Archive for the ‘Asbestos Abatement’ Category

Carlsbad, New Mexico - The Eddy County Commission has approved the first step in an asbestos abatement project in Happy Valley and La Huerta, but plans to take the project slowly due to the high level of asbestos in one of the condemned properties.

The first step-inspection of the properties to determine how much asbestos is present-has been approved. The next steps will include removing the asbestos and demolishing the buildings.

This abatement project is a little unusual, however, as the committee is not sure who owns the condemned buildings. Commissioner Lewis Derrick was concerned that the county doesn’t know whether the properties have mortgage liens against them, as the county will initially be paying for the asbestos removal.

The commission already authorized the inspections after taking advice from county attorney Cas Tabor, but has decided to hold off on authorizing the rest of the project until a title and mortgage search has been carried out to determine if any liens or other liabilities are held on the properties.

Tabor said, “I agree with Lewis. We need to do the research to see if there is an existing mortgage on the properties. If there is a sizeable one, we can work with the mortgage company.”

Another problem with the project is the expense of asbestos abatement. Safely removing asbestos requires contractors and work crews who have received special training in handling asbestos, as well as the use of special techniques such as wet-removal to minimize the generation and dispersal of asbestos dust. In addition, disposal of asbestos waste is around three times more expensive than disposal of non-hazardous waste.

Eddy County Manager Steve Massey says that the presence of asbestos in one building has already been confirmed, but is not certain whether asbestos is present in the others. Massey has estimated the costs of removing asbestos from just one of the properties as between $17,000 and $20,000. The costs of abatement in the three other buildings will depend on how much asbestos is present in them.

The county has decided that if it proceeds with removal, it will bill the owners of the properties for the costs of asbestos abatement and demolition, and place liens against the properties until the money is repaid. If the owners don’t pay the bills, the county says, they can recoup the money by selling the properties.

Massey has also emphasized that the county is not simply targeting properties because they are unsightly or are built on valuable land. The clean-up and demolition is necessary due to the asbestos hazards posed by the buildings.

Commissioner Janell Whitlock said, “If we are going to go in and demolish structures because they are unsightly in the neighborhood, then I would be against it. But if it’s a health and safety hazard, then I don’t have a problem.”

Newton, Massachusetts - A month after asbestos was discovered at Fire Station 3 in Newton, Massachusetts, more of the toxin has been unearthed at Fire Station 2 in nearby Auburndale.

Even so, trucks and firefighters that were on shift during the clean-up operations were removed from the station to prevent exposure. They were sent to other locations in the district, to remain on standby.

Mayoral spokesperson Jeremy Solomon said that the asbestos-which was found in tiles and heating pipe elbows-was not friable, and therefore there was minimal danger. Non-friable asbestos doesn’t crumble easily and therefore fibers are unlikely to become airborne.

According to Solomon, air tests at Fire Station 2 had never been positive for asbestos. However, an April 11 report about samples taken by FLI Environmental indicated that friable asbestos was discovered at Fire Station 2, but the fibers had not been airborne.

The FLI report said that damaged asbestos materials were found in the boiler room, a bathroom, a closet, in the tire-check room, and in other areas throughout the station.

Of the boiler room material, 35% was Chrysotile asbestos that was damaged and friable. Of the pipe insulation, 10% was found to be Chrysotile asbestos that was damaged and friable. Damaged tiles were found in three different locations and noted to be 5% asbestos.

Other exposure incidents at Fire Station 3 prompted more careful handling of asbestos abatement in the fire stations.

The first exposure incident occurred on March 19 when contractors were working in Fire Station 3. During the incident, visible dust was dispersed and debris from the ceiling fell near four firefighters. One employee said dust had fallen onto him and his computer.

An investigation was initiated after the exposure incident. Initial tests carried out on the air and the dust in the incident area came back negative.

A state report released on Friday March 28 indicated that the asbestos dust and debris did pose a health hazard to the workers carrying out the renovation work and to the firefighters present in the station.

