&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Pesticides
and Toxic Substances
Washington DC 20460
fcPA 560/5-81-10
June 1981
Toxic Substances
Identifying
Potential Asbestos Exposures
in Schools:
The
New York City
Experience
Cv
-------
Identifying
Potential Asbestos Exposures
in Schools:
The New York City
Experience
by
J, F, Cesario, R, A. Chiljean, A. R. Smith
Board of Education of the City of New York,
Division of School Buildings
Long Island City, New York 11101
and
E. E, Logue
Research Triangle Institute
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Contract No. 68-01-5848
Task Manager; Cindy Stroup
Contract Project Officer: Joseph Carra
Design and Development Branch
Exposure Evaluation Division
i JQ pp/ Office of Toxic Substances
n.,-,K^ ' 7, Environmental Protection Agency
quarers and Chemical Ubraties Washington, DC 20460
EPA West Sidg Room 3340
Ma»icode 3404T
1301 Constitution /we NW June 1981
Washington DC 20004
202-566-0556
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared under contract to an agency of the United
States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any of its
employees, contractors, subcontractors, or their employees makes any
warranty, expressed or implied, nor assumes any legal liability or
responsibility for any third party's use or the results of such use
of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed in this
report, nor represents that its use by such third party would not
infringe upon privately owned rights.
Publication of the data in this document does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the joint or separate views and policies of
each-sponsoring agency. Mention of trade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
ii
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
CONTENTS
Page
DISCLAIMER ii
LIST OF TABLES v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vi
ABSTRACT vii
I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Sequence of Events in the New York City
Program 2
B. Organizational Considerations 3
II. FIELD DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES
III.
A. Building Inspection 7
B. Bulk Sampling 8
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
A. Polarized Light Microscopy with Dispersion
Staining
C. New York City Bulk Sampling Program Results . , .
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
C. New York City Algorithm Results
ABATEMENT OPTIONS
RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
NEW YORK CITY PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Public Relations
13
15
16
21
21
23
24
29
29
31
33
37
37
37
iii
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
Page
C. Bulk Sampling 38
D. Laboratory Quality Control 39
E. Abatement Options and Costs 40
F. Recordkeeping 41
G. Asbestos Waste Disposal 41
REFERENCES 43
Appendix A Asbestos Exposure Algorithm Form and Bulk
Sample Canister Labels A-l
Appendix B Memoranda from the Executive Director of the
Division of School Buildings to the Chancellor
of the Board of Education B-l
Appendix C Summary Form, Building-Specific File C-l
Appendix D Initial Asbestos Survey Instructions and
Data Forms D-l
Appendix E Abatement Contractor Evaluation Forms E-l
Appendix F Components of a Postsurvey Monitoring System .... F-l
iv
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
1 Bulk Sample Analyses: Inter laboratory Differences 18
2 Asbestos Content of Bulk Samples Collected in New York
City Schools by Borough 19
3 Distributions of Algorithm Components by Borough 25
4 Distributions of Asbestos Exposure Assessment Algorithm
Scores by Borough 28
5 Abatement Unit Costs 32
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
ACKNOWTEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of Ms. Cindy Stroup
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, and of Dr. Tyler
Hartwell of the Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina.
vi
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
ABSTRACT
This report describes the experience of the New York City (NYC) Board
of Education and their asbestos-in-schools program. The program objectives
were to: (a) identify current and potential asbestos exposures in NYC public
schools, 00 evaluate the seriousness of these asbestos exposures, (c) recom-
mend appropriate abatement action, and (d) oversee the completion of the
recommended action. A survey of all school buildings was completed and
priority problem areas were identified. Major abatement activities were
scheduled for summer recess periods and completed as funds became available.
vn
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the experience of the New York City (NYC) Board of
Education and their asbestos-in-schools program. The program objectives were
to: (a) identify current and potential asbestos exposures in NYC public
schools, (b) evaluate the seriousness of these asbestos exposures, (c) recom-
mend appropriate abatement action, and (d) oversee the completion of the
recommended actions. The NYC asbestos-in-schools program was created because
public concern was focused upon the possible adverse health effects caused by
respirable airborne asbestos released by deteriorating asbestos-containing
surfacing materials. Various epidemiologic and clinical studies support the
existence of a causal relationship between asbestos exposure and chronic
rionmalignant respiratory disease, or cancers of the lung, chest, abdominal
lining, and gastrointestinal tract (Selikoff and Hammond 1979).
The asbestos-containing materials that can contribute to airborne
asbestos levels in schools include soft or friable insulation or sound-
proofing materials usually found on ceilings and walls of classrooms,
corridors, gymnasiums, and band rooms. In some schools, asbestos-containing
materials were applied to structural steel to minimize building collapse
during a fire. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established a
guidance program (USEPA 1979) to help State and local officials identify and
control potential asbestos exposures in schools. This guidance program was
specifically designed to help local school districts comply with the proposed
EPA asbestos identification and notification rule.
Subsequent portions of this introductory section are concerned with the
sequence of events in the NYC program and organizational considerations.
-------
Major sections of this report deal with field data collection activities, the
laboratory analysis of bulk samples, exposure assessment, and abatement acti-
vities. The last two sections describe recordkeeping and reporting in the NYC
program, and NYC program recommendations.
A. Sequenceof Events in the Mew York City Program
The Division of School Buildings of the New York City Board of
Education became aware of a potential asbestos exposure problem in New York
City schools on January 5, 1977. During the previous month, six elementary
schools in New Jersey were closed because of parental concern about elevated
health risks subsequent to asbestos exposures in these schools. On January 7,
Division of School Buildings (DSB) personnel were assigned to review archi-
tectural specifications for buildings constructed between 1946 and 1971, but
it was quickly recognized that physical inspections would be necessary to
identify suspect materials. On January 10, the DSB Director met with officials
from the New York City Environmental Protection Agency who agreed to collect
air and bulk samples in selected schools. Later in 1977 and early 1978, DSB
personnel began exploring different abatement options, but delays in completing
specifications and reviewing contractor bids slowed the program.
In November of 1978, the newly appointed Executive Director of DSB estab-
lished the Asbestos Task Force. One impetus for the increased DSB activity at
this time was that Community School Board #3 closed PS 185/208 in Manhattan
because of exposed asbestos-containing fireproofing above vandalized suspended
ceilings. Thus, preliminary contractual agreements were quickly finalized,
and DSB initiated the removal of asbestos-containing materials from 11
buildings that had been inspected previously. This abatement work began
during vacation periods in November and December. In January 1979, the
-------
Director issued an "emergency oral order" and abatement activities began at PS
185/208 Manhattan. During the remainder of 1979 and in 1980, the surveying of
school buildings and the collection of bulk samples of suspect materials
continued. Abatement activities were carried out during the summer recess
months in 1979 and 1980.
An initial review of the architectural specifications of 321 buildings
constructed between 1946 and 1971 suggested that approximately 185 school
buildings had asbestos-containing materials--!.e., spray-on fireproofing,
insulation, acoustic treatments, or trowelled-on acoustic plaster. By January
1981, the DSB had visually inspected 1,411 buildings; 18 percent (257/1411) of
these buildings had asbestos-containing materials confirmed by bulk sample
analysis. Conflicting laboratory results (some positive, others negative)
were received for bulk samples collected in an additional five buildings.
Abatement activities were completed in 60 percent of the target schools (257)
by January 1981. Other abatement projects were scheduled for the 1981 and
1982 summer recess periods.
B. 0 r gani za t iona, 1 Consi:_der;at i o n s
The Division of School Buildings is responsible for the construc-
tion, maintenance, and operation of all (1,411) structures operated by the NYC
Board of Education. Approximately 1,000 of these structures are school buildings,
No other Board of Education Divisions were involved in the asbestos abatement
program. Other organizations involved in the initial (1976-77) survey phase
included the New York City Environmental Protection Agency, the New York City
Health Department, and the Environmental Sciences Laboratory at the Mount
Sinai School of Medicine.
The Asbestos Task Force established in November of 1978 included a planning
group and a field group. The planning group consisted of a task force director
(administrative architect), four architects, and a secretary. The field group
-------
consisted of four supervisors of school maintenance, five civil engineers,
three superintendents of construction, and two mechanical engineers. An
academic consultant was also hired to advise the DSB on measuring asbestos
exposures. By January 1981, 49,560 person-hours had been expended by the DSB
in asbestos-related activities. The cost of these person-hours was $423,765
plus an additional $9,500 for the academic consultant. Office space and
office equipment were provided by DSB for the Asbestos Task Force. The EPA
guidance document (USEPA 1979) referred to previously and the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration Regulation 1910.1001 (OSHA 1973) concerning
asbestos provided a technical framework for establishing the New York City
Asbestos-In-Schools Program.
The DSB dissolved the field group of the Asbestos Task Force when all
1,411 buildings had been surveyed at least once. The planning group orig-
inally delegated the writing of asbestos abatement specifications to the
various borough offices of DSB and reviewed the prepared documents, but the
planning group has recently prepared standard specifications for the various
types of abatement activities—sealing, encapsulation, enclosure, and removal.
This centralized process should improve the uniformity and the quality of
abatement work throughout the NYC school system.
The salaries of the Asbestos Task Force members were paid from funds in
the operating expenses budget of the City of New York; the abatement activi-
ties were financed from the capital budget. DSB has applied to the State
Department of Education to help pay for the $4.7 million spent, for abatement
activities as of September 1980. The 1982 State budget has approximately $3.5
million for asbestos abatement grant programs, and the DSB has obtained a
percentage of the money expended for work to date. It should be pointed out
-------
that the expenditure of New York City funds to identify and control asbestos
exposures in schools required some difficult trade-offs. The approximately $5
million spent for asbestos-related activities could have been used to modernize
five existing schools, or to pay part of the cost of a new elementary school
to replace an aging school still in use, but local political pressure supported
the DSB decision to give asbestos control a high priority,
A major impetus for the initial establishment of the Asbestos Task Force
was parental concern about asbestos-related health risks in PS 185/208. An
individual who is very active in the Parents Association in PS 185/208 noticed
the gray shaggy looking material on a steel beam behind broken acoustical tile
and made inquiries. This individual was told that the suspect material was
probably asbestos and that serious health problems can result from exposure to
asbestos. Other parents in the association shared this concern about the
material's presence and applied pressure to the local school board until the
school was closed.
The school closing, and the nature of the subsequent abatement activity
received attention from national television news organizations and local print
journalists. DSB's strategy for dealing with the questions of reporters was
to provide them with all of the available facts and to acknowledge DSB's
ignorance about many issues. A frequent response to a journalist's question
was, "We don't know, but we will do our best to find out and get back in touch
with you." This open relationship with the press helped to clarify a complex
problem and kept all the other schools open.
One quarter of a million dollars was eventually spent on abatement activ-
ities in PS 185/208. Containment and limited encapsulation were the abatement
-------
methods decided upon after lengthy negotiations with the parents' representa-
tives. DSB's consultants from Mt. Sinai School of Medicine helped to reassure
the parents that containment (the construction of a substantial physical
barrier) and encapsulation (application of a penetrating semirigid coating)
were sufficient to isolate the asbestos from the student population at risk.
In sum, the experience at PS 185/208 demonstrated that DSB was dealing appro-
priately with a complex problem, and helped make subsequent abatement activity
much more cost-effective by familiarizing building contractors with the pre-
cautions needed to work with asbestos.
-------
II. FIELD DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES
This section describes the two major components of DSB's field data
collection activity: building inspection and bulk sampling. The objective of
the building inspections was to identify the location and physical condition
of friable materials that could contain asbestos. The objective of bulk
sampling was to obtain representative samples of the suspect materials for
laboratory analysis. Laboratory analysis of bulk samples is a necessary
prerequisite for a credible asbestos-in-schools program because neither the
presence of asbestos in friable materials, nor the amount, can be reliably
ascertained by visual inspection.
A. Building Inspection
In Hew York City, the identification of asbestos-containing materials
in school buildings was facilitated by assuming that asbestos is most likely
to be present in boiler or pipe coverings, sprayed-on fireproofing, sprayed-on
acoustical materials, and acoustical plaster or tile, DSB inspections concen-
trated upon sprayed-on materials and acoustical plaster because these materials
were more likely to contribute to student exposures. DSB's inspection strategy
was to examine every physically defined space or room in the building.
Asbestos-containing sprayed-on material was visible on exposed structural
steel in nonstudent areas, but in student areas the suspect material was
hidden behind lightweight suspended ceilings. If the sprayed-on material was
used for fireproofing it was usually found throughout the building, whereas
sprayed-on acoustic material was more localized in those areas where noise was
more of a problem. Sprayed-on acoustic material was found in music rooms,
swimming pools, gymnasiums, cafeterias, and boiler rooms. If asbestos was
present in the sprayed-on material, subsequent laboratory analysis usually
showed that the percentage ranged between 20 and 60 percent.
-------
The trowelled-on acoustic plaster was much more varied in its asbestos
content, DSB's experience with acoustic plaster suggests that two samples of
this material taken 20 feet apart will often give contradictory impressions;
i.e., one sample might indicate that the material was 10 percent asbestos,
while the other sample might indicate that no asbestos was present. This
variation in the percentage of asbestos present in acoustic plaster was
probably a result of the heterogeneity of the plaster mix, the relatively low
percentage of asbestos, and the relative difficulty of analyzing this type of
material. One way of dealing with the problem of a heterogeneous plaster mix
was to collect multiple bulk samples from the same ceiling or wall area so
that the empirical estimate of the "average" as'bestos content would be more
stable. The problem of laboratory quality control is discussed in Section
VII, In the New York City schools, acoustic plaster was found in corridors,
libraries, auditoriums (ceilings and walls), lunchrooms, and music rooms.
Manufactured acoustic tile was a fourth material that occasionally con-
tained asbestos. DSB sampled many sites where acoustic tile was used, and
received laboratory reports indicating that no asbestos was present. Yet DSB
did receive reports on acoustic tile samples from other States that indicated
that the tile was 4 or 5 percent asbestos. DSB concluded that certain brands
of acoustic tile may contain asbestos. Typical areas where acoustic tile was
used included libraries, lunchrooms, corridors, swimming pool areas, music
rooms, auditoriums, and kindergartens.
B, Bulk Sampling
During their building inspections, DSB identified suspect materials
by noting the use of the materials and their physical appearance. DSB did not
follow a uniform sampling rule based upon square footage when bulk samples of
the suspect material were taken. Rather, DSB's overall approach to the sampling
-------
problem was to take one non-random bulk sample from each type of similarly
appearing suspect material within each school building. When the suspect
material was located in multiple classrooms in a building, DSB took one sample
from every five to seven classrooms. When fewer classrooms were involved, DSB
took only one sample. When the suspect material was located in corridors on
several floors of a school building, DSB first took one sample from the first
floor corridor. After DSB became aware of the heterogeneity of some of the
suspect materials (like acoustic plaster), they took one sample from each
corridor on each floor of the building. In large areas like auditoriums,
there was also an evolution of the sampling strategy from a single sample to
multiple samples after the heterogeneity problem was recognized. Thus, within
a given building a single (non-random) sample may have been taken of acoustical
plaster in one corridor or of friable materials in a sound control room. Yet
if a given material was used extensively in a building, as many as six samples
may have been taken of the same type of material. In one large building, 60
to 70 samples were taken by DSB personnel because of the amount of suspect
acoustical plaster present and because of conflicting laboratory results. Overall,
the need for multiple samples of identically appearing suspect material from
the same building can depend upon the heterogeneity of the suspect material,
whether or not the true percentage of asbestos in the material is high or low,
and the cost of probable abatement action.
A preliminary EPA guidance document (USEPA 1979) has suggested that "one
sample should be taken for approximately every 5,000 square feet of material
having the same color and texture, while material of a different appearance
should be sampled separately." Revised guidelines for bulk sampling are
presented in a document (USEPA 1980a) that was developed subsequent to the New
York City Asbestos-ln-Schools Program. Since the average classroom has
-------
approximately 700 square feet of ceiling (28 ft, x 25 ft.), the one sample per
5,000 square feet rule implies that a sample should be taken in every seven
classrooms where ceiling materials are a concern. If suspect materials on the
walls and ceilings of classroom are a concern, then the same sampling rule
would require multiple samples in every seven classrooms. DSB usually took
more samples than the number dictated by the 5,000-square-feet rule if rela-
tively expensive abatement procedures were being considered for large areas
like corridors or auditoriums because it was important to have accurate data
in these situations.
Bulk samples were collected by twisting the open end of a plastic 35-mm
film canister into the softer materials. If the material was too hard to use
this technique, a knife was used to scrape off a snail patch of the material
into the film canister. When the softer materials were sampled, the canister
was usually filled, while only one quarter to one-half of a canister of the
harder acoustic plaster was taken. Samples of these sizes were more than
adequate for several laboratory analyses of either material type.
After a ceiling sample was taken, the floor beneath the sampling area was
wet-cleaned to minimize the reentrainment of any asbestos fibers released
during the sampling process. Similar wet cleaning was performed after wall
samples were taken. DSB personnel who were taking samples did not routinely
use respirators to avoid alarming students and teachers. Sampling personnel
either held their breath, if they were taking samples during school hours, or
they were offered a respirator for use when they took the samples during
nonschool hours.
Each sample canister had a pressure sensitive label indicating the name
of the building where the sample was taken, the type of material, the location
in the building, the sampling person's name, and the date. A unique sequential
10
-------
sample identification number was also assigned to each sample at DSB head-
quarters where a running log of sample numbers and relevant descriptive
information (borough, district, school) was maintained. Certain samples were
split into two or three subsamples when ID numbers were assigned so that
replicate laboratory analyses could be obtained.
Prior to the sample splitting, the sample was homogenized in the original
canister so that the subsamples would be more representative of the whole.
However, DSB discovered that it was possible to pulverize and grind some
acoustical plaster samples so thoroughly that laboratory analysts had a very
difficult time finding the fibrous asbestos-like materials in the low per-
centage mixtures. Thus, it was recognized that the mixing process had to be
relatively controlled. DSB found that gentle stirring with a spatula was
sufficient to homogenize the sample without obliterating the asbestos fibers.
It should be added that the individual who was responsible for mixing and
splitting samples used a respirator.
Batches of several hundred film canister samples were stockpiled at DSB
headquarters before they were sent to the analytical laboratories. Individual
film canisters with their identification labels were closely packed in card-
board boxes, padded with foam, and mailed to the laboratories. No other
special handling was required; the canisters did not pop open during shipment.
By January 1981, DSB had collected approximately 2,100 samples from 1,411
school buildings. However, it should be recalled that only 257 (18 percent)
buildings had asbestos-containing materials that could contribute to the
airborne asbestos levels experienced by students, teachers, and school
administrators.
DSB had 14 supervisor/engineers working full time inspecting buildings
and collecting samples from November 1978 to December 1979. The general
11
-------
sampling strategy was to concentrate upon (a) soft material located in boiler
rooms, fan rooms, music rooms, cafeterias, or applied to structural steel; and
(b) upon acoustic plaster located in corridors, auditoriums, libraries, and
other rooms where quiet conditions were necessary. Boiler/pipe coverings and
acoustic tile received less emphasis; but they were sampled nonetheless. The
personnel taking samples were specifically told to look for (a) soft, fluffy
material about 1-1/2 inches thick on boiler room or mechanical room ceilings;
(b) soft-ceraentious spray-on material applied to structural steel; and (c)
trowelled-on acoustic plaster on ceilings of corridors, libraries, cafeterias,
or on ceilings and walls of auditoriums, music rooms, and sound control rooms.
After suspect material in each school was located, samples were taken and the
physical characteristics of the area were rated by means of an asbestos exposure
algorithm, which was described on the back of the survey forms carried by the
building inspectors/samplers (see Appendix A).
12
-------
III. LABORATORY AMALYSIS OF BULK SAMPLES
This section describes the accepted protocol for the laboratory analysis
of bulk samples for asbestos fibers, DSB's laboratory quality assurance pro-
cedures, and results from DSB's bulk sampling program. These bulk sampling
results are based upon data sheets accumulated by DSB in 1979 and 1980.
A. Pol_ari,_zed Light Microscopy with Dispersion Staining
Present technology suggests that polarized light microscopy with
dispersion staining (PLM/DS) is the most cost-effective laboratory procedure
for the identification of asbestos in bulk samples. Other laboratory procedures
such as X-ray diffraction analysis and electron microscopy are used for con-
firmation in difficult samples, but these latter techniques are more expensive,
and many laboratories have had less experience with them. The four primary
laboratories that processed DSB samples used PLM/DS, supplemented by the
occasional use of X-ray diffraction analysis.
