New soil tests from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health found high levels of lead and other toxic metals destroyed by homes devastated by catastrophic wildfires in January and were removed by federal cleanup workers.

The county health department hired Roux Associates Inc. to sample soil in 30 homes cleaned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - a federal agency-led debris removal operation for Eaton and Palisade wildfires. The Army Corps and the Federal Emergency Management Agency said staff will remove wildfire debris and remove up to 6 inches of topsoil in the ash covered portion of the property.

In Eaton burn scars, about 27% of Ruks soil samples still have higher than the state standard for residential properties in California (80 mg per kilogram) in areas where federal cleaners scratched. Among samples collected from parts of the soil that were not excavated, nearly 44% of lead levels were above the state benchmark.

In the Palisades fire zone, the figures are even more sure: less than 3% of the soil samples come from scratched parts of the property, while about 12% of the soil samples from the striped areas have higher lead levels.

Roux vice president and chief scientist Adam Love said the Eaton Fire's taller lead painted homes hit by Altadena, which was mainly hit by the Eaton Fire, could be one of the reasons for the huge gap.

"The honest answer is that we don't know all the things that could be caused (changes in lead pollution)," Love said. "It may be related to differences in housing stock, and homes in the Eaton area are more likely to have lead-based paint.

"During the scratching process, this may be emitted from the soil or blown into the scratched area from adjacent plots."

Love and County public health officials now recommend that owners in affected areas consider potential soil contamination before rebuilding.

“Soil impact assessment and management should indeed be part of any reconstruction plan,” Love said. “You may want to consider doing the assessment through an environmental professional to ensure you take the appropriate steps to be protected.”

This is because county and city officials issued reconstruction permits without soil testing requirements and some developers have broken down.

The county’s results add to growing evidence that large amounts of property can still have dangerous contaminants even after federal cleanup workers complete the removal of wreckage – pollution is often blocked by national guidelines, requiring a comprehensive soil testing.

This week, the Los Angeles Times published a special report surrounding a soil testing program that provides the first evidence that homes restored by federal contractors still have heavy metal levels higher than typical state cleanup targets. Times reporters found that two burnt Altadner houses, later cleaned up by federal cleaners, still contain dangerous heavy metals higher than California standards.

The Times first reported in February that the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would not pay for soil testing after the Eaton and Palisade fires. Federal and state disaster agencies refused to conduct soil testing after a long-standing guide to wildfire recovery in California, which aims to ensure cleaners eliminate fire-related pollution from residential properties.

Previous wildfire tests found that after the first round of debris removal, about 20% of properties failed to meet the cleaning targets of California's potentially toxic substances, which usually involves unloading about 6 inches of surface soil. However, soil sampling allows state and federal contractors to determine which properties are still highly contaminated and then redeploy cleaners to remove other soils to ensure properties meet California cleaning standards.

For this kind of cleanup, without soil testing, federal cleaners will not return to remove other soil, the Army Corps of Engineers said.

Many environmental and public health experts criticized the decision not to conduct comprehensive soil testing.

“By not performing soil testing, the federal and state governments decide to leave contaminated property behind contaminated property instead of informing homeowners how much pollution is left,” said Andrew Whelton, a professor of civil, environmental and ecological engineering at Purdue University, who has studied environmental disasters.

When Eaton and Palisades opened fire to consume thousands of homes and cars, they released a large amount of dangerous chemicals. The most worrying thing is lead, a brain-damaged chemical that has been used in paint history and remains a fixture in the battery.

"Given these findings, it is crucial to understand the specific health risks posed by detected chemicals, especially lead, which remains one of our most concerned issues," said Nicole Quick, chief medical consultant for the county health department. "Lead is an effective neurotoxin, and even at low levels, exposure can affect young children's learning, development, and behavior. Lead exposure is not always obvious. Symptoms do not appear immediately until damage has been caused."

The county health department previously shared preliminary results of soil tests on static houses around Eaton and Palisades. Up to 80% of the Eaton Fire downwind collected soil samples have higher lead levels than state health properties.

However, department officials refused to provide copies of soil test results, saying the data has not been completed. The department also said it will not share the results with individual owners. The Times has submitted a public record request for this data.

The Los Angeles County Health Department is the only government agency that performs post-cleaning soil sampling. Federal disaster agencies have repeatedly refused. Newsom Administration also did not conduct any soil tests.

In April, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved $3 million to help fire homeowners test their docks. The program is expected to begin on May 19, with public health officials saying 26,000 qualified properties will receive postcard invitations and provide more information.

In this case, the homeowner will need to collect the soil samples themselves and place them down for analysis.

If contamination is found, homeowners may pay for additional soil removal or other methods of contaminated areas. As the meeting was extended, many residents in the comments section expressed concern about how they paid for such dismissals.

One commenter wrote: “We have no money.”