives, and to the extent 
permitted by law, agencies are to identify and consider regulatory 
approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of 
choice for the public.
    OMB reviewed this proposed rule under Executive Order 12866 
(entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review''). This rule was determined 
to be a ``significant regulatory action,'' as defined in 3(f) of the 
order. The docket file is available for public inspection 
electronically at Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov under the title and docket number of this rule.

Regulatory Impact Assessment

    HUD is publishing, concurrently with this proposal, its draft 
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) that examines the costs and benefits 
of the proposed regulatory action in conjunction with this proposed 
rule, organized into three sections: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Sensitivity 
Analysis; and Economic Impacts. The RIA is available on-line at: http://www.regulations.gov. The major findings in the RIA are presented in 
this summary.
    The analysis of net benefits reflects costs and benefits associated 
with the first year of hazard evaluation and reduction activities under 
the proposed rule. These costs and benefits, however, include the 
present value of future costs and benefits associated with first year 
hazard reduction activities. For example, the costs associated with 
first year activities include the present value of future reevaluation 
costs. Similarly, the benefits of first year activities include the 
present value of lifetime earnings benefits for children living in or 
visiting the affected unit during that first year, and for children 
living in or visiting that unit during the second and subsequent years 
after hazard reduction activities.
    In regard to the discount rate used for this regulatory analysis, 
HUD is using both the 3 percent, and the 7 percent discount rates in 
accordance with OMB guidance in OMB Circulars A-4 on Regulatory 
Analysis,\70\ and A-94 on Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-
Cost Analysis of Federal Programs.\71\ By presenting results using both 
3 and 7 percent discount rates, HUD is providing a broad view of costs 
and benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a004_a-4/.
    \71\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a094.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Employing a 3 percent discount rate of the lifetime earnings 
estimates, the RIA concludes that monetized benefits of activities have 
a present value of $97.91 million; while first-year costs are $22.17 
million. Thus the estimated net benefit is $75.74 million using a 3 
percent discount rate. If a 7 percent discount rate is used for 
lifetime earnings benefits, the monetized present value of the benefits 
of the proposed rule are estimated to be $31.81 million, and estimated 
first year costs remain at $22.17 .28 million. The proposed rule would 
therefore be seen as having a net benefit of $9.64 million using the 7 
percent discount rate. Further, the monetized benefit estimates 
represent a lower bound on benefits, as they only account for lifetime 
earnings resulting from cognitive impacts on children under age six. 
Reductions in lead exposure would be expected to result in additional 
health benefits for these children, as well as older children and 
adults living in or visiting the housing units addressed by the rule. 
Such additional benefits include avoidance of decreased attention, 
increased impulsivity, hyperactivity,\72\ impaired hearing, slowed 
growth, delayed menarche,\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ EPA. Integrated Science Assessment for Lead (see fn. 1, 
above). 2013. Table ES-1. p. lxxxiii-lxxxvii.
    \73\ Selevan SG, Rice DC, Hogan KA, Euling SY, Pfahles-Hutchens 
A, Bethel J. Blood lead concentration and delayed puberty in girls. 
N Engl J Med. 2003 Apr 17;348(16):1527-36. www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa020880.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That the benefit-cost calculation giving lower weight to future 
generations shows a smaller net benefit is not surprising, given that 
the monetized benefits of the rule pertain to the future earnings of 
children under age 6, while the costs pertain to the designated parties 
of the housing in which the young children currently reside. As noted 
above, the calculation included monetized but not non-monetized quality 
of life factors associated with children's lower intelligence, fewer 
skills, and reduced education and job potential, and adults' decreased 
cognitive function decrements, psychopathological effects (self-
reported symptoms of depression and anxiety), hypertension, coronary 
heart disease, blood system effects (decreased red blood cell survival 
and function, and altered heme synthesis),

[[Page 60322]]

male reproductive function decrements, among other effects.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ EPA. Integrated Science Assessment for Lead (see fn. 1, 
above). 2013. Table ES-1. p. lxxxiii-lxxxvii.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    The number of housing units that would require evaluation, possible 
hazard reduction, and/or reporting of EBLL information to HUD would be 
changed by the proposed rule. Accordingly, HUD is requesting OMB 
approval for revising its information collection request approval to 
reflect the change in the burden.
    The information collection requirements contained in this rule have 
been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), for 
incorporation under existing OMB approval number 2539-0009. In 
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency may not 
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 
collection of information unless the collection displays a currently 
valid OMB control number.

    Table 1--Requirements for Notification, Evaluation, and Reduction of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Federally Owned Residential Property and Housing
                                                              Receiving Federal Assistance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Number of     Frequency of    Total annual    Burden hours    Total annual    Total annual
                 Information collection                     respondents      response        responses     per response    burden hours        cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Evaluation....................................           6,887               4          27,550           0.175           4,821         $42,819
Notice of Reduction.....................................           6,887            3.17          21,833             0.1           2,183          25,707
Summary Reporting.......................................           6,887               8          55,100             0.1           5,510          59,404
Recordkeeping...........................................           6,887               4          27,550           0.033             909          10,808
EBLL Report.............................................           6,887               4          27,550               1          27,550         278,907
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total or Average....................................           6,887              23         159,583            5.95          40,974         417,645
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), HUD is soliciting comments 
from members of the public and affected agencies concerning the 
information collection requirements in this interim rule regarding:
    (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the 
proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether 
the information will have practical utility;
    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the 
collection of information;
    (3) Whether the collection of information enhances the quality, 
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
    (4) Whether the information collection minimizes the burden of the 
collection of information on those who are to respond; including 
through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other 
forms of information technology (e.g., permitting electronic submission 
of responses).
    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding the 
information collection requirements in this rule. Under the provisions 
of 5 CFR part 1320, OMB is required to make a decision concerning this 
collection of information between 30 and 60 days after the publication 
date. Therefore, a comment on the information collection requirements 
is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives the comment 
within 30 days of the publication date. This time frame does not affect 
the deadline for comments to the agency on the interim rule, however. 
Comments must refer to the interim rule by name and docket number (FR-
5816-P-01) and must be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management 
and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, Fax 
number: (202) 395-6947.