In general, the identification of asbestos by means of PLM/DS is based
upon the difference between the refractive index of the suspect fiber and the
index of the liquid medium in which the fiber is immersed (MeCrone et al.
1978). For example, chrysotile asbestos will transmit a blue color if the
chrysotile fibers are perpendicular to the polarized light and immersed in the
appropriate refractive oil. The microscopist identifies the asbestos fibers
in a mixture of fibrous and nonfibrous material by changing refractive oils
and rotating the polarizing filter.
The Environmental Protection Agency has recognized the importance of bulk
sample analysis and the need for increasingly reliable and valid PLM/DS esti-
mates. Thus, the EPA has supported a program of laboratory standardization
(USEPA 1981) and the development of more systematic PLM/DS protocols (Lentzen
et al. 1981). The EPA also contracted with MeCrone Laboratories to conduct
13
-------
intensive 1-week courses on the analysis of bulk samples via PLM/DS in each of
the 10 EPA administrative regions.
The DSB had no in-house PLM/DS expertise when the Asbestos Task Force was
formed, but two DSB staffers completed the intensive EPA-sponsored course
given by McCrone Laboratories in Mew York City's Federal Plaza building.
Neither staffer had prior experience with a microscope; nevertheless, they did
develop the ability to identify asbestos fibers in many samples.
When DSB received conflicting laboratory reports, the in-hoyse micros-
copists would check the relevant subsample before sending a portion of it to a
third laboratory. The DSB microscopists found that, in many instances, their
analytical results were confirmed by the third laboratory. However, the
analytical results obtained by the in-house microscopists were never used as
the sole basis for abatement decisions.
By January 1981, DSB had spent approximately $95,000 for 3,800 laboratory
analyses of bulk samples and subsamples from approximately 2,100 sampling
sites. Replicate analyses constituted 45 percent (1700/3800) of the work
performed. The average laboratory charge per analysis was $25, but the volume
of laboratory work required by DSB facilitated the negotiation of relatively
favorable contracts between DSB and their principal laboratories.
The average turnaround time for a single PLM/DS analysis from a commercial
laboratory was 3 or 4 weeks, which did not delay any abatement work. However,
abatement activity was delayed when two conflicting laboratory reports were
received and third or fourth opinions had to be obtained. DSB gratefully
acknowledges the cooperation of the Environmental Sciences Laboratory at
Mt. Sinai, which frequently gave same-day service in these conflicting report
situations.
14
-------
B. Qua Ii ty Assurance
The first bulk samples collected in NYC during 1977 were sent to the
Environmental Sciences Laboratory at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine because
of the laboratory's previous experience analyzing bulk insulation materials
for asbestos content. The laboratory's location in New York City and its
affiliation with the City University also made it a logical choice. However,
the Environmental Sciences Laboratory did not have the capability of analyzing
large numbers of bulk samples, so DSB had to find two commercial laboratories
to assist. In 1979, DSB signed contracts with McCrone Laboratories in Chicago,
Illinois, and with GCA Corporation in Bedford, Massachusetts.
In 1980, DSB signed a third contract with the State University of New
York at New Paltz in order to have a third opinion when conflicting analysis
reports were obtained from the two commercial laboratories. DSB considered
two laboratory reports to be in conflict when one report indicated that asbestos
was present, and the second report indicated that no asbestos was present.
Yet, reports of 5 percent and 10 percent were not considered to be in conflict
because both reports indicated that asbestos was present. DSB was more interested
in determining the presence of asbestos in a given sample, (i.e., > 1 percent)
than in estimating the exact percentage of asbestos.
DSB's administrative interpretation of a single laboratory report suggesting
that a sample had less than 1 percent asbestos was influenced by the infor-
mation received from the other two laboratories. Thus, if two laboratory
reports were in a yes/no conflict, a third report of less than 1 percent was
interpreted as confirming that no asbestos was present in the sample. Yet if
one report was positive (equal to or greater than 1 percent asbestos, and two
other reports indicated that less than 1 percent asbestos was present, then
DSB concluded asbestos was present at the sampling site. The rationale behind
15
-------
this latter decision was that all three laboratories were able to detect some
asbestos in their subsamples. Table 1 lists examples of conflicting laboratory
results from two laboratories and an indication of DSB's administrative decisions
when results were received from the third laboratory.
Conversations between DSB and the three laboratories suggested that many
of the conflicting analysis reports could be traced to differences in the
relative proficiencies of individual microscopists employed by the three
laboratories. In addition, some conflicting reports may have been caused by
the heterogeneity of the subsamples (usually acoustic plaster).
In summary, DSB's laboratory quality assurance efforts centered upon
interlaboratory differences, not upon intralaboratory differences. Thus the
DSB did not return intentionally disguised (blind) subsamples from the same
sampling site to the original laboratory for reanalysis. Rather, subsamples
from the same site were always sent to different laboratories. During the
period when its workload was the heaviest, the Asbestos Task Force was primarily
concerned with reconciling laboratory conflicts rather than creating them by
comparing a laboratory's performance with itself over time.
C. New York City Bulk Sampling Program _R_egul_t_s
Table 2 displays the asbestos content of bulk samples collected by
DSB in NYC schools by borough. These data are based upon the laboratory
analysis of 2,359 bulk samples collected in 266 schools where asbestos-
containing materials were present. Inspection of the last row in the table
reveals that the average number of samples per school varied from 7.9 to 24.1
across the five boroughs. More samples were taken by DSB personnel if the
school was larger, if the school had heterogeneous suspect materials, or if
laboratory results were in conflict. The asbestos content data displayed in
Table 2 may not yield an accurate statistical description of the true situation
16
-------
in the 266 schools because a statistically valid sampling rule was not followed
when the bulk samples were collected. Nevertheless, the data in Table 2
clearly suggest that the asbestos content of suspect materials can range from
less than 1 percent to well over 50 percent. A typical sample among all 2,359
samples had an asbestos content between 6 and 50 percent, but among the samples
from Brooklyn and Queens, a typical sample had a greater chance of being less
than 1 percent asbestos. However, it is not clear from the data that the
schools in Brooklyn and Queens with asbestos-containing materials have different
levels of asbestos in their suspect materials or that the apparent differences
are an artifact of the bulk sample collection procedures.
17
-------
Table I, Bulk Sample Analyses: Interlaboratory Differences
School
lumber
1
I
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
9
9
9
Sample
nunber
1517
1518
1918
944
1706
1707
1876
1877
1878
887
889
890
1985
1986
1987
1911
1912
1913
1883
1884
1885
1068
1100
1342
1343
1344
Lab
A
1-3%
2-3%
1-2%
<1%
6-9%
1-3%
1-2%
1-2%
1-3%
-------
Table 2. Asbestos Content of Bulk Samples Collected in New York City Schools by Borough
Borough
Manhattan
Asbestos .
content (%)
<1
1-5
6-50
>50
Total samples
Total schools
Samples per
school
N
73
89
111
153
426
54
7.
(%)
( 17)
( 21)
( 26)
( 36)
(100)
.9
Staten
Island
N
3
6
179
101
289
12
24.
(%)
C i)
C 2)
{ 62)
( 35)
(100)
1
Bronx
N
59
28
348
--
435
67
6.5
(%)
( 14)
( 6)
( 80)
__
(100)
Brooklyn
N
136
61
156
44
397
51
7
(%)
( 34)
( 15)
( 39)
( 11)
(100)
.9
Queens
N
346
33
83
350
812
82
9
(%)
( 43)
( 4)
( 10)
( 43)
(100)
.9
All
boroughs
N
617
217
877
648
2359
266
8,
(%)
( 26)
( 9)
( 37)
( 27)
(100)
.9
Logue, EE, Hartwell, TD. 1982. (January) Research Triangle Institute. Characteristics of an
asbestos exposure assessment algorithm. EPA Contract No. 68-01-5845.
Estimated by polarized light microscopy.
Samples from schools with detectable levels of asbestos in suspect materials.
Schools with detectable levels of asbestos in suspect materials.
€s
More samples were taken if the schools were larger, or if they had heterogeneous appearing materials,
or if laboratory results were in conflict.
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
20
-------
IV. EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
This section describes DSB efforts to assess the seriousness of the
exposure situation in the 250 schools where asbestos-containing materials were
identified. From DSB's point of view, a serious exposure problem was one in
which large numbers of students and school personnel might be subject to
relatively high levels of airborne asbestos for long periods of time, and a
less urgent exposure problem was one in which small numbers of students and
school personnel might be subject to trace levels of airborne asbestos for
short periods of time. Thus, although the bulk sampling program clearly
indicated that asbestos-containing materials were present in several hundred
NYC schools, there were no clearcut data available to indicate the seriousness
of a given situation,
A. Air Monitoring Prgble!ms_and_ Experience
DSB did not monitor airborne asbestos on a routine basis because of the
associated air sampling and laboratory analysis costs, technical difficulties,
and public relations problems. Monitoring airborne asbestos in schools is
expensive because the samples collected on membrane filters should be char-
acterized by electron microscopy rather than the less expensive phase contrast
microscopy. The latter technique cannot distinguish asbestos fibers from
other fibers such as fiberglass. Air monitoring is also technically difficult
because airborne asbestos concentrations can change over time as some fibers
settle to the floor and others are reentrairied or released from the bulk
material by human or mechanical activity. In short, the episodic nature of
airborne asbestos concentrations requires long sampling times under a variety
of building conditions. Moreover, background levels or airborne asbestos
would also need to be measured because ambient urban air can influence building
21
-------
air concentration estimates. Finally, air monitoring might unnecessarily
alarm students, teachers, and parents and disrupt classroom routines because
the sampling pumps would have to be operated continuously while school was in
session.
DSB's experience with air monitoring illustrates the technical difficulties
associated with this method of exposure assessment. In one school, airborne
asbestos fiber counts were lower on a floor where extensive removal of asbestos-
containing material was taking place than on another floor where the same
material was undisturbed. An investigation of the urban area around the
school revealed that an apartment building across the street from the school
was being demolished. This demolition included the removal of old hot water
heating pipes that had been wrapped with asbestos-containing material. DSB's
consultants concluded that an open window on the undisturbed school building
floor had allowed asbestos fibers from the demolition project to enter the
school. Thus the airborne fiber counts on the "undisturbed" school building
floor were increased by contaminated ambient air. The original concern about
the unexpected difference between airborne fiber counts inside the school
might have been avoided if outside and inside air had been sampled simul-
taneously and the demolition effects had been noted.
In another school, airborne fiber counts in a cafeteria were quite different
when two samples were taken 10 days apart. The domed ceiling of the cafeteria
was covered with a 2-inch layer of very fluffy, sprayed-on asbestos-containing
material. DSB concluded that either alternating cold nights and warm days
were disturbing the very high ceiling, or that someone had sabotaged the
second measurement by throwing a quantity of the ceiling material into the
sampler's intake port. This example illustrates (a) the need for taking
multiple air samples over time so that changing meteorological conditions can
22
-------
be taken into account and (b) the difficulties associated with placing
sensitive scientific equipment in areas where it may be tampered with.
B. AnExposure Assessment Algorithm
The air sampling problems experienced by DSB underline the general
need for a relatively inexpensive and technically simple procedure for esti-
mating asbestos exposures in schools. Thus DSB personnel were quite interested
when the EPA and one of their consultants indicated that a preliminary draft
of an asbestos exposure assessment algorithm had been prepared (see Appendix A),
This asbestos exposure algorithm combines information from the laboratory
analysis of a bulk sample with ratings of seven physical characteristics at
the sampling site. However, there were no data indicating that the proposed
algorithm was predictive of airborne asbestos levels, (After DSB completed
its inspection and assessment activities, the EPA sponsored a study of the
algorithm's relationship with airborne asbestos levels. Preliminary results
from this study suggest that the proposed algorithm is not related to airborne
asbestos levels.)
Consequently, DSB used the asbestos algorithm as a guide for data collec-
tion, rather than as a procedure for estimating exposure scores, because DSB
was not convinced that the exposure scores per se had a great degree of measure-
ment validity. The scores were calculated at DSB's central office, but specific
cutpoints were not referred to when decisions were made about abatement action.
DSB preferred to rely upon the informed judgments of Asbestos Task Force
members who accumulated an impressive amount of experience as the asbestos
program progressed,
The task force usually concentrated on the material's accessibility, its
general condition, and the level of activity at the site when they made their
abatement decision. If the material contained asbestos, and was accessible
23
-------
and damaged, it was usually decided that abatement should be carried out.
Removal of asbestos-containing material was only considered when the material
was very friable. Damaged material was routinely coatained, regardless of the
percentage of asbestos (over 1 percent) present, or the degree of damage,
because it was assumed that asbestos fibers would be released into the air in
the future, even if they were not already present.
C. New York CityAlgorithm Results
Table 3 presents empirical distributions of the eight (asbestos
exposure assessment) algorithm components by borough and for all boroughs.
The data are based upon DSB inspections in schools where asbestos-containing
materials were found (see Table 2). The data for ail boroughs suggest that
the majority of sites were not damaged, were fully exposed, were not highly
accessible, were subject to moderate levels of human activity, were not subject
to an air plenum, and had materials with low friability. However, exceptions
to this pattern can be identified when the borough-specific data are examined.
More damaged materials were identified in Queens, and more highly friable
materials were identified on Staten Island.
Table 4 presents empirical distributions of exposure assessment algorithm
scores by borough and for all boroughs. The data given in Table 4 suggest
that the typical algorithm score calculated by DSB was less than 24, although
a few scores in excess of 85 were noted in each borough.
The information included in Tables 3 and 4 should be considered highly
provisional because a positive relationship between algorithm scores and
airborne asbestos levels has not been established. In addition, there is the
possibility that these data do not fairly represent the true situation in New
York City because a uniform, defensible sampling rule was not followed when
bulk samples and algorithm data were obtained.
24
-------
Table 3. Distributions of Algorithm Components by Borough
to
Ul
Algori thm
component
codes
Material
condition
No damage (0)
Moderate (2)
Widespread (5)
Water
Damage
None (0)
M i no r ( 1 )
Major (2)
Kxposed
surfaces
None (0)
UG! (1)
>10% (4)
Borough
Manhattan
Staten
Island
Bronx
Number (percent)
N
452
158
12
622
522
62
41
625
108
31
485
624d
(%)
( 72)
( 25)
( 2)
( 99)c
( 84)
( 10)
( 6)
(100)
C 17)
C 5)
( 78)
(100)
N
221
46
15
J
282^
232
2
48
282*
209
22
58
289
(%)
( 78)
( 16)
( 5)
(100)
( 82)
( 1)
( 17)
(100)
( 72)
( 8)
( 20)
(100)
N
485
109
16
610*
551
40
22
613
195
111
307
613
(%)
( 79)
( 18)
( 3)
(100)
( 90)
( 7)
( 3)
(100)
( 32)
( 18)
( 50)
(100)
Brooklyn
Queens
All
boroughs
of sites inspected
N
209
151
37
397
288
40
69
397
97
37
263
397
(%)
( 53)
( 38)
( 9)
(100)
( 73)
( 10)
( 17)
(100)
( 24)
( 9)
( 66)
(100)
N
591
660
24
1275
1160
84
31
1275
404
18
853
1275
(%)
( 46)
( 52)
( 2)
(100)
( 91)
( 7)
( 2)
(100)
( 32)
( 1)
( 67)
(100)
N
1958
1124
104
3186
2753
228
211
3192
1013
219
1967
3199
(%)
( 61)
( 35)
( 3)
(100)
( 86)
( 7)
( 7)
(100)
( 32)
( 7)
( 61)
(100)
-------
Table 3 (continued)
A J gorithm
component
codes
Borough
Manhattan
Staten
Island
Bronx
Brooklyn
Queens
All
boroughs
Number (Percent) of Sites Inspected
Accessibility
No (0)
Low (1)
High (3)
Activity
None (0)
Moderate (1)
High (3)
Plenum
No (0)
Yes (1)
Friability
Low (1)
Moderate (2)
High (3)
N
256
329
40
625
258
330
37
625
558
48
606*
328
141
153
4
622
(%)
( 41)
( 53)
( 6)
(100)
( 41)
( 53)
( 6)
(100)
( 92)
( 8)
(100)
( 53)
( 23)
( 25)
(100)
N
213
68
8
289
--
251
38
289
276
13
289
13
2
274
289
(X)
( 74)
( 24)
( 3)
(100)
__
( 87)
( 13)
(100)
( 96)
( 4)
(100)
( 5)
( 1)
( 94)
(100)
N
360
208
45
613
398
172
41
611*
322
291
613
144
430
35
jrl
609*
(%)
( 59)
( 34)
( 7)
(100)
( 65)
( 28)
( 7)
(100)
( 53)
( 47)
(100)
( 24)
( 70)
( 6)
(100)
N
145
190
62
397
92
212
93
397
269
127
396*
152
56
145
353
(%)
( 37)
( 48)
( 16) '
(100)
( 23)
( 53)
( 23)
(100)
( 68)
( 32)
(100)
( 38)
( 14)
( 37)
( 89)"
N
394
704
174
1272d
394
704
174
I2j2&
1069
120
A
1189*"
762
19
346
1127
(%)
( 31)
( 55)
( 14)
(100)
( 31)
( 55)
( 14)
(100)
( 90)
( 10)
(100)
( 64)
( 2)
( 29)
f
( 95)*
N
1368
1499
329
3196
1142
1669
383
3194
2494
599
3093
1399
648
953
3000
(%)
( 43)
( 47)
( 10)
(100)
( 36)
( 52)
( 12)
(100)
( 81)
( 19)
(100)
( 47)
( 22)
( 32)
(100)
-------
Table 3 (continued)
Algorithm
component
codes
Borough
Manhattan
Staten
Island
Bronx
Brooklyn
Queens
All
boroughs
Number (Percent) of Sites Inspected
70 Asbestos
<1 (0)
1-5 (1)
6-50 (2)
>51 (3)
N
73
89
111
153
J
426d
(%)
( 1?)
( 21)
( 26)
( 36)
(100)
N
3
6
179
101
289
m
( 1)
( 2)
( 62)
( 35)
(100)
N
59
28
348
j
435^
(%)
( 14)
( 6)
( 80)
(100)
N
136
61
156
44
397
(%)
( 34)
( 15)
( 39)
( ID
(100)
N
346
33
83
350
j
812d
(%)
( 43)
( 4)
( 10)
( 43)
(100)
N
617
217
877
648
2359
(%)
( 26)
( 9)
( 37)
( 27)
(100)
c
c!
See footnote a, Table 2.
Exposure assessment algorithm component rating codes.
Three observations were coded "1".
Total varies because of missing data.
Fourty-four observations were coded "0".
Sixty-eight observations were coded "0".
-------
Table 4, Distributions of Asbestos Exposure Assessment Algorithm Scores by Borough
GO
ll
Score
i nterva I
0-24
25-54
5e»-84
85-J 14
J 15- 144
Borough
S tat en
Manhattan
N
371
38
6
3
0
C,
(
(
(
(
(
I)
89)
9)
1)
1)
0)
Island
N
213
30
25
12
2
('
(
(
(
(
(
o
76)
11)
9)
4)
1)
Bronx
N
397
25
8
I
0
(1
(
(
(
(
(
I)
92)
6)
2)
0)
0)
Brooklyn
N (
315 (
39 (
33 (
4 (
4 (
:%)
jg)
: 10)
8)
' °c
All Five
Queens
N
706
50
28
12
1
(
(
(
(
(
I)
89)
6)
4)
2)
0)
AH
boroughs
N
2002
182
100
32
9
(%
(
(
(
C
(
.)
86)
8)
4)
1)
0)
'l*o Lai
418 (100)
282 (100)
431 (100)
395 (100)
797 (100) 2325 (100)
Source: USEPA, 1979 (September), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Asbestos exposure
assessment algorithm. Draft report. Washington, D.C.; Office of Toxic Substances,
USEPA.
SCORE = (Material Condition Rating + Water Damage Rating -f Exposed Surfaces Rating + Accessibility
Rating + Activity Rating + Plenum Rating) x Friability Rating x % Asbestos Rating.
Two observations exceeded 144.
-------
V. ABATEMENT OPTIONS
This section describes DSB's general experience with five different
abatement options and presents unit cost estimates for each option. Each time
asbestos-containing materials were identified. DSB considered the following
five abatement options:
General monitoring—the periodic acquisition of data concerning
building conditions at a previously inspected site where asbestos-
containing materials are located.
Sealing—the application of multiple coats of latex paint to a
relatively hard surface.
Encapsulation--the application of a penetrating binder to a more
friable surface.
Containment-~the construction of a gypsum board barrier.
Removal/replacement--the removal of friable soundproofing or thermal
insulation and the substitution of suitable nonasbestos-containing
material.