At the time, Mayor David Cohen said, “We are going to continue to [take] precautions as we do additional work in the fire stations to make sure that our workers are not exposed to asbestos and that we are making the work as safe as possible. The first priority of the city is the safety of the inhabitants of the fire stations.”

Jefferson, Wisconsin – Jefferson resident Brian S. Johnson was convicted and sentenced on Friday May 2 for failing to remove asbestos before demolishing a building, and also for illegal open burning. He was sentenced by Judge Jackie Rohloff Erwin to a twenty-day jail sentence.

According to the criminal complaint laid against Johnson, he purchased an old property known as the County farm and nursing home from Jefferson County in March of 2005.

Johnson hired contractors work on renovation and demolition at the site, and to burn down several buildings. A number of agricultural buildings on the site were demolished, but it was subsequently found that these buildings contained asbestos. Wisconsin law requires that asbestos be removed from buildings before demolition or burning, to prevent the dispersal of asbestos dust.

Inhalation of asbestos dust can cause serious health problems, including a chronic lung condition called asbestosis. More seriously, inhaling even a small amount of asbestos is enough to cause the development of a cancer called mesothelioma. The cancer generally develops in the lining of the lungs, but has a typical latency period of between two and five decades.

Due to the health risks of asbestos exposure, and because many older buildings contain large amounts of asbestos in construction materials, demolition of buildings is tightly regulated in most states.

Brian Johnson was criminally charged over the incident because it was determined that he intentionally violated the state’s asbestos regulation laws.

He was informed when he purchased the property that some of the buildings contained asbestos, and that the asbestos would have to be removed before the buildings could be demolished.

Johnson also received warnings from government officials that he would not be able to burn any of the demolition debris, again due to asbestos-related hazards.

However, despite receiving these warnings Johnson demolished and burned the buildings without first removing asbestos.

Brian Johnson subsequently lost the property due to foreclosure. The site is now being cleaned up by the purchaser of the foreclosed property.

Johnson’s asbestos violations were discovered when the Watertown Health Inspector carried out asbestos inspections for the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

Moline, Illinois – The owner of a former nurse’s dormitory is hoping to demolish and redevelop the site, but until the Environmental Protection Agency sees an asbestos remediation plan for the site, all work is halted. The EPA has now notified owner Mike Shamsie that it may refer the case to the Attorney General’s office.

The former dormitory was scheduled for demolition last summer—however the EPA received an anonymous complaint that improper demolition activities were being carried out on site. The subsequent site investigation located asbestos on the property.

Following the discovering the EPA issued a violation notice, citing violations of the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants and the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, for improper handling, removal, and disposal of asbestos waste. The notice was issued on September 5, 2007.

The EPA also requested that the development project hire a licensed contractor to design an asbestos removal plan that would provide details of handling, removal, and disposal of the asbestos on the site. However, more than six months later the EPA has still not received the plan.

Lew Steinbrecher, a Moline city administrator, said that the EPA had issued a notice to begin legal action in Mid-March. The developer had thirty days to comply, and that time period has now expired, but Steinbrecher said he did not know what action would be taken. The EPA must now provide notice of its decision to refer the federal Clean Air Act and the Pollution Control Board violations to the Attorney General.

The EPA still hopes to receive an asbestos removal plan, but the agency still has no plan, or even any information to suggest a contractor has been hired to create one. After a remediation plan has been lodged with the EPA, the agency must review it, and then accept the plan so work can begin.

The city of Moline would like the asbestos removed as soon as possible, but would prefer it to be carried out cautiously. The EPA has also advised that the city proceed carefully in its involvement in the case, because of the possibility of further disturbance of the asbestos that the city might become financially responsible for.

Steinbrecher said, “On the advice of the Illinois EPA, we have been very cautious in any enforcement actions on our part until it releases the property for demolition…If we order the property owner do certain things and those actions result in further disturbance of the asbestos, we could be financially responsible for the cleanup.”