And

    Anna P. Guido, HUD Reports Liaison Officer, Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4186, Washington, DC 
20410.
    Interested persons may submit comments regarding the information 
collection requirements electronically through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly encourages 
commenters to submit comments electronically. Electronic submission of 
comments allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a 
comment, ensures timely receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make them 
immediately available to the public. Comments submitted electronically 
through the http://www.regulations.gov Web site can be viewed by other 
commenters and interested members of the public. Commenters should 
follow the instructions provided on that site to submit comments 
electronically.
    The information collection requirements contained in this rule have 
been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). HUD has 
determined that the following provisions contain information collection 
requirements: 24 CFR part 35, subparts D, H, I, L, and M.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
605(b)), HUD has reviewed this proposed rule before publication and by 
approving it for publication, certifies that the proposed regulatory 
requirements would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, other than those impacts 
specifically required to be applied universally by the statute. As 
discussed below, the requirements of the proposed rule are applicable 
only to a limited and specifically defined portion of the nation's 
housing stock. To the extent that the requirements affect small 
entities, the impact is generally discussed in the economic analysis 
that accompanies this proposed rule.
    Specifically, the economic analysis estimated the number of index 
units and other assisted units to be evaluated and, possibly, based on 
the evaluation, having lead hazard control work done. For each type of 
assistance and for all types of assistance together, the economic 
analysis also estimated:
     The cost per unit of the evaluation (environmental 
investigation for index units, and risk assessments or visual 
assessment for other units that are assisted and have a child under age 
6 residing, as per the current LSHR);
     The total cost of the evaluation and hazard control (for 
index units, other units, and both); and

[[Page 60323]]

     The percentage of units evaluated and possibly, based on 
the evaluation results, hazard controlled (again, for index units, 
other units, and both).
    The estimates are summarized in the table below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   HUD Project-                    USDA Project-  All assistance
                                  Public housing       based       Tenant- based       based           types
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of index units...........           1,899           1,494           3,383             112           6,887
Average cost per index unit for           $2,680          $2,680          $2,680          $2,680  ..............
 environmental investigation and
 hazard control.................
Cost for index units............      $5,090,047      $4,004,506      $9,066,416        $300,206     $18,461,176
Other assisted units with                  8,014           3,783           2,855             284          14,935
 children under age 6...........
Average cost per other assisted             $615            $615            $260            $615  ..............
 housing unit for risk
 assessment (or visual
 assessment) and hazard control.
Cost for other assisted units...      $4,924,470      $2,324,545        $740,829        $174,264      $8,164,108
Total cost......................     $10,014,517      $6,329,051      $9,807,245        $474,471     $26,625,284
Total number of units evaluated            9,913           5,277           6,237             396          21,822
 and possibly hazard controlled.
Total number of assisted units..       1,100,000       1,200,000       2,200,000         286,108       4,786,108
Percent of assisted units                  0.90%           0.44%           0.28%           0.14%           0.46%
 evaluated and possibly hazard
 controlled.....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among the key results are that:
     About 6,887 housing units would have a child under age 6 
with a blood lead level that is elevated but not an environmental 
intervention blood lead level; these units would be required to have an 
environmental investigation and have any lead-based paint hazards 
controlled.
     About 14,935 other housing units would be evaluated and 
have any lead-based paint hazards controlled.
     About 0.46 percent of the assisted housing stock covered 
by this rulemaking would be evaluated and have any lead-based paint 
hazards controlled, specifically, 0.90 percent of the public housing 
stock, 0.44 percent of the HUD project-based rental assisted housing 
stock, 0.28 percent of the tenant-based rental assisted housing stock, 
and 0.14 percent of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) project-
based rental assisted housing stock.
     The total cost of evaluation and control (and the small 
amount of temporary relocation of occupants) would be $26.63 million, 
including $10.01 million for public housing, $6.33 million for HUD 
project-based rental assisted housing, $9.81 million for tenant-based 
rental assisted housing, and $286,000 for USDA project-based rental 
assisted housing.
     Using the 3 percent discount rate, benefits are estimated 
at $97.91 million, with net benefits (i.e., benefits less the $22.17 
million in costs) estimated at $75.74 million. Using the OMB's 7 
percent discount rate, benefits are estimated at $31.81 million, with 
costs remaining at $22.17 million, so the net benefits would be $9.65 
million.
     Regarding index units, for FY 2017, an estimated 1,899 
units of public housing, 1,494 units of HUD project-based rental 
assisted housing, 3,383 units of tenant-based rental assisted housing, 
and 112 units of USDA project-based rental assisted housing have 
children under age 6 with EBLLs that are not EIBLLs, that is, children 
for whom an environmental investigation and possible (i.e., if hazards 
are found) hazard control of their housing unit and common area 
servicing it would be newly required under the proposed rule.
     Regarding other units to have lead hazard control work 
conducted, for FY 2015, there would be an estimated 8,014 units of 
public housing, 3,783 units of HUD project-based rental assisted 
housing, 3,383 units of tenant-based rental assisted housing, and 112 
units of USDA project-based rental assisted housing.
     The conservative (i.e., intentionally high, in this 
instance) assumption about the properties in which these children 
reside is that each of them is a different property (vs. there being 
more than one such child in a property); a similarly conservative 
assumption about the private entities (i.e., the ones that lease the 
project-based and the tenant-based assisted units to the families of 
these children) is that all of them are small entities and all have 
just one such child (vs. an entity having more than one property with 
such a child). The economic analysis used the FY 2017 Congressional 
Justifications of the number of housing units assisted by the several 
programs: 1,100,000 public housing units, 1,200,000 HUD project-based 
units, 2,200,000 tenant-based units, and 286,108 USDA project-based 
units. Regarding units other than the index units, a maximum of 
approximately 0.73 percent of other public housing units, 0.32 percent 
of other HUD project-based units, 0.13 percent of other tenant-based 
units, and 0.10 percent of USDA project-based units (overall, 0.31 
percent of units in these assistance programs) would be required to 
undertake a risk assessment and, possibly, based on the risk 
assessment, lead hazard control.