A. Ab a t em en tE xj> e r i e n c e
DSB required all abatement contractors to follow Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA 1973) rules pertaining to work with asbestos.
DSB contracted for the removal of soft friable materials when they were exposed
in student-occupied areas such as lunch rooms, swimming pools, and music
rooms, DSB also contracted for the removal of damaged or deteriorating friable
material that was exposed in custodial spaces such as boiler rooms or fan
rooms. Undamaged exposed friable material in custodial spaces was encapsulated
by spraying it with a sealant. Damaged acoustic plaster or accessible acoustic
plaster in student areas was contained by installing a dropped ceiling of
29
-------
gypsum board and acoustic tile. DSB hired contractors to seal undamaged/
inaccessible acoustic plaster on auditorium or library ceilings with three
coats of latex paint, and previously painted acoustic plaster was monitored
for damage so that containment could be carried out when problems appeared.
DSB's first abatement project involving the removal of soft acoustic
material from a cafeteria ceiling, was completed by a general contractor with
QO prior asbestos experience. Thus, DSB hired a foreman from an experienced
asbestos contractor to set up and supervise DSB's project. DSB assigned one
of their own construction inspectors to the first abatement project for on-
the-job training. DSB also took photographic slides of the removal activity
and the required health and safety precautions. The resulting slide presen-
tation and narration was used to train contractors for subsequent abatement
projects.
At present, DSB conducts preliminary training seminars for all prospective
bidders and in-depth training seminars for the employees of contractors awarded
a specific job. DSB discovered that this two-stage educational effort was
necessary because the workers actually engaged in removing asbestos-containing
materials had not been informed of the hazards of working with asbestos despite
the fact that their supervisors had attended a preaward training session.
DSB training sessions now use slide cassettes and a film that were pro-
fessionally prepared under a government grant during abatement work at two NYC
schools. The slide and film package is available through OSHA regional offices
for general use in training contractors, foremen, workers, and school administra-
tors ,
Air samples were collected and fiber counts were estimated by phase
contrast microscopy when asbestos removal work was underway, but the time
30
-------
required for laboratory analysis of the samples decreased the usefulness of
the results, OSHA regulations state that air samples should be collected both
inside and outside of the sealed work area. Yet in many instances the abatement
project was completed within 2 weeks, and it usually required 2 weeks for
DSB's laboratories to complete their analyses of the air samples. Thus air
monitoring could not be used to verify compliance with OHSA regulations during
most removal jobs. However, DSB found that air monitoring was useful to
document the thoroughness of the final cleanup of the worksite. During the
actual removal activity, DSB found that a visual inspection for dust outside
of the sealed work area was sufficient in terms of increasing contractor
compliance with OSHA regulations. Of special interest was the finding that
fiber counts were generally higher during encapsulation projects than during
properly conducted wet removal projects.
When general monitoring is selected as the most appropriate abatement
action, DSB relies on a very simple strategy. First the building custodians
are told which areas are to be monitored. Then the custodians are instructed
to send in monthly forms to the Asbestos Task Force whether or not damage has
occurred to the asbestos-containing material. If the damage is nontrivial,
plans are made to enclose the problem area.
B. Abatement Costs
DSB has compiled a list of unit costs (Table 5) for the various
abatement options. These unit costs are based on average contractor bids for
the 1981 summer abatement period. The monitoring unit cost in Table 5 is
based upon the time required for a building custodian to inspect the areas in
question and to fill out his monthly report to the Asbestos Task Force.
31
-------
fable 5, Abatement Unit Costs
Abatement option Unit cost ($)
General monitoring 15.00/month per building
Sealing 2.85/ft2
2
Encapsulation 3.50/ft
2
Containment 7.75/ft
2
Removal/replacement 7.00/ft
Abatement options are defined in the opening paragraph of Section V,
DSB has found that the unit prices listed above are generally lower than
the unit prices encountered by the Asbestos Task Force when the program first
began. DSB assumes that this modest decrease in unit costs over time is a
reflection of increased experience of contractors with asbestos abatement work
and increased competition among these contractors. The unit prices listed
above include preparation of work areas, "clean rooms," and showers (where
required), and at least two thorough wet cleanups. An allowance in the
abatement contracts was also made for the costs of air sampling and analysis
via phase contrast microscopy before, during, and after the abatement work.
DSB assumed air monitoring costs of $2,500 for a removal project and $750 for
a containment project. These total costs are based upon a unit cost of
approximately $350 per day.
Total abatement costs were financed by the City of Sew York, as part of
the capital budget. Recently, the Education Department of the State of New
York allocated $3.5 million for abatement activities; the DSB has received a
portion of these funds. However, the City of Mew York's total cost for asbestos
abatement in schools is expected to reach $10 million by September 1983.
32
-------
VI. RJECORDKEEPING AND REPORT I KG
DSB's documentation of their asbestos control program included master
files and large series of building-specific files. The master files or
"record books" contain all bulk sample analysis results (3,800 analyses of
primary or split samples from 2,100 building sites). The sample record book
is organized by sample number; the five borough books are sorted by district
and school. A unique sample identification number, the borough name, district
number, and school name are included in each of the six record books along
with the laboratory results. The master files also indicate which samples
were split for multiple laboratory analyses. Each of 1,411 building-specific
files contain survey sheets, correspondence, and abatement specifications if
they were required. Thus, if there are questions about the type of asbestos-
containing materials presently in a given building, or questions about the
need for abatement activity, the Task Force will be able to document their
understanding and current recommendations.
Appendix A contains the asbestos exposure algorithm form and an example
of the pressure sensitive label applied to the bulk sample canisters. The
overall progress of the DSB asbestos control program is documented in a series
of memoranda from the Executive Director of DSB to the Chancellor of the New
York City Board of Education. These memoranda are included in Appendix B. An
example of a summary form from the building-specific files is included in
Appendix C, and an example of the initial asbestos survey instructions and
data forms are included in Appendix D.
After abatement decisions were made, DSB had to select qualified con-
tractors to perform portions of the abatement work. Appendix E contains two
forms used to evaluate the performance of abatement contractors. The first
33
-------
form Is filled out by a DSB inspector/construction supervision who periodically
visits the work site. The second fora is used by Asbestos Task Force personnel
when they want to compare the performance of several current contractors prior
to award of additional abatement contracts.
If the asbestos-containing material was undamaged and relatively inaccessi-
ble, general monitoring might have been selected as the abatement option.
Appendix F contains a series of items used to monitor the status of asbestos-
containing materials left in schools. The first item is a warning stamp,
which is applied to the relevant pages of the custodian's logbook. This
logbook must be signed by all contractors before they begin work of any type
in the school building. The second item is a sample form and instructions for
completing it, to be filled out by custodians to report changes in asbestos-
containing materials over time. The final item is a warning sticker, which is
placed in school buildings to warn mechanics, specification writers, inspectors,
designers, and custodial personnel to check with the custodian before working.
The purpose of this sticker is to minimize the intensity of asbestos exposures
when routine maintenance or renovation is carried out.
A number of additional reports or memoranda document the activities of
the Asbestos Task Force. Progress reports were sent to all District Super-
intendents and to DSB's Executive Director soon after specific schools were
surveyed. The report to each District Superintendent listed the schools in
the district with asbestos-containing materials, the types of material present,
the material's location, the appropriate method of abatement, and an abatement
action schedule. An asbestos information sheet was also sent to all schools
with positive bulk sample results. This information sheet was mounted in a
red frame and placed on the wall of each Custodian's office. The information
sheet lists the locations of asbestos-containing materials in the school,
34
-------
the type of materials, the appropriate method of abatement, and when abatement
was completed or scheduled.
In summary, DSB's approach to recordkeeping for the asbestos program was
to adequately describe the asbestos problem in each school and to document
each recommendation and action. The documentation had to be sufficiently
detailed so that subsequent questions about any previous action could be
answered accurately .
35
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
36
-------
VII. NEW YORK CITY PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
This section contains recommendations from the NYC asbestos-in-schools
program that may be useful to other school officials faced with similar asbestos
exposure problems. The recommendations in this section deal with public
relations, building inspection, bulk sampling, laboratory quality control,
abatement options, abatement costs, recordkeeping, and asbestos waste disposal.
A. Publicgelations
DSB's principal recommendation concerning public relations is that
school administrators should be candid when they are confronted with a potential
asbestos problem. Parents, teachers, students, custodians, and representa-
tives of the press should be given the best available information so that
everyone concerned will appreciate the true extent of the situation without
undue alarm. It should be made clear that laboratory analyses are needed to
ascertain the presence of asbestos-containing materials, and that no single
abatement option is appropriate for all asbestos sites. Moreover, the selection
of an abatement option is a complex process in which the adverse health risks
associated with inadequately characterized asbestos exposures (the status quo}
roust be balanced against the monetary costs of the available abatement options.
B. Build ing Inspection
DSB's experience suggests that the most effective way to identify
all areas of concern is to conduct an extensive visual survey in all school
buildings. The individuals conducting the survey should be trained to recognize
materials that may contain asbestos. DSB suggests that the visual inspectors
should look above suspended ceilings for spray-on fireproofing or old acoustical
materials in addition to noting the characteristics of the visible ceiling
material and the wall coverings. Spray-on fireproofing materials are likely
to be present throughout a school if they are present at all. Acoustical
37
-------
materials are most likely to be found in libraries, lunchrooms, corridors,
swimming pool areas, auditoriums, music rooms, kindergartens, and in sound
control rooms.
C. Bulk Samgli.ng
Bulk samples of suspicious materials can be collected immediately
after each space is visually inspected, or the bulk samples can be collected
on a subsequent visit to the site. The choice between these two data collection
options may be guided by resource constraints. If the school system is large,
and the funds available for the analysis of bulk samples are limited, it may
be desirable to visually inspect all spaces in each school building before a
single bulk sample is collected. A list of suspicious areas and their dimen-
sions keyed to school floor plans should be compiled. After the scope of a
potential asbestos problem has been tentatively defined, rational decisions
about the number and location of bulk sampling sites can be made.
The first bulk samples should be taken from suspicious materials present
in many spaces throughout a school or in a series of schools. Yet it should
be recognized that material with a similar appearance across spaces or schools
may not have a uniform asbestos content. The EPA has published a description
of a simple statistical sampling procedure (USEPA 1980a) that minimizes arbitrary
and unsystematic bulk sample collection. It is desirable to have an unbiased
estimate of the amount of asbestos present in suspect material so that appropriate
abatement decisions can be made. The statistical sampling procedure was
designed so that potential bias will be minimized and the best abatement
decision will be made. DSB specifically recommends that samples of acoustic
plaster should be collected at three different locations in the same space or
room prior to splitting for laboratory analyses.
38
-------
When bulk samples are collected from a specific location, the physical
characteristics of the sampling site should be recorded on a standard form.
This information is important because the presence of friable asbestos-
containing material in a given school space may not necessarily imply that the
air in the school space has a high concentration of asbestos. Friable asbestos-
containing material may increase the concentration of airborne asbestos only
under certain conditions (e.g., when the friable material is severely damaged).
DSB recommends that particular attention be paid to the general condition
of the suspect material, to the proportion of the material directly exposed to
building occupants, and to the level of human activity in the area. DSB also
feels that materials with a higher percentage of asbestos are of more concern
than materials with a lower percentage. DSB's rationale for highlighting
condition, exposure, and activity is the reasonable assumption that these
three factors should be associated with fiber release and the concentration of
airborne asbestos.
D. Laboratory Qua1ity Control
DSB recommends that the qualifications of laboratories performing
bulk sample analysis be checked. Polarized light microscopy with dispersion
staining is the analytical technique of choice. DSB suggests that the labora-
tory should be questioned in writing about the background of the analysts who
will be working with the samples. DSB also suggests that some bulk samples
should be split into thirds. Specifically, the first third should be stored
for reference purposes and the second and the third should be sent to different
laboratories for analysis. The EPA has supported a laboratory proficiency
program (USEPA 1981 and Lentzen et al. 1981) that will help minimize the
problem of laboratory error in estimates of the bulk sample asbestos percentage.
39
-------
A list of participating commercial laboratories is available from the EPA,
(Call 1-800-334-8571 and ask for Gene Braatly or Don Lentzen.)
E. Abatement Options and Costs
The selection of an appropriate asbestos abatement option exemplifies
decisionmaking in a context where all the needed scientific information is not
available. Thus, DSB prefers to rely on the judgment of experienced Asbestos
Task Force members instead of on an arbitrary exposure score when abatement
decisions are made. Abatement decisions cannot be based upon rigid rules
given the state-of-the-art of asbestos exposure measurement in schools.
With the benefits of hindsight, DSB is presently recommending removal
instead of encapsulation for highly friable, accessible materials with a high
percentage of asbestos. Encapsulation should only be used where the materials
are structurally sound and well bonded to the substrate and removal is essen-
tially impossible. If water damage is possible, another abatement option
should be considered. The penetrating type of encapsulating agent is superior
to a surface-coating agent because the bond to the substrate is usually improved.
As just noted, DSB recommends removal as the best abatement procedure for
highly friable and accessible material with a high percentage of asbestos.
During removal, the material should be thoroughly wetted before it is scraped
off the ceiling or wall. The pieces of wetted asbestos-containing material
should be picked up and bagged continuously as the removal operation proceeds.
Inaccessible asbestos-containing acoustic plaster in excellent condition
should be sealed with several coats of high quality latex paint because the
water base penetrates the material and preserves acoustic properties. Accessi-
ble or damaged asbestos-containing acoustic plaster should be contained with a
gypsum board and acoustic tile barrier. A building identification and monitoring
system should also be set up to ensure that nonproblem areas do not change
40
-------
into problem areas In the future. DSB's experience indicates that school
systems should expect unrealistically high or low bids for abatement work
until area contractors acquire the necessary experience.
F. Recordkeepiiig
DSB's experience also suggests that the original scope of the asbestos
problem should be described in detail in writing. Moreover, subsequent abate-
ment decisions should be defended on paper. Investments in detailed record-
keeping will pay for themselves by improving public relations when a concerned
parent, teacher, or reporter asks about what was done in a particular school.
G. Asbestos_ Wa s t ePis po s a1
DSB recommends that State and Federal authorities become more directly
involved in the proper disposal of asbestos waste. DSB has discovered that
many landfill operators are refusing to accept the waste generated by asbestos
removal projects. Thus, DSB suggests that States should designate asbestos
waste disposal sites on State-owned property.
41
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
42
-------
REFERENCES
Lentzen DE, Brantley EP, Gold KW, Myers LE, 1981 (April). Research Triangle
Institute. Interim method for the determination of asbestoforra minerals in
bulk insulation samples. EPA Contract No, 68-02-2321.
McCrone WC, McCrone LB, Delly JG, 1978. Polarized light microscopy. Ann
Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Science.
OSHA. 1973. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Asbestos
regulations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor 29 FR 8826.
Selikoff IJ, Hammond EC. 1979. Health hazards of asbestos exposure. Annals
New York Acad Sci Vol. 330.
USEPA. 1979 (March). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Asbestos-
containing materials in school buildings: a guidance document, Part I,
Washington, DC: Office of Toxic Substances, USEPA.
USEPA. 1980a (December). U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Asbestos-
containing materials in school buildings: guidance for asbestos analytical
programs. Washington, D.C.: Office of Toxic Substances, USEPA, EPA-56G/13-
80-017A.
USEPA. 1980b (August). U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Asbestos-
containing materials in school buildings: bulk sample analysis (quality
assurance program. Washington, D.C.: Office of Toxic Substances, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-560/13-80-23.
USEPA. 1981 (March). U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Asbestos-
containing materials in school buildings: bulk sample analysis quality
assurance program, round 2. Washington, DC: Office of Toxic Substances,
USEPA. EPA-560/5-81-001.
43
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
Appendix A
Asbestos .Exposure Algorithm Fom_and Bulk
Sample Canister Labels
A-l
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
A-2
-------
AS&ESTOS
PR 1 0 R IT Y _ SURVEY
SfAC« OR
«OOH MUM61K.
RBMAfTKS
•
^
l«/I/<
infepBCToR
"ftvps »i» in»ricftoH
MAIifllAl.
^r.
Wft
At,
AC
I*L.
MUh6 Ctfi
ML9W ff
vei
no
-
SCHOOL
6/
WrtWTW*
Mf>A«|
o.'i-S '"
/ »o*i> DISTRICT
D
WATIK
QAHAfit
0- 1 -1
ry
CXP05IO
ItHFACi
0-1-4
®
Access.
0- 1 3
(§)
ACTwirr/
m«niirr
0- (• 1
(9
PUMUM «i
AiKfTMAM
O-\
ToTAt,
(SUM °^
5"""^)
USB v*MJJE» -I«T«0 IN
IHSTRUCTK>«» (KZYWMSK
SiOE\ - uaAvB UAST 2.
C.OLUMMS BLAMr«
FMlAflUTT
0 iZ 3
•/. af
ASBi»T»5
O'l-i 1
ffdoKity
FACTOR
..-.—
/•.CTION
• REMOVAL. £ > S
SHEET
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
A. CONDITiQN/OAHAGE
Combination of adhesion to substrate, deterioration and physical damage,
Bo Rot consider water damage,
None., ,, 0
Superficial damage, or MM 11 are* of disruption -- ,. -
Widespread, severe Or targe pieces dislodged ,, 5
S, UATIR DAMAGE
Visible water stains, or dislodged material due to water.
None 0
Mi nor or Sraa I I areas OA I y ,..,.„. .,*.,,,,.,,.....,,.. I
Moderate to major leak! ng........... , ,. 2
t. EXPOSES SURFACE
MCTi: Grids, or other open ceiling systems should be considered exposed.
Exposed does not mean accessible.
Hone (all areas behind hung ceiling) .......................... ... 0
Less than 101 exposed ........ , .......................... . ........ I
Over 10% exposed,. ........................... . ................... 4
0. ACCESS jBIL I TY
If Material can be reached by occupants, custodial or maintenance per-
sonnel . it is accessible.
lot Accessible ....... .....,,,... ___ ....... ___ , . .................. 0
Low: Rarely Accessible, ....... ... ............. ,,.,.. ........ ..... I
Moderate to High: Access may be frequent ..... , ..... . ............ J
E-
y by students and custodial or maintenance personnel ,
and structure vibration.
None or Low (libraries, most class roans, some custodial spaces}.. 0
Moderate (Some classroom*, corridors, au4itoriy«s! ............... I
High (Some corridors. Student cafeterias, gymnasium/playrooms) . . , |
f. PljEHUM OR 01 SECT Al« STRE_AM
Is material located in an air plenum (space between hung ceiling and
slab above used For air ci rcw' it ion) or in path of direct forced or
mechanical air stream?
(to ---- ., ........... .... ............ . ..... . ................. . ..... 0
*es ..... ... ................................................ » ..... I
TOTAL SUM
The total sum of walues noted In Column * through F.
Ft! ABILITY
Very important factor.
Hene or !}ues t i onab le.... .......... . ................. . ........ ... 0
Low: Difficult but possible to damage by hand. Penetration
of material by tool or coin ................ . ......... ..... ...... I
Hod-'rate,: Fairly easy to dislodge and crush.,..., ............ ... 2
Highly Friable: Easy to dislodge, separate. Fibrous or fluffy... 3
PE«CE?'TAG£ OF AS3ESTOS
Less than t|,.., 0
1% to 5«... ' ". ... 1
6* to SOS.. z
514 and oyer 3
Algorithm Score = (Sun of A to F) x (Friability) x (7, Asbestos)
A-4
-------
r:'.""1:
, f • ; i"
A-5
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
A-6
-------
Appendix B
Memoranda from the Executive Director of the Division of
School Buildings to the Chancellor of the Board of Education
B-l
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
B-2
-------
BOARD OF EDUCATION
OF TMC CITV OF NC.W TQflK
no UVINOSTON street
FAANK J. MACCHIAHOS.A
CHANC CIUQA
November 8, 1978
TO:
FROM;
SUBJECT:
ME_Mp_RA_N_0_y_M
Members of the Board of EckJcaBion
Frank J.
ASBESTOS IN SCHOOL BUILD
MEMORANDUM 1
Attached for your information and review is a copy
of Memorandum No. 1, Asbestos in School Buildings, November 6,
1978, prepared by Anthony Smith, Executive Director, Division
of School Buildings.
" ! will brief the Board of Education on the course
of action we are taking regarding inspection of facilities
and resolution of problems.