East Brunswick, New Jersey – A week-long project to remove asbestos from Hammarskjöld Middle School in East Brunswick, New Jersey is under way. The project is being carried out during the school’s spring break to reduce the possibility of exposure hazards for students and staff.

School district spokeswoman Patricia LaDuca has said that no work was or will be carried out while school is in session, and there will be no safety hazards for children or staff when they return after the spring break.

La Duca said, “The contractors are certified and experienced in this type of work, and licensed professionals will oversee the removal and monitor and test air quality to ensure that the regulatory standards are met.” Parents were told of the planned asbestos removal project in a letter sent earlier in April.

Some district parents have expressed concern about the asbestos removal, but Patricia LaDuca says that “this process is highly regulated by federal, state and OSHA, or Occupational Safety and Health Administration, standards,” and there is no cause for alarm.

The wing in which asbestos is being removed is ultimately planned for demolition over the school’s summer vacation period. However, the asbestos must be removed before demolition can take place, as demolition projects can create and disperse large clouds of asbestos dust if the substance is not removed beforehand.

Asbestos is a naturally-occurring fibrous mineral that was widely used in industry, residential areas, and public buildings such as schools for much of the twentieth century. It is a light-weight yet durable substance with a very high resistance to fire and heat, making it an ideal insulator and fire-proofing material.

However, asbestos is also known to cause cancers such as mesothelioma and lung cancer, as well as a chronic lung condition called asbestosis. Exposure to asbestos can cause serious health problems.

In schools where asbestos is present there is usually no risk of exposure for students and staff. Risks are present only when the asbestos is disturbed, either accidentally or deliberately, as in the case of abatement projects.

In most cases the Environmental Protection Agency recommends leaving asbestos in place rather than disturbing it. Generally removal is recommended only if the asbestos has deteriorated to the point where fibers are likely to be released into the air. In addition, in the case of demolition projects, asbestos must be removed before demolition.

Edison, New Jersey – Remnants of Camp Kilmer, a now-closed military installation that was built during World War II, are being demolished at the Edison Job Corps Academy in New Jersey. There are half a dozen buildings in the cluster.

Job Corps is a federally-funded program that is administered by the Department of Labor. The program provides disadvantaged people aged 16 to 24 with residential academic and vocational training. Currently the Edison Job Corps Academy has around 530 students.

Lee Mathews, director of the Edison Job Corps Academy, said the buildings are in very poor shape, “It was either we tear them down, or they would fall down on their own.” Matthews said the buildings include an old trailer, a storage building, and old barracks that have long been boarded up unused.

Demolition of the buildings began on Wednesday April 23 and is proceeding cautiously due to the presence of asbestos insulation in some of the buildings. Lee Mathews expects the demolition to take around a week. The space will be turned into a recreational area once the demolition is completed.

Job Corps students who are learning construction trades will be helping build the recreation area once the demolition is complete. Plans include the addition of an outdoor volleyball court, seating areas, and a running track.

According to Lee Mathews, the demolition is a federal government project due to the presence of asbestos insulation in many buildings on campus. Strict environmental and public safety procedures have been put in place to make sure people aren’t exposed to asbestos. Most of the buildings being demolished contained only a small amount of asbestos, said Mathews, and some didn’t contain any.

Requirements for the project included hiring a professional asbestos abatement firm to remove asbestos prior to the demolition. Wet-removal procedures, in which asbestos containing materials are thoroughly wetted before being disturbed, are being carried out to reduce the possibility of generating asbestos dust.

Asbestos is a fibrous mineral that was used liberally in construction in the twentieth century due to its excellence as an insulator.

However, because asbestos is known to cause a type of cancer called mesothelioma, as well as other types of cancer and a chronic lung disease known as asbestosis, any procedures that involve working with or around asbestos must be tightly controlled to prevent exposure to the substance.

Springfield, Illinois – Work has begun on the demolition of a former Cargill-Pillsbury plant on the northeast side of Springfield, Illinois, and Environmental Protection Agency representatives are keeping a close eye on the process.

