The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently announced that the BoRit asbestos site in Ambler, Pennsylvania has been added to the Superfund National Priority List (NPL).

According to the EPA, the NPL is a “national list of sites where hazardous contaminants could impact public health and/or the environment.” Once a site has been investigated by the EPA, the agency begins cleaning up the contaminated area as funds and time allows.

To date, more than 1,500 sites have been added to the NPL. These sites may be contaminated with toxins such as arsenic, chromium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, sulfuric acid and asbestos. Though all of these substances can pose a serious health risk, asbestos is one of the largest concerns for Superfund sites.

Exposure to asbestos can cause a number of illnesses including the rare cancer mesothelioma. A mesothelioma diagnosis may not be determined until several decades after the exposure occurred, as the latency period associated with the disease can last for 20 to 50 years. The mesothelioma survival rate for patients is usually less than one year.

The BoRit site was first proposed for the NPL in September 2008. Throughout its history, the site was primarily used as an area to dump asbestos-containing materials from a nearby asbestos-manufacturing plant.

Asbestos fibers at the site have been found in the soil, surface water and air samples taken by the EPA. The site is currently divided into three parcels, including an asbestos waste pile, a reservoir owned by Wissahickon Waterfowl Preserve and a playground owned by Whitpain Township.

The asbestos waste pile covers nearly two acres of land and is about 20 feet above ground level. The berm (a narrow ledge) of the 15-acre reservoir is constructed of asbestos shingles, millboard and soil. In addition, visible asbestos-contaminated pipes and tiles surround the reservoir and stream banks.

Another area, which covers approximately 11 acres, is a depression that was previously filled and leveled. This particular location was used as a playground and was eventually closed off by fencing during the 1980s.

Although the asbestos contamination at the site is dangerous, a nearby creek remains a popular fishing destination for local patrons. The site has been added to the NPL largely because the nearby residential population may be at risk of airborne asbestos fibers.

Additional information about asbestos exposure and mesothelioma may be found through the Mesothelioma Cancer Center.

Around ten days ago, the Pennsylvania Department of Health has issued a health consultation document stating that the BoRit asbestos site is not dangerous, saying the site poses “no apparent public health hazard to the community for cancer effects or no cancer effects.” However, residents of Ambler, Pennsylvania aren’t convinced, and they’re concerned about public safety issues now that work is starting at the contaminated site.

According to the results of a study recently released by the Pennsylvania Department of Health and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the site is not harmful to the public. However, the document also says that “exposures to asbestos fibers when on-site soils and asbestos-containing material are disturbed are a public health hazard to area residents.”

It’s the implications of that last sentence which have Ambler residents worried, now that crews contracted by the Environmental Protection Agency have begun clearing out brush and vegetation to prepare the site for the clean-up work.

According to the document, activities such as on-site sampling may disturb soil and materials to the extent that they may become hazardous to the public. In addition, very dry weather conditions may also cause an increase in airborne asbestos.

The 38-acre BoRit site has a long history, beginning in the late 1800s. Until 1933 the site was owned and operated by Keasbey & Mattison Co., which used the site to manufacture milk of magnesia. In 1933 the site was contaminated when a number of manufactures dumped asbestos-containing waste and other industrial contaminants on the then-unused site.

By the 1980s the BoRit site was considered a public health risk due to the presence of large amounts of exposed asbestos. Now designated an EPA Superfund site, the federal agency will fund and supervise clean-up of the contaminated land.

However, the work currently underway on the site has some residents concerned over safety issues. Residents are also concerned about the safety of the workers themselves, as they have been spotted without protective clothing to prevent dust exposure and inhalation.

Asbestos is dangerous only when fibers are airborne and can be inhaled, and the activities workers are carrying out may cause asbestos fibers to become airborne. Some Ambler residents say the EPA has violated its own guidelines because it did not warn them that the work was beginning at the site.

EPA officials say there’s no danger, but residents believe even a little risk is a big enough issue. Considering that some experts say that the inhalation of just a few asbestos fibers can cause mesothelioma, its no surprise that Ambler citizens are worried.

The Pennsylvania Department of Health has issued a health consultation document stating that the BoRit asbestos site is not dangerous, saying the site poses “no apparent public health hazard to the community for cancer effects or no cancer effects.” Asbestos fibers have been found in soil, surface water, sediment, and air samples at the BoRit site over the years.