Environmental Impact

    A Finding of No Significant Impact with respect to the environment 
has been made in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR part 50, 
which implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). The Finding of No Significant 
Impact is available for public inspection electronically at Federal 
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov under the title and 
docket number of this rule.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (entitled ``Federalism'') prohibits an agency 
from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule 
either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and local 
governments or is not required by statute, or the rule preempts State 
law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements 
of section 6 of the Executive Order. This rule will not have federalism 
implications and would not impose substantial direct compliance costs 
on State and local governments or preempt State law within the meaning 
of the Executive Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 
1531-1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements for federal agencies to 
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and 
tribal governments, and on the private sector. This rule does not 
impose any federal mandates on any State, local, or tribal governments, 
or on the private sector, within the meaning of UMRA.

List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 35

    Grant programs--housing and community development, Lead poisoning, 
Mortgage insurance, Rent subsidies, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, HUD amends 24 
CFR part 35 to read as follows:

[[Page 60324]]

PART 35--LEAD-BASED PAINT POISONING PREVENTION IN CERTAIN 
RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES

0
1. The authority citation for 24 CFR part 35 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 4821, and 4851.

0
2. In Sec.  35.100, add, in alphabetical order the definitions of 
``Elevated blood lead level'', ``Environmental investigations'', revise 
the definitions of ``Evaluation'' and ``Expected to reside'' and delete 
the definition of ``Environmental intervention blood lead level'', to 
read as follows:


Sec.  35.110  Definitions.

    Elevated blood lead level means a confirmed concentration of lead 
in whole blood of a child under age 6 equal to or greater than the 
concentration in the most recent guidance published by the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on recommending that an 
environmental intervention be conducted. (When HHS changes the value, 
HUD will publish a notice in the Federal Register, with the opportunity 
for public comment, on its intent to apply the changed value to this 
part, and, after considering comments, publish a notice on its applying 
the changed value to this part.)
* * * * *
    Environmental investigation means the process of determining the 
source of lead exposure for a child under age 6 with an elevated blood 
lead level, consisting of administration of a questionnaire, 
comprehensive environmental sampling, case management, and other 
measures, in accordance with chapter 16 of the HUD Guidelines for the 
Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing 
(``Guidelines'').
* * * * *
    Evaluation means a risk assessment, a lead hazard screen, a lead-
based paint inspection, paint testing, or a combination of these to 
determine the presence of lead-based paint hazards or lead-based paint, 
or an environmental investigation.
    Expected to reside means there is actual knowledge that a child 
will reside in a dwelling unit reserved or designated exclusively for 
the elderly or reserved or designated exclusively for persons with 
disabilities. If a resident woman is known to be pregnant, there is 
actual knowledge that a child will reside in the dwelling unit.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec.  35.125 by adding paragraph (c)(4)(iii) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  35.125  Notice of evaluation and hazard reduction activities.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) However, for the protection of the privacy of the child and 
the child's family or guardians, no notice of environmental 
investigation shall be posted to any centrally located common area.


Sec.  35.165  Prior evaluation or hazard reduction.

0
4. In Sec.  35.165 amend paragraph (b)(4) by removing the term 
``environmental intervention blood level'' wherever it appears and 
adding its place the term ``elevated blood lead level''.
0
5. Revise Sec.  35.325 to read as follows:


Sec.  35.325  Child with an elevated blood lead level.

    (a) If a child less than 6 years of age living in a federally 
assisted dwelling unit has an elevated blood lead level, the owner 
shall immediately conduct an environmental investigation. Interim 
controls of identified lead-based paint hazards shall be conducted in 
accordance with Sec.  35.1330.
    (b) Other assisted dwelling units in the property. If the 
environmental investigation conducted under paragraph (a) of this 
section identifies lead-based paint hazards, the owner shall conduct a 
risk assessment for other assisted dwelling units covered by this 
subpart in which a child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside 
on the date interim controls are complete, and for the common areas 
serving those units. The risk assessments would be conducted within 30 
calendar days after receipt of the environmental investigation report 
on the index unit if there are 20 or fewer such units, or 60 calendar 
days for risk assessments if there are more than 20 such units. If the 
risk assessment identifies lead-based paint hazards, the owner shall 
control the hazards in those units and common areas within 30 calendar 
days, or within 90 calendar days if more than 20 units have lead-based 
paint hazards such that the control work would disturb painted surfaces 
that total more than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350(d). The 
requirements for other assisted dwelling units covered by this subpart 
do not apply if:
    (1) The owner conducted an environmental investigation and 
conducted interim controls of identified lead-based paint hazards 
between the date the child's blood was last sampled and the date the 
owner received the notification of the elevated blood lead level; or
    (2) The owner provides the Federal agency documentation of 
compliance with evaluation, notification, lead disclosure, ongoing 
lead-based paint maintenance, and lead-based paint management 
requirements under this part throughout the 12 months preceding the 
date the owner received the environmental investigation report.
    (c) Interim controls are complete when clearance is achieved in 
accordance with Sec.  35.1340.
    (d) The Federal agency shall establish a timetable for completing 
environmental investigations and hazard reduction when a child 
identified as having an elevated blood lead level is identified.


