Document 1QawVKgRvXyGkDJrnQG9zNG4o

FILENAME: Flintkote (FLK) DATE: 1981 July DOC#: FLK037 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Journal Article - Asbestos in Vermont Schools: Findings of a Statewide On-Site Investigation PUBLIC HEALTH BRIEFS a* Asbestos in Vermont Schools: Findings of a Statewide On-Site Investigation L l o y d F. N o v ic k . MD. MPH. C a ro l R ic e . SM. M a ry A n n e F r e e d m a n , MA, a n d D a v id J il l s o n . PhD Abstract: Materials containing asbestos were found in 75 per cent of 336 Vermont Schools constructed or renovat ed between 1946 and 1974. w'ith two-fifths of the materials in student exposure areas. Findings from visits to all schools contrasted with an earlier investigation relying on selfreporting. Of 105 schools with student exposure disclosed by the current survey, only eight had been identified in the earlier effort. Ceiling tiles, previously not believed to contain substantial asbestos material, constituted a source of student exposure in 36 schools. iAm J Public Health 1981:71:744746.) A survey for asbestos-containing materials was per formed by room-to-room inspection of all 336 Vermont schools constructed or structurally renovated between 1946 and 1974. Findings were.compared with the results of a previous study performed in 1977 that employed self-report ing to potential asbestos problems hv Vermont school offi cials. In 1979, the Vermont Department of Health embarked on this repeat survey because the earlier 1977 self-reporting effort resulted in an incomplete response and suspected under-reporting. The design of the 1979 repeat survey differs significantly from that recommended by the Environmental From the Vermont State Department of Health. Address reprint requests to Lloyd F. Novick. MD. MPH. Commissioner. Vermont State Department of Health. 60 Main Street. Burlington. VT 05401. Ms. Freedman is Director, and Dr. Jillson is Biostatistician. both with-the Division of Public Health Statistics. VSHD: Dr. Rice, formerly with Division of Occupational Health of VSDH. is now with the University of North Carolina. This paper, submitted to the Journal September 17. 1980. was revised and accepted for publica tion February 19. 1981. Protection Agency (EPA) and others which rely on selfreporting by schools.1"' Surveys that employ self-reporting have inherent deficiencies of both under-reporting and lack of uniformity of information, as suggested in a recent study from Rhode Island: "Can we be certain, however, thai schools do not report having spray-on asbestos actually have none.'" ' Design o f the Survey The 1979 survey utilized a trained inspector to asse" the use and conditions of the wide range of material' possibly containing asbestos in the school setting. The survey protocol required the 'Vstemutic visual inspection '! each room in the school. Inspection and sample collection included areas above suspended ceilings, bathrooms, spe cialized rooms, storage and maintenance areas. For eacr room, the inspector recorded location, condition, accession ity. friability, and proximity to air moving system of an;, suspect material. Collection of samples from classrooms w.idone- after school hours to minimize studen: exposure and concern among students or parents. A petrographic light microscope was chosen as the analytical method due to it' high reliability for identification of asbestos in bulk samples For quality assurance, the inspector split samples according to a regimen similar to that adopted by EPA.1 Results The 1979 survey disclosed that 251 schools or threefourths of the institutions visited had asbestos containing materials. The most frequent use of asbestos was tor pipe and boiler insulation (Table I). In 105 schools, asbestos- T A B L E 1-- Location o f Asbestos-C on tain in g Material Identified in 336 Vrmont S ch o o ls Location ol Asbestos Matenais Type ol Sample # Schools * Schools Pipe Lagging 183 Boiler Cover 104 Suspended Ceiling 34 Spray-on 21 Non-suspended Ceiling 2 Other* 114 One or more of above 251 54.4 31.0 10.1 6.3 0.6 33.9 74.8 ` Hot water tank covers, cnimney cover, kiln wire insulation, welding dividers, welder curtain, etc. 744 Location o: Asbestos Matenais m Stuoer; Exposure Areas al Schools ' Schools 43 12.8 36 10.7 17 5.1 2 0.6 25 7.4 '105 31.3 A JPH July 1981. Voi. 71. No. 7 -eir- ting luck udy 'hat une 'SS rials The n ol iion 'PC- :.uh ibilam A and igm a its sles. Jin treenine pip .tos- PUBLIC HEALTH BRIEFS T A 8 L E 2-- Type of Asbestos by Type of Sample Found in Student Exposure Areas Type o Samla Total Numoer ol Samples Taken Type of Asbestos Present in Student Exposure Areas Amosite Chrysotile Crocttoiite Hardboaro Total Pipe Lagging 312 10 47 2 Boiler Cover 124 0 0 0 Suspended Ceiling 292 24 21 0 Spray-on 115 0 45 0 Non-suspended Ceiling 153 1 0 0 Other1 212 1 29 1 TOTAL 1208 36 142 3 12 71 0 _ 8 53 4 49 1 2 4 35 29 210 ` Hot water tank cover, chimney cover, kiln wire insulation, wetting dividers, wetting curtain, etc. ! ^containing materials were found in student exposure areas. | :Overall. 