Strengthen gas regulation to protect kids
Each year, tens of thousands of children nationwide, including hundreds across Connecticut, suffer serious, irreversible harm due to lead poisoning. Some studies have suggested that more than half of all U.S. children have detectable levels of lead in their blood. Communities of color have disproportionately suffered. This is an ongoing public health crisis that warrants aggressive intervention.
Last year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released a strategy to comprehensively reduce lead exposure across the country. The EPA’s strategy was a long-overdue first step to protect our children from permanent, preventable harm. Buttressed by billions of dollars in funding from President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the plan replaces lead pipes, remediates lead-contaminated construction sites, enhances training and support for painting and renovation contractors, and increases investment in lead testing in schools and childcare centers.
I joined a coalition of 19 state attorneys general weighing in on these plans, urging specific, stronger measures to further protect American children and to reduce the presence of this hazardous substance in our homes, soil and drinking water. I was pleased to see several of those suggestions adopted in the final plan, including a commitment from the EPA to strengthen collaboration across federal agencies, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The EPA’s strategy is a significant commitment to protecting our children, but there is one other major source of lead exposure that still requires urgent attention.
Recently, I joined a coalition of 12 state attorneys general supporting the EPA’s latest efforts to strengthen regulation of leaded aviation gas. Leaded aviation gas (avgas) from piston-engine planes is the single worst contributor of airborne lead emissions in the United States and is the only remaining lead-containing transportation fuel.
Piston-engines power smaller aircraft that fly relatively short distances and use smaller general aviation airports. There are more than 200,000 registered piston-engine aircraft in the country today. These planes released more than 930,000 pounds of lead in 2017 and are responsible for nearly three-quarters of total lead emissions nationwide.
General aviation airports that service these planes are often located near densely populated metropolitan areas, communities already disproportionately impacted by environmental hazards and risks, and residential areas near homes and schools.
Connecticut is fortunately ahead of the curve. Our emissions are relatively low — far lower than the strictest current national air quality standards for lead, and 44th in the nation for avgas emissions. Unfortunately, our upwind neighbors in New York and Pennsylvania are eighth and 10th highest in the nation, respectively.
Much, if not all, of the lead emissions from piston-engine planes could be avoided, as unleaded fuel options are available.
In 2014, the Federal Aviation Administration launched the Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative to speed up the “deployment of the most promising unleaded replacements,” but despite the FAA’s certification of various unleaded fuels, including two recent fuel replacements suitable for nearly all piston-engine planes, these unleaded aviation fuels have not successfully penetrated the market. Less than 3% of U.S. airports that service piston-engine planes sell unleaded alternatives.
The EPA is now considering whether to issue a finding definitively stating that emissions from the combustion of leaded aviation gasoline contributes to air pollution that endangers public health and welfare. This finding will trigger a requirement that EPA issue new standards and regulations under the Clean Air Act and finally require the FAA to establish new fuel standards. I have joined with attorneys general from 12 states in full support of EPA’s efforts to expedite the transition to safe fuel sources for all aircraft.
Children who have been exposed to even very low levels of lead are at risk for neurological and physical problems during critical stages of early development. No safe lead level in children has been identified. EPA deserves our full support in implementing its comprehensive and aggressive measures.