Statement of City of Philadelphia spokeswoman Lauren Hitt on June 16, 2017, in response to reporters seeking information for Toxic City: Tainted Soil First, while you may have found high lead levels in Fishtown, Kensington and Port Richmond neighborhoods that suggest a potential risk, a review of the data available to the City suggests that this potential risk isn't being actualized with any regularity. To recap the evidence we've shared with you: 1) individual case investigations of children with elevated lead levels have not suggested soil as a source, 2) the map of blood lead levels in Philadelphia does not show higher blood levels in the neighborhood with high levels in soil than in adjacent neighborhoods, and 3) the special study by EPA and ATSDR found that children’s blood lead levels were associated with lead in home dust, but not nearby soil. There is a possible explanation why lead in soil may not be important sources of exposure. Lead levels in children peak at 1-2 years of age, probably because this is the age when toddlers are both mobile and have frequent hand-to-mouth behavior, so they ingest lead-contaminated house dust. But children at this age are usually kept indoors and are thus not typically exposed to soil. This is not to say that exposure to lead from soil is impossible. However, we do not believe someone can conclude from the data available to us that it is a systemic problem occurring in Philadelphia now. Second, we have reviewed at length your suggestion that digging as part of construction activity increases a child's risk of exposure to lead. We cannot find much well-regarded literature that suggests that extraordinary measures must be taken to keep typical urban soil from becoming airborne during earth disturbance activities (such as construction excavation, utility work, gardening, etc --- please note this is a different category of activity then demolition). When lead is added to soil, it largely accumulates in the top 1 to 2 inches, such that digging 8-ft to 10-ft in the ground for utilities and foundations for homes will not disturb any additional high lead content soil beyond the immediate surface. In fact, it is logical to assume that the process of digging, regrading and back filling with deeper soils and borrowed (imported) soil will actually lower the lead concentration at the surface level where children may come in contact with bare ground. Third, demolition presents a different issue from construction or other earth disturbance activities. Dust generated by demolition is theoretically more concerning, because if the walls of the building being demolished had been painted with lead paint, the resulting dust would include lead paint particles. However, it's important to note that this concern is lessened in Philadelphia, where demolition in occupied areas is conducted by hand. A demolition thereby generates less dust than it would in most jurisdictions, like the Chicago and Baltimore studies referenced in the City's AMS Dust control ordinances, where mechanical methods still predominate. However, out of an abundance of caution, we are developing legislation associated with demolition activity to provide even further protection against the generation of lead dust. Among the measures under consideration are:  Including violations of Health Department dust control regulations among the violations that subject contractors to L&I administrative enforcement action  Mandating annual training for contractors to review L&I, Streets, OSHA, and Health Department requirements related to demolitions, including dust control  Requiring a fence with dust control features to be erected around the project  Requiring use of a chute for material drops of over 20-ft