The document was released on July 14 by the Pennsylvania Department of Health and the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. The document was prepared at the request of the Region 3 Environmental Protection Agency, but the organizations also hope that the document will alleviate some of the public’s concerns about the safety of the BoRit site.

The document includes details of a study carried out to “determine if levels of asbestos detected in the EPA’s 2006-2007 on-site and off-site ambient air sampling at the BoRit site in Ambler were at levels of public health concern.”

According to the study, the site is not harmful to the public, but “exposures to asbestos fibers when on-site soils and asbestos-containing material are disturbed are a public health hazard to area residents.” Essentially, the site is safe for now, but could become a hazard once the clean-up begins.

In addition, activities such as on-site sampling, which the EPA carries out to determine the extent of contamination at such sites, may disturb soil and materials to the extent that they may become hazardous to the public.

The document also states that in dry weather conditions such as those seen in the area in September 2007 might cause an increase in airborne asbestos levels at the site and potentially create a public health hazard.

This month, the EPA issued a fact sheet to be distributed to area residents, to let locals know that EPA contractors will soon begin preparing the BoRit site for clean-up. This work involved clearing vegetation, repairing fencing, and building access roads so that the site can be cleaned efficiently and safely. An EPA on-scene coordinator estimates that these preparatory activities will take around 45 days to complete.

The public can read the Pennsylvania Department of Health health consultation document online at www.epaosc.net/borit, under the “Documents” heading. There is a 45-day comment period, which ends on August 31. Comments must be mailed to the following address: Pennsylvania Department of Health, Bureau of Epidemiology, Health Assessment Program, ATTN: Christine Lloyd, Health Assessor, Room 933, Health and Welfare Building, 7th and Forster Streets, Harrisburg, PA, 17120

As many schools across the country take advantage of the summer vacation to complete repairs and renovation projects, the Assumption School in West Grove, Philadelphia is continuing with an asbestos removal project thanks in part to grants received from several different organizations.

The school was built in 1959, during a period in which asbestos use in construction materials was peaking in the United States. Asbestos is an increasingly prevalent problem in schools across the country due to heavy use between the 1940s and 1980s.

Asbestos was once heavily used in construction materials of many different types, but due to its toxicity the asbestos is now becoming a serious problem, particularly as these buildings age and the asbestos they contain becomes more exposed and begins degrading.

In the Assumption School, the asbestos removal project is currently in the second phase of a three phase project planned for this summer. Currently asbestos is being removed from ceilings, hallway insulation, and from four classrooms.

All schools are required by federal law to adhere to Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) guidelines, which require schools to create and maintain asbestos management plans. The plans must include details of the location of any asbestos, as well as all measures taken to prevent exposure risks.

In addition, schools must be inspected every three years, and asbestos management plans must be available for public review by staff and parents.

According to Assumption School’s Home and School Association President Helen Leinhauser, the school is checked annually to ensure the asbestos it contains is safely sealed, and that students and staff are not at risk of exposure.

Over the past two years the school has raised around $260,000 for the asbestos removal and renovations. In addition the school has received grants from several different organizations, including a $37,000 grant in June from the Connelly Foundation of West Conshohocken, and a $20,000 grant in December 2007 from the Raskob Foundation of Wilmington.

The school also received $13,535 from funds raised by MesoWalk 2008, a charity walk held in Philadelphia in April. The Mesothelioma and Asbestos Disease Society contributed $6,000, while the other $7,535 was raised Assumption School walkers.

Fund-raising isn’t over yet, however. To complete phase three of the project, the school must still raise $32,000 to replace doors which were erected using asbestos caulking.

Oakland, Pennsylvania – Students at Schenley High School in Oakland won’t be returning after the summer: the school is closing down, forever, due to the need for repairs which would cost more than the school can afford.

The renovation costs have been driven up significantly by the presence of asbestos which needs to be removed, and there just isn’t enough money in the budget to repair the 92-year-old high school building.

Many students are upset that they won’t be returning to the high school after the summer. Instead, they’ll be temporarily relocated to another nearby school.

Use of asbestos in construction and renovation materials was widespread between the 1940s and 1980s. Older buildings, including schools, which undergo renovation or demolition must be treated with caution due to the likelihood that asbestos is present.