Sec.  35.715  Multifamily properties receiving more than $5,000 per 
unit.

0
6. Amend Sec.  35.715 by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraph (d)(4) as paragraph (e); and
0
b. Removing the term ``environmental intervention blood level'' and 
adding in its place ``elevated blood lead level''.


Sec.  35.720  Multifamily properties receiving up to $5,000 per unit, 
and single family properties.

0
7. In Sec.  35.720 amend paragraph (c) by removing the term 
``environmental intervention blood level'' wherever it appears and 
adding in its place ``elevated blood lead level''.
0
8. Revise Sec.  35.730 to read as follows:


Sec.  35.730  Child with an elevated blood lead level.

    (a) Environmental investigation. Within 15 calendar days after 
being notified by a public health department or other medical health 
care provider that a child of less than 6 years of age living in a 
dwelling unit to which this subpart applies has been identified as 
having an elevated blood lead level, the owner shall complete an 
environmental investigation of the dwelling unit in which the child 
lived at the time the blood was last sampled and of common areas 
servicing the dwelling unit. The requirements of this paragraph apply 
regardless of whether the child is or is not still living in the unit 
when the owner receives the notification of the elevated blood lead 
level. The requirements of this paragraph shall not apply if the owner 
conducted an environmental investigation of the unit and common areas 
servicing the unit between the date the child's blood was last sampled 
and the date when the owner received the notification of the elevated 
blood lead level. If the owner conducted a risk assessment of the unit 
and common areas servicing the unit during that period, the owner need 
not conduct another risk assessment there

[[Page 60325]]

but shall conduct the elements of an environmental investigation not 
already conducted during the risk assessment. If a public health 
department has already conducted an evaluation of the dwelling unit, 
the requirements of this paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply.
    (b) Verification. After receiving information from a person who is 
not a medical health care provider that a child of less than 6 years of 
age living in a dwelling unit covered by this subpart may have an 
elevated blood lead level, the owner shall immediately verify the 
information with the public health department or other medical health 
care provider. If the public health department or provider denies the 
request, such as because it does not have the capacity to verify that 
information, the owner shall send documentation of the denial to the 
HUD rental assistance program manager, who shall make an effort to 
verify the information. If the public health department or provider 
verifies that the child has an elevated blood lead level, such 
verification shall constitute notification, and the owner shall take 
the action required in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section.
    (c) Hazard reduction. Within 30 calendar days after receiving the 
report of the environmental investigation conducted pursuant to 
paragraph (a) of this section or the evaluation from the public health 
department, the owner shall complete the reduction of identified lead-
based paint hazards in accordance with Sec.  35.1325 or Sec.  35.1330. 
Hazard reduction is considered complete when clearance is achieved in 
accordance with Sec.  35.1340 and the clearance report states that all 
lead-based paint hazards identified in the environmental investigation 
have been treated with interim controls or abatement or the public 
health department certifies that the lead-based paint hazard reduction 
is complete. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if the 
owner, between the date the child's blood was last sampled and the date 
the owner received the notification of the elevated blood lead level, 
already conducted an environmental investigation of the unit and common 
areas servicing the unit and completed reduction of identified lead-
based paint hazards. If the owner conducted a risk assessment of the 
unit and common areas servicing the unit during that period, the owner 
is not required to conduct another risk assessment there but shall 
conduct the elements of an environmental investigation n not already 
conducted during the risk assessment.
    (d) If an environmental investigation, evaluation or hazard 
reduction is undertaken, each owner shall provide notice to occupants 