The plant, which is almost eighty years old, is now owned by Ley Metals Recycling, Inc. The company purchased the plant from Cargill Corp., a Minneapolis-based organization. The former flour mill is currently classified as an ‘enterprise zone,’ meaning it might qualify for sales and property tax breaks if redeveloped.

Many residents of the area hope the building will be demolished and the site redeveloped. David Briggity Sr. and wife Ola number amongst them—they live just south of the plant and say that they frequently get run-off from the plant when it rains.

Although many locals and officials have assumed a demolition was planned, the new owners haven’t yet applied for a demolition permit for the site. New owner Jim Ley says he’s not ready to announce any specific plans for the site as yet.

Regardless of what Ley’s plans for the former Pillsbury plant turn out to be, the EPA will be keeping a close eye on the project.

Tests that were carried out several years ago indicated the present of asbestos at the site, and the EPA visited the property this week after locals had expressed concern that work on the site had already begun.

However, the EPA did not find any evidence that any violations, including illegal asbestos removal, had occurred. Maggie Carson, an Illinois EPA spokesperson, said that while workers had been removing items from the site, no asbestos-containing materials had been removed.

In addition, Carson said that the asbestos present in the plant is contained, and the EPA does not consider that the asbestos poses any public health hazards.

She also said that if any asbestos is disturbed during the course of any work carried out on the site, the EPA has to be notified. “Anytime you’re going through a demolition process, a business like this would have to document that the asbestos is being managed properly, or that it is being removed in an appropriate way.”

The owner of the plant must also apply for a permit to demolish the plant, and must remove any potentially hazardous asbestos materials before demolition is carried out. Demolition work can potentially release large quantities of asbestos fibers if the material is not removed beforehand, and in cases where asbestos is involved, demolition is generally regulated more tightly.

Montgomery, New Jersey – A second round of asbestos-containing steam pipe removal work has begun at a site near the Village Elementary School in Skillman Village, New Jersey.

Last year, sections of pipe located both above and below ground were removed from the site. After the completion of that section of the project, all the remaining above-ground steam pipe had been removed, leaving only below-ground sections in place.

During the peak years of asbestos use between the 1940s and 1980s, asbestos was often used in pipes, particularly those that conducted heated air or water, as the addition of asbestos provided excellent thermal insulation, making the conduction of heated air or water more efficient.

The current project is being carried out by subcontractor Demolition and Asbestos Removal Inc. of Richmond, Va. The contractor for the work is Weston Solution officials, who presented a plan for the project to the Community Advisory board earlier in April. Weston Solution expects that the project will be finished by the end of the summer.

There are several remaining sections of pipe located in a number of areas around the Village Elementary School. One is located slightly east of the school. According to Community Information Officer Tamara Garaffa, that section will not be removed until after the end of June, when school has finished for the summer.

This is one asbestos removal project that has been planned down to the last detail: school officials say that even unexpected delays won’t prevent the abatement from being completed on time, as they are prepared to hire extra work crews or weekend crews for the project to ensure it is completed before school reopens after summer vacation.

For the current project, the contractor crews involved in removing the asbestos-laden steam piping are trying to work as far away from the Village Elementary School as possible, to prevent any exposure risks. The crew will start at the most distant location from the school and work inwards.

The process of removing the asbestos-laden pipes is designed to eliminate the risk of exposure to asbestos-containing dust, and involves the use of negative air pressure and a protective ‘tent.’ Within the tent, the air pressure is negative, meaning that even if a small hole or rip occurs in the tent, the negative pressure means that any asbestos dust is unable to escape. These measures make the process of asbestos pipe removal much safer, meaning that it is highly unlikely that any environmental contamination will occur.

Sandwich, Massachusetts - After delays lasting several months, a former freezer plant situated alongside the Cape Cod Canal is finally undergoing demolition. The project will be completed by May 8.