FJM:cms
Attachment
cc: Mr. Halverson
Mr. Siege] (2)
Ms. Browne!1
Mr. Wirtz
Mr. Bogart
B-3
-------
-2-
To d.ite, the following has emerged. In connection with the 1976-77 survey;
I, Asbestos was used for fire retardation and sound proofing in
r~ny buildings built prior to 1971;
2. A;>proxi;u-itely 185 buildings were listed AS containing asbestos
bearing iriaterial used and/or located in such a way as to be
visible and accessible in the nori-Jil use of the building.
He-cause Chat material was accessible, it was vulnerable to
being dislodged or disturbed.
3. In eleven (11) schools, because of a corbinatlon of the nntcri.ila
used and the location of those ir-aterials, it was decided th?.t the
n.Jterials themselves would have to be physically removed.
(Originally, this list was longer; subsequent investigation
changed and shortened it.)
A. Of these eleven (11) schools, work has been cowpleted in'three (3)j
5. Contracts have been awarded in another six (6) schools. T-..-D
contracts have to be rebid. We will vork closely with the Cc -inity
School Boards, District Superintendents and Principals to i:
the TBQ_Bt^exped 11 i o u s and least jij.^s_ruptive schedule on which to
complete this phase,
6, As indicated in the December 1977 report, the four phases into
which the Initial prograa has been prioritized are as follows;
I, Instructional areas, assembly areas, and swimming pools
with fluffy, spray-on soundproofing and/or fireproofi.-.^;
II. Locations with damaged, but basically harder, denser,
stronger acoustical plaster;
III, Undamaged areas of the same type of hard, dense plaster;
IV. Boiler Rooms, caehinery rooms, etc, with spray-on sound-
proofing or fireproofing (and not generally accessible) .
Only in the case of llgh_t_.__f_Uiffy__t riore_bre_ajcabl_g and fully exposed i-
isphysical removalindicated (phase I).
It should be noted that in roost cases, the asbestos containing materials ur.ad
In our buildings are quite dense and quite strong and, therefore, are susceptible
to sealing with spray and/or other cJteriala.
Tqc hn 1 c a 1 an d FC d 1 c a 1 e xpe rts federally fa vor__s e a 11 n j> a n d /o r at m ct \ > n 1 con-
j_ aj-nj^rig of t ha_t c y_p e of d en_o e a5bestos, as OP p o s e d t o r ernoy Ing It p! r. -; i -; 11 v,
B-4
-------
II. P.S. 185-208
Y'-u should also know Chat the situation recently encountered at P.S, Ifi5~208
in Manhattan was not Included In the progr.ira because the condition w.-ia Wing
f •rrected by replaccr-anc of the pissing ceiling tile. Specifically, P.S. l."5
208 involves a type of construction tn which the steel be.'ims, coated vl th the
::,.rayed on asbestos-bearing fire retardant, are located above a nuspnrs !cd
ceiling and were considered sufficiently protected to assume that the .i^'ucsto
* irlng i.-aterial could retrain intact (undamaged). At this writing, \,e do not
1 . -aw the extent to which this type of condition may exist elscx.'liore. It
c-rista at P.S. 185-208 only because the suspended ceiling on several floors
-•'.;td in several locations was severely dac-.iged. The result of this dvi^e
\ .-ins that the heretofore isolated asbestos-bearing fire rctard.ir.t3 :ira now
visible. Visibility does not have to oean that we have a hazardous ccr.utulon.
"2 are examining the school intensively to determine what ir.ust ba done Lo
protect the health and safety of all thosjt who use this building.
ill. FLANKED ACTION ,i
1. We intend to inspect every school in the Board's system.
2. Ir.sed on data available to us and developed over the next few •. .-.-'is,
we will establish priorities for inspection and then sealing arH/or
containing asbestos-bearing materials based on the extent to *»hich
they are accessible and vulnerable to disturbance and/or have already
beeo disturbed. In those few cases, eleven now identified (and three
already accomplished) where removal is the most prudent course of
action, we will expedite it,
3. Our greatest need for Information now Is the number of schools ••*!.*ch
have the type of problem identified at P.S. 185-208: originally con-
cealed material now accessible and therefore susceptible to dsi nje.
To acquire this information, I will be meeting, on Hove-^ber 6th, vith
the custodians from the oore than 240 schools constructed during the
period (1960-1971) when asbestos might have been used in this canr.ur.
(Please note: not every school built between 1960 and 1971 contains
asbestos aa a fire retardant). the custodians will be asked to return
to their schools and, as quickly as possible, survey all suspended
ceilings which have been damaged and to report the extent to which
any type of fire retardant material is visible on the steel beans
which can now be seen through those damaged suspended ceilings. '..*e
will not be asking the custodians to aake a judgement as to whether
the caterial they can see contains asbestos, nor whether the c-^.terial
they are looking at has been physically disturbed.
Also, on Monday, Kovenber 6th and Tuesday, November 7th, a team of *Icw
York City Raalth Departoent Sstvitari-ins and Air Resource Surc.^u I- \ .'.ITS
will be trained by Dr. William Hicholsoa of Mount Sinai Hospital in de-
tecting datr-age to sprayed on fire retardants caused by such disturl'~u,;,e
as vandalism and water leakage.
-------
ooAflo or EDUCATION or TUB CITY or NCW
OFFICE OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
20-11 HxrDGL PLAZA NCHTH
LONG ISLAND CITY. N. Y. I! IO1
TtLCfxOHCi EMP««« J-7711
November 6, 1978
TO: Dr. Frank J. Macchlarol*
FROM: Anthony R.
SUBJECT: ASBESTOS IN SCHOOL BUILDINGS
MEK03AHBUM #1
We have a problem with asbestos. We do not have an er.-»rj"*^cy. 7"?is
rcj-'.TC '.-fill suicsarize for you what we kr>Q>,,' io f.tr, ." ..ci vh.it the planned
01 ^cilcn is.
I. BACKGROUND
Thare is an Increasing public awareness of the existence and use of asbestos
in the construction of many buildings of all types, including school Luiltiiogs.
Initially, concern focused on those who had actually worked with or i.2ar
asbestos; nore recent attention is being given to those whose acadc;..ic, pro-
fessional and residential environments are located in structures which contain
asbestos-bearing r-aterials. In all cases, the concern'has been caused by the
proven relationship of certain types of disease which have been contracted by
those who have worked with high concentrations of airborne asbestos fibers
over long periods of tirae.
The evidence to date is that the disease occurrence is related to high levels
of airborne asbestos fiber concentrations existing over ir-any years, Thare is
nothing ia ou_r__g_^ooj._^sv8:]tea:;::=which bears any relationship _to^ sy_ch^a__condttion.
nevertheless, the concern ia completely understandable. Our program of action
is geared to attack the cause of the concern.
From late 1976 and into 1977, the Division of School By tidings, with the
assistance of the New York City Department of Air Resources and the Mrumt
Sinai Hospital Environmental Kaalth Laboratories, conducted a survey of Board
of Education buildings to identify any school which might have a potential
or actual health problem caused by asbestos being accessible, and therefore
susceptible to being damaged. Technical experts state th.ic onlv when disturbed
In sorac way do fibers become airborne; medical experts state chat only wV.cn
airborne can the fibers be inhaled; and, they note, only when they ate inhaled
in concentrated fashion over prolonged pericds of tlove, does it now appear
that one of several asbeatos-caueed diseases caa be contracted. Such diseases
may not appear, or be detectable, for twenty or thirty years after exposure.
B-6
-------
-4-
if:ing the data from the custodial lurvcy to set our order of ins^.-etton
priorities, (I.e., the rost severely damged suspended celtinga, vlth
t'-e i -jst visible fire retardant will be highest priorities) the T -1th
.- -d Atr Resource Inspectors will begin making the rounds of the school!
asbestos might have been used In Its basic construction process.
5. During this Inspection p^riod, we will be putting up for bid and avirding
,13 quickly as possible, contracts for the scaling and/or- containing of
nterlals containing asbestos identified in the survey u.ide in 1976-77.
6. We will also be developing technical specifications for now types of r.uch
stronger ^suspended ceilings to be Installed in place of the easily dir-.'i^nd
acoustical tile ceilings which led to the problem typified at P.S. 125-203,
Irquiries, other than press, should be directed to Mr. Bernard Lakrlt: at
361-7711. I have designated Mr. Roger Chlljean of this Division, as the
ovor-all operational coordinator for all aspects of this program. H-2 has
rr.y complete confidence. I
I am not able, yet, to give you either « construction clrse-frana or collar
cr-tinate. Obviously, the co=plete program will far exceed the $3,OC3,QOQ
earmarked in the Capital Budget for the covering of the acoustical rsterial.
Ve Intend to have our first priority school inspections completed within three
weeks and I would hope we vould have the full survey of all Soard of ".^
facilities completed by late February, 1979.
ARS;c=aj
B-?
-------
UOAHC Of" i_^',. CATION OF Ti-it iliTY CF N t_W «rQRK
OFFICE OF SCHOOL 3UiL.Di.NGS
28-11 BRIDGE PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N, Y. 111O1
T£L£FHQWE EMPIRE ^-7711
November 15, 1978
TO: Dr. Frank J, Macchriarola
FROM: Anthony R. Smith
SUBJECT: ASBESTOS IN SCHOOL BUILDINGS
MEMORANDUM #2
Our survey of schools which are known to or which may contain asbestos
continues. Approximately one half of the schools which we are surveying
on a priority basis have now been examined by either a representative
of the Department of Health or the Bureau of Air Resources of the
Department of Environmental Protection, To date none of those surveys
has revealed a condition which would dictate the closing of all of or
portion of any school. The only exceptions to that previous statement
are two swimming pools, one at Franklin K. Lane High School, where
removal work commenced on November 14; and a swimming pool at Bushwick
High School which has a ceiling similar to that of Franklin K. Lane and
which, I believe, could be a potentially hazardous environment until the
ceiling has been removed,
"
The task ahead . We must now concentrate our efforts on locating "friable
material. Material "friable" can be crushed easily in the hand. When we
have located friable material, we must then have it analyzed to determine
whether or not it contains asbestos, (N.B.: Material can be friable,
sprayed on and used for acoustical purposes, and contain cellulose rather
than asbestos.)
.<•
The determination of friability is relatively uncomplicated. If it were
not for the number of schools and the size of some of our schools we could
have it done in a very short period of time. It will take longer because
of the size and scope. Friable material will now be taken in bulk samples
(bulk in this case meaning something that would fit into a container the
size of a 35 mm. film can), it will then be analyzed using highly
sophisticated techniques which are available in only a handful of
laboratories in the United States.
When we have determined with certainty that the friable material does
contain asbestos, a determination will be made as to what is the most
responsible way to isolate that material from entering the regular
environment of the school.
B-8
-------
-j re I.-.G suiic
Depending on ;re Je^ree of "friability" and evicence
mat the material ha^ been ^ananea o_r_ access ! D! I I ly to potential
damage, we will consider removal. Removal has tckan place in
several schools. ".enoval was indicated in t~e December 1977
report for 11 schools. Our recent survey ha 'ndicated that
removal may not, in fact, be appropriate in •. ^ry one of those
cases. Removal procedures are spelled out wi tn great precision
in recent documents published by both the Federal Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (GSHA) , The technology and the guidelines and the
experience al] exist to Insure that removal can be done in such
a way that it is safe for tnose engaged in the labor, and it is
safe for those who will use the building after the removal is
completed. We must insure, of course, that our own work force
a_njd any contractor who works for us on a removal project not only
understands but is in complete compliance with everyone of these
regul atlons,
2, Conta.I nment. Containment can take three forms: (1) A sealant can
be sprayed on the asbestos containing material; (2) The material
can be Isolated from the environment using structural materials.
Depending on the situation, this would range _frorn a simple plywood
barrier to a more complicated celling to replace an existing
suspended calling when the first ceiling might not be strong
enough to prevent damage and therefore access to a fire retardarst
above It; (3) A combination of sealant ind structural containment,
We arc attempting now to develop criteria and guidelines to
assist us In making decisions as to which one of She preceedfng
alternatives Is appropriate In any given situation. One of our
problems In determining the basic decision, removal versus
containment, lies In the nature of the asbestos material itself.
In one school, for example, we might find a fairly friable asbestos
containing fire retardant which was so well bonded to the steel
beams that either a sealant and/or structural containment would be
indicated. In another school, we might find the fire retarsant rot
bonded welJ> enough :o the steel for -is to feel conformable in
recomnendf ng anything otner :h«n removal. The sj tyatjcn will va.ry_
on a case by case b a s i s .
What the above indicates Is the need for a well trained and well disciolinea
cadre of personnel within the Division of School Buildings who can supervise
contractors and our own work force whenever they are working in, around,
or with asbestos containing materials. We are establishing sucn a program.
T i Tie _c j b 1 e . You and members of the Central Board, members of local Community
School Boards, concerned parents and many representatives of the media have
repeatedly asked when all of these things which need to be done will, In
fact, De done. I regret I cannot yet give you a definite sate. The challenge
B-9
-------
-3-
us, is now assuming -j.-,jgcjble proportions, We know what
«e have to do. We know how v*e have to do It. We are getting increasingly
expert advice and assistance from individuals who have been doi»n this
road before, either as active participants in removal and containment
programs in other jurisdictions, or as consultants and advisors to those
•.vho ore involved in retrieval and con ta inrr.cn t. Because of that counsel,
I am increasingly comfortable in saying that the tech- *ogy is available
and it is available to us. Our two obvious problems c e time and the
~a'3rntude of the work which ns^st be done In so many of our schools.
Vhen >.e know the answers to those two questions we will then be able to
provide you with an estimate of the total cost. I am hoping that In my
next report 1 will be able to answer sorrse of these profoundly Important
quest Ions.
ARS:SS
B-10
-------
~ '-~c :f ~~. Tit-,-', er *n£ ;:r> cr •;-.%•
OFFICE OF SCHOOL LJUILDIMGS
23-11 LRIDGE PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY. N. Y, HIO1
Tn.C*«C>
-------
PC*"3 CF r 3bCAT !;_••» cr THE CUT OF m.w IQ«IK
OFi-"lCE OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
23-11 E=?1DGE PLA7A NORTH
LCNG ISLAND CITY. N. Y. 11IO1
TELir«ONt EMPmi 1.77M
MEMORANDUM
November 22, 1978
TO; Dr. Frank J, Macch(arola.Chancel lor
FROM: Anthony R. Sraith
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum #3
When I wrote memorandum #1 on November 6, 1978, I stated that, "We
have aproblern with asbestos. We do not have an emergency." The events,
the information and the expert counsel I have received in the previous
two weeks confirm the appraisal of the situation which confronts us to be
the sa«"ne as that presented to you in memorandum #1.
S u rvey Re su11 s. Our initial phase of surveys was to cover ^00 schools
and other facilities of the Board of Education. As of November 21 we
have completed 361 (90?) of those surveys. The preliminary results are
as follows:
1. Acoustical plaster of some type was found In 281 (of the 36!
schools) ;
2. Spray-on fireproofing (non-concrete) was found In 73 schools;
3- In k7 of the 73 cases the spray-on fireproofing existed in areas
used by teachers and students (and in most, but not all, cases
was either contained behind a suspended ceiling or was intended
at the tine of contruction to have been so contained);
k. In 26 of the 73 cases where spray-on fireproofing exists, it
appears to be located only in custodial areas and Is therefore
accessible only to a trained, technical staff;
S' 2k\ schools contain either acoustical plaster and/or spray-on
fI reproof Ing.
In other words, as of this writing, 241 schools represents the total
knov.n universe of schools v.hich have acoustical or fire retardant -.aterial
,»hich is either known to contain or which appears likely to contain as;
: c s
B-12
-------
-2-
Having es t ab 1 i sited a knc-.-.n universe the next Step is quickly to establish
repair priorities. The repair priorities were described in ncr;orandum -2.
Briefly, to recapitulate:
1. Determine if the material is "friable" (that is crushable in one
hand) ;
2. Determine if the material contains asbestos (which can only be
done through laboratory examination of a bulk example and there
are only a few labs and very few scientists auali fJed to run these
tests.
3- I f the material is friable, and i_f_ the material contains asbestos
then if the material is visible, is it a c c e s s ib1e ? If it is visible
and accessible has it been disturbed? On friable material marks
indicating disturbance are clearly obvious;
If the answer to all of those points above is in the affirmative we
have a situation which requires a priority action. That action, as noted
in the previous memorandum may include: removal; spraying on an a sealant;
or structural containment (In some cases with a sealant applied before hand,
and In some, perhaps most, cases without a sealant having been previously
a p p1 led.
Coin men t: Based on more and more consultations with experts In the field,
Iam i nc rea s ing 1 y _ pe r suaded t_ha t in mo_s t_cases only st ruet u raj con ta i nmen t
is highly appropriate. This is part icularly true where there is an opportunity
to structurally contain and isolate from the useable environment by Installing
a strong suspended ceiling.
0ut_s_j_de Consul tants_: In the past week, we have been most fortunate to have
had the services for on-site inspections and consultation of several-of
the nations experts on asbestos problems:
1. Dr.Robert N. Sawyer, M.O, Dr. Sawyer has now spent two days in the
past week assisting us. He has come down from his regular position
at the Yale University Health Service in New Haven Connecticut. He
is an engineering graduate of M.I.T. and has his MD from Case-Western
Reserve University in Ohio. He is an expert on occupational and
preventive medicine, cancer, and specifically on asbestos problems
of all types, focusing on the problems of asbestos in academic
Institutions. He is viewed and used by the Federal Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) as its principal consultant from the medical
field on asbestos associated diseases and "asbestos abatement"
problems and solutions. He is fully aware of the engineering and
medical challenges in dealing with asbestos on the one hand, as v-.e 1 1
as the public policy issues of explaining what asbestos is and is
not, and the kind of fear engendered by asbestos ainong students,
teachers, parents, and the public at large.
B-13
-------
-3-
2. Mr, Larry Dorsey, i.-.ho Is one of Federal EPA's load Project
Directors on asbestos problems, joined Dr. Sawyer and me on
"overnber 21 for a tour of several schools;
3. Mr, Glen Murdoch, a private contractor in Connecticut i-.l»o has
worked on many asbestos containment and removal jobs also toured
several of our schools late last week and provided his insights
into the nature of the work to be done.
Please note that all of the above named consultants gave of their time
freely to the Board of Education; while obviously, we would have expected
such assistance from the Federal EPA, I am deeply grateful for the generous
amount of time 'which both Dr. Sawyer and Mr, Murdoch gave to the Board of
Educat ion.
Or. Sawyer's basic philosophy in dealing with asbestos can be put
rather simply: if the material contains asbestos, if It is friable, if
is is visible, if It is accessible, 1 have already described above what the
alternatives are and they will depend on each situation. The correlation is
also true: If any one of the above points is not answered In the affirmative,
In most cases the asbestos containing material can be left where_ and as it I s ._
The advice Is concurred in by Mr. Dorsey and does indeed represent the most
expert guidance and counsel which exists in this country today on the subject
of asbestos.
Specific examples of alternate "abatement" alternatives might Include:
'• 185/208. The primary problem at 185/208 is asbestos containing
fire retardant spray-on steel beams. As you know, it was not
Intended to be exposed and has been exposed because of a rather
poor type of suspended ceiling which had been badly damaged.
Keeping in mind Or. Sawyer's overall philosophy and specific engineeri-q
and medical approach, In this case, for example, he strongly recomrrsnds
structural containment. This means installing a strong plaster board
(Sheet Rock-type) material with acoustical tile glued to it. This
new suspended ceiling will create a tight, strong containment and
will effectively Isolate the asbestos containing material from the
useable environment of the school. (He does recommend spraying a
sealant on the exposed asbestos on the beams of the fan room, since
there is no suspended ceiling in that room). It should be noted that
Or. Sawyer in making this recomriendati°n is speaking not only for
himself but he _i_s authorized to and was, in fact, soeaking for the
Federal Envi ronmental Protect ton Agency i n maki nq thi s recomriendat I_pn .
2. We saw several different types of problem or potential problems at
Susan E. Wagner High School on Staten Island. There are several
laboratories in which the students sit at different level tiers and
for several of those tiers, the ceiling was very low, (u-el 1 under
six and a half feet). The ceiling tiles had been damaged, leaving,
in one case, exposed spray-on fire retardant, (Asbestos assuned,
pending laboratory examination). Those rooms were prudently closed
by the principal and the Parents Association. They will regain and
B-14
-------
they should rcnaln dosed until action has been taken to i^ol.ite
those steel beams from the environment of that room, Ann in
structural containment will do the job.
3- I .S. 33 ~ _B_rook] yn._ This is a Junior High School built in the
mid-1950s. It contains a large amount of acoustical piaster, which,
pending lab work, appears of likely to contain asbestos. In most
of the schools the application of glued-on acoustical tiles should
be an effective containing barrier to Isolate the acoustical plaster
from the academic environment. There are two or three locations,
however, where the plaster has been so badly damaged that removal is
Indicated. Fortunately, the areas are small and are fairly easy
to isolate until that work can take place.