Due to the health risks involved in asbestos exposure, work with or around the substance is tightly regulated and there are several laws and requirements that control how asbestos-containing materials and buildings must be handled. These requirements tend to significantly increase the costs of any renovation or demolition involving asbestos. In the case of the Schenley High School and other buildings which contain asbestos materials, there are two factors that significantly increase the costs of renovation.

The first is that the asbestos must be treated with extreme caution, and special procedures must be used when handling or removing the substance. This requires licensed professionals who are trained to handle asbestos, and often means tight school budgets are stretched even further by the need to hire licensed asbestos contractors.

The second factor is that disposal of asbestos-containing construction waste is up to three times more expensive than disposal of non-hazardous waste, due to the necessity of disposing of the material at a landfill that is equipped to handle hazardous materials. If asbestos waste must be removed, its disposal pushes up the costs of renovations hugely.

The issue of asbestos in schools is likely to become an increasingly widespread problem. Asbestos was used in a variety of building materials between the 1940s and 1980s, due to the substance’s excellence as a fire-retardant, insulator, and acoustic barrier. As asbestos-containing materials age, repairs and renovations may cause disturbance to asbestos materials. These types of disturbances can potentially present a health hazard if proper procedures are not followed to limit exposure.

To deal with asbestos in schools, the EPA requires that all schools that contain asbestos maintain a management plan that details the location of asbestos, its condition, and the measures taken to prevent exposure. In schools where asbestos is present, parents and school employees can request to see a copy of the asbestos management plan at any time.

For some schools, such as Schenley High School, however, simply managing the asbestos just isn’t an efficient way to deal with the problem. Many more schools are likely to face similar issues in the future, as the costs of managing asbestos become prohibitive.

Ambler, Pennsylvania – After last week’s funding request to the Environmental Protection Agency for money to clean up the BoRit site in Ambler, PA, U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz has written a letter to the EPA headquarters supporting the request and the citizen’s petition that asks for the site to be included on the National Priorities List.

EPA Region 3 asked EPA headquarters to supply $4 million in Superfund money to clean up the BoRit asbestos site last week. The funding request came from Eduardo Rovira, the eastern EPA branch’s on-scene coordinator. Rovira said in the memo that he estimated eighteen months and more than $8.1 million would be needed to “prevent, limit or mitigate the threat posed by hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants at the site.”

The memo also says that the region can itself cover almost $4 million of the needed money, and asks that EPA headquarters cover the rest. EPA headquarters have so far budgeted $2 million for the regional agency to complete asbestos abatement at the site, over a twelve month time frame.

Asbestos fibers have been found in surface water, sediment, soil, and air samples at the BoRit site. Despite the contamination the nearby creek is a popular local fishing site, and some studies have shown that asbestos has negative effects on fish. More seriously, asbestos causes a highly lethal type of cancer called mesothelioma in humans.

The memo sent by Rovira contained some serious warnings about the asbestos contamination at the BoRit site. Rovira wrote, “If the proposed actions at the site are not implemented or are delayed, the release of hazardous substances into the environment may increase as asbestos-containing materials erode, erosion and run-off continue, asbestos-containing materials are brought to the surface by burrowing animals and/or worst-case weather conditions develop.”

Schwartz’s letter, addressed to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, stressed the importance of the request, and the importance of the EPA to “realize the strong support there is in this community for placing BoRit on the NPL.”

Schwartz said she had received a petition from constituents who supported putting the site on the NPL. The petition was started by Sharon McCormick, an Ambler resident and CAG member. The petition has been circulating since November 2007, and has gained almost 4,500 signatures.

In the letter, Schwartz emphasized the community’s need and desire for the clean-up, saying, “I realize that EPA’s final decision will ultimately be based upon scientific analysis of the conditions at the site, but it is my strong recommendation that EPA consider the input of the community in this matter as it makes its determination.”

Ambler, Pennsylvania - Environmental Protection Agency Region 3 has asked EPA headquarters to supply $4 million in Superfund money to clean up the BoRit asbestos site in Ambler, PA.

The initial funding request came in a memo from Eduardo Rovira, the eastern EPA branch’s on-scene coordinator. Out of necessity the memo indicates on vague plans for cleaning the BoRit site, as it must allow for flexibility in the way asbestos removal and encapsulation is carried out.