in accordance with Sec.  35.125.
    (e) Reporting requirement. (1) The owner shall report the name and 
address of a child identified as having an elevated blood lead level to 
the public health department within 5 business days of being so 
notified by any other medical health care professional.
    (2) The owner shall also report each confirmed case of a child with 
an elevated blood lead level to the HUD field office and HUD Office of 
Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes within 5 business days of being 
so notified.
    (3) The owner shall provide to the HUD field office documentation 
that the designated party has conducted the activities of paragraphs 
(a) through (d) of this section, within 10 business days of the 
deadline for each activity.
    (f) Other assisted dwelling units in the property. (1) If the 
environmental investigation conducted pursuant to paragraph (a) of this 
section identifies lead-based paint hazards, the owner shall, for other 
assisted dwelling units covered by this part in which a child under age 
6 resides or is expected to reside on the date hazard reduction under 
paragraph (c) of this section is complete, and for the common areas 
servicing those units, conduct a risk assessment if the unit 
investigated was covered by Sec.  35.715, within 30 calendar days after 
receipt of the environmental investigation report if there are 20 or 
fewer such other units, or 60 calendar days if there are more than 20 
such other units; or conduct a visual assessment if the unit 
investigated was covered by Sec.  35.720, within 30 calendar days of 
receipt of the environmental investigation report.
    (2) Control measures. (i) If the risk assessment conducted under 
paragraph (f)(1) of this section identifies lead-based paint hazards, 
the owner shall complete the reduction of identified lead-based paint 
hazards in accordance with Sec.  35.1325 or Sec.  35.1330 in those 
units and common areas within 30 calendar days, or within 90 calendar 
days if more than 20 units have lead-based paint hazards such that the 
control work would disturb painted surfaces that total more than the de 
minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350(d).
    (ii) If the visual assessment conducted under paragraph (f)(1) of 
this section identifies deteriorated paint, the owner shall stabilize 
the paint in those units and common areas within 30 calendar days, or 
within 90 calendar days if more than 20 units have lead-based paint 
hazards such that the control work would disturb painted surfaces that 
total more than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350(d).
    (3) The owner shall provide to the HUD field office documentation 
that the designated party has conducted the activities of paragraph 
(f)(1) and (f)(2) of this section, within 10 business days of the 
deadline for each activity.
    (4) The requirements of this paragraph (f) do not apply if the 
property meets any of these conditions:
    (i) If the property is covered by Sec.  35.715, the owner conducted 
a risk assessment and conducted interim controls of identified lead-
based paint hazards in accordance with Sec.  35.175(b) between the date 
the child's blood was last sampled and the date the owner received the 
notification of the elevated blood lead level;
    (ii) If the property is covered by Sec.  35.720, the owner 
conducted a visual assessment and stabilized deteriorated paint (unless 
it was determined not to be lead-based paint) identified in accordance 
with Sec.  35.720(b)(2) in the other assisted dwelling units and the 
common areas serving those units, between the date the child's blood 
was last sampled and the date the owner received the notification of 
the elevated blood lead level; or
    (iii) The owner has documentation of compliance with evaluation, 
notification, lead disclosure, ongoing lead-based paint maintenance, 
and lead-based paint management requirements under this part throughout 
the 12 months preceding the date the owner received the environmental 
investigation report pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section; and
    (iv) The owner provides to the HUD field office documentation that 
it has conducted the activities of paragraphs (f)(4)(i) through (iii) 
of this section, within 10 business days of the deadline for each 
activity.
    (g) HUD encourages the owner to evaluate for sources of lead 
exposure in units other than those covered by this subpart, and to 
control such sources.
0
9. Revise Sec.  35.830 to read as follows:


