Students, faculty and staff may have been unnecessarily exposed to asbestos in the Medical Science Building (MSB) after the removal site on the first floor was shut down in December over concerns about the quality of work being done there.
The site, which is located outside the Dean’s Office and a high traffic elevator corridor, began removing asbestos as early as October. But the work was halted mid-December after asbestos dust was found inside the containment area and poor construction work resulting in broken water pipes signalled a poor job, say sources close to the project.
Asbestos, a mineral typically used as pipe insulator, is a known carcinogen.
Another source with firsthand knowledge says the site was abound with evidence of untrained practice in asbestos removal by on-site workers. These include having lunch and cigarettes in the containment area, removing masks while inside, and not showering upon exiting. The containment area is a Type 3 enclosure, the highest level of caution, and requires stringent adherence to abatement procedures.
“They definitely used inexperienced employees that are untrained,” he said.
The source, close to senior level managers on site, says he was on hand when air quality measurements were done in the outside corridor, and says the tests failed multiple times.
Another source familiar with the air measurements says tests were suspect in their implementation but results were below accepted levels. He described the work done there as “horrid” and MSB as “the most dangerous building I’ve ever been in.” Both sources agree that workers were untrained.
MSB Project Manager Ron Pansino insists no students, staff or faculty were exposed. “There is no way asbestos could have leaked out. There are three large negative containment units,” he said. “[Students and staff] were never exposed, and the air testing can prove all of that.
“Whether we exposed people, whether the university had done anything wrong, in terms of exposing people we have not.”
Those close to the project also say mismanagement by the in-house consultant hired to oversee the project, was another reason for the project’s troubles. The consultant was fired in January before the project’s resumption under Tom Harris Consultants.
The shutdown raises ongoing questions over the quality of asbestos work on campus and comes several months after Local 503 union held on-campus demonstrators in October charging that Impact Services, the sub-contractor hired to remove asbestos at MSB, was illegally using untrained workers.
Pansino says the quality of Impact workers was ensured beforehand. “We verified all the paperwork coming in. We made phone calls on every person who came on site,” he said.
Despite the allegations against Impact, which university administrators were aware of, Impact was re-hired for $25,000 to finish the remaining work in January due to contractual obligations with the university.
An inside source said “only a fool wouldn’t know” that Impact was unqualified to remove asbestos on campus when the university re-hired them in January.
“If we have a contract, and the contract states who the general contractor is, and who the sub-contractors are because they’re on the list and we accepted them as sub-contractors, [then] that extends to that list of sub-contractors,” said Pansino. “There are contractual agreements.”
But Pansino also implied that Impact will no longer be invited back on campus. “As of right now, they do not qualify for our asbestos removal list,” he said.
Asbestos does not induce acute reactions but is known to cause cancer under long-term exposure. Although short-term exposure to asbestos is generally harmless, studies have shown that even brief exposures may result in asbestos-related illnesses. It may take several years before symptoms become apparent.