EPA headquarters have so far budgeted $2 million for the regional agency to complete asbestos abatement at the site, over a twelve month time frame.

EPA community involvement coordinator Larry Johnson says this is just a starting point for clean-up of the BoRit site.

In addition, Rovira says in the memo that he estimates eighteen months and more than $8.1 million will be needed to “prevent, limit or mitigate the threat posed by hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants at the site.”

Rovira says that after additional data was collected at the site, it was determined that “additional funding will be necessary to complete the removal action and initiate additional removal activities.”

The memo also says that the region can itself cover almost $4 million of the money needed for the clean-up, and asks that EPA headquarters cover the rest of the money.

Asbestos fibers have been found in soil, surface water, sediment, and air samples at the BoRit site over the years. Despite the contamination the nearby creek is a popular local fishing site, and some studied have shown that asbestos has a negative effect on fishing, including increased mortality.

More seriously, asbestos causes a type of asbestos cancer called mesothelioma in humans, which is highly lethal due to its resistance to treatment.

The memo contains some serious warnings about the asbestos contamination at the site.

“If the proposed actions at the site are not implemented or are delayed, the release of hazardous substances into the environment may increase as asbestos-containing materials erode, erosion and run-off continue, asbestos-containing materials are brought to the surface by burrowing animals and/or worst-case weather conditions develop.”

In addition, the memo states that “Nearby human populations and the environment may continue to be threatened by the potential for exposure to hazardous substances.”
Before money can be allotted for the project, however, details of the world that will be carried out on the site have to be formed into a cohesive plan. According to Larry Johnson the plan will be completed by June.

Railroad giant CSX is again trying to uncover instances of whit is believes is fraud perpetrated by asbestos lawyers who have filed large numbers of claims.

CSX Corp. wants to file its Second Amended Complaint in federal court as part of its case against Pittsburgh law firm Peirce, Raimond & Coulter.

The case is connected to that against Bridgeport doctor Ray Harron, who was accused of falsely diagnosing asbestos-related diseases in people who did not have them.

CSX alleges that the falsely diagnosed people were then packaged with others in class action lawsuits with thousands of plaintiffs. CSX says that this method of filing meant the company was unable to properly investigate individual plaintiffs.

The complaint says, “CSXT’s proposed Second Amended Complaint is based on the same fraudulent scheme described in the Amended Complaint and reasserts claims based on the same legal theories.”

“Specifically, the proposed Second Amended Complaint alleges that Harron and the lawyer defendants fabricated and prosecuted objectively baseless asbestos claims against CSXT and seeks damages for injuries caused by 11 such claims.”

One of those eleven claims was a case of ‘mistaken identity’ that occurred after CSX employee Ricky May learned that the Peirce, Raimond & Coulter was conducting an asbestos screening. May had tested negative for asbestosis in a previous screening.

CSX alleges that a former employer, Robert Gilkison, had been hired by the law firm as a ‘runner,’ a person who was hired to convince former colleagues to initiate law suits against CSX. The company also alleged that Gilkison had suggested to May that he find someone who tested positive for asbestosis to impersonate him for the screening.

CSX’s complaint on the case says, “Defendant Gilkison suggested to Mr. May that he should get someone who had previously tested positive for asbestosis to set for his exam and thus be eligible to file a claim against CSXT.”

The railroad company then alleges that May enlisted CSX worker Danny Jayne, who had already been diagnosed with asbestosis, to pretend to be him for the exam. The suit also claims that Gilkison smoothed the process over, allowing May to complete the paperwork while Jayne completed the exam.

The x-rays were then sent to Ray Harron, who diagnosed asbestosis. May received a settlement of $8,000 from CSX.

CSX investigated the case and filed suit after a doctor verified that the x-rays taken of May and Jayne were in fact of the same person. After the company filed suit both men confessed to having taken part in the fraud.

Upper Bucks County, Pennsylvania – A man has been accused of operating an illegal garbage dump, after authorities allegedly found several different types of hazardous contaminants, including damaged lead batteries and asbestos, at the site.

The accused is Upper Bucks County resident Herman J. Moyer, who faces a court trial after waiving a preliminary hearing. Ellis B. Klein, the man’s attorney, hopes to negotiate a plea bargain in May, so that Moyer, 86, doesn’t have to spend time in jail.

