PODCAST TRANSCRIPT – Associated Report: “EPA Needs to Re-Evaluate Its Compliance Monitoring Priorities for Minimizing Asbestos Risks in Schools”

TIA:	Hello, I’m Tia Elbaum with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Inspector General, and with me today is Hilda Canes Garduño from the OIG’s Office of Audit and Evaluation. Hilda and her team recently completed an audit titled “EPA Needs to Re-Evaluate Its Compliance Monitoring Priorities for Minimizing Asbestos Risks in Schools.” Thank you for being here, Hilda. 

HILDA:	Thank you, Tia.

TIA:	From the 1940s through the 70s, asbestos was widely used in school buildings. Today, asbestos is still used in some newer or renovated schools but the EPA has developed policies for properly maintaining it to reduce the risk of exposure. What is asbestos and what are the potential health risks associated with it?

HILDA:	Asbestos is a mineral substance that has several applications, including as insulation and as a fire retardant in buildings. There is a misconception that asbestos has been banned in the United States. In reality, asbestos-containing products continue to be manufactured, imported, processed and distributed.  If asbestos is improperly handled in the construction, renovations, or repair of school buildings, students and employees can face significant health risks. In particular, asbestos fibers can be inhaled and become trapped in the lungs, leading to serious health problems such as cancer, lung inflammation and scarring. Children are especially at risk of exposure to asbestos as they are more active than adults, breathe at higher rates and through their mouths, and spend more time closer to the floor where fibers can accumulate. Many of these serious health conditions do not show up until decades after exposure.

TIA:	Your report deals with the EPA’s efforts to protect children from asbestos exposure in schools, as required by the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act or AHERA. Can you tell us a little more about the act and the EPA’s role in enforcing it? 

HILDA: 	Sure, Congress passed AHERA in 1986 as an amendment to the Toxic Substances Control Act. Under the law, public and private nonprofit schools must inspect their buildings for asbestos, prepare asbestos management plans and perform asbestos response actions. The schools are responsible for taking these actions, but the EPA is responsible for enforcing the law and conducting compliance inspections. Our audit was conducted to determine whether the EPA was indeed performing sufficient AHERA compliance inspections of schools.

TIA:	What did you find?

HILDA:	We found uneven state oversight. Fewer AHERA inspections are being conducted in federal implementation jurisdictions, which are the 29 states and territories where the EPA is directly responsible. From 2011 to 2015, the period studied, states with EPA grants to conduct their own compliance inspections performed approximately 87 percent of inspections, compared to just 13 percent by EPA regional offices with federal jurisdiction. 

TIA:	So, AHERA and asbestos inspections in schools have not been a top priority for the agency?	

HILDA: 	No, the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, the office responsible for AHERA enforcement, considers AHERA a “mature” program. Since the program is over 30 years old and schools have become more aware of asbestos hazards, the agency doesn’t think that it needs to provide as much oversight or enforcement as in the past. 

TIA:	During the audit, you interviewed eight local educational agencies in the Atlanta and Chicago areas. You found that those local educational agencies generally appeared to be implementing AHERA. If the AHERA program is “mature” and most school districts are following the law, why is a significant enforcement presence still needed? 

HILDA:	Without compliance inspections, the EPA can’t determine whether schools pose an actual risk of asbestos exposure. This creates the risk that asbestos exposure in schools could occur and go undetected, unenforced or not properly remedied. Notably, Chicago-based EPA staff said that AHERA is undervalued and indicated asbestos is still a problem in the region. AHERA and the EPA play an important role in discovering disturbed asbestos or potential asbestos problems. 

TIA:	What else did you find?

HILDA:	We found that all 10 EPA regions have either completely disinvested or significantly reduced resources to the AHERA program. As an example of why education of local educational agencies is necessary, one school district we visited did not require schools to maintain an asbestos management plan when it obtained an exclusion statement. Such a statement is a letter indicating that, to the best of their knowledge, the project engineers or architects knew of no asbestos-containing building materials being used as a building material. The district was unaware that, regardless of the presence of exclusion statements, it is unlawful for any school or district to fail to develop and maintain a management plan. 

TIA:	So, am I right that the EPA has been disinvesting in AHERA while prioritizing other Toxic Substances Control Act programs? 

HILDA:	Correct. Until recently, the EPA directed regions to allocate the majority of their Toxic Substances Control Act resources to the lead compliance assurance program and recommended that all regions have a strategy for their Toxic Substances Control Act compliance monitoring efforts. However, only one EPA regional office – in Denver – currently has a region-specific AHERA compliance monitoring strategy. Because resources are so limited, only five EPA regions conduct AHERA inspections and only when they receive asbestos-related tips or complaints.

TIA:	What recommendations did your team make to the agency? 

HILDA:	After we received the agency’s feedback to our draft report, we revised the report and our initial recommendations.  The agency said that disinvestment from the asbestos program has been due, in large part, to increasing resource limitations and competing Toxic Substances Control Act priorities. Ultimately, we recommended that the EPA require the EPA regions, through the National Program Manager Guidance, to incorporate asbestos strategies in their Toxic Substances Control Act compliance monitoring efforts. We also recommended that the EPA Inform local educational agencies, in coordination with the EPA regions, that they must comply with the requirements of the Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools Rule. In keeping with the rule, the local educational agencies must develop and maintain an asbestos management plan, regardless of the presence of an exclusion statement, and the EPA must monitor compliance.

TIA:	Did the agency agree with your final recommendations?

HILDA:	The EPA agreed to our recommendations and said that it would require the EPA Regions to document asbestos strategies to the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance as part of their Toxic Substances Control Act compliance monitoring efforts. They also said that they would work with the regions to develop wholesale compliance assistance materials for the local educational agencies on the requirements of the Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools Rule. Both of our recommendations have been resolved with corrective actions pending. 

TIA:	Thank you for sharing the results of your work with us, Hilda. 

HILDA:	You’re very welcome, Tia.

TIA:	To learn more about the EPA Office of Inspector General’s work, please visit our website at www-DOT-epa-DOT-gov-FORWARD SLASH-oig and be sure to follow us on Twitter at EPAOIG.