
 
 
December 26, 2023
Legacy Lead-Sheathed Telecommunications Cables: Status and 
Issues for Congress
From the late 1800s through the 1950s, telecommunications 
acquisitions in the U.S. telecommunications sector. Some 
companies hung, buried, or placed under water extensive 
lead-sheathed cables have been acquired by current 
networks of cables containing lead sheaths― casing that 
companies. Some cables may have multiple owners if 
protects the wires―throughout the United States. By the 
different companies acquired different parts of a network. 
mid-20th century, companies began installing new cables 
Some lead-sheathed cables may be abandoned and have no 
that use non-lead sheathing, removing some legacy cables 
owners. If removal or remediation efforts are required, 
while leaving others in place. In July 2023, media reports 
questions of responsibility and liability may be complex. 
on lead-sheathed cables identified numerous sites across the 
country where legacy cables exist and claimed that they 
Potential Risks of Exposure to Lead 
may be releasing lead into water and soils at potentially 
The extent to which lead-sheathed telecommunications 
harmful levels. This reporting led some stakeholders, 
cables may contribute to overall human health and 
environmental groups, and public officials—including some 
environmental risks of lead, in comparison to other sources, 
Members of Congress—to call for action. Subsequently, 
would depend on exposures. Proximity to lead alone would 
there were historic drops in U.S. telecom companies’ stock.  
not necessarily be an indicator of risks. Site-specific 
circumstances that would have a bearing on risks may 
Within weeks of the July 2023 reports, AT&T, Verizon, the 
include whether the lead in cable sheathing may be intact or 
State of New York, and the U.S. Environmental Protection 
may leach into the environment and contaminate soil, 
Agency (EPA) said they would conduct testing at sites 
groundwater, or surface water through which exposures 
named by the media. Initial EPA and state agency tests 
could potentially occur. As with any chemical, potential 
have not identified public health risks that would require 
risks would also depend on the exposure conditions, 
immediate response or remediation. However, following the 
including the route of exposure through which lead may 
July media reports, plaintiffs have filed several class action 
enter the human body (i.e., inhalation, ingestion, or skin 
lawsuits against telecom companies challenging their 
contact), the dose (i.e., concentration, frequency, and 
failure to publicly disclose information about lead-sheathed 
duration of exposure), and the characteristics of the exposed 
cables and protect utility workers from lead exposure. 
individual (e.g., age, genetics, and health of an individual at 
the time of exposure). Age would be a significant risk 
This issue may be of continued interest to Congress, as 
factor for lead. The Centers for Disease Control and 
constituents, utility workers, and advocacy organizations 
Prevention and others have found that children up to the age 
request information on cable locations and additional 
of six are more susceptible to lead exposures primarily 
testing of identified sites. If it is determined that legacy 
because of developmental effects. The potential for human 
lead-sheathed cables need to be removed or remediated, it 
exposure to lead would also likely differ depending on 
could cost telecommunications companies resources, 
whether the cables are located at the surface, suspended 
including time, staffing, and potentially billions of dollars. 
above the surface, buried underground, or in underwater 
With litigation ongoing, Congress could wait for these 
areas, given differences in how individuals may encounter 
cases to be decided before determining whether or not to 
these environments. Ecological risks would also depend on 
take any action. If Congress were to take action, one option 
exposures among animal and plant species. 
would be to direct new funds or redirect funds from existing 
congressionally mandated broadband and 5G programs to 
Environmental Remediation 
assess, test, and potentially mitigate any risks that 
Multiple federal and state statutes authorize actions to 
subsequently emerge. Another option would be to rely on 
investigate lead and other types of contamination and to 
cable owners to undertake these activities and costs, which 
remediate potential risks if warranted. At the federal level, 
could be passed on to consumers.  
for example, lead is a hazardous substance under the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 
Who Owns What? 
and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. Subject 
Some telecommunications companies assert that only small 
to the availability of funding, EPA may take CERCLA 
portions of their networks consist of lead-sheathed cables. 
response actions to investigate and remediate the release, or 
For example, AT&T estimated that lead-sheathed cables 
substantial threat of a release, of lead into the environment 
represent less than 10% of its copper cable footprint of 
under the Superfund program at sites on nonfederal lands. 
roughly 2 million miles. Verizon also reported that lead-
The state in which an individual site is located would have 
sheathed cables make up a small percentage of its copper 
a role in such actions through a coordinated framework 
network. It may be challenging to identify the location and 
under CERCLA. CERCLA established categories of 
ownership of all lead-sheathed cables due to the breakup of 
potentially responsible parties (PRPs), and PRPs may be 
the Bell System in 1984 and subsequent mergers and 
liable for response costs and natural resource damages. 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Legacy Lead-Sheathed Telecommunications Cables: Status and Issues for Congress 
While determination of liability under CERCLA depends 
on nonfederal lands under their respective laws and 
on site-specific factors, if there were a response action to 
jurisdictions. The federal and state roles in environmental 
address risks of lead from a telecommunications cable, 
remediation may raise policy questions for investigating 
PRPs could include not only the company that installed and 
potential lead contamination from telecommunications 
operated the cable but also current and some past owners of 
cables considering competing priorities for the use of 
the site on which the cable is located. A party may qualify 
federal resources among other types of contaminated sites 
