Check out Safety Emporium for your N95, N99, and face shield needs.
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 23:33:09 -0500
Reply-To: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: "B. Rayfield" <barryrayfield**At_Symbol_Here**NC.RR.COM>
Subject: Re: NY School
The PCB Aroclor patterns found in early school sampling matched what is typical for paints and caulks better than what would be in a lighting ballast, but this was apparently limited at the time to three schools being remodeled. As pointed out to EPA-ORD last year, it is time for ballasts to start failing if made in the 70s to early 80s. Plus PCBs are semivolatile compounds, with air flows around a source (ceiling air plenum returns sharing the space with light fixtures, plus lots of near 100% recirculation in schools trying to save on HVAC costs), not hard to imagine how airborne concentrations could reach or exceed Federal standards.
Hope EPA can set up reasonable risk management and mitigation standards to deal with this (starting with practices to minimize PCB volatilization and concentration as an airborne contaminant), and not the protracted review and messy fight that occurred with the Dioxin reassessment. Paul is probably right this PCB and PBB issue has been dragged out for 30 years, just like the dioxin reassessment has been going on for 20+ years.
"Long, Don" wrote:
>Gotta start somewhere.
>
>Anybody remember asbestos?? Removal of that has created an entire industry.
>
>Don A. Long
>STS, CAIH
>Southwest Research Institute Laboratory
>Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal Facility
>PO Box 20130
>White Hall, AR 71612
>870-541-4930
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**list.uvm.edu]On Behalf Of
>Redden, Patricia
>Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 3:06 PM
>To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
>Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] NY School
>
>
>Thanks - I did indeed mean "before" 1979. This just seems to be the same mentality that says if you have very intact paint on your walls but some of the underlayers are lead-based, you must remove the lead-based paint.
>
>Pat
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: DCHAS-L Discussion List on behalf of ACTSNYC**At_Symbol_Here**CS.COM
>Sent: Mon 1/10/2011 3:37 PM
>To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
>Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] NY School
>
>Pat,
>
>I think you meant to say built "before" 1979. I was at one of those public
>meetings. And actually, this is their strategy to save money. And I think
>it is probably wrong headed.
>
>Yes, the light balasts before this date usually did contain PCBs and they
>are getting airborne. But to just deal with this and not the fact that about
>30% of latex paints before this contained them, most of the old caulks did,
>many plastics and more, my concern is they are going to remove the balasts,
>declare the problem over, and leave some schools still with high PCB levels
>from other sources.
>
>Monona
>
>
>In a message dated 1/10/2011 1:02:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>PREDDEN**At_Symbol_Here**SPC.EDU writes:
>>
>> Am I crazy thinking this is overkill, that you automatically need a
>> complete lighting retrofit if the school was built after 1979?
>>
>>
>> http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/01/10/meeting-held-to-discuss-s-i-school-chemical-problem/
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post