1.208 samples were collected at all facilities and 542 ' (45 per cent) were positive for asbestos. ; Comparison of these findings to the earlier 1977 self- report survey showed a marked divergence. Of 105 schools with student exposure disclosed by the current survey, only eight had been identified in the earlier effort. In the 1979 survey. 21 schools had spray-on coatings containing asbes tos. Of these. 13 schools were never identified in the 1977 survey because the school officials did not recognize the suspect material. ; Type of asbestos, location of the positive samples in student exposure areas, and the friability of these materials are shown in Tables 2 and 3. Some asbestos content was found in 34 schools in suspended ceiling tiles. Two schools used perforated asbes tos (chrysotile) cement hardboard as tiles. All other tiles were the more porous commercially available variety, ap- i proximately V; inch thick. Ceiling tiles containing asbestos were installed in- 1 schools built between 1952 and 1974. The name of the supplier of the installed asbestos tiles cannot be determined, hut a review of available building specifications and architec- 1 turai designs indicates that these were most likely obtained , from national firms. The total cost of the survey was S26.330. or S78 per facility. Of these costs. 51 per cent were for sample collec tion. 20 per cent for sample analysis, and 29 per cent for design and administration (see Table 4). Discussion Identification of asbestos-containing materials was fol lowed by issuance of recommendations for the control of significant sources of potential exposure to students and staff. The health department can provide valuable assistance to schools faced with the problem of asbestos-containing materials where there is concern about both the hazard to health and the cost of remediation, which can be substantial. Meetings with the local school board and other contact between health department and school staff defused poten tially troublesome situaitons and established plans for reso lution of potential asbestos hazards. In one school in a small Vermont community, however, a bond issue including SI00.000 to replace an asbestoscontaining ceiling is being opposed by some residents who regard the risk as too speculative or remote to justify the large expenditure. The detection of asbestos content in ceiling tiles that was first disclosed by this survey was an important rinding with respect to student exposure. The EPA has verified the Vermont Department of Health results by performing repeat analyses of these ceiling ti'e samples. For schools with asbestos-containing ceiling tiles, edu cational officials were advised that vandalism, strong air currents, and movement of the tiles can contribute to airborne concentrations. Unnecessary movement of the tiles was discouraged and monitoring of vandalism or water damage was advised. 20OS 3 7 1 .6 4 .3 ' 1 T'`dy' . ;V. * , yl ' 2 ' V* . } V;V * TABLE 3-- Friability by Type of Sam ple for S ch o o ls Having P ositive A sb e sto s Sam ples with Student Exposure Type-of Sample Number ol Schools Samoied Friability ci Samples r>SteSent Sxoesure Areas Non-fnable Slightly Moderately Very Total Pipe Lagging 209 27 13 0 3 43 Boiler Cover 110 0 0 0 0 -- Suspended Ceiling 198 34 0 0 0 34 Spray-on 40 9 7 1 0 17 Non-suspended Ceiling 120 2 0 0 0 2 Other" 138 21 4 0 0 25 On` e or` m` ` or' e- o--f---a---b---o- ve 3---3- -6-- 93 24 1 3 123 _____________ -- --- _ ........ " *Hot w w m tank c o w , chim ney cover. Kiln wire insulation, welding dividers, wetotng curiam , e tc.. ?< % 1981, Vol. 71. No. 7 , IA L 4-- o a s t u a ta iis A a so cia ta o with Proiect * ................... .. 