for a defense to or exemption from CERCLA liability in 
where federal assistance may also be desired. 
some situations. See CRS In Focus IF11790, Liability 
Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Class Action Lawsuits 
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).  
Several class action lawsuits have been filed against 
telecommunications companies challenging their failure to 
In addition to CERCLA, lead is listed as a hazardous waste 
publicly disclose information about lead-sheathed cables. 
under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (often referred to as the 
As of December 2023, the majority of these challenges are 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act or RCRA). 
based on violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the 
Section 7003 of RCRA authorizes EPA to issue 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (SEA). Section 10(b) of 
enforcement orders for abating an imminent and substantial 
the SEA prohibits fraud in connection with the purchase or 
endangerment to human health or the environment resulting 
sale of securities in contravention of Securities and 
from the past or present handling, storage, treatment, 
Exchange Commission rules. Section 20(a) provides that 
transportation, or disposal of a solid or hazardous waste. 
“every person who … controls any person liable” for a 
However, this authority applies only to a discarded 
violation of the SEA is jointly and severally liable for that 
substance, which is a prerequisite for a substance to be 
violation. The plaintiffs—shareholders in the 
considered a solid or hazardous waste pursuant to the 
telecommunications companies—claim that the companies 
definitions of these terms under Section 1004 of RCRA. 
knowingly released materially false information to the 
The potential applicability of RCRA to a site where lead is 
public by failing to disclose information about lead-
released into the environment from a telecommunications 
sheathed cables. This, plaintiffs argue, artificially raised the 
cable therefore would generally depend upon whether the 
stock prices of the companies’ shares, causing investors 
release may constitute discarding under this statute. 
financial harm when information about the lead-sheathed 
cables was later released (Brazinsky v. AT&T; General 
If lead derived from lead-sheathed telecommunication 
Retirement System of the City of Detroit v. Verizon; 
cables were to migrate into groundwater or surface water, 
Jankowski v. Verizon; McLemore v. Lumen Technologies, 
enforcement actions under two other federal statutes might 
Inc.; Meehan v. Verizon). 
be used to mitigate potential impacts on water quality. 
Section 1431 of the Safe Drinking Water Act grants EPA 
Utility workers have also filed a class action complaint 
“emergency powers” to issue orders for abating an 
against Verizon for negligence in exposing the workers to 
imminent and substantial endangerment to public health 
the lead-sheathed cables. The workers argue that Verizon 
when (1) a contaminant “is present in or is likely to enter a 
was aware of the harm that its lead-sheathed cables caused 
public water system or an underground source of drinking 
and failed to protect workers from that harm. The workers 
water” and (2) the appropriate state and local authorities 
argue that lead is a “hazardous substance” under both 
have not acted to protect public health. Section 504 of the 
CERCLA and RCRA and that Verizon did not take the 
Clean Water Act also grants EPA “emergency powers” to 
actions required under those laws to dispose of the retired 
issue orders for mitigating a discharge of a pollutant into 
lead-sheathed cables properly (Tiger v. Verizon). 
U.S. waters, if warranted, to abate an imminent and 
substantial endangerment to human health or the welfare of 
Considerations for Congress 
persons where such endangerment is to their “livelihood” 
If Congress were to take action, one option would be to 
(including the “inability to market shellfish”). 
mandate an inventory of legacy lead-sheathed cable 
locations and ownership nationwide. It may also consider 
Whether actions may be warranted under any of these 
which agency could or should lead the development of an 
federal statutes would be a site-specific determination based 
inventory (e.g., the Federal Communications Commission, 
on the potential risks of exposure and other criteria specific 
EPA), whether interagency coordination is needed, and 
to each statute. The mere presence of lead contamination 
whether to share collected information publicly or only with 
derived from a lead-sheathed lined cable would not 
relevant state and local agencies. Congress could, once an 
necessarily warrant action under any of these statutes. If 
inventory is complete, mandate or encourage federal 
remediation were warranted under a particular statute, the 
coordination or assistance (e.g., technical, financial) to 
removal of a telecommunications cable containing lead may 
jurisdictional authorities (i.e., federal, state, local, tribal). 
not be required if alternative measures are more cost-
Finally, it could opt not to act, allowing private sector 
effective and more practical from a technical standpoint to 
owners, current law, and the courts to address the matter.  
address potential risks. For example, potential alternatives 
may include encapsulating a cable to prevent the leaching 
Jill C. Gallagher, Analyst in Telecommunications Policy   
of lead or land use controls (e.g., physical barriers) to 
Colby Leigh Rachfal, Specialist in Telecommunications 
prevent exposures. Another potential consideration would 
Policy   
be the degree to which the state of jurisdiction desires 
Madeline W. Donley, Legislative Attorney   
federal involvement. States take the predominant role in 
investigating and remediating contamination at most sites 
Lance N. Larson, Analyst in Environmental Policy  
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Legacy Lead-Sheathed Telecommunications Cables: Status and Issues for Congress 
 
IF12559
 
 
Disclaimer 
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to 
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. 
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has 
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the 
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include 
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you 
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. 
 
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12559 · VERSION 1 · NEW