To be candid it Is likely that there will be some that resist the idea
of structural containment, (as opposed to removal) particularly one that has
not been accompanied by the application of the spray-on sealant. I believe,
however, that where indicated this Is a responsj b l_e_, s_a_fe_j and re I a t i ye 1y
rapid way of dealing prudently and effectively with the problem.
The inherent problems associated with either removal" or spraying on:<:
a sealant will far outweigh any advantages, except where containment is not
sufficient, given the nature and/or location of the material. Each situation
(that is, not only each school, but each use and location within each school)
will have to be decided on a case by case basis, using the Sawyer "yes-no"
set of questions on friability and accessibility.
•"•Specifically, the more of either that is done the greater likelihood of
stirring up and releasing fibers into the air.
B-15
-------
OAHOOF fOUCATIQNQf TMECITV OF M r w VQBK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
2S-1 1 QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY. N.Y, ! 1 tOI
TELEPHONE: 381-7711
MEMORANDUM
November 29, 1978
TO: Frank J. Macchtarola, Chancellor
•p/Y
FROM: Anthony R. Smlthv^/
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum jk
Because of the long Thanksgiving holiday period, there have been no major
changes in the data since the report of last week.
185/208
On Tuesday, November 28 I met for several hours with representatives of
the District 3 School Board, the Corcnunity Superintendent, 2nd <~encerr>«d parents,
~:-'--jrily fr:m i$5/208. The purpose of the -ess ten was to discuss ny rccc\.~<^nJa-
tion that the appropriate, responsible, and most effective way of isolating the
asbestos containing fire retardant from the useable environment of those two
schools Is through the emplacement of a strong structural barrier: a scaled
suspended ceiling made of half-inch plaster board with three quarter inch
acoustical tiles glued to the plaster board.
I think it is an accurate summary of the consensus of opinion of those
at the meeting from District 3 that thJs recommendation may not be adequate
from their current perspective. Were the installation of this stronger ceiling
preceded by the spraying-on of an encapsulating agent, some of the parents and
.nenbers of the board who were present would, perhaps, feel that a no re appropriate
approach had been taken.
1 described to those present how I had reached the recommendation of using
a strong structural barrier and that it reflected the expert counsel i had
received from Or. Robert N. Sawyer of Yale, Mr, Larry Dorsey of the Federal
Environmental Protection Agency, Or. Sawyer's assistant (a micro-biologist), and
a construction contractor from New Haven -.-.ho has had considerable experience in
the "abatement" of asbestos problems of various types.
B-16
-------
-2-
told them that there were effectively three options open to us:
Removal . This option would require not only the complex task
of, in effect, hermetically sealing the area where the work was
to take place, it would also require the additional time, material
and expense of replacing the fire retardant which was removed.
Encapsu 1 a t i on with a strong stj'jjctural ceiling. I stated that one
of the major problems with encapsulation, and the reason that 1 will
recommend it be used only in circumstances where no other option
is available, is that the physical application of the sealant
probably disturbs the asbestos containing fire retardant snore than
any other action we could take, including physical removal. The
reason for this nassive disturbance potential is that during removal
operations, the fira retardant is thoroughly wetted down before
removal. The liquid encapsulating agent, however, is spr.iyed on,
with the fire retardant material dry, and the liquid under a pressure
of 40 pounds per square Inch, which can disturb and disrupt any loose
material which might be on or near the surface. Encapsulating alone
Is not sufficient in an areas of the building 'which is actively used
by students and teachers. It would be satisfactory in a boiler or
fan room where there is no suspended ceiling in the first place and wr •
only technical people are admitted in the second place.
Structural Containment. I noted that the overall attempt must be
to Isolate the asbestos containing material from the useable
environment and that a strong barrier, too strong for any child
deliberately or accidentally to break through,wou1d accomplish
this. There '..as considerable skepticism end ccncarn as to hew sure
one could be that the barrier would in fact fully isolate asbestos
from the useable environment. The principle concern seems to be
that either asbestos fibril Is could "leak" through the new ceiling
and/or at some point ceiling either could be accidentally broken,
broken through vandalism, or in the course of having to rake repairs
or routine maintenance when one might have to penetrate the ceiling.
Here the concern was expressed that asbestos .-night have accumulated
on a celling ever a period of time and be released, in a rather
intense concentration, Into the atmosphere of the building. Despite
the assurances which I attempted to convey to the assembled group
that I had received from the various experts to whom I had put
essentially the same questions, the District 3 group was not convinced
that the barrier alone would do the job. I told them that as soon as
Dr. Sawyer is next in the City that he would be available to answer
their questions. Concerned was expressed that Dr. William Nicholson,
of Mt. Sinai, had suggested that a combination of encapsulation and
structural barriers was the best approach. (Consent: It ;nay be that.
Dr. Nicholson has expressed that opinion; he has not expressed it
to me as the only approach; he has, however, net on at least one
occasion with essentially the same group with whom 1 met on
November 28, and It may well be that this is his recommenda t Ion.
1 believe that Dr. Sawyer, who has had extensive "hands-on" experience
'with removal, encapsulation, and containment and ,-/ho is also a .medical
doctor who specializes in carcinogenic substances, specifically
asbestos, is probably the ~,ost qualified expert, perhaps in the c:_ncr
B-17
-------
-3-
to whom we could turn, ! would recommend accepting his advice, were
it not in agreement with the re cQrnmen ri.it ion of Or. Nicholson.)
There were a number in the group who led me to believe that they will
not accept a combination of encapsulation and structural containment. They,
as I interpreted what they were saying to me, believe that only removal is
a safe and appropriate response.
City Council Testimony
On Monday, November 27, I testified before the New York City Council
Education Corn it tee for approximately 2 hours, 1 briefed them on the background,
on the current work plans and what we see as the various alternative ways of
abating the asbestos problems. 1 also pointed out that each school, and perhaps
sections within each school, will have to be approached as unique and special
si tuations.
Federal Assistance
Federal EPA on November 28, has indicated, through Larry Dorsey in
Washington, the beginning of interest in assisting the Board on asbestos
abatement. The initial suggestion was quite limited: paying for Dr. Sawyer's
consulting fees to conduct a two day seminar in New York City for Board of
Education personnel as well as one representative from each of the ten EPA
Regions around the United States.
I have suggested and expressed the hcpe, that perhaps r-ore support ind
assistance than that might be forthcoming and quickly.
ARS:ss
B-18
-------
»OA«D Or EDUCATION or THt CITY Of NEW
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-11 QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N. Y, 511O1
JtLtrnom- 36I-77H
MEMORANDUM
December 8, 1978
TO: Dr. Frank J, Macchiarola, Chancellor
FROM: Anthony R. Smith
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum 15
Work PJ ai nand C os t Estimates
On Wednesday, December 6 my staff completed its preliminary estimates
on the cost of an asbestos abatement program designed, over a period of
years, to Isolate asbestos from the used environment of schools wherever
It is located in such a way that it could enter that environment.
My staff has estimated that the cost of dealing with asbestos used in
acoustical plaster, which we now estimate will turn up in 330 schools, at S23-1
mi 11 ion;In certain cases, removal will be required, as opposed to structural
containment, and we estimate that at another $500,000. The largest single
expense is that associated with removal, encapsulation, and/or barrier
containment of asbestos containing fire retardant. We estimate 72 schools
will have that problem and the cost of deal Ing "with it could range from
$12 to 2*t mill ion.
In summary, the range for dealing with the asbestos problem will be
from $35 to 48 mil I Ion of capital budget funds.
Please note: the above estimates deal only with work on asbestos itself.
Other st ructural problems are associated with asbestos, most importantly
water proofing, repair of leaking roofs, and other type of leak problems.
As I have noted for you before, water erosion is a serious problem and must
be dealt with either before the asbestos Is contained or at the same time
that process Is underway. These types of projects, normally expense budget
items, should, of course, become capital budget items as part and parcel of
asbestos abatement. Similarly, where major asbestos work has had to be done
in corridors and classrooms, painting and plastering, also nortnally expense
budget Items, will, in many cases, be part and parcel of the asbestos abatement
program as wel1.
B-19
-------
ANTHONY R SMITH
EXECUTIVE OiBECTQB
BOABO OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
23-11 QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N. Y. 11101
TCkEPHONC: 361-7711
MEMORANDUM
December 19, 19/8
TO: Dr. Frank J. Hacchiarola, Chancellor
FROM: Mr. Anthony R, Smith J
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum #6
Survey Resu1ts
A team of inspectors from the Division of School Buildings is currently
visiting selected schools. They are: I) Taking bulk samples for analysis of
asbestos content in all schools having acoustic plaster, sprayed on fire-
proofing or acoustic material; 2) Inspecting schools that have been added to
the original lists either because of modernizations or the years the buildings
were constructed; 3) Re-inspecting selected buildings where previous reports
may have indicated conflicting information. It Is expected this task will
be 'completed by December 22, 1978.
Samples are being delivered to this office. They are being sorted and
split (so that we can retain a portion of the sample) and will be sent to
laboratories for a qualitative and quantitative analysis.
P rog ram Progress
Preparations are underway to enable work to be performed during the
Christmas recess in eleven (1!) buildings by using our in-house mechanics.
The method of corrective work employed will be to paste on acoustic tiles
to the acoustic plaster. This method of containment has been discussed with
Dr. Sawyer and met with his approval. Preparation of contracts has begun.
To update you on progress of work regarding Phase I removal contracts,
we provide Information on the attached listing. As you recall, this category
of work was established to remove all visible (therefore accessible), sprayed-
on friable materials used either for fireproofing or acoustical treatment.
ARS:ss
Attachment
B-20
-------
C
-2-
My staff is currently attempting a correlation between those buildings
with known asbestos abatement problems and those with known water leakage
problems in an attempt to determine the final cost of those two now inter-
related projects.
C i ty-wt de Approaches
Also in connection with asbestos, it should be noted that Or. Irving
Selikoff of Mr. Sinai's Environmental Health Sciences visited P.S. 185/208
on Monday, December *». He stated, and was quoted in the press as noting, that
no two schools will require precisely the same type of asbestos abatement
program; and, further within any given school, there may be one or several
or combinations of several approaches that are required. 1 believe that it
was important and significant that a man of Or, Sellkoff's eminence has
publicly stated this important fact. .It should reinforce with the public that
the BoardLs response, so far, has been appropriate and responsible.
185/208
Specifically at 185/208, Dr. Selikoff stated that two, and possibly
three approaches are appropriate:
A. Fan Room; encapsulate with a sealant;
8. Auditorium doorways and entrance areas to each school: either
contain with a barrier, or_ remove;
C. Remainder of the building: structural containment.
NewSystems
Or. Selikoff, Dr. Sawyer and ! have discussed the critical importance
of having a "fall-safe" management control system In place In buildings in
which asbestos material has been contained behind an impervious barrier. These
are now being developed.
ARS:ss
B-21
-------
Decci-bcr 19, 1978
C
School
Andrew Jackson
H.S. Queens
Sushwick H.S.
K
James Had I son
H.S.-K
Susan Wagner H.S,
K
P 219 Queens
Benjamin Cardozo
H.S. dueens
P 126 K
Prospect Heights
H.S. K
Franklin K. Lane
H.S. K
P rob \_em_
friable
Sound Deadening
Material in Pool
Fri able
Sound Deadening
Material In Pool
Sound Deadening
Material
Rooms 136, 138
PublIc Address
Room
Spray-on Fire
Proofing on Beams
and Aud i tor turn
Stage
Spray-on Fire
Proofing on Beams
in Gym and Aud.
Stage
Spray-on Fire
Proofing on Beams
in Auditorium stage
and Storeroom
Friable Sound
Deadening material
in Cafeteria, Band
and Music Rooms
Friable sound
Deadening material
Sn Band Practice
Room
Friable Sound
Deadening material
in Pool
Prooress
Pool Closed
Pool Closed
Spaces locked
by custodians.
not being used.
Beams inaccessi-
ble. Dr. Sawyer
indicated no
Imninent danger
in use of spaces
Beams Inaccessi-
ble. Teachers
instructed to
moni tor
act!vi ties.
Contractor
working - Areas
sealed with
drop cloths.
Substantially
complete -
Instal1 ing
Acoustic tile
Substantially
Complete -
removals
comp1e te. Trim
around new Ac.
tile be Ing
installed
Removals
complete.
Contractors
working on
finish patching
Completion Date
Work scheduled to sta'
Ch r i s trnas Week. P roj e •: •
completion Jan. 1, IS/"
Work scheduled to start
Christmas Week. Projertc
comp 1 e t i on Jan. 1 , 15 ?"9.
Work scheduled to
start Christmas
Week. Projected
Completion Jan. 31, '* '?
Work scheduled to sta-
Christmas Week. Projei
completion Jan. 31» •'
Work scheduled to
start Christmas
Week. Projected comi
i Christmas Week -
1 Easter Week
Projected comoletlon
January 1, 1979
Projected completion
January 1, 1979
Projected completion
December 22, 1978.
Projected completion
December 22 , 1978.
B-22
-------
School
P 219 K Annex
P 158 Q
P rofa1 em
Spray-on Fire Proofing
on Beams
Painted friable
sound deadening
material in student
cafeterI a
-2-
Progress
Landlords Contractor
substantially complete
Finishing work being
completed.
Completion Date
Projected
January 1,
tomplet i on
1979-
'*/ork scheduled to
start Christinas Week.
Projected completion
January 1, 1979-
Thus in summary, of the eleven(ll) Phase ! projects, five (.5) projects have
already begun, two (2) are projected for completion by December 22, 1978 and three (3)
are projected for completion.on or about January 1, 1979- Six (6) projects are
scheduled to commence Christmas week, with completion of three (3) projected for
January 1, 1979, two (2) for January 31, '979 and the remaining project to be completed
1/2 during Christmas week and 1/2 during the Easter recess.
B-23
-------
Of SCHOOL BUILDINGS
19-51 OU = £"-'s PL1. HA *;CM7H
,C-;G -SL-fO ClTY. N Y I11O1
.?y, K-7C
w ™ ^*.
:; D u .v.
Or. .Trar.f; J, .','acch 1 a'o I a, Chance I f or
.Vr. An f hon y R. S.TI i t h
Asbestos in School Buildings
urn t/7
;-jr icsr raiort, "e".crandu,-r! .,'c, ivas issued on Oeceriacr 19, li?7S. .-urJr.er
sr,vSN;i ajarci;r.onr activity has seen taken since fhat fi.-ne. Using our sho
scnanics .'or,; force, an isolarina barrier v:as created by boncinc acoustic
iles to 2SO'_»Grcs—cent al n ing acoustic siaster In a nunoer of schools. The
ratus af rhese prcjecrs is as fcfiov.'s:
Mat • ois Co: 3lerei!
P 116 :.",
J 15 ;.\
J 133 X
J 50 v
! ns
at i 3ns
r I a I *.* Cor-o o
'Oi I C-- i I : T;
j : JC r^r j
? 44 ~
j 2 4 <:
I 53 -:
P =5 K
j 277 ::
In 1 i: i r"
-J-j.- .1 r i .;.,n c f rhe C:
,/r. C ; j I .jf'^u fo d
B-24
-------
' ,ir o I a
Procress
Cc~o I et ion 3-3re
- r I as i e
Scund Deadening
"jiorial in Pool
Pool Clcsec
Ass-;sfos "oterial
re-jved, rinisninc
v.'ork in arocress.
rro jcc t -3 d Cc?'-'.^ lo
Jjnuory 31 , 11/79.
H.S. K Friable
Sound Deadening
,','aterfal in Pool
Pool Ciosed.
V.'ork Started.
Projected cc:.-plefr ion
January IS, 1379.
en
•i. S .
Sound Deadening
/.'.atari a I Rooms
136, 138 Pub Iic
Address Room
Spaces locked by
custodians. "Jot
being used. V/ork
started.
Projected corpletion
January 31, 1979.
Suoon '.Vaj-er H.S. K Spray-on Fire-
proof ing on beams
and Audi tor?urn
Stage
P 215
Spray-on Fire-
proofing on bears
in Gym and Aud.
Staae
3cs;rs inaccessible,
'.York started.
Projected corpletion
January 31, 1979.
Sears inaccessible. Projected corpletion
Teachers instructed Spring recess.
to monitor activities.
?c
~!\—'.
:3~tin Carcjzo
Spray-on Fire-
proofing on bears
In Audl'orium stage
and Storeroom.
Contractor •/.•orking -
Areas sealed *.vith
droo cloths.
Projected corpletion
January 6, 1979.
P 125
Friable sound
deadening material
in Cafeteria, Sand
and /,'usic Rooms.
Substant ial1y
complete - i fi-
st a I I ing Acoust ic
Ti le.
Projected cor.pleticn
January 3, 1979.
'resect Keighrs Friable sound
!.S, K deadening material
in Band Pract ice
Room.
Substant ialIy
cotnp I ete — re-
rriovals ccrplete.
Trira arounc new
Ac. tile be!ng
installed.
Projected Cor-pletion
January 12, 1979.
-.;-'•:: i n K. Lane
. 5. /
Fr i abi e sound
deadening matt-rial
i n Poo I ,
ls cc.-'Dlere.
Contractor i.-crking
on finish Dateline.
Projected co«-zletion
January 12, 1379
Spray-;.-. Fir2-
r^ofi'i on bc3
L^n.Jl-.rd'j con- Project-:-J Cc-
tractor s-bc: _nt ial I y January 2, l
ccr.pl ete. Finishing
;.s i n c- c o« G i e t e c.
o i 111 e d f r i o D t e
"... r ^ r i j I in j f 11 c-j n t
~* Q *' ? r w* r° i o •
Vork p-_r f ;
JUT i n
-------
c
'. - -s, in c-'j • jry, of ! -3 efc-ysn fill Phase 1 projects, v.ir*; h..s ^. .
•' „. -:-d on : en 1101, Two (2) of jr. .-will be corpic-te on Jar:,,i.-y \
,-£i.,hr ID] cf.-.cro will t»e c j..pl stc-d during January. Cnc 11) j.'f<._,"Ct
'jched'jl oci for ccinpleticn during the Spring recess.
You -.vi 1 I note that the work at J.H.S. IDS Queens has been c-.. ip I •.•; oi. The
cvntractor on this project had boon scheduled to work on the "i:i,::.vick High
School project, V.'e postponed work on the Sushwick Fool in oru^r to c^f.'.pbte
the more urgent work at J.H.S. 158 during the Christmas recess. On this
important removal project, we were fortunate to obtain the services of
r.urdoch and Sons,, a contractor experienced in this area of work, to act as
a consultant on the job site. They have provided training, advice and ex-
pertise which expedited the project and assured the safety of the personnel
and environment,
V.'e are now in the incipient stage of an extensive program to isolate all
asbestos—containing acoustical plaster installations. The work will be
performed by contractors through contracts prepared and bid in our division.
in the first stage, fifty-sight 150) schools have been identified for in-
clusion in a request to the Office of ."cnaoonent and Sudcet for funding
under Capital Budget line E—643. V.'e anticipate early approval of our request,
.V.earv.vhi I e, o-jr standard specification which will act as the guide for all
the specifications for acoustical plaster work, is being finalized. Every
effort will be made to maximize the work to be performed 3y contract during
the Spring recess.
During our survey of the school buildings, approximately five hundred (500]
samples cf materials suspected of being asbestos-containing were taken.
These are in various stages of being tabulated and sent to laboratories for
analysis. V.'hen the laboratory results are known, we will be i n a position
to know with greater certainty the extent of our program.
In P.S, IDS .Y.anha t tan, the backs of book cabinets throughout the building
had an asbestos material application. Teachers in the school were concerned
ebout the method to be used by the contractor i,n performing the work of
eliminating the asbestos. The situation was resolved by having the bcok
cabiners reroved from the building. They will be returned after the asbestos
has Deers re.-aved at the contractor's shop.
v.e had boen concerned about the use of asbestos in swirming pools throughout
the system. Especially since friable materials in three 13) pools (Andrew
Jackson H.S. 0, Franklin K Lane H.S, K and Sushwick H.S. K) had forced the
closing of those areas until re~cvals are completed. There are forty-three
{ijj swiminc pools in thirty—nine (595 school locations. V.'Jth the exception
of tncse pods where removal of asbestos is new taking piece, only two 123
cor.tain raterial which warrant testing for asbestos content. Sjrplcs have
ie-en far.en for submission tc laboratories. In scrr.e cases, pipe i ns'j!at ion
trat r.ay contain asbestos, '.".as used. However, there was no i.'.ojor use of
B-26
-------
>, ~r3™,;; J. ."."acchi arsl 3 -4- Decoder 2"L, 1373
asbestos— cent jini ng materials for sound retardation purposes,
thin the next week, we expect to have the program developed for raking
repairs to damaged hung ceilings in schools y,'!icra a sprayeci— on fireproof ing
.-.as used to protect structural steel r,-ar,5ers. V.'e will supply materials to
custodians and have the:?, rr.a?;e these temporary repairs. This nothod of rc-
stcrlnq the integrity of a hung ceiling to isolate asbestos .v,orer fals is a
.-sans Qf providing protection to occupants until rare positive ccntainr-ant
or rcncval f.iothods are devoioped. Terporary repairs have already seen made
at 3o~5 schools, e.g., Susan -"."agnor High School and Benjamin Carcozo High
School .