Sec.  35.830  Child with an elevated blood lead level.

    (a) Environmental investigation. Within 15 calendar days after 
being notified by a public health department or other medical health 
care provider that a child of less than 6 years of age living in a 
dwelling unit owned by HUD (or where HUD is mortgagee-in-possession) 
has been identified as having an elevated blood lead level, HUD shall 
complete an environmental

[[Page 60326]]

investigation of the dwelling unit in which the child lived at the time 
the blood was last sampled and of common areas servicing the dwelling 
unit. The requirements of this paragraph apply regardless of whether 
the child is or is not still living in the unit when HUD receives the 
notification of the elevated blood lead level. The requirements of this 
paragraph shall not apply if HUD conducted an environmental 
investigation of the unit and common areas servicing the unit between 
the date the child's blood was last sampled and the date when HUD 
received the notification of the elevated blood lead level. If HUD 
conducted a risk assessment of the unit and common areas servicing the 
unit during that period, HUD is not required to conduct another risk 
assessment there but it shall conduct the elements of an environmental 
investigation not already conducted during the risk assessment. If a 
public health department has already conducted an evaluation of the 
dwelling unit, the requirements of this paragraph shall not apply.
    (b) Verification. After receiving information from a person who is 
not a medical health care provider that a child of less than 6 years of 
age living in a dwelling unit covered by this subpart may have an 
elevated blood lead level, HUD shall immediately verify the information 
with the public health department or other medical health care 
provider. If the public health department or provider denies the 
request, such as because it does not have the capacity to verify that 
information, the HUD Realty Specialist assigned to that property shall 
send documentation of the denial to the HUD Office of Lead Hazard 
Control and Healthy Homes, which shall make an effort to verify the 
information. If the public health department or provider verifies that 
the child has an environmental intervention blood lead level, such 
verification shall constitute notification, and HUD shall take the 
action required in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section.
    (c) Hazard reduction. Within 30 calendar days after receiving the 
report of the environmental investigation conducted pursuant to 
paragraph (a) of this section or the evaluation from the public health 
department, HUD shall complete the reduction of identified lead-based 
paint hazards in accordance with Sec.  35.1325 or Sec.  35.1330. Hazard 
reduction is considered complete when clearance is achieved in 
accordance with Sec.  35.1340 and the clearance report states that all 
lead-based paint hazards identified in the environmental investigation 
have been treated with interim controls or abatement or the public 
health department certifies that the lead-based paint hazard reduction 
is complete. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if HUD, 
between the date the child's blood was last sampled and the date HUD 
received the notification of the elevated blood lead level, already 
conducted an environmental investigation of the unit and common areas 
servicing the unit and completed reduction of identified lead-based 
paint hazards. If HUD conducted a risk assessment of the unit and 
common areas servicing the unit during that period, it is not required 
to conduct another risk assessment there but it shall conduct the 
elements of an environmental investigation not already conducted during 
the risk assessment.
    (d) Notice. If evaluation or hazard reduction is undertaken, each 
owner shall provide a notice to occupants in accordance with Sec.  
35.125.
    (e) Reporting requirement. (1) HUD shall report the name and 
address of a child identified as having an elevated blood lead level to 
the public health department within 5 business days of being so 
notified by any other medical health care professional.
    (2) HUD shall also report each confirmed case of a child with an 
elevated blood lead level to the HUD Office of Lead Hazard Control and 
Healthy Homes within 5 business days of being so notified.
    (3) HUD shall provide to the HUD Office of Lead Hazard Control and 
Healthy Homes documentation that it has conducted the activities of 
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, within 10 business days of 
the deadline for each activity.
    (f) Other assisted dwelling units in the property. (1) If the 
environmental investigation conducted pursuant to paragraph (a) of this 
section identifies lead-based paint hazards, HUD shall, for other 
assisted dwelling units covered by this part in which a child under age 
6 resides or is expected to reside on the date hazard reduction under 
paragraph (c) of this section, and the common areas servicing those 
units, is complete, conduct a risk assessment in accordance with Sec.  
35.815 within 30 calendar days after receipt of the environmental 
investigation report if there are 20 or fewer such other units, or 60 
calendar days if there are more than 20 such other units.
    (2) If the risk assessment conducted under paragraph (f)(1) of this 
section identifies lead-based paint hazards, HUD shall complete the 
reduction of identified lead-based paint hazards in accordance with 
Sec.  35.1325 or Sec.  35.1330 in those units and common areas within 
30 calendar days, or within 90 calendar days if more than 20 units have 
lead-based paint hazards such that the control work would disturb 
painted surfaces that total more than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  
35.1350(d).
    (3) The requirements of this paragraph (f) do not apply if HUD, 
between the date the child's blood was last sampled and the date HUD 
received the notification of the elevated blood lead level, conducted a 
risk assessment in the other assisted dwelling units and the common 
areas serving those units, and conducted interim controls of identified 
lead-based paint hazards in accordance with Sec.  35.820.
    (4) The requirements of this section do not apply if HUD has 
documentation of compliance with evaluation, notification, lead 
disclosure, ongoing lead-based paint maintenance, and lead-based paint 
management requirements under this part throughout the 12 months 
preceding the date HUD received the environmental investigation report 
pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section.
    (5) HUD shall provide to the HUD Office of Lead Hazard Control and 
Healthy Homes documentation that it has conducted the activities of 
paragraph (f)(1) through (3) of this section, or that it has complied 
with the requirements in paragraph (f)(4) of this section, within 10 
business days of the deadline for each activity.
    (g) Closing. If the closing of a sale is scheduled during the 
period when HUD is responding to a case of a child with an elevated 
blood lead level, HUD may arrange for the completion of the procedures 
required by paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section by the purchaser 
within a reasonable period of time.
    (h) Extensions. The Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing 
Commissioner or designee may consider and approve a request for an 
extension of deadlines established by this section for lead-based paint 
inspection, risk assessment, environmental investigation, hazard 
reduction, and reporting. Such a request may be considered, however, 
only during the first six months during which HUD is owner or 
mortgagee-in-possession of a multifamily property.
0
10. Revise Sec.  35.1130 to read as follows:


Sec.  35.1130  Child with an elevated blood lead level.

    (a) Environmental investigation. Within 15 calendar days after 
being notified by a public health department or other medical health 
care provider that a child of less than 6 years of age

[[Page 60327]]

