Jump to main content.

Project XL Logo

Portland Water Bureau (XLC)XLC Logo

Meeting #3 Summary
January 25, 1999

Project XL for Communities Sponsor/Stakeholder meeting for Portland's Lead Hazard Reduction Program (LHRP)
Meeting Summary
Meeting #3, January 25, 1999, 9:00am-1:00pm

In Attendance:

Facilitator - Joan Brown-Kline

Sponsors - Bert Seierstad, Rosemary Menard, Stacey Drake Edwards, Mark Knudson, Curt Ireland

Co-sponsors - John Dougherty, Chris Johnson, Dave Leland

EPA Stakeholders - Monica Kirk

Direct Participant Stakeholders - Jerry Arnold, Dean Fritzke, Ann Kimerling,

Alfonso Lopez, Josiah Hill, LeRoy Patton, Tom Penpraze, Harvey Rice, Marty Wegner, Lore Wintergreen, Damon Whitehead


All meeting participants introduced themselves. There were some new individuals who had joined the group and others who were unable to attend the first meeting.


The agenda was reviewed, and there was consensus on how to proceed today. It was stated that this is NOT the last opportunity to review the draft FPA - there will be time after this meeting for people to do further review and provide comments.


Mark Knudson provided handouts summarizing the results of monitoring in Tier 1 Homes, with emphasis on the most recent round of monitoring which showed results slightly over the lead Action Level.

The maximum lead levels have decreased, and the appearance of the distribution curves in the areas that are greater than the 90th percentiles has changed. The Lead and Copper Rule requires selection of the" worst case" homes for Tier 1 monitoring. Tier 1 homes were built in 1983 and 1984 and contain copper plumbing joined with lead-based solder.

There are some concerns about collection of samples. Because of the mixing valve in single-handed faucets, it is difficult to collect a sample that is from the cold water source only. Use of water pipes for electrical grounding can cause or intensify corrosion problems. The Bureau's Water Quality Inspectors will be visiting each home to investigate and followup on any problems of this nature.

The Bureau's water treatment process to increase pH does decrease corrosion, but increasing the pH to this level also puts the pH into a range were it is less stable. The Bureau will carefully look at increasing the pH a bit more to refine the process and perhaps put the pH in a range where it is more stable and there is greater buffer intensity.

As per the Lead and Copper Rule requirements, the Bureau and its wholesale water purveyors are doing public notification and education on lead in drinking water. A copy of the brochure/bill stuffer that was developed was provided. It was suggested that in the press releases, there be advice added regarding running the water 10-15 seconds, and only using cold water for drinking and cooking.


Alberta Seierstad provided a summary of the FPA, and identified some areas on which it might be beneficial to concentrate today's work. However it was also made clear that other areas should be identified by the group of stakeholders.


Comments and suggestions for revising the FPA and the Lead Hazard Reduction Program content:

Alan Hipolito: The group should be thinking about how to use EPA's opportunities through the Technical Assistance Grant for supporting the Comprehensive Lead Plan efforts. Both the Comprehensive Planning process and the documents it produces would benefit. The Comprehensive Plan should inform the LHRP, and the LHRP also informs the Comprehensive Plan.

Damon Whitehead: We need to identify exactly HOW we IDENTIFY and REACH targeted populations. And Monitoring and Evaluation needs to demonstrate how effectively we actually reached those populations.

The group felt that the FPA needs to be shorter, and we need to get to the "meat" of the programs at the beginning of the document.

Alfonso Lopez: Information on Community Participation needs more emphasis and needs to appear sooner in the document.

Alfonso Lopez: Add a mediation process to the Decision-Making section of the FPA. Monica Kirk: resources for providing that mediation also need to be included in the FPA.

Alfonso Lopez: More "accountability from the system" is needed in the way of structured commitments. State specifically how minorities will be represented and included in the programs? If we have a void (minorities not sufficiently represented), then how will this be addressed? How can community representatives have ongoing access to the programs, and can they be present to more closely monitor the program work?

LHRP staff provided information on how the Oversight, Review and Planning Committee for the Home Lead Hazard Reduction Program will be transitioning to a Public Forum for all four components of the LHRP. A team of people (including representatives from the community) is currently working on this transition.

Lore Wintergreen: Perhaps we should investigate innovative ways to bring more people to public forums, such as remunerating people so that they can attend. Monica Kirk said that this might be possible through the EPA's Technical Assistance Grants, or through EPA's Environmental Justice Small Grants.

Rosemary Menard: The Water Bureau, as Project Sponsor, has taken the strategy of filling a niche - i.e. developing a program that is risk-based and focused on prevention. We need to be careful that the Water Bureau is not forced into becoming the magnet working to develop resources for umbrella organizations instead of the other way around. Alfonso Lopez agreed that this role should be taken by public health agencies. The group agreed that the question is "How do we strategize to bring these resources to this table, while also making sure that these resources address the larger effort effectively?"

Josiah Hill: We also need more participation by the medical community. Outreach has been done to this group, but we have found it hard to gain their participation.

Stacey Edwards: We are not here to reinvent the wheel. We do outreach, and try to tap into other programs and efforts. We have a budget, but it is not unlimited. These "other" resources should go towards furthering general public health efforts for the community.

Monica Kirk: This program is for the purposes of building a model for community participation, so that the EPA can better work with the community in the future.

Lore Wintergreen: The Comprehensive Planning process is meant to be the entity that envisions and implements a strategy which balances and addresses all aspects of the lead-related issues.

Stacey Edwards: How to obtain and use "other" resources would be an appropriate topic for the next Lead Summit.

Alberta Seierstad: We need help from this group in getting the right people (such as the medical community) to the Lead Summit Table.

It was agreed:

-- To add an Executive Summary

-- That the four most important categories of information for each LHRP component are:

- Goals and Objectives

- Key Commitments

- Monitoring and Evaluation

- a Project Report and a Work Plan for the current year

and this information should be places prominently in the document

-- That the remainder of the information could be placed in Appendices

It was also agreed that Goals and Objectives, and Key Commitments should be made more generic and universal, so that this information would be usable for the life of the project. The details on these topics should be included in the Project Report and Work Plan instead.

Rosemary Menard: Our annual plan should also enumerate exactly how resources on community participation are being spent and allocated. How the resources are allocated, should be in keeping with the stated Goals and Objectives.

It was agreed to provide Goals and Objectives in three categories:

1) G&Os to protect public health

2) G&Os to build support and capacity for community participation

3) G&Os for personal development (this probably applies only to the CLEARCorps program)

It was agreed that Key Commitments for all four program components need to include commitments to make changes as needed when evaluation shows that strategies don't work.

It was agreed to develop Goals and Objectives, and Key Commitments for the Lead Hazard Reduction Program as a whole.

It was agreed to categorize Monitoring and Evaluation information and tasks into "process" (what will be done), and "outcome" (actual results that will be reported).

Alfonso Lopez: Add details to Goals and Objectives and Key Commitments on how to address issues of cultural competency, and the provision of translations of materials into other languages.

Add reference to other ways that water quality monitoring information is also made available to the public (e.g. Consumer Confidence Reports, requests to Customer Service Call Center).


The next meeting will be:

Monday March 8, 9:00-2:00, at the same location

The goal is for the LHRP staff to revise the FPA as was agreed to here today, and distribute it to allow about one week for review prior to the next meeting.

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.