11 Request an update on Casa Bonita

Home Browse Search

that if it's approved for widespread use, contractors who take shortcuts would put people at risk. He also had issues with the cost savings estimated. "The EPA seems to inflate the cost of the standard NESHAP method to show that this alternative method is a fiscal way to do it," he said. Roger Wilmoth, chief of the EPA's industrial multimedia branch in Cincinnati, said the agency is trying to find more cost-effective ways to demolish asbestos-filled buildings. As more and more buildings that contain asbestos surpass their usefulness, cities and landowners are forced to deal with how to demolish them. The alternative method, he said, often costs less and takes less time. "That's exactly why we're looking at the research that's involved and gathering the scientific data to support or refute the alternative method," he said. "Obviously, we wouldn't be looking at it if we didn't think it offered great promise." Mr. Wilmoth said some of the first peer review group's recommendations were incorporated in the second test and will be used again in Fort Worth this week. Some of those include having an asbestos monitor on the individual soaking the inside of the building and using more stringent monitoring of the asbestos levels inside the structure. Conditional savings Mr. Dokell said the alternative method is cost-effective only in certain situations. He said only smaller buildings with substantial land surrounding them could provide savings under the new method. And, he added, the buildings would need to have a lot of asbestos inside. "In most cases, it costs more to clean it up that way than to do it under the old demolition," he said. Mr. Boerner said they recognize the limits in cost savings for larger buildings, but noted that in Texas, there is only a small difference in cost between disposal of regular construction debris and debris tainted with asbestos. "It's not significant enough to overshadow the labor cost," he said. Mr. Laubenthal said his biggest concern about approval of the wet method is whether contractors would follow the specifications carefully enough. "If this were put out on the streets, we know for sure that the average asbestos contractor out there would have a couple of kids with garden hoses making a vain attempt at trying to keep the material wet," he said. Representatives of Public Interest said more research should be done in isolated areas. Inez Byrd, who lives in an apartment across the street from Oak Hollow, said she fears for the health of the children and people with respiratory problems in her complex. "Once this stuff gets airborne, it is going to hurt people," Ms. Byrd said. She was one of the few neighbors to show up at the news conference on the sidewalk in front of Oak Hollow. Greg Ricks, vice president of the nearby Woodhaven Neighborhood Association, said he's confident of the city's and EPA's assurances that this test isn't dangerous. 3 51(4)