living in a dwelling unit to which this subpart applies has been 
identified as having an elevated blood lead level, the PHA shall 
complete an environmental investigation of the dwelling unit in which 
the child lived at the time the blood was last sampled and of common 
areas servicing the dwelling unit. The environmental investigation is 
considered complete when the PHA receives the environmental 
investigation report. The requirements of this paragraph apply 
regardless of whether the child is or is not still living in the unit 
when the PHA receives the notification of the elevated blood lead 
level. The requirements of this paragraph shall not apply if the PHA 
conducted an environmental investigation of the unit and common areas 
servicing the unit between the date the child's blood was last sampled 
and the date when the PHA received the notification of the elevated 
blood lead level. If the PHA conducted a risk assessment of the unit 
and common areas servicing the unit during that period, the PHA need 
not conduct another risk assessment there but shall conduct the 
elements of an environmental investigation not already conducted during 
the risk assessment. If a public health department has already 
conducted an evaluation of the dwelling unit, the requirements of this 
paragraph shall not apply.
    (b) Verification. After receiving information from a person who is 
not a medical health care provider that a child of less than 6 years of 
age living in a dwelling unit covered by this subpart may have an 
elevated blood lead level, the PHA shall immediately verify the 
information with the public health department or other medical health 
care provider. If that department or provider denies the request, such 
as because it does not have the capacity to verify that information, 
the PHA shall send documentation of the denial to its HUD field office, 
who shall make an effort to verify the information. If that department 
or provider verifies that the child has an elevated blood lead level, 
such verification shall constitute notification, and the housing agency 
shall take the action required in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this 
section.
    (c) Hazard reduction. Within 30 calendar days after receiving the 
report of the environmental investigation conducted pursuant to 
paragraph (a) of this section or the evaluation from the public health 
department, the PHA shall complete the reduction of identified lead-
based paint hazards in accordance with Sec.  35.1325 or Sec.  35.1330. 
Hazard reduction is considered complete when clearance is achieved in 
accordance with Sec.  35.1340 and the clearance report states that all 
lead-based paint hazards identified in the environmental investigation 
have been treated with interim controls or abatement or the local or 
State health department certifies that the lead-based paint hazard 
reduction is complete. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply 
if the PHA, between the date the child's blood was last sampled and the 
date the PHA received the notification of the elevated blood lead 
level, already conducted an environmental investigation of the unit and 
common areas servicing the unit and completed reduction of identified 
lead-based paint hazards. If the PHA conducted a risk assessment of the 
unit and common areas servicing the unit during that period, it is not 
required to conduct another risk assessment there but it shall conduct 
the elements of an environmental investigation not already conducted 
during the risk assessment. If the PHA does not complete the hazard 
reduction required by this section, the dwelling unit is in violation 
of the standards of 24 CFR 965.601, which incorporates the uniform 
physical condition standards of Sec.  5.703(f), including that it be 
free of lead-based paint hazards.
    (d) Notice of evaluation and hazard reduction. The PHA shall notify 
building residents of any evaluation or hazard reduction activities in 
accordance with Sec.  35.125.
    (e) Reporting requirement. (1) The PHA shall report the name and 
address of a child identified as having an elevated blood lead level to 
the public health department within 5 business days of being so 
notified by any other medical health care professional.
    (2) The PHA shall report each confirmed case of a child with an 
elevated blood lead level to the HUD field office and the HUD Office of 
Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes within 5 business days of being 
so notified.
    (3) The PHA shall provide to the HUD field office documentation 
that it has conducted the activities of paragraphs (a) through (d) of 
this section, within 10 business days of the deadline for each 
activity.
    (f) Other units in the property. (1) If the environmental 
investigation conducted pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section 
identifies lead-based paint hazards, the PHA shall conduct a risk 
assessment of other units of the building covered by this subpart 
within 30 calendar days after receipt of the environmental 
investigation report if there are 20 or fewer such other units, or 60 
calendar days if there are more than 20 such other units, and shall 
complete the reduction of identified lead-based paint hazards in 
accordance with Sec.  35.1325 or Sec.  35.1330 within 30 calendar days, 
or within 90 calendar days if more than 20 units have lead-based paint 
hazards such that the control work would disturb painted surfaces that 
total more than the de minimis threshold of Sec.  35.1350(d).
    (2) If the environmental investigation conducted pursuant to 
paragraph (a) of this section identifies lead-based paint hazards and 
previous evaluations of the building conducted pursuant to Sec.  
35.1320 identified lead-based paint or lead-based paint hazards, the 
PHA shall, for other dwelling units in the property in which a child 
under age 6 resides or is expected to reside on the date hazard 
reduction under paragraph (c) of this section is complete, and the 
common areas serving those units, conduct a risk assessment within 30 
calendar days after receipt of the environmental investigation report 
if there are 20 or fewer such units, or 60 calendar days if there are 
more such units.
    (3) Control measures. If the risk assessment conducted under 
paragraph (f)(2) of this section identifies lead-based paint hazards, 
the PHA shall control the hazards in those units and common areas 
within 30 calendar days, or within 90 calendar days if more than 20 
units have lead-based paint hazards such that the control work would 
disturb painted surfaces that total more than the de minimis threshold 
of Sec.  35.1350(d).
    (4) The PHA shall provide to the HUD field office documentation 
that it has conducted the activities of paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) 
of this section, within 10 business days of the deadline for each 
activity.
    (5) The requirements of this paragraph (f) of this section do not 
apply if the PHA, between the date the child's blood was last sampled 
and the date the PHA received the notification of the elevated blood 
lead level, conducted a risk assessment of the other assisted dwelling 
units and the common areas serving those units, and conducted interim 
controls of identified hazards in accordance with Sec.  35.1120(b); or 
if the PHA has documentation of compliance with evaluation, 
notification, lead disclosure, ongoing lead-based paint maintenance, 
and lead-based paint management requirements under this part throughout 
the 12 months preceding the date the PHA received the environmental 
investigation report pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section; and, in 
either case, the PHA provided the HUD field office, within 10 business 
days after receiving the notification of the elevated blood lead level,

[[Page 60328]]

documentation that it has conducted the activities described in this 
paragraph (f)(5) of this section.
    (g) HUD encourages the PHA to evaluate for sources of lead exposure 
in units other than those covered by this subpart, and to control such 
sources.


Sec.  35.1135  Eligible costs.

0
11. Amend Sec.  35.1135(d) by removing the term ``environmental 
intervention blood level'' and adding in its place the term ``elevated 
blood lead level''.
0
12. Revise Sec.  35.1215(b) as follows:


Sec.  35.1215  Activities at initial and periodic inspection.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * For the unit subsequently to come under a HAP contract 
with the housing agency for occupancy by a family with a child under 
age 6, paint stabilization must be completed, including clearance being 
achieved in accordance with Sec. 35.1340.
* * * * *
0
13. Revise Sec.  35.1225 to read as follows:


Sec.  35.1225  Child with an elevated blood lead level.