The work was delayed in March after roofing shingles were found to contain asbestos. Sandwich Fire Prevention Officer J.J. Burke said the asbestos in the shingles was encapsulated in roofing tar and wasn’t dangerous.

Even so, the asbestos-containing shingles has to be removed, contained, and safely disposed of before demolition can begin. Safe removal of asbestos materials usually requires so-called ‘wet removal,’ to prevent the formation of asbestos dust. According to required regulations, the asbestos waste will taken to an approved asbestos disposal site once it has been removed and sealed.

Further delays came from the requirement of the site to undergo preparation before the asbestos-containing shingles could be removed. Certain interior electrical components had to be removed prior to asbestos removal, to prevent the possibility of contamination. Asbestos waste is three times more expensive to dispose of than non-contaminated waste, so the plan had to minimize the possibility of contamination of ‘clean’ waste.

Another issue that held the procedure up was that some sections of the roof would land on adjacent property owned by the Army Corps of Engineers, meaning that the owners of that land also had to approve the plan.

Developing a careful plan for the removal of asbestos-containing waste is an absolute requirement in most states, particularly for large-scale industrial demolition. Failure to remove asbestos waste prior to demolition could constitute an enormous hazard to public safety, as demolition would create massive clouds of inhalable asbestos dust.

Inhalation of asbestos can cause lethal diseases such as asbestosis and mesothelioma, two serious lung conditions. Mesothelioma can develop in people who experience relatively low level asbestos exposure, so protecting the public is an important consideration in cases such as the Sandwich freezer plant demolition.

Because the potential risks are so severe, heavy fines and penalties face people who are convicted of crimes involving the failure to remove or dispose of asbestos safely. Unfortunately, some developers and contractors are tempted to ignore asbestos regulations due to the expense of removing and disposing of the toxic substance.

In the case of the freezer plant, asbestos removal and demolition of the building will cost in the region of $250,000.

O’Fallon, Missouri – The tax abatement deal that would have allowed the redevelopment of a toxic waste dump laden with asbestos into a new residential development illustrates just how tricky asbestos issues can be.

Only a few days ago, it looked like a done deal, but now, concerns over the asbestos present on the site, and about the terms of the deal, mean that O’Fallon’s mayor may veto.

The twenty acre proposed development site, which had accommodated a trailer park from the 1960s until 2007, is currently vacant. The Highland Homes development company plans to build a $38.5 million housing and retail complex called Highland Terrace on the polluted site.

The building was demolished in 2007. During the demolition workers discovered an illegal dumping ground that contained hypodermic needles, asbestos waste, broken appliances, car parts, and other waste.

The results of an environmental study that was carried out suggest approximately 34,000 tons of asbestos-containing waste is present on the site. All of the asbestos must be removed, sealed according to regulations, and disposed of at a site that can deal with asbestos waste safely.

Cleaning up the site, which is contaminated with asbestos and other pollutants, will have an estimated cost of at least $2.2 million. The city of O’Fallon has agreed to reimburse the $2.2 million to the developers. The money is expected to come from property taxes.

Highland Homes also asked the city to declare the contaminated site as a “blighted area,” to allow the company to qualify for thirteen years’ worth of property tax abatement, according to Missouri’s urban redevelopment law.

On Thursday April 10 the City Council voted 5-2 to declare the site as a blighted area, and allow Highland Homes to qualify for the property tax abatement.

However, Mayor Donna Morrow says she plans to veto the deal due to concerns over an asbestos clean-up issue. City Attorney Kevin O’Keefe says the proposal doesn’t include a plan for asbestos clean-up, and doesn’t include a clause to revoke the development company’s tax abatement privileges if the development project isn’t completed. In addition, O’Keefe also says that the law allows only ten years’ worth of abatement, rather than the 13 years the development company asked for.

Another city official, Pierce Conley, who cast one of the two dissenting votes for the tax abatement deal, is concerned because Highland Housing hasn’t provided any documentation to prove their claims that 34,000 tons of asbestos contaminate the site.