Asbestos in U.S. a national problem

Press, 23 August 1984, Page 28

Asbestos in U.S. a national problem

NZPA-NYT Washington New information gathered by the United States Federal Government shows that asbestos is much more pervasive in public and private buildings than previously realised and that it may present a complex national health and economic problem. Asbestos, a building and insulating material widely used for years for its heatresistant qualities, has been found to cause cancer and other severe illness in humans who breathe or swallow its fibres. A recent survey by the Environmental Protection Agency, not yet made public, has found that as many as 700,000 buildings, including federal buildings and commercial office buildings and apartment houses, could contain asbestos in an easily crumbled or powdered state. Such asbestos is more likely to be inhaled or ingested, agency officials said. Evidence that 100,000 to 200,000 private homes may contain easily crumbled asbestos, largely in aging forced-air heating and cooling systems, is being studied by the Health and Human Resource Department’s National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Mr David Rail, director of the institute, said: “There is certainly asbestos paper in the ducts. Whether there is also fibre there we have to find out.” He said the institute was supporting a survey conducted by Dr Irving J. Selikoff and Dr William Nicholson of Mount

Sinai Medical Centre in New York city to determine the extent of the problem. The surveys are the first national studies of asbestos exposure in public buildings and homes. Previous studies of asbestos exposure have focused on workplaces and schools. A new E.P.A. survey on asbestos in schools has found that about 15 million children and 1.4 million school employees are in buildings that contain asbestos. This is a substantially higher exposure figure than previously estimated. Efforts to remove asbestos from schools are hampered by high costs. The Education Department has estimated an average cost of $lOO,OOO a school to clean up asbestos. The total amount of money needed to remove asbestos dangers in the nation’s public and private schools ranges from $1.5 billion to $3 billion. The high cost of removing asbestos came up again when Steven Schwager, chief school business executive for the New York City Board of Education, responded to a $237,900 fine by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency for failing to comply with regulations on the use of asbestos in schools. He called the E.P.A. action “outrageous” and said New York City probably leads the nation in asbestos removal, having spent $l5 million on the programme since 1978. The information on asbestos in public buildings was described by Mr Alvin Alm, deputy administrator of the

E.P.A., as preliminary. He emphasised that the evidence accumulated so far presented “no cause for alarm.” At the same time, the evidence did not give any cause for “complacency,” said Mr Alm, who is leading the agency’s efforts to deal with the asbestos problem. “It is obviously a concern. Asbestos is dangerous stuff,” he said. “The problem is we don’t have a good feeling for the problem. You don’t know from the survey how much of a problem you have until you go and do onsite inspections.” He said it might be that exposure to asbestos in public and private buildings was still limited and the material could be removed or contained before there was any broad public health threat. “The good news side,” Mr Alm said, “is that of the schools containing asbestos — there are some 31,000, according to the Environ: mental Agency’s figures — two-thirds have already taken action to abate the problem and 27 per cent are planning action. Abatement actions include removing the asbestos or encapsulating it so that it cannot escape into the environment. He said this record showed that the agency’s asbestos-abatement programme for schools was “working.” Further strengthening of the programme is under consideration, he said, adding that the resources devoted by the agency to dealing with as-

bestos in the schools have tripled since Mr William Ruckelshaus took over as administrator of the environmental agency last year. But Representative George Miller (Democrat, California), who is active on asbestos issues in Congress,, said: “The evidence indicates that there is substantial public health danger from asbestos in schools, homes and in public buildings. The fact is, there is no comprehensive public policy for reducing that danger to millions of Americans, particularly our children.” Mr Anthony Mazzocchi, an occupational safety and health official for the Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers’ Union, who is now a leader of an organisation called Parents Against Asbestos Hazards In Schools, said: “What passes for abatement programmes is no more than a patchwork quilt of controls that will absolutely make the situation worse rather than better.” Mr Mark Wein, counsel for the Safe Buildings Alliance, which is composed of companies that previously manufactured building materials made with asbestos, said the E.P.A. report on the number of buildings containing asbestos “came as no surprise and does not raise any reason for alarm.” He said the E.P.A. had found that much of the asbestos in buildings is encased and not likely to release fibres into the air.