A~S:3JL:yni
C
B-27
-------
SCAUP or eoycATioM of TM£ CITY OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-11 QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N, Y, M1O1
Tfti»«CBi 341-771!
ANTNON¥ R SMITH
IXtCbTIVI 9IMCTOM
C
January 16, 1979
TO; Dr. Frank J. /Aacchiarol a, Chancellor
ROM: Mr, Anthony R. Smith W
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
fflemoranduci *8
During the weekend of January 13, 14, 15, 1979, shop mechanics con-
tinued work in schools listed in my last memorandum C#7, dated
December 29, 19781 as partially completed installations. These were
schools that contained acoustic plaster ceilings where bonded—on
acoustical tiles were being installed during Christmas week. Con-
tractors neared completion on the asbestos-removal projects currently
under contract. A full tabulation will be included in my next memorandum.
Since my last memorandum, 1 testified before the House of Representa-
tives' Education and Labor Committee in Washington. As a copy of my
testimony indicated, I also had a meeting with representatives from
the National institute of Health. The National Institute of Environ-
mental Services and National Cancer Institute were represented, i
explored the possibilities of Federal assistance for our program. I
will be following up this potential source of Federal Grants for certain
phases of our program.
P.S,_785/208 Manhattan
After informing the Bureau of Budget and Comptrol ler 's office, I have
issued an oral order for work to commence in P.S. 185/208. The con-
tractor is H,£. 'Aurdock and Sons, a Connecticut firm expert in the
field of asbestos control. This project will be used as a demonstra-
tion project and will serve as a training ground for our design and
maintenance staff, contractors who may be interested In bidding future
asbestos related work, and individuals from interested jurisdictions
in the New York area whicn may have similar asbestos problems. Our
future contractors will be required to visit this site during the
3-28
-------
Dr. Frank J, ".accht arola -2- January 16, 1379
C
r. 'Ogress of construction to witness proper procedures- and precautions
that1 will be required. it will be a prerequisite lor qualifying on
sirnilar projects,
I expect work to corv.ience in P.S, 185/238 on January 17, 1979,
CURRENT STATUS _^_SURV_EYS_
In my first memorandum (#1, dated November 6, 1978), I indicated a
projected target date for surveying and inspecting all Board of Edu-
cation facilities by late February 7979. Thus far, we have completed
surveys in 587 buildings that were constructed or modernized during
the years 1946 to 1971. We have listed another 921 sites to be sur-
veyed. In this category are:
1, Buildings constructed before 1946 and after 1971.
2. Leased premises.
3. Buildings or premises used for actalnist-rat i ve offices.
4. District 75 buildings or premises.
Completed surveys In this group number about 190.
Although we are on schedule for the February 1979 projection as far as
owned premises are concerned, It new appears doubtful that all leased
premises can be completed in this time period. The middle to end of
March is a more realistic time frame for these sites.
CURRENT JJftJTjS^j. Samp I e Test Ing
Thus far, 474 samples have been sent to the Walter C, JVcCrone, Asso-
ciates Laboratories In Chicago for bulk sample analysis. Additional
samp | es are being sent as they are received, but we don't anticipate
too many more samples to be taken sines surveys are now being con-
ducted In older or newer buildings which have less I Ik I i hood for
containing asbestos. Due to the current weather problems in the
mid-west, we may experience delays In receiving reports back of the
test resul ts.
We hope within the next reporting period to develop a training manual
that will be part of our management control system, out 1 Ining procedures
in working on or around asbestos— containing materials. Also, we will
be notifying Community School District Superintendents of our interim
findings as a result of our surveys,
ARS:BJL:ym
B-29
-------
BCARC of £oun»~.O"» CF "»»tc;TYOf"f«ew foan
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-11 QUEENS PLA31A NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY N Y 11101
TcifPttOHt 3SI-77I1
ANTHONY R SMITH'
tXtCutfvl D'HCCTOft
February 2, 1979
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
"Dr. Frank J. Macchiarola, Chancellor
Mr.- Anthony R. Smith
Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum # 9
C
Since my last memorandum, progress in the asbestos program is a follows:
P.S. 185/208 Manhattan
On Wednesday, January 17, 1979, H.E. Murdock and Sons started work. A
media briefing session was conducted to introduce the project. Now into
his second week on the job, the contractor after thoroughly sealing off
the work areas with plastic barriers, has started his structural con-
tainment work in the third floor corridors. The electrical contractor
is working along with him on related work in that trade. Controls were
put into place with the cooperation of the school custodian.
With regard to the use of this job as a training ground and demonstra-
tion project, we mailed notices to contractors requiring their atten-
dance at the briefing sessions. Notices were also sent to other city
agencies and private sector educators inviting them to attend. Our
personnel will also be attending the sessions as part of an in-house
training prograra. Slides that were taken during the removal at J.K.S.
158 - Queens will be coupled with an audio sound tracic showing proper
procedures and precautions to be utilized on an asbestos project. The
Board photographer has been asked to take pictures at P.S. 135/208 as
he did at J.H.S. 153 - Queens.
UPDATE STATUS - CURRENT REMOVAL PROJECTS
As I indicated in my memorandum number eight (8) (dated January 16, 1979)»
a tabulation of status of Phase I removed projects follows:
B-30
-------
/..-.drew Jackson H.S.-
Friable
Sound Deads.ling
Material in Pool
?DO! Closed
Friable Material
removed. Cant.
cleaning area.
Patching regains
to be done.
pletion Fa'
Hushwick H.S.-K
Ja~ss Madison H.S.
Susan Wagner H.S.
Friable
Sound Deadening
Material in Pool
Soimd Deadening
Material
Rooms 136, 138
Public Address
Room
Spray-on Fire-
proofing on Beams
in Gym and Aud.
Stage
Pool Re-ooened
Work Comr-lei e
Work
P 219 - Queens
Benjamin Cardozo
H.S. - Queens
P 126 -K
Prospect Heights H.S.-K
Franklin K. Lane H.S.-X
Spray-on Fire-
proofing on Beams
in Gym and Aud.
Stage
Spray-on Fire-
proofing on Beams
,in Auditorium stage
and Storeroom
Friable Sound
Deadening Material
in Cafeteria, Band
and Music Booms
Friable Sound
Deadening material
in Band Practice
Roora
Friable Sound
Deadening material
in Pool
Beams inaccessi
ble. Teachers
instructed to Projected i D~
monitor Easter Wee1-- .
activities. A.O.
having trouble
with contractor
starting work.
Contractor Projecter op.
working-asbestos February * .'., 1
removed. Contractor
to submit shop
drawings for re-
fireproof ing.
Substantially
complete -
Painting trim.
Pool He-ocened
Ccmeuec
Work Co.T.oleted
Work Co-cle-.e;
B-31
-------
C
„,_: riy-o.n rireprooiing ......
on £-327:5
? 153-- Q Painted friable Cafeteria Work
sound deadening Re—opened
material in student
cafeteria
CURRENT STATUS - SURVEYS
We are continuing our survey of schools and leased spaces used by the Board.
A summary of surveyed buildings and types of materials we have identified
are as follows:
Number of Surveys " , 932
Number with Acoustic Plaster 361
Number with Spray-on Fireproof ing. 74
Number with Soft Acoustical Material 33
Number with Soft Acoustical Material
in student occupied spaces (includes
Phase I projects already completed)......... 9
TOTAL Number of schools with suspected Asbestos Materials 408
A complete listing of schools with materials identified in certain areas has
been distributed to each Community School District Superintendent and the ffi £/
School Superintendents. This listing has also been distributed to our various
bureaus for disse,irLnation to the work force as part of our management control
system. It is intended to make those working on or around suspected asbestos
materials aware of their presence.
Draft copies of our Abatement and Control Guidance Manual have been distribute-
for review and comment and before finalizing the document, I want Dr. Sawyer's
comments and input.
Also as part of our management control system, we have designed a sticker thai
is to be applied to wall and ceiling surfaces wherever there are asbestos
materials in a building. It will caution those who plan to perform any work
in the area to check arLth the custodian who will have copies of the information
sheets I mentioned before. An order for a supply of stickers is being processr.
Our Bureau of Building Services has been asked to report:
1) Those projects where roof repair specifications have been prepared or are
planned and 2) Schools where reports of other water damage will require
corrective work. From this information, we will be better able to estsblis:
priorities for a coordinated Asbestos/Hoof Repair Program and monitor the
progress of the work. Those projects that contain asbestos and require ro>-
or water damage repair, will be higher on our priority lists.
CURRENT STATUS - ACOUSTIC PLASTER SPECIFICATIONS
As I indicated in a previous memorandum, we are planning on preparing specifi-
cations to contain acoustic plaster in over 50 schools during the fiscal year.
Eaphasis would be placed in bidding as raany projects as possible for work to
be performed during the Easter recess period. Specifications for twelve (12)
schools have now been prepared and bid dates will be established in our atter.nt
to work in these twelve (12) schools over the Easter recess period. Using more
exact fig-ores now. that the specification work is complete, our previous esti.T.at
8-32
-------
C
based on averages of 10,000 square feet per school and $30,000 cost per building
nust now be adjusted upward. Twenty-one (21) schools where preparatory work is
completed for specifications now average about 5138,000 per job. The nirr
-------
BOA*»O OF ECUCAT1CN OF TMt CITY OF SCW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-H QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY. N. Y, II1OT
391.7711
March 5, 1979
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dr. Frank J. Macchlarola, Chancellor
FROM: Mr. Anthony R. Smith
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum $10
c
I can report the following progress on our Asbestos Program during
the month of February.
P. S. 18 5/208 Man ha 11 an _(Demon s t ra t i on Project)
While work progressed in the building, we conducted five successful
briefing sessions. Attendance and participation in the lectures,
slide presentations, question and answer period and building tours
spanned a broad spectrum of interest groups. Our in-house people
from various bureaus were in attendance (numbering approximately 150).
In addition, about 60 people representing k2 contracting firms at-
tended sessions as part of our information and pre-qualification re-
quirements for bidding future asbestos related projects. Also attending
have been representatives from:
Congressman Weiss' Office
Board of Higher Education
New York Fire Department
New York Regional Office of Environmental Protection Agency
Regional NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health) Offices - Cincinnati, Atlanta, Boston, New York
Diocesan Building Office
U.S. Environmental Protection Administration - OFflce of Toxicology
Various City Agencies
We expect to be conducting additional sessions until the contractor
completes the project (projected completion is the end of March).
B-34
-------
Frank J. Hacchiarola -2- Harch 5, 1979
FUTURE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS - I am preparing a letter to the National
Cancer Institute, asking that funding be made available for several
additional demonstration projects. The schools chosen for that purpose
are as follows:
1. SHEEPSHEAO BAY HIGH SCHOOL-BROOKLYN - Exposed softacoustic
material in cafeteria and auditorium. Corrective work: Re-
move the material and replace with an alternative acoustic
material.
2. SUSAN WAGNER HIGH SCHOOL - RICHMOND - Spray-on fireproof Ing
throughout the building, with water damage. Corrective work:
Repair water infiltration problems; Contain fireproof ing
materials in corridors and classroom areas; Encapsulate
fireproof ing materials In mechanical spaces and custodial areas,
3. p.S. 263 - BROOKLYN - Acoustic plaster in various areas in
the building. Corrective work: Structurally contain acou-
stic plaster with approved methods.
it. P. S. 162 - BRONX - Spray-on fireproof ing in various custodial
areas inthe building. Corrective Work: Encapsulate fire-
proofing in mechanical and custodial areas.
In addition, we plan to monitor damage to an acoustic plaster installa-
tion that does not contain asbestos materials. Our purpose is to de-
termine the extent of damage, where none now exists, as an aid in
setting priorities for corrective work in future acoustic plaster ma-
terials that do contain asbestos.
LABORATORY REPORT ON SAMPLES
We have received the first written results from our Chicago testing
laboratory. They have indicated the following:
Total number of samples sent to laboratory ...kjk
Number of responses kl3
Number of materials cental ningasbestos 201 '- " ~"
Number of material s wl th no asbestos .212
This does not mean we have 201 schools that contain asbestos. For
example, in six (6) of the schools containing asbestos, more than one
sample had been taken. A further breakdown of the tabulated figures
is as follows:
Number of schools with confirmed, asbestos-containing acoustic
pi aster 73
Number of schools confirmd, asbestos containing spray-on
f I reproof I ng ^3
Number of schools with confirmed, asbestos-containing soft
acoustic or thermal material 16
-------
Frank J. .lacchtarola
-3-
Harch 5, 1979
G
We have approximately 200 additional samples which are now being pre-
pared for analysis. Additional samples will be taken as our surveys
of the buildings continues.
We are now discussing with Dr. Robert Sawyer, methods of verifying the
accuracy and reliability of the testing results in the schools.
Recently, the New York Regional Office of NIOSH requested that we work
with a chemist in their Cincinnati laboratory, who is attempting to
develop and perfect-a testing method to identify asbestos using a chemi-
cal analysis process- IF the method is proved reliable, it could
eliminate the need for costly microscopic and x-ray defraction methods
for testing, which rely so heavily on the abilities of the person using
the microscope. It would then become simple matter for on-the-site
analysis using vials of chemical re-agent. We have agreed to send
samples to the chemist and work with him in his efforts to perfect his
approach which could have national impact, while giving us confirming
informat ion at no cost.
UP-DATED SURVEY INFORMATION
To date, we have surveyed 1,200 school buildings or sites used by the
Board for educational or administrative purposes. About 1,^12 such
sites exist, leaving about 212 sites remaining to be surveyed. Our
projected date for completing all surveys in March still holds. In
these latter stages of the survey portion of the program, we are finding
considerably less material that appears to contain asbestos in student
occupied spaces. Since our last report, we surveyed 268 schools of
which kl (approximately 15%) were visually identified as having a
material that might contain asbestos. Samples were taken in each
stance to determine the presence of asbestos in the materials.
i n-
ASBESTOS ABATEMENT PROJECTS
The ceiling of the pool in Jylia Richman H.S., was found to contain
soft acoustic asbestos-containing material. Our shop mechanics
undertook and completed the project of containing the material, making
the pool area safe for use. At P.S. /I Manhattan, one corridor was
completed by our shops using our newest acoustic plaster containment
method. Five eighths (5/8) inch thick sheetrock was toggle-bolted to
the ceiling. Acoustic tiles were then bonded to the sheetrock. Costs
will be ascertained for this procedure from material and labor records
maintained for this project.
Dr. Sawyer Inspected a number of schools which have been confirmed to
contain asbestos. He is making recommendations to us as to methods to
be used Inthe abatement projects.
B-36
-------
Frank J. Maccniarola -k- March 5, 1979
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
On February 5» 1979? I testified before the Education Committee of the
New York City Council indicating progress in our asbestos control
program and outlining priorities, projected costs and the need for fi-
nancial assistance.
On February 21, I testified for a second time before the House of
Representatives Education and Labor Committee - Sub-Committee on
Education in Washington. This was a follow-up and update of infor-
mation relati ve to "two bills, sponsored by Congressman Perkins and
Congressman Miller. I offered comments regarding both bills on ways
that they could be improved, with special emphasis on the need for
retroactivi ty to be included in order that we can recoup monies al-
ready expended. I believe that the committee was receptive to the
proposed changes.
OUR ASBESTOS UNIT AS A RESOURCE
City, Sta-te and Federal Government Agencies as well as other juris-
dictions have taken advantage of the expertise we have gained in this
field.
The Department of Sanitation is investigating asbestos problems in
its offices and garages. The Housing Authority Is beginning the as-
bestos survey and analysis of its Installations. Both agencies have met
with us to seek guidance in their programs. Assemblyman Stavisky's
and Senator Goodman's offices have requested data and guidance with a
view toward preparing State legislation. Congressman Weiss' office
has also requested information. The United States Office of Toxic
Services and the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
have sent representatives to the demonstration project and to our office
to learn of our procedures. We have received requests for informa-
tion from local private and church organizations as well as requests
from offices as distant as the state of Nebraska. We believe that
our program is receiving nationwide recognition.
ARS:BJL:ym
B-37
-------
ANTHONY R SMITH
EJlICUTIVC DISECTQ*
,
0
*it
BOARD OF EDUCATION OP THE CITY OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-11 QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N. Y. MIO!
TELEPHONE. (2iz> 301-771 I
MEMORANDUM
April 18, 1979
TO: Dr, Frank J. Macchiarola, Chancellor
FROM: Mr. Anthony R. Smit
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum II1
C
Following is a summary of major events since the previous memorandum:
1. Federal funds for Demonstration Projects. Although we are awaiting
final confirmation, which should be forthcoming in a week, it appears
likely that the National Cancer Institute will transfer funds to
the Occupational and Safety Health Agency, a part of the Department
of Labor, for three major demonstration projects to be conducted in
three of our schools this summer. In addition, we will be able to
apply for funds to make a training film at these three sites, which
will be used nationwide by several of the National Institutes of
Health as well as other federal agencies. The focus of the film and
the training projects will be worker protection.
2. Surveys and Laboratory Results. We have now surveyed 1,400 Board of
Education locations; we have taken a total of 725 samples and had
528 of those completely analyzed. The results are as follows:
Number of samples taken 725
Number of samples analyzed 528
Number of schools with asbestos used in plaster,
soft acoustic material, or fireproof ing 1^7
Samples awaiting results 50
3- Summer Program. We hope to work in about 50 schools this summer.
We do not know what bids we will get from contractors so it is
uncertain at this time how many of the schools we wi11 in fact be
able to work in.
B-38
-------
C
-2-
k. Easter Work Program. We are working in three schools during the
recess. We had planned to work in twelve, however laboratory
results from nine of the schools for which specifications had
originally been written were found not to have asbestos. No other
specs were available in time "to bid for this recess.
5. Work Priority. Working closely with Dr. Robert Sawyer of Yale, we
have developed a hazard and work priority formula. Using this
formula we are able to establish the urgency of the abatement program
on a room by room basis in any given school. The formula has now
become part of the Federal Environmental Protection Agencies asbestos
abatement doctrine and will be included in a national publication.
it takes into account a wide variety of variables and permits a
certain amount of subjective difference on the part of those
surveying. We think it is a major contribution for school adminis-
trators around the country.
6. Envi ronmentaj Protection Agency Seminar. Division of School
Buildings personnel from the Asbestos Task Force were invited by
Federal EPA to participate in briefings on March 27 and 28 for
EPA personnel from throughout the entire northeast region of the
United States. We presented the slide tape show that has been
used for training at P.S. 185/208 and took the entire group, after
school was closed, to P.S. ?1 in Manhattan as a reinforcing field
trip. The Division of School Buildings has, in effect, become the
major federal training ground for EPA, NCI, NIOSH, NIEHS, and
apparently HEW. It Is quite a tribute. They are coming here not
simply to see schools that have an asbestos problem; they are coming
here to see what a progressive and aggressive administration is doing
to deal with the problem.
7. P.S. 1 85/208. The final training and demonstration session took place
at P.S. 385/208 on March 29. Following is a partial summary of those
who attended:
1. Division of School Buildings personnel.... .......
2. Personnel from local contractors .......... ........112
a. Above figure represents 78 different
firms and 1 Minority Trade Association
3. City, State and Federal Agencies ..... .... ...... ... 14
k. Private schools and companies ......... ............ 5
5. Press coverage of the seminar itself from
media organizations. .............. ...... .......... k
6. Other Individuals or groups ................. . ..... 4
B-39
-------
o
ARS:ss
-3-
A total of 633 individuals signed the log, although it was far
for complete and we estimate somewhere in the neighborhood of
725 attended the seminar.
