EPA Cites Schools for Not Warning of Asbestos

Federal officials have cited the Los Angeles Unified School District a second time for violating requirements that parents and school employees be informed of asbestos hazards.

The district has failed to meet inspection, record-keeping and “right-to-know” provisions of federal school asbestos rules, according to violation notices the U.S. Environmental Protection agency issued recently. Similar violations were found in the EPA’s inspection of the district in 1984.

District officials disagreed with some of the federal agency’s findings and said they sent the EPA letters and documents last month certifying that the alleged violations--some of them minor infractions--have already been corrected. EPA officials said they still are reviewing that material.

School officials said the violations do not reflect on the safety of the schools or the district’s attempt to rid them of asbestos, an effort they said goes beyond federal requirements.

‘Probably the Best’

The citations do not mean “that the district isn’t doing a good job of abating asbestos,” said David W. Koch, acting business manager for the district. “We have, in my judgment, probably the best asbestos abatement program of any school district in the United States,” Koch said.

Jo Ann Semones, toxics section chief for the EPA in San Francisco, said the district has “done a great deal of (asbestos) abatement, which is very positive.”

But she added: “The law is the law, and people--up to the time (asbestos) material is abated--have a right to know whether there is potential hazard.”

The violation notices, which carry no financial penalty, are based on a review of records in six district maintenance offices and visits last summer to about 30 schools in various parts of the city. The notices were issued in September.

Asbestos--a fibrous mineral widely used in insulation and other building materials--is harmless when intact. But friable asbestos--material that is broken or frayed--can release microscopic asbestos fibers when bumped or stirred by air currents.

Asbestos is widely regarded by experts as second only to cigarettes as a known environmental cause of lung cancer and has been linked to other types of cancer.

Asbestos illness has shown up mainly in workers exposed over long periods to much higher asbestos concentrations than would be found in a school. Reports of disease in people thought to have been exposed only lightly or briefly have, however, prompted many experts to conclude that even minimal exposure carries some risk.

District officials said they have spent at least $6 million in recent years on asbestos projects in nearly half of their 800 schools and other buildings. Another $1.75 million has been budgeted for the work this year. Most of the remaining asbestos is in boiler rooms, attics and similar areas where pupils and teachers rarely go.

So much material is left, however, that corrective work will be going on for years, as asbestos material gets broken or as buildings are remodeled. District officials say the cost eventually could top $80 million.

Local Decision on Removal

Although a new federal law will require schools to start correcting asbestos hazards by 1989, it has been a local decision until now.

The existing federal rules, under which the district was cited, require only careful surveillance of asbestos and notice to the public, leaving it up to each district whether to get rid of the asbestos.

The rules set a 1983 deadline for school districts to thoroughly inspect their buildings, test friable material for asbestos content and record and map areas where friable asbestos is found.

Districts also had until 1983 to notify employees of any areas in their schools where friable asbestos was found and had to post signs noting its location. Custodians had to be advised how to avoid disturbing asbestos material. Parents of students at each school with friable asbestos were to be notified individually by letter or through parent-teacher associations.

According to the EPA citations, the district in some cases overlooked or failed to sample friable materials. Several schools visited by inspectors had no files showing where friable asbestos could be found. Under the federal regulations, each school is to have a file available in its office for any citizen to review. At a number of schools that did have files, the information was incomplete.

No Proof of Notification

The EPA also said that in many cases, there was no way to tell if schools supplied required information to employees or letters to parents or PTAs.

Agency officials said some schools that notified their PTAs apparently used a “generic” letter that lacked information specific to the school. District officials said Friday that they do not know which schools properly notified employees and parents.

Susie Wong, main safety officer for the district’s employee safety section, said school principals were sent sample letters and notices for parents and employees in 1983 and told to distribute them.

She said no one checked which schools complied, even after the violations found by the EPA in 1984.

Because of the latest citations, Wong said, district administrators are considering requiring each principal to certify in writing that his school has met all notification and record-keeping requirements.

Wong said district safety and maintenance officials also hope to begin reinspecting district buildings next year for asbestos that was overlooked or has become friable in recent years.