Brian Coffey, Deputy Attorney General for the Attorney General’s Environmental Crimes Section, said that Moyer’s waiver shows he’s willing to cooperate, and the state will take that into consideration.

Moyer apparently ran the illegal dump for several decades, and may be liable for fines of up to $1,000 per day of operation. Ellis B. Klein hopes to be able to negotiate a reduced fine.

The site is located at 394 North Mine Road in the townships of Richland and Springfield. Moyer began operating the dump at a time when the current permit requirements and environmental laws didn’t exist. Moyer burned and buried waste for decades without permits, but Moyer’s attorney says the dump operator wasn’t aware that he was breaking any laws.

The site was first inspected on July 13 2005. During this inspection, a representative of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection found waste tires, construction waste, trash buried up to thirty feet deep, and a walk-in burn barrel. A further inspection on September 19 revealed more evidence of burning of solid waste.

Among the waste seized was partially-buried asbestos-containing pipe.

Herman J. Moyer has owned the 47-acre property for more than 50 years, and turned the site into a dump-yard before the state began regulating these types of waste disposal sites.

The first regulations came into effect in 1980, and Moyer began receiving violation noticed shortly after. In 1990 and 1998 Moyer was ordered to stop receiving waste and to clean up the property. In 1991, a massive fire at the site saw an estimated 300 firefighters work around 18 hours to quell the blaze.

Moyer continued to operate the site despite the warnings, but it was not until 2005 that the first inspections were initiated. Further inspections in 2007 revealed the presence of even more waste, including lead-acid batteries, old tires, waste buried thirty feet deep, and asbestos-containing waste.

A Department of Environmental Protection spokesperson said that Moyer would slow down activity following violation notices, but that the department would begin receiving more reports of activity eventually.

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania – In a case before the Philadelphia Common Pleas Court, jurors handed up a liability verdict that awards $25.2 million in compensatory and punitive damages in three combined asbestos suits last week.

The three cases were combined in a reverse-bifurcated trial and heard by a jury under Judge James Murray Lynn. In two of the cases, the jury established that the potential damages are $12.6 million. Those cases were settled before the liability phase. If they had proceeded to the liability phase, the award amount could have approached $40 million for the combined cases.
In the third case, the jury awarded $18.2 million in punitive damages. The defendants in that case requested that Kentucky law be applied. That request would have reduced their liability. The judge agreed to the request.

Because the settlements in the other two cases are confidential, it’s not publicly known how much the plaintiffs will receive. Mesothelioma cases often rest on determining whether or not the asbestos containing products to which the plaintiffs were exposed were manufactured or distributed by the defendants, or whether the defendants could have prevented the exposure.
The estate of James Baccus, the one plaintiff whose case proceeded beyond the damages phase, will receive $7 million in compensatory damages and $18.2 million in punitive damages. In addition, there were several defendants in each case who settled prior to the damages phase of the trial. Those amounts are also not known publicly.

Baccus died of malignant mesothelioma. He worked around asbestos during his tenure in the U.S. Navy, which was served in Philadelphia. The suit alleges that the majority of his injuries were received in Kentucky, where he worked for American Synthetic Rubber. The defendants asked that Kentucky law be applied to the case, and the judge agreed. The jury awarded $7 million in compensatory damages, and apportioned the damages among three separate companies. The punitive damages were also apportioned among the companies, with Crane company being assessed $11.9 million of the shared verdict, and $6.3 million to be paid by Yarway company.

An attorney for the plaintiffs stated that it’s the first case in more than 20 years where he has seen a jury award punitive damages in an asbestos case. He said that the standard for applying punitive damages in Pennsylvania is much much higher than in Kentucky.

The defendants wanted Kentucky law applied because of the method by which liability is apportioned. It assigns an individual portion of liability to all defendants, including those who have settled before the liability phase. Under Pennsylvania law, all defendants share the damages equally.

The strategy, meant to reduce the liability carried by the three remaining defendants, backfired when the jury held all of the settled defendants zero percent responsible.

The defendants that settled before the compensatory damages phase of the trial were Ingersoll Rand, THAN, IMO/DeLaval, Westinghouse, Owens Illinois and Goulds Pumps.

Yarway and Crane Co. will most likely appeal the awards, and their attorneys believe they have a strong case on appeal.