Work at the school should be completed towards the end of April,
although we have run into delays caused by additional work which
has been assigned to the contractor. The communIty school board
and the parents understand this, and in fact some of that work was
at their request. So far, the work which has been done appears to
be excel lent,
Press Coverage. The work of the Board of Ed was the focal point
of a lengthy feature on CBS National News which ran on Friday morning,
March 16. New York Times had a major story on Saturday, March 31,
which despite some inaccuracies, was a useful and constructive
article. The MacNei1-Lehrer Report of Monday, April 16 was devoted
to the problem of asbestos in schools. It started with a
three and half to four minutes segment filmed at P.S. 185/208 which
included an interview with me and a description of the work being
undertaken there as representative of what we are doing elsewhere.
LookMagazine wi11 be publishing an article on asbestos in schools
towards the end of this month or early May. Family ClRCLE will have
an article on asbestos in schools sometime in September, written by
New York Daily News correspondent, Mark Liff. Because of his New York
base, it will focus considerable attention on the work that we have
done here in connection with Bob Sawyer of Yale.
As_s_j_s^ance toother city agencies. At the request of Sanitation
Commissioner Norman Steisel, our three most experienced asbestos
task force inspectors visited a sanitation garage at Bergen Landing
in Queens, near JFK airport. 1 have forwarded the detailed report
and recommendations which they prepared, but in summary the location
was found to have very serious problems and, acting on our recommendation
the Commissioner has closed that portion of the garage which has
exposed an extremely severely damaged asbestos fire retardant. An
abatement project is planned in the immediate future by Sanitation.
We have provided some assistance to other agencies such as the Buildings
Department and the Department of Environmental Protection.
B-40
-------
BOARD Or EDUCATION OF THE G!TY OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-1 I QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N. Y. 111O?
TtLEPMONt: J2I2) 361-771 I
ANTHONY R. SMITH
e«EC!jT!ve oiaecrow
June 12, 1979
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frank J, Macehiarola
VIA: Richard Halverson
FROM: Anthony R. Smith
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum 112
The following is a summary of the asbestos program to date:
1, P.S. 185/208 reopened on Monday, June 11, 1979. The total cost
has not yet been calculated but will be in the vicinity of
$275,000. This is more than twice the original estimate because
significantly more than twice the original amount of work ended
up being done in those schools. The schools are virtually new
in appearance with entirely new ceilings in all corridors and
fourteen (Ik) classrooms. In every location within the building
where we worked all previously painted surfaces have been repainted,
thus all the corridors appear practically new, as well as many of
the classrooms and other locations within the building. Three (3)
different techniques were used in the building: (a) the Installa-
tion of strong barrier ceilings - used throughout much of the
building; (b) removal - used in two relatively small, limited
areas where containment was not practical; and (c) encapsulation
with Decadex Firecheck, used In the kitchen and a custodial fan
room as well as a few small areas to which no students or teachers
will have regular access.
2. The summer 1979 program is as follows:
Work will be carried out in at least *»5 schools, ye had originally
planned to do 50 and had written specifications for that number,
however, a number of schools have been cancelled following labora-
tory samples which indicate no asbestos present. (Comment: from
B-41
-------
C
-2-
this experience we have learned that it is necessary, In many cases,
to have several samples from within any given school before making
the operational decision to proceed with an abatement project.
As a result of the approach, for example, we will not have to
expend an anticipated $567,900 in Wingate High School to do work
throughout the entire building but rather a relatively small amount
under $100,000 for limited work in a limited number of locations
within that school).
Me anticipate that the work in the kS schools will cost in the
neighborhood of $2.5 to $3 million for the summer.
We anticipate that all asbestos containment work in those schools
will be completed before school reopens. There may be some limited
cosmetic and/or acoustical work (the g.luing of acoustical tiles on
to plaster board) which will continue into the school year. That
work poses absolutely no risk or hazard to anyone in the building.
We now realize that modernization in buildings which contain
acoustical plaster present a potential problem which had not
previously been recognized. As we use" the term "modernization"
usually refers to rewiring a building and replacing incandescent
with flourescent light fixtures. Of necessity and by definition
this requires extensive work in ceilings. If those ceilings contain
asbestos, we will be releasing fibers when we work in and around
them. Previously we have not had this problem because buildings
that we were modernizing were generally built prior to the use of
asbestos in this manner. We are now beginning to modernize buildings
constructed in the early 1950s and will encounter asbestos acoustical
plaster for the first time. We will be confronted with one of two
options: (1) close the school while the modernization goes on; in
the past we have carried out modernizations while the building
continued to be occupied as an educational Institution; or (2) if
the architecture of the building permits it, isolate and empty one
wing at a time for modernization. A modernization must be carried
out both horizontally and vertically so it will not work to simply
isolate a floor, we will have to isolate an entire vertical wing
as well. If we cannot successfully isolate, we will then have to
relocate students. It may be possible to relocate students in a
building that we had otherwise planned to close and keep it opened
for a few months while modernization is carried out in the target
building. This may be cost effective in that the contractor will
be able to work much faster in an empty building and that savings
may more than offset the cost of keeping a building for an additional
year. At the moment, this is merely hypothetical and we do not_
have any examples In mind.
B-42
-------
-3-
Negotiatlons with the Occupational Safety and Health .Administration
(OSHA) of the Department of Labor continues and it appears that a
contract will be in place in the near future which will provide us
with fynds to offset some of the costs of removal and containment
operation in several schools during the summer. Those schools are
likely to include: Sheepshead Bay High School in Brooklyn, Cardoza
High School in Queens, and several other locations. OSHA will, be
funding the making of a film, 30 minutes, in sound and In color,
to focus on worker protection and safety associated with asbestos
abatement projects. This film should result, in among other things,
a training program for us to use for our own personnel as well as
those of contractors and also should provide national recognition
for the leadership role which the Board of Education has taken in
this field.
r
ARS:ss
B-43
-------
BOARD OF EDUCATION Of THE CITY or NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-1 I QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N, Y. I 1 IO1
NB: (212) 38 I -771 I
ANTHONY B. SMITH
wecuT.ve D.KBCTOR
July 12, 1979
H_ E_H_g RA H D U jH
TO: Frank J. Macchiarola
FROM: Anthony R. Smith 4*
SUBJECT: Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum #13
1. 1979 S umme rAsbestos Aba ternent Prggram
With the July 3rd meeting of the loard of Education, the final
f asbestos abatement contracts for work this summer were awarded. The
V total for this summer's work follows:
Total number of schools in which work is taking place: ^*5
Total cost of all contracts is $2,9 million,
Thirteen construction contractors and seven electrical contractors
are performing the work at the above schools.
I I, OSHA Film and Demonstration Project
The filming has begun at both Sheepshead Bay High School and
Cardoza High School.
Ill, New York Cjty P rpg ram
We have provided the city with our Internally written and published
asbestos manual which has now been widely circulated throughout the
Division of School Buildings. The city has made a few changes in it and
has begun printing it for Its own use. Vie have been asked to participate
in the development of a city asbestos abatement program and Roger ChIIjean
and I recently met with a group chaired by Deputy Mayor Ronay Menschel,
B-44
-------
-2-
I V. Statewide Program
On Monday, July 16th 1 will be meeting with the New York State
Department of Health at the World Trade Center to discuss its response
and reaction to the asbestos legislation recently passed by the New York
-State Legislature. That legislation, introduced by Stavisky, does
nothing for New York City In that It directs, with no funds provided,
local school districts to survey and sample In their schools for
asbestos and then to develop an asbestos program. Since only New York
has done this, New York State Is interested in our guidance as they
develop their program,
V. Federal Legjs1 a t i on
The Hi Her Bill, which would provide long-term no interest loans
for asbestos abatement projects is still awaiting a rule In the House,
Similar legislation was introduced in a Senate Committee early in
July.. The future of this legislation remains uncertain.
C
ARS:ss
cc:Reuven Savitz
B-45
-------
ANTHONYS, SMITH
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-1 1 QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N, Y, 111Q1
TeLfBMONE. (Z12i 361-771 I
August 17, 1979
TO: FRANK J. MACCHIAROLA
FROM: ANTHONY R. SMITH
SUBJECT: ASBESTOS IN SCHOOL BUILDINGS
MEMORANDUM # Ik
1.
1979 SUMMER ASBESTOS ABATEMENT PROGRAM
c
Mid-way through the summer In the 45 contracts under way, the overall
progress of contracts is encouraging. As of August 10th, the last
reporting period from each of our Area Offices, we average, on a city
wide basis, about 46% completion on all projects.
II
FEDERALLY FUNDED DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS FILM
Filming has continued at Sheepshead Bay High School and Cardozo High
School. Most of the actual construction sequences have been completed
Some background scenes of New York and a few contractor motivational
aspects must be filmed. We have not viewed any of the footage, but
reports from Battelle Labs indicate they are very satisfied with what
they have developed thus far.
ye have met with OSHA representatives on August 15th, to discuss Our
program and progress on the demonstration projects.
Ill
CITY, STATE AND FEDERAL PROGRAMS
ye have provided assistance to City Hall in their attempts to organize
.an asbestos program. This has taken the form of advice and counsel.
The Department of Parks has recently sought our advice In evaluating
conditions at one of their sites.
3-46
-------
August 17, 1979
Page 2 - Cent inued
Now that the Governor has signed the Stavisky Bill, which contains
reporting deadlines to identify asbestos hazards in schools, there
will probably be a statewide thrust in this area. The legislation
was approved with deadlines for inspection and filing with a Com-
missioner, information on asbestos materials and their locations,
by November 1979- By April 1980, local school authorities must
submit a plan for abatement. We expect our assistance will be
sought due to our experience in these areas.
At the Federal level, there has not been much activity on proposed
leg i slatipn.
B-47
-------
ANTHONY R. SMITH
iXECUTIVEL DIRECTOR
9OARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF NEW rCHK
DIViSiON OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
Z8-11 QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N. Y, 111OI
TELEPHONE; (2!3) 361-7711
September 18, 1979
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DR. FRANK J. MACCHJAROLA, CHANCELLOR
MR, ANTHONY R. SMITH
ASBESTOS IN SCHOOL BUILDINGS
MEMORANDUM $15
This memorandum will be rather lengthy. It is a summary of asbestos abatement
completed to date, an update of the federally funded demonstration projects and a
projection of what we hope to accomplish in the near future.
I have attached detailed progress sheets for abatement work already completed.
Part I Itemizes work prior to the summer and Part II indicates the comprehensive
nature of the summer abatement program. Let me briefly summarize here.
Number of Projects completed prior to Summer 1979 •
Number of Projects completed during the Summer 1979
19
53
TOTAL .............. 72
Cost of abatement work done by contract
Summer 1979 projects are listed as complete. They are all 100% contained (except
for I -201 -Manhattan - Auditorium). That means the asbestos materials have been
protected with paint or a structural barrier. Eleven (11) jobs are 100? complete,
(sixteen (16) more are 99% complete). In 42 cases, projects will require some
electrical work and other minor work (such as painting, trim, sticker applications)
before they can be listed as 1 00! complete. We expect the remaining work on these
projects will be completed in September or early October.
Federal 1 y F und e d Demo n s tration Projects
Cardozo High School - Queens - Contractors virtually completed work on August 30.
One storeroom, previously locked and inaccessible remains to be completed. It is
not being used presently and the contractor will be completing this small area
during the next long weekend.
(ContInued)
B-48
-------
c
Septsmcer !t. I
Page 2 - '.,"'.'
Memorandum = ; 5
Federa11y Funded Demonst rat ion Proj ects - (Continued)
Sheepshead Bay High School - Brooklyn - The General Contractor completed his re-
moval, replacement and encapsulation and clean-up prior to school opening. The
Electrical contractor is completing fixture re-installation in the cafeteria now,
working around the scheduled lunch periods.
Project Filming - As work on each project progressed, Battelle Columbus Labor-
atories filmed all pertinent work operations. Final New York skyline sequences
were completed August 18/19. I will be at the Columbus Laboratories on September
19th and 20th for a script and film editing conference. Within two weeks, 1 hope
to have a committment for a well known narrator.
Except for progress follow-ups and coordination, our involvement in the overall
project is winding down as the Battelle effort to produce the film, slide cassette
and printed matter will intensify.
Overa 1 I Program
Our efforts at taking additional samples in all buildings will be fi'nished shortly.
We will end up with about 1900 samples. Two laboratories will be providing con-
firmation on the asbestos content and we will have a firm basis for future work
projects.
There are now 171 schools that have some form of asbestos containing materials
(except pipe and boiler insulation). This number changes from time to time as we
receive test results, but 1 don't expect It will exceed 200. Of the 171 schools,
146 have the materials in student occupied areas.
Our next group of schools we will concentrate on contain sprayed-on materials.
Where these materials was used in student occupied areas, they were generally
protected with a hung ceiling assembly. Custodians have been alerted to im-
mediately repair damaged hung ceilings or report them to the area offices for
immediate repair. When the materials are exposed, they are generally Boiler
Rooms and Custodial spaces. The soonest work in these areas can start will be
the Easter recess because of heating requirements in the winter. About 13 en-
capsulation projects are scheduled for the Easter recess period.
During the upcoming recesses, ! hope to schedule relatively small, but needed
abatement work that shop mechanics can perform. Our target will be about 12-15
acoustic plaster abatement projects over any long weekends or Christmas. Next
summer, I expect to complete at least as many projects as we did this summer.
Availability of contractors will probably be our only limiting factor.
ARS:RAC:db
cc: Reuven Savitz
Joseph Saccente
Richard F. Halverson
Nat 0_uinones
Louise Latty
B-49
-------
ANTHONV R. SMITH
EXECUTIVE DIRICTOB
iOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CSTY OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
2B-H QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N. Y. 11101
TKLCPHONIi 3«t-7TII
February 6, 1980
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Dr. Frank J. Macchiarola, Chancellor
Mr. Anthony R. Smith
Asbestos In School Buildings
Memorandum # 16
c
Although I have not prepared an Informational memorandum on our asbestos
program recently, and there has been much progress, I wi 1 I attempt to be
brief.
v.
OVERALL PROGRAM
Except for isolated Instances, we have completed our sampling efforts. Our
two primary laboratories have given us some conflicting Information on the
presence or absence of asbestos, delaying our final decision on corrective
work in some schools. Whfle attempting to resolve those conflicts, we have
taken bids on 13 encapsulation projects In Boiler Rooms, for work during the
Easter recess period. Those 13 jobs, along with a list of about 60 other
projects scheduled for preparation of specifications for Summer 1980 work,
are confirmed asbestos-containing schools.
We now have about 18? schools that contain asbestos. About 164 of the 18?
schools have asbestos materials in student-occupied areas. These numbers could
conceivably increase by 40 if all the conflicting results show the presence
of asbestos and all are in student spaces.
Over the Christmas recess period, shop mechanics completed five (5) small
acoustic plaster containment projects.
FEDERALLY FUNDED DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS
The film and slide cassettes are nearing completion. I have attended several
screenings, the latest on January 21, The Gabe Kaplan sequence was spliced
In for that session. On February 13, another session Is scheduled with the
Battelle people. Generally, 1 am satisfied with the progress and content of
the entire audio visual package. Permission to use "Stayin1 Alive" for the
theme music, coupled with a film title of "Doin1 It Right", should contribute
to a successful "up-beat" package.
B-50
-------
c
Asbestos in School Buildings
Memorandum #16 - 2 - February 6, 1980
Application has been made for another federal grant to perform encapsulation
work in several Boiler Rooms, then evaluate the relative effectiveness of
various products, methods and a variety of work on the different asbestos-
containing products. Air monitoring before, during and after will provide
information on potential hazard levels in this heretofore unemphasized
school building area. Review of our application will probably take place
in April and if we are successful in obtaining our $$45,000 request, work
will start in the selected schools in June, 1980.
CITY, STATE AND FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT
ye have continued to receive inquiries, and assist anyone with an asbestos
problem. Several of those inquiries have come from other city agencies.
On January 9, 10, 11, Ht. Sinai sponsored an Asbestos Control seminar that
\ participated in as a speaker and panel moderator. City agencies sent
representatives, along with federal and private sector people, and 1 am
sure they came away with valuable information.
Both in December and January, representatives of U.S. EPA spent several
days with us. They are interested in preparing a case study on our program
that should benefit many others who have an asbestos problem. We are
furnishing data and talking with two EPA contractors whose tasks are aimed at
a broad dissemination of our experiences,
On a statewide level, I have participated In an asbestos Advisory Council
meeting at the State Education Department in Albany, Again, we are
providing advice and data so that a responsible State program can be
implemented. Even though the State School Asbestos Safety Act was enacted
in July, 1979, the State has not instituted an effective program.
Also, 1 have testified at the Stavisky hearings In Albany on February 5, and
expect to do the same when Senator Javits holds hearings on the Senate
Asbestos bill in a few weeks.
You are probably aware of the overwhelming passage of HR 3282 in December, 1979.
ARS:RC:jsf
B-51
-------
c
SOAHD OF £O\JCA-"CS Of •'WE'Clfv CF ME'A
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-11 QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N Y t I IOI
TEttr-CNt ll 111 361-7"? 1 I
S'-tiTH
May ?, 1980
TO: DR. FRANK J. MACCHIAROLA, CHANCELLOR
FROM; MR. ANTHONY R. SMITH;
SUBJECT: ASBESTOS IN SCHOOL BUILDINGS
MEMORANDUM NO. !/
The following information wi 1 1 update our asbestos program progress:
OVERALL PROGRAM
We were only able to complete two of the asbestos encapsulation projects
during the Easter recess period. The remaining projects will be done this
summer. The contractors did not have registered contracts in time, and those
that had awards, were not willing to work (except for the two) on the strength
of Proceed Letters.
With these displaced Easter projects and the specifications that are now rea
for bidding (or have been bid already) our Summer work program will probably
involve between 50 and 60 schools.
are now ready
The total number of confirmed asbestos containing schools has grown to 232.
In many schools only one sample was analyzed early in the program. We now
have several samples from those schools, in the hands of two or more lab-
oratories, and are in some cases, getting conflicting results. It is in
the resolution of the conflicts, that we are increasing the number of schools
that contain asbestos.
The combination of an increasing number of schools requiring work, and our
inabilities to have contractors on board to perform work during recess periods,
may extend our program beyond the summer 1981 recess period. We have completed
asbestos work projects in 85 schools.
(Cont i
B-52
-------
Fl3«L=fkkL JJiNPEP DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS
The training film and slide cassettes will be formally presented at a screenlna
I will I attend in Washington, the week of -May 12, 1980. We are all pleased with
Che outcome and now look forward to general release.'
We have not heard about our r.ore recent grint application to N10SH for $5^*5,000,
but have been advised that seven successful applicants will be notified very soon.
Ve could not determine whether we were one of the seven. When we are notified
officially, we are prepared to start inmedtately with the work we outlined in
our application. As you recall, this application addressed asbestos material
conditions in Boiler Rooms and their possible affect on Custodial Employees
a^d other school occupants. Additionally, corrective work was to be performed
and material conditions evaluated.
GENERAL INFQRMATI ON
Ue continue to be an asbestos information resource both locally, as well as
responding to inquiries from New York State, California (U.S. Navy), Louisiana
(New Orleans Mayor's Office) and Canada (Toronto, city and Provincial officials
and private people).
More direct1y, we have offered direct assistance to Brooklyn College, Presbyterian
Medical Center (New York Psychiatric Center) as well as our continued Involvement
on the New York State Asbestos Advisory Council.
Results of our joint efforts at P.S., 185/208 before Senator Javits, have paid
off. An Asbestos Bill was approved by the Senate Sub-Committee shortly after
we testified, and the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee approved the
bill on Apri1 30th.
We are also continuing our contractor training efforts, now expanding exposure
to the actual workers. Identification cards are being issued to attendees, and
no worker will be permitted to work on an asbestos related project unless he
has attended a training session. The Issued card must be displayed while the
worker is on the work project. Use of motivational Training Package will
facilitate this endeavor.
APS:<*AC:db
B-53
-------
ANTHONY B, SMITH
EXECUTIVE 8IHSCTOB
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
28-1 ! QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N. Y. ItlOJ
TELEPHONE (212) 361-771 I
September 23, 1980
TO: DR. FRANK J. MACCHIARQIA, CHANCELLOR
FROM: ANTHONY R. SMITH
SUBJECT: ASBESTOS IN SCHOOL BUILDINGS
MEMORANDUM NO. 18
c
1 will briefly outline progress in our Asbestos Program. Our greatest act-
ivities in the past three months were concentrated on work projects that
took place this summer.
SUMMER PROGRAM "
Work took place in 57 schools. Again, the major asbestos material worked
on, was acoustic plaster, both structurally contained or sealed with paint,
But encapsulation and some removal also took place. Cost of this work ap-
proached one million dollars. With a few except tons, work was completed
prior to the opening of each school. In the majority of work in major
student occupied areas was complete, or contained and safe for occupancy.
