Tests at a school in Wales, which was closed last month because of asbestos fears, have detected airborne-fibre levels up to ten times above the previously accepted background level for schools.
Cwmcarn High School, which caters for more than 900 pupils, shut on 12 October after a structural report identified the presence of asbestos. Yesterday (19 November), Caerphilly County Borough Council released a further report undertaken by Santia in the wake of the initial findings.
The report uncovered evidence of widespread contamination within the ceiling voids at Cwmcarn High School, as well as damage to asbestos-insulating boards (AIBs) within some classrooms, caused by scrapes and scuffs from pupils vacating chairs and tables.
Tests also confirmed the presence of asbestos fibre in heater cabinets and unsealed AIB in other heaters. With the heaters in use for a period of four hours in the unoccupied school, the tests detected airborne fibre levels up to 0.007 fibres/cm3 – more than ten times above the accepted level for schools of 0.0005 fibres/cm3, as referred to in a government guidance document issued in 1999.
The report added: “In situations where the heaters are left on for longer periods during the cold winter months and with the school occupied by up to 900 pupils and 100 staff, it is possible that the airborne-fibre levels and the associated risk will increase.”
Based on its findings and the potential remedial costs involved, the report concludes “it is not practical, based on cost versus risk, to continue the school’s operation”, and recommends that the Council remove all asbestos-containing materials, so far as reasonably practicable, and then demolish the school.
The Council released the report to ensure parents and staff have the full facts behind the decision to close the school. Special health-advice sessions are also being offered to parents this week.
“The council wants to be honest, open and transparent in the way we deal with Cwmcarn High School, so we felt it was important that all interested parties had access to the full report,” explained council leader Harry Andrews.
“The decision to temporarily close the school was not taken lightly, but the health and safety of pupils and staff is paramount. We are confident that we took the right decision faced with the information that was presented to us on the afternoon of Friday 12 October, and we acted swiftly and decisively to protect the school community.”
The council has commissioned an invasive asbestos survey of the whole site, which is likely to take a month to complete. The HSE’s inquiries are also continuing and the council currently awaits its findings.
The report by Santia is available at http://tinyurl.com/bt6oa5o
Asbestos, the problem that won’t go away.
My father-in-law worked in Chatham Dockyard and died 7 years ago from mesothelioma. My wife (a teacher in her early 40’s) is due some investigative treatment for a rather worrying persistant cough. She has long wondered if she was exposed to fibres brought home on his clothes.
As to the teacher/pupil exposure rates, in most scools the teachers use the same classroom year after year, whereas the pupils cycle through the classrooms and the school.
A teacher may work out of the same classroom for many years, whereas the pupil will only be in the whole school for 5/6 years.
The result is the teacher has more continuous exposure to the risk than the pupil. The downside is the the population of pupils exposed could easily be in the high hundreds per teacher exposed.
Another duty to manage asbestos farce.
And do you believe this is the only school with such problems?
No wonder thousands continue to be affected by this vast quantity of deadly material inherent in a multitude of public and private buildings.
And the advice continues to state that if you leave it alone all will be fine??
Time to rethink this approach I think?
Regrdless of the fibre count, the fact that people can come into direct contact with AIB in a classroom does not equate to compliance with the Duty to Manage Asbestos?
Stated above – damage to asbestos-insulating boards (AIBs) within some classrooms, caused by scrapes and scuffs from pupils vacating chairs and tables. Truely shocking!
Is this not completely unacceptable, illegal and morally reprehensible?
Is there any confirmation of the method of fibre count? The most common method is called phase contrast microscopy and is used for measuring fibres per volume of air, but does not distinguish asbestos from non asbestos particles. Therefore a more accurate method should be used before recommending such drastic measures.
Having read the report it seems it may be somewhat flawed. The results of the air monitoring undertaken that are given in the report are below the limit of quantifiction for the individual air tests (0.01 f/cm3), therefore the reported results of 0.007 f/cm3 in the report can not be deemed accurate. Also the method used (PLM), does not distuinguish between asbestos fibres and other fibres that may be present, surely the samples needed to undergo ESM to determine actual asbestos content?
In a statement read out at a meeting 20 November 2012 by deputy chief executive Nigel Barnett on behalf of the HSE, it was said that the HSE had concerns the report had been misinterpreted. The HSE statement also said that none of the air samples exceeded the limit of 0.01 asbestos fibres per cubic centimetre
Overzealous none sense, we had no asbestos regulations until the 90’s, with the bulk of asbestos materials installed in the 60-70s people worked on those materials all the time up until that point, are all the teachers and pupils of those eras now consigned to asbestos diseases – No, maybe a handful only, but you need to get a sense of perspective. £10bn to save say 10 people, not resonably practicable, if u like it or not. Only trades are the really affected groups
If you think that spending £10bn removing all asbestos in schools to prevent 15 deaths a year is a valid cost benefit ratio, you should immediately lock yourself in a padded room from all risks, because you can no longer drive or cross a road, far more dangerous.
Sorry Pete D you’re wrong, try standing in front of parents and kids and tell them they may be collateral damage and aren’t financilly worth protecting.
Of all the people we should be protecting from asbestos, it’s children and young workers who’ve had minimal exposure. Around 15 teachers die a year from mesothelioma which indicates that the 30 kids in each class have been exposed. That’s totally unacceptable, worse than smoking next to a cot because it’s LA or government sancitioned.
tests detected airborne fibre levels up to 0.007 fibres/cm3 – more than ten times above the accepted level for schools of 0.0005 fibres/cm3, as referred to in a government guidance document issued in 1999.
But this is still well below the clearance indicator of 0.01 fibre/cm3 when an are will be handed back to the school after asbestos removal. As someone from the industry I am concerned the school and LA are being mislead