    (a) Within 15 calendar days after being notified by a public health 
department or other medical health care provider that a child of less 
than 6 years of age living in a dwelling unit to which this subpart 
applies has been identified as having an elevated blood lead level, the 
designated party shall complete an environmental investigation of the 
dwelling unit in which the child lived at the time the blood was last 
sampled and of common areas servicing the dwelling unit. When the 
environmental investigation is complete, the designated party shall 
immediately provide the report of the environmental investigation to 
the owner of the dwelling unit. If the child identified as having an 
elevated blood lead level is no longer living in the unit when the 
designated party receives notification from the public health 
department or other medical health care provider, but another household 
receiving tenant-based rental assistance is living in the unit or is 
planning to live there, the requirements of this section apply just as 
they do if the child still lives in the unit. If a public health 
department has already conducted an evaluation of the dwelling unit, or 
the designated party conducted an environmental investigation of the 
unit and common areas servicing the unit between the date the child's 
blood was last sampled and the date when the designated party received 
the notification of the elevated blood lead level, the requirements of 
this paragraph shall not apply. If the designated party or the owner 
conducted a risk assessment of the unit and common areas servicing the 
unit during that period, the designated party need not conduct another 
risk assessment there but shall conduct the elements of an 
environmental investigation not already conducted during the risk 
assessment.
    (b) Verification. After receiving information from a person who is 
not a medical health care provider that a child of less than 6 years of 
age living in a dwelling unit covered by this subpart may have an 
elevated blood lead level, the designated party shall immediately 
verify the information with the public health department or other 
medical health care provider. If the public health department or 
provider denies the request, such as because it does not have the 
capacity to verify that information, the designated party shall send 
documentation of the denial to the HUD rental assistance program 
manager, who shall make an effort to verify the information. If that 
department or provider verifies that the child has an elevated blood 
lead level, such verification shall constitute notification, and the 
designated party shall take the action required in paragraphs (a) and 
(c) of this section.
    (c) Hazard reduction. Within 30 calendar days after receiving the 
report of the environmental investigation from the designated party or 
the evaluation from the public health department, the owner shall 
complete the reduction of identified lead-based paint hazards in 
accordance with Sec.  35.1325 or Sec.  35.1330. Hazard reduction is 
considered complete when clearance is achieved in accordance with Sec.  
35.1340 and the clearance report states that all lead-based paint 
hazards identified in the environmental investigation have been treated 
with interim controls or abatement or the public health department 
certifies that the lead-based paint hazard reduction is complete. The 
requirements of this paragraph do not apply if the designated party or 
the owner, between the date the child's blood was last sampled and the 
date the designated party received the notification of the elevated 
blood lead level, already conducted an environmental investigation of 
the unit and common areas servicing the unit and the owner completed 
reduction of identified lead-based paint hazards. If the owner does not 
complete the hazard reduction required by this section, the dwelling 
unit is in violation of the standards of 24 CFR 982.401.
    (d) Notice of evaluation and hazard reduction. The owner shall 
notify building residents of any evaluation or hazard reduction 
activities in accordance with Sec.  35.125.
    (e) Reporting requirement. (1) The owner shall report the name and 
address of a child identified as having an elevated blood lead level to 
the public health department within 5 business days of being so 
notified by any other medical health care professional.
    (2) The owner shall also report each confirmed case of a child with 
an elevated blood lead level to the HUD field office and the HUD Office 
of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes within 5 business days of 
being so notified.
    (3) The owner shall provide to the HUD field office documentation 
that it has conducted the activities of paragraphs (a) through (d) of 
this section, within 10 business days of the deadline for each 
activity.
    (f) Other assisted dwelling units in the property. (1) If the 
environmental investigation conducted pursuant to paragraph (a) of this 
section identifies lead-based paint hazards, the designated party or 
the owner shall, for other assisted dwelling units covered by this part 
in which a child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside on the 
date hazard reduction under paragraph (c) of this section is complete, 
and the common areas serving those units, conduct a visual assessment 
in accordance with the procedures of Sec.  35.1215(a), within 30 
calendar days after receipt of the environmental investigation report 
if there are 20 or fewer such units, or 60 calendar days if there are 
more such units.
    (2) If the visual assessment conducted under paragraph (f)(1) of 
this section identifies deteriorated paint, the owner shall stabilize 
the paint within 30 calendar days, or within 90 calendar days if more 
than 20 units have deteriorated paint such that the control work would 
disturb painted surfaces that total more than the de minimis threshold 
of Sec.  35.1350(d).
    (3) The requirements of this paragraph (f) of this section do not 
apply if the designated party or the owner, between the date the 
child's blood was last sampled and the date the owner received the 
notification of the elevated blood lead level, conducted a visual 
assessment or risk assessment in those other assisted dwelling units 
and the common areas serving those units, and the owner stabilized 
deteriorated paint (unless it was determined not to be lead-based 
paint) identified; or if the owner has documentation of compliance with 
evaluation, notification, lead disclosure, ongoing lead-based paint 
maintenance,

[[Page 60329]]

and lead-based paint management requirements under this part throughout 
the 12 months preceding the date the owner received the environmental 
investigation report pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section; and, in 
either case, the owner provided the HUD field office, within 10 
business days after receiving the notification of the elevated blood 
lead level, documentation that it has conducted the activities 
described in this paragraph (f)(4) of this section.
    (g) HUD encourages the designated party or the owner to evaluate 
for sources of lead exposure in units other than those covered by this 
subpart, and to control such sources.
    (h) Data collection and record keeping responsibilities. At least 
quarterly, the designated party shall attempt to obtain from the public 
health department(s) with area(s) of jurisdiction similar to that of 
the designated party the names and/or addresses of children of less 
than 6 years of age with an identified elevated blood lead level. At 
least quarterly, the designated party shall also report an updated list 
of the addresses of units receiving assistance under a tenant-based 
rental assistance program to the same public health department(s), 
except that the report(s) to the public health department(s) is not 
required if the health department states that it does not wish to 
receive such report. If it obtains names and addresses of elevated 
blood lead level children from the public health department(s), the 
designated party shall match information on cases of elevated blood 
lead levels with the names and addresses of families receiving tenant-
based rental assistance, unless the public health department performs 
such a matching procedure. If a match occurs, the designated party 
shall carry out the requirements of this section.

    Dated: August 26, 2016.
Michelle Miller,
Deputy Director, Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control.
[FR Doc. 2016-20955 Filed 8-31-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P