In the others, work was pretty much confined to Auditoriums which could
be effectively isolated from other parts of the building.
Our new contractor training efforts continued. We Issued worker identifi-
cation cards. Workers were required to display the cards while working on
any project. Training continued from the spring and tapered off during the
summer, but over 60 contractors sent over 350 workers to the sessions. We
used an early release of the Asbestos Training FTlm as the basic media de-
vice.
FEDERALPROGRAM
We did not get the N10SH grant, and were disappointed,
I am trying to Iron-out some nagging details with OSHA on the Asbestos
Training Film. The release is being delayed longer than we anticipated.
I think we have resolved some of these details this past week.
ARS:RAC:db
B-54
-------
Appendix. C
Summary Form, Buildlng_~Specifi.c File
C-l
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
C-2
-------
PROGRAM
7
DJSTftlCT
61cKeever Place 11225
1-320 K
SCHOOL
BOROUGH
A Acoustic Plaster
Corridor (Basement), Husic Room,
Band Practice Room.
B Spray on Fireproof ing
Soft Acoustic Materia
S.O.F. throughout building
C Insulation (piping / boilers)
TEST SAMPLE
LOCATION
Results
16
658
659
661
1732
1733
1731*
Corridor (Bsmt,)
Husic Rm, C-2
Corr.{8smt. at
Music Room)
Music Rm. C-2
Corridor (2nd fl .
Corridor (Bsmt.)
Room 210
No
Ho
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
I
121
657
660
Corr
Corr
Corr
i dor
i dor
idor
(3rd fl.
(kth fl .
(3rd fl.
Yes
Yes
'Yes
Specifications (work description)
Area Shops: Repair damaged hung ceilings in areas below spray-on fI reproof ing,
Spec.# 918-E-31 * Contained Basement Corridor and Music Room,
Removed and replaced hung ceilings in 3rd & kth floor corridors.
Above work completed.
Remarks
REVISED: 1/12/82
REVISED: 9/15/80
Daft 9/5/79
C-3
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
C-4
-------
Appendix D
Initial Asbestos Survey Instructions andDataForms
D-l
-------
D-2
-------
FOR
COtO'LETIKC ASBESTOS ItraVCT
FORK "B"
At Please fill In School number for P«S. or I«S. and name for High School, (All shsets)
3. Check off box pertaining to Borough. (All sheets),
C. tlrite in District Number. (AIL sheets)
0. Fill in name and telephone ntsmbers (School and hone) of both Custodian and Principal.
(Sheet 1 only)
E. Mufflber sheet I of 3; 2 of 3; etc.
M.MTKTAJ, TYIT,
2. Acoustic Tile
Lay-In
3. Spray On
Fireproofing
4. Soft Acoustic
Material
/. Acoustic Tile
Spline no backing
6. Acoustic Plaster
7. Soft Acoustic Material
iMgao pries .-j;n rus'ii'si..: LUC AH ON _ ^;j:j
Catlier dense, wicli some resiliency. Usually
found in corridors, auditoriums, cafeterias,
music and band practice rooms, libraries, some
offices and sound control rooms.
A mineral cile board usaally 2i**x*3" in size.
Can be found alaost anywhere, aost corasraly in
corridors, lunch rooms and other isrge areas.
A soft, knobby looking naterial sprayed to steel.
In moat cases above a hung ceiling, although it
may be exposed in auditorium stage areas and
custodial
A soft fluffy type applied to walls and ceilings
of fflusle and band practice rooras and swiming
pools.
A mineral cilc 12"xl2" with no back up. Susi-en.lcc
by metal c.irriers «ich flat thin rtctal strips i:»oc
to engage grooves on edges of tll€.
Usually found its corridors, lunchroom and other
l,-rge areas.
Sasae as Type I, bat used on "alls.
Same as Type 4, but used on walls.
Please inspect each space in building and check off appropriate spjees. If none, "--rite
none*
Use type numbers I thru 7 as described above to indicate extent and type of daaage.
List only classrooras with types of aacarials listed in 1 thru 7.
Please indicate on last sheet if you observe any damaged pipe covering and it's location;
an asbestos curtain on auditorium stage (H.5.) and any other remarks you nay wish to enter.
If fireproofing is visible directly above damaged ceiling, indicate approximate square foot-
age of nissing ceiling tiles directly beneath fireproof ing in rfsssrkr, colunra.
THAKK TOO FOE YOUR COOPERATION
D-3
-------
. ASBESTOS SURVEY
f3L 1 SCHOOL
[| O NUMBt* °*- NAME; . .
BOROUGH a &ROMX
a BRAOJCLVN D MANHATTAW
Q QUEPHS a STATtH ISLAND
f/ISUM. WSFECflOM tl: riR.IPR.OOF»56 AND OR ACOUSTICAL TREATMENT
LOCATION
Corri'lors—
- """ " IsT floor "
11 2nd "
" __lsL "
* Itth "
Veatibulea-Lobblea
Kxi.tVX _r_. .
Aulliorium
}'i ejection Room
''ir Ic Room
!1 mil fractico Room
ilirory
.Undent Cafeteria
1 c« trh« ra Cafeteria
1 i 1 chin
t li«jr iii~it.no
Cvifiiisla
* fficrs by rm./r
^uir'winf Fool
1'uL.tnilio] Spaces
Ifuilir Hourn
rf'lll T({^OETI
^ * ~
ORIGINAL CE1UMG FINISH & TYPE
[*_, .
Acoaj>Tic
PL/VSTER
2-—
ACOUS. TILE
tAV-IN
3 4
SCR. AY -ON
riREPROOFIH6
SOfT
ACOUSTIC
^.TJtU^l-.
_^J5
5t>l_l»JE
MO_(J*C^(HQ
REMARKS
OKU3I)
DISTRICT
DATE
CUSTOOI
PRlMClP.
AM st
\L .
„
" ~
PLEASE FILL IN AWHOPMATK 5».*tE'
ia WALL FIHWH
ACOUSTIC
PUSTER,
,.—^+> -.
-- -
,, ,
- -
- J
son tt&Jstc
MATIB.IAL
—
---
._.
H<
M
> WIT
* EXTENT OP DAMAGE I*CA.U!
* IHDlCATt
HOME
.
US51WM
J07.
. . . _
TELEPHONE
MOOl .
aw*.
OM5 -
H
SE
CJ
itr-
/
OF LV'MAGE
Bf_^ RE LATlMa TO T^PE Of PtJiSM
10%
TojjO*/.
OVER,
507,
- -
_
VAHDH
I5M
WATIR.
C8MST.
SCLF
- —
tlotoi Attwch additional sheets as required
SHEET of
Date
-------
ASbESTOS SUR.VEY
LJAIh
B
SCHOOL
AOPR.ESS.' -
BOKOUQH a BRONX
a BRAOK.UYN D MANHATTAN
a Q tin H* a STATEN ISLAWD
VISUAL INSPECTION OF F I R.E PROOFING AND OR. ACOUSTICAL TREATMENT
LOCATION
'°!.i:;srooms or
. •' 'ivj- Dooms of
'ii'.t mclion
ORIGINAL CEIL1MG FINISH
: t ^^,,
AC0U5TIC
(
?
ACOU5. TILE
LAV- IM
I
|i i
1 '
1'
i
!
1!
i
•
1
: ,.. .
3
"SPR.AY-ON
- -
4-
SOFT
ACOUSTIC
& TYPE
5
Aox«ne nil
SPLItJI
T
i
*
1
'
i
f
^SK™^™ " =
REMARKS
DISTRICT
CUSTODI
PRIMCIP
AN 1<
M
4L S^—
ruft/st
t, ^
*
MOMI _ _ _ .
PLEASE FILL IN APPROPRIATE SPACES WITH CHECK /*
ORSGIHAL WALL FIKISH
'6 1 7 ' ,
ACOUSTIC
PIASTER,
son «oysie
_JJ_Xf£NT OP DAMAGE J^CAUSE OF DAMAGE •
# INDICATE feV ^R.ELAflMG TO TYP£ OF fnr)iGl-l |
NOME
UttlUM
10%
TO 5&7,
! '
1
OVER,
50%
v*«»!r
w«jSSI:
— —
! ! i
i
i
,
1 1
!
i i
i
' i
1
;
1
•
,
I
i
» - P
1 ; I
r
*
1
i
'
f
.
?
_ —
"i*.
f i
: '
t
• |
i
1
t
:
- — __,
r "
1 *
.: f '
o
I
Ul
'.ttach ailtlitiofiB1 5'ieet-j as rcqiiirrd
s»r;!-rr or
Signature
Date
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
D™6
-------
Appendix E
Abatement Contractor Evaluation Forms
E-l
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
E-2
-------
ASBESTOS FIELD REPORT
N.Y.C. BOARD OF EDUCATION
DIVISION OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS
ASBESTOS TASK FORCE
fri
I
OJ
REPORT BY DATE
TIME IN TIME OUT
WORK IN PROGRESS (CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX - COMPLETE ALL BOXES)
YES NO
P Q Plastic barriers/temp, facilities
D P A! r -Test ing
L oc fit" ions ,„„_„,.,--. ••--
TflTAI NHMRFR OF UnRKMFN PRFSFNT
RFMABK^
OBSERVATIONS
YES NO
O O Plastic Barriers in Place.
tU JU Plastic Barriers Maintained.
D P Duct Tape Used.
D D Workers Using Proper Masks.
D JU Workers Using Disposable Uniforms.
D Hi Workers Changed Uniforms As Required.
D 13 Workers Changed Filters As Required.
JD D Had Uniforms for Inspectors.
Q D Had Masks for Inspectors.
P D Caution S igns-Adequate/Oi splayed .
CITATIONS ISSUED FOR ITEMS CHECKED AS " NO " AfiOVE
ITFMI firm FOR H"tJ-rf»Mpi lAMfF
RKHARkS: ....
YES
P
P
P
D
P
a
YES
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
n
a
p
YES
NO
a
a
n
a
p
p
NO
D
a
p
p
p
a
n
a
n
n
D
Remova 1
Encapsulat ion
Containment/Gypsum Panels
Acous t Ic Tiles
Sealing (Acoustic Plaster)
Pipe/boiler insulation
Clean Room.
Clean Room Located Properly.
S howe r .
Shower Located Properly.
Daily Clean-Up Satisfactory.
Dust and Dirt Confined to Work Area.
Debris Bagged Properly.
Final Clean-Up Thorough.
Final Clean-Up Satisfactory.
Additional Clean-Up Required.
NO D
-------
tiOTS- L"3 OHLy THB
pet,u»wtH« ejMBoLt;
5 • exCELLEHT
4 • 6t?^P
3 - AVERAGE
2 • fe-tloH AVE^AM
0 - P&&K
CeilTfWP*
3
£-
1*
ii
* .1
si
Itt
n -
I*
*j
P!
?2
it
1
0
h
t
SJ
H
$
LI
k
tt
i
E
*o
fl
is
r
0
1
3
tt
ti
<
1
|
Q
U
*
3
1
ft
rl
...
I
0
p
s
*
II
'<
ft
1
"*•
-
a
u
i
1
1
•ft
It
M
|
i
—
._
a
1
3
<
•"—
—
-
—
.
—
j
1
i;
5£
_
—
_
-
«
1
i)
<
o
i
s
T
_.
—
—
A
h
i
rit
0*
II
,u
—
—
__
.._.
„-
i
u
1
Q
•
%
«
tf
I
r
_
_
.,__
—
-,^ —
d
If
a»
r
ii
ji
ti
__
—
—
.^«,™
r
«
J
3
m
I
1
B
K
1.
r
_
—
-
__
«•
I|H
'•t
34
• I
l«
M
r.S
no
OW
Pi,
_.
1
1
|
O
u
1
r
_
|
i
i
*
€i
33
d
u
..
-
I
1
5
if
•
i
I
~
._
i*
i
H
P
10
3<
j«
*V
• f
...
1
«
1
a
—
_
.
C
i/
_
_
_
*
Ul
1
*ft
0
E
f
J
?
6
-
i ,
-------
Appendix F
C ompon.ents of a P o st-Survey Mo n. i tor ing System
F-l
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
F-2
-------
C~ • f •
-.i. I ^
IQ
^
f-IATr:?^:' ' " U \.. 3
\ •
:.
i/ J
F-3
-------
j_NSTRUCTl_qNS FOR _CCiflfj-ETl fl£
CUSTODIAL ASBESTOS PROGRAM REPORT
A, CUM (>di .iiis who hitvfc 'jpr.'jyoi'i fireproofing, soft acoustic/thermal material or
>icousl?c planter (as reported on Information Sheets) will complete;
1. School, Borough, District,
2. Location (list each space within the building where various materials are
present).
a. If spray-on fireproof ing was used throughout building - so note - list
exceptions, plus any individual areas where water damage or damaged
ceilings are present.
3. Work by:
a. Custodian - locations where he has repaired damaged hung ceilings undej"
spray-on fireproofing,
b. Shops - locations where shop mechanics have repaired damaged hung ceil-
ings under spray-on fireproofing or have done some corrective work on
acoustic plaster.
c. Contractor - locations where contractors have repaired damaged hung
ceilings under spray-on fireproofing or have done some corrective work
on acoustic plaster,
^. Material - Next to each noted localioa, check-off type of asbestos material
present.
5- Corrective Work - Next to each noted location check-off type of corrective
method used for Custodian, Shops or Contractor.
6. Damage to hung ceiling - date reported, If custodian cannot repair damage
to hung ceiling assembly under spray-on fireproofing, he is to indicate
date damage was reported to Area Office for r-pairs.
7- Corrective Action On Hung Ceilings - Custodian is la report date hung
ceiling repairs under spray-on fireproofing were made by Area Office-or
Contractor.
8. Water Damage - Date Reported - Indicate date water damage to spray-on
fireproofing, soft acoustic/thermal material or acoustic plaster, was
reported to Area Office for repairs.
9- Water Damage - Date Corrected - Indicate date corrective 'work by contractors
(or shops) took place.
JO. Custodian Log Sook Stamped - Check-off whether Custodian sign-in book was
stamped,
NOTE: Information on this form will be used to complete portions of the Asbestos
Program Check list.
F-4
-------
ANTHONY K, SMITH
MICUTtVC DI«tCTO«
or COUCATION or THC CITY or NEW YORK
DIVISION OF SCHPOL BUILDINGS
28-11 QUEENS PLA2A NORTH
LONG ISLAND Crpr. N, ¥. fltOI
301.7711
TO:
SCHOOL CUSTODIAN/SCHOOL CUSTODIAN ENGINEER
FROM: ROGER A. CHILJEAN
SUBJECT: " CUSTODIAL ASBESTOS PROGRAM REPORT
SPRAY-ON FIREPROOF ING
SOFT THERMAL MATERIAL
Some of yoy .have been participating in a monthly procedure to record
damage on hung" celling assemblies In buildings that contain spray-on
fireproofIng, We are expanding the reporting procedyre to those
schools that have-soft thermal materials. _*"
* . *
The attached form is to be ysed to report any damage. Framed data
sheets, that should be posted in your office, identify the specific
areas In which the materials were used.
Oyr purpose is to continue to'monitor hung ceiling conditions since
the assembly offers protection to (and from) the fireproof ing mate-
rial. We will be sending you these forms about three (3) times dur-
ing the school year. Please respond as promptly as possible. In the
event any damage occurs by water, maintenance or vandalism, don't wait
until the next reporting period. Notify the Asbestos Task Force im-
mediately.
Thank you for yoyr continuing cooperation in this Important matter.
ATTACHMENT
RAC:db
cc: Francescani
F-5
-------
- Aes»e*nr06 FR^RAM
PISTRICT
OKtt
5
i
a
1
MATE^AL
S
WO IMC
"H
"2
I
II
< ft.
•u
PAT6
01
3
UJ
F-6
-------
ANTHONY K. SMITH
sincere**
TO:
FROM;
SUBJECT:
• 0*1*0 3F EDUCATION OF TH« CITY Of* MCW '?OJ*H
DIVISION OF SCHOOL 5LMLOIN5S
28-»t QUEENS PLAZA NORTH
LONG ISLAND CITY, N. T, «1IOt
TtLttfKOMC; (211: 3*1-7711
June 6, IS79
Dec i
CUSTODIAN
CUSTODIAN ENGINEER
t
KR. HUGH FORCE ^"'/^
APPLICATION Of STICKERS AND ARROWS TO IDENTIFY ASBESTOS MATERIALS
Transmitted herewith, are warning stickers and arrows. They are to be applied,
as indicated below, to alert those who enter spaces that contain asbestos mate-
rials, Mechanics, specification writers, inspectors, designers and custodial
personnel who report to these areas are instructed by the sticker to check with
the Custodian for types of materials and their locations. Information sheets
part of this oackage, contain that data. The sheets are to be framed and
posted in your office.
These stickers are to be applied as follows:
A. ACOUSTIC PLASTER AND GENERAL APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS
I. Stickers shall be applied at 20' intervals in corridors, (staggersd
on each side wall), Auditoriums, Cafeterias, Libraries and other
areas larger than normal classroom sizes on the wall within 12
Inches of the intersection of the finished celling (or hung ceiling)
and the wall surface. In normal size Classrooms or smaller rooms a
minimum of one sticker per short wall and two stickers for walls in
excess of 20 feet long are to be applied. In closets, small toilets.
Janitor's Sink Closets and other similarly sized areas, one sticker,
applied on the wall facing the entrance dcor will be sufficient. In
large areas, such as Auditoriums, Gynnastuns. Cafeterias, Libraries,
etc., stickers are to be applied to the ceiling at 20' intervals in
each di reelJor.
(Centifi
F-7
-------
June 6, 1979
Page 2 - Cont i
o
r
2. Arrows are to be applied to point
materials (see sample below).
the direction of the asbestos
B. SOFT THERMAL/ACOUSTIC MATERIAL
1. Stickers shall be applied at 20' intervals on the wall within 12
Inches of the intersection of the finished ceiling and the wall
surface.
2. J f- this material was used on 3 wall surface or portion of one,
the Custodian should use his discretion in selecting an ap-
propriate location. The sticker is to be applied as close as
possible to the material, on a sound firm surface, not directly
art the asbestos materials.
•
C. FI REPROOFING MATERIAL
1. If the structural members are visible, apply stickers to the wal1
surface 12" below each framing member containing asbestos, fire-
proofing in every area of the building. If the fireproof ing is
concealed within a hung ceiling, follow instructions outlined in
I) and 2) abov« in Acoustic Plaster and General Application
Instruct ions.
Retasn the extra arrows and stickers as replacements. In the event they are
removed or damaged, new stickers and arrows are to be replaced immediately.
F-8
-------
50277 '01
REPORT DOCUMENTATION i- RCPOST NO 2.
PAGE EPA 560/5-81-10
4. T.tlr .mrl Stit.tilli'
Identifying Potential Asbestos Exposures In Schools:
The New York City Experience
7. AutnorKi j.pt Cesario*, R.A. Chiljean*, A.R. Smith*, E.E. Logue
3. Recipient's Accession No
5. Report pate
June 1981
i6-
** !B.
9. Performing Organization N3*rie 3nd Addr*^5
*Board of Education of the
City of New York
Division of School Buildings
28-11 Queens Plaza North
Long Island, NY ___ 11101
12* Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
Office of Toxic Substances
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, B.C. 20460
15. Supplementary Notes
Revised May 1982
**Research Triangle Institute
P, 0. Box 12194
Research Triangle Park,
NC 27709
arming Organization Rept, No
10, Proiect/Tash/Work Unit No.
1864-13
11. Contraet(C) or Grant(G) No.
(C) 68-01-5848
(G)
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
Final Report
16. Abstract (Limit; 200 words)
This report describes the experience of the New York City (NYC) Board of Education
and their asbestos-in-schools program. The program objectives were to: (a) identify
current and potential asbestos exposures in NYC public schools, (b) evaluate the
seriousness of these asbestos exposures, (c) recommend appropriate abatement action,
and (d) oversee the completion of the recommended action. A survey of all school
buildings was completed and priority problem areas were identified. Major abatement
activities were scheduled for summer recess periods and completed as funds became
available.
17. Document Analyses a. Descriptors
Asbestos Exposures; Public Schools
b. Identifiers/Operp Ertdfd
c. COSAT) Fipltl/Group
18, Availseility SUtempnt
Release Unlimited
19. Security Class (This Recort)
Unclassified
20. Security Class (This Pagd
, 21. No of Pages
22. Price
(See ANSI-Z39.18)
'ns^rucUons on Reverse
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77;
(Formpriy NTIS-351
n**pa^ment of Commerce
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
------- |