1 - n ! Sample Collection Inspector salary Travel, meals, lodging Other operating expenses Subtotal Sample Analysis Technician salary Operating expenses Subtotal pther Administrative Costs Supervisory salaries Operating expense Subtotal total $10.865 2,255 308 $13,428 $4.016 1.250 $5.266 S6.400 1,236 $7.636 $26,330 Removal, encapsulation, and enclosure were consid ered as control approaches in schools with spray-on materi als containing asbestos. Removal was generally preferred, even if control hadjto be delayed until the next fiscal year, as it offers the only permanent solution. A characteristic of the 1979 survey is the uniformity of the techniques employed. A simple trained inspector gath ered samples from all schools. Laboratory analysis was by Vermont Health Department staff who had received special training. This approach is different from that described in the Federal Asbestos School Hazard Detection and Control Act of 1979 wmen would proviue uetection tunas lor individual schools.'1The latter ach has serious pitfalls because it does not provide a rr. hism to assure that identification of asbestos containing materials in various schools will be performed with accuracy and uniformity. This problem is documented in the differences noted between an earlier Vermont study relying on self-reportine and the latter survey utilizing actual inspections. The self' report approach did not detect the problem in the majority of schools where potential student exposure existed to asbes tos-containing materials. REFERENCES 1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Asbestos-Containing Materials in School Buildings: A Guidance Document. Parts 1 and II. Washngton. DC:EPA 1979. 2. Irving KF, Alexander RG. Bauley H: Asbestos exposure in Massachusetts public schools. Am Indus Hyg Assoc 1980- 41:270-276. | j 3. Faich G: Asbestos hazard evaluation in Rhode Island schools Am J Public Health 1980: 70:162-164 4. U.S. House of Representatives: H.R. 3282. Asbestos School Hazard Detection and Control Act of 19~9. ACKNOWLEDGMENT We gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Arthur Rohl. PhD. of the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, for invaluable assistance in the analyses of matenais for asbestos. ; .^inten ; yirary ^ V ;trii> .faice ' b d s . ' ! 7 Whet I 'epo: /-their j .-7 : i ! jJurbar : strate ; -' -areas i -7 . Fror //.can fc ' to de dog li estab the tl feces hours 5 per dogs on th when '.trati. Modifying Dog Litter in Urban Communities L e o n a r d A. J a s o n . PhD. a n d E d w in S. Z o l ik . Abstract: Dog litter not only damages the estheticquality of a community but also poses a serious health, problem. The present paper summarizes a series of projects which were designed to ameliorate this litter problem. Two studies indicated that surrounding specific target areas with posts connected by string effectively eliminated dog drop pings. Two other studies, which focused on prompting dog owners to pick up their dogs' droppings, also brought about considerable reductions in dog litter. M/i J Public Health 1981:71:746-747.) Besides damaging the esthetic quality of a community, dog litter is pan of a number of pernicious, well-documented Address reprint requests to Leonard A Jason. PhD. Associale Professor of Psychology. DePaul University. 2219 N. Kenmore Avenue. Chicago. 1L 60614. Dr. Zolik is Professor. Department of Psychology. DePaul University. This paper, submined to the Jour nal October 3. 1980. was revised and accepted for publication February 23. 1981. health hazards. Some of the infections and parasites which can be transmitted from uncollected dog feces to humans include: round worms, fish tapeworm, leptospirosis, and echinococcosis.1There is a need to devise behaviorj strate gies to ameliorate this ubiquitous urban litter prorL.-tl. The present paper reviews a three-year, anti-litter research effort conducted by a team of investigators at DePaul University. Fence Interventions The first two studies occurred in low-income and highincome areas in Chicago. In both studies, one biock was selected as the target intervention site. In the target area, throughout each study, dog feces were collected each morn ing starting at 7:00 am. All dog litter which had color and texture, and was located within a 0.2m area, was counted aonly one dropping. In both studies, during a four-day baseline phase, there were four to seven droppings collected daily in one site and six to 13 droppings in the other. In both studies, the /ter t to prt propi in tht The news ordin 1 :. tht litter inter litter tygr own -colla 746 AJPH July 1981. Vol. 71, No. 7