Detecting and mitigating the toxic chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls, widely used in school construction materials between 1950 and 1979, can be complex and costly.
But there鈥檚 plenty that district leaders can be doing now to prepare for the possibility that PCBs may be found in their buildings and deal with them without upending a school or district鈥檚 operations.
Here are 5 things district leaders can start doing right now.
1. Familiarize yourself with state and federal regulations
At least 18 states provide PCB guidance for schools on their websites, according to an Education Week analysis. They include , , , and .
Several more have webpages that touch on PCBs, though not specifically regarding schools. They include , , , and .
The Environmental Protection Agency, meanwhile, offers a , including a guide to levels of PCBs that require appropriate action when people of specific ages are likely to be exposed.
2. Make a long-term facilities plan鈥攁nd stick to it
PCBs don鈥檛 dissipate over time. If a school building has them, they will only spread. That means it鈥檚 crucial for districts to be proactive about upgrading their facilities鈥攊deally with substantial financial help from states and from local taxpayers.
The Littleton school district in Colorado has crafted a 50-year plan for renovating and tearing down buildings to be sure the average age of its buildings doesn鈥檛 increase further. The includes a timeline for putting bond issues on the ballot for a public vote, a running list of how old each school building will be in a given year, and a detailed rundown of current and future maintenance issues, small and large, that will need to be addressed.
3. Identify schools most likely to contain PCBs, and most likely to be affected by their presence
69传媒 built between 1950 and 1980 are most likely to still contain PCBs. The chemicals were in circulation since the early 1930s, so some buildings constructed during or shortly after World War II may also have them.
Consulting the district鈥檚 archive of construction and environmental records could also be worthwhile. If buildings were originally constructed during that time frame and fully renovated later, PCBs may already have been handled. Buildings that were constructed earlier or later than that are highly unlikely to yield major PCB findings.
Younger children feel the effects of PCBs most severely, so elementary schools should be high on the priority list. So should schools that serve large populations of students from low-income families, given that they鈥檙e more likely in general to experience environmental pollution.
4. Replace old light fixtures with LED equivalents鈥攚hether the old ones have PCBs or not
Testing light fixtures for PCBs might be less advantageous than simply getting rid of any that might cause a problem. LED lights emit less carbon into the environment than the fluorescent lights that were de rigeur in schools for decades. Washington state that proactively replace hazardous lights.
Many districts, like Salt Lake City, are already in the process of making the switch. Getting rid of old lights鈥攁nd properly disposing of them鈥攚ill also proactively remove one potential risk area for PCB exposure.
5. Educate parents and students on relative risk
When people hear that dangerous chemicals were found in a school building, their natural first impulse is to panic. They may not feel reassured even if more information arrives later.
District officials should do everything they can to provide staff, students, and parents with the resources they need to understand the situation. Just because a building has PCBs, for example, doesn鈥檛 mean students and staff have been exposed or that the contamination is sufficient to present a serious cause for alarm.
Getting schools on board: a cautionary tale
Getting districts to take steps like these isn鈥檛 always easy.
In the mid-2010s, officials at the Washington state health department assembled a PCB-mitigation plan that recommended tackling easy-to-remove sources of PCBs in schools鈥攏amely, light ballasts, which control the flow of electricity to light fixtures.
鈥淵ou鈥檙e going to have some low background of PCBs in the air settling into surfaces, settling onto dust, even when the ballasts are intact and functional,鈥� said Elinor Fanning, a toxicologist for the Washington state health department.
For a while, though, state lawmakers didn鈥檛 offer any funding to encourage schools to take this step. That changed after The Seattle Times and ProPublica this past January published an into the widespread illness and turmoil that resulted from long-term PCB exposures at the Sky Valley Educational Center in Monroe, Wash. Lawmakers commissioned a study, due by the end of this year, from University of Washington researchers outlining the appropriate responses to PCB findings. They also set aside $1.5 million for replacing aging light ballasts that might have PCBs
So far, however, only a single district鈥擱eardan-Edwall, in northeastern Washington鈥� has taken the state up on its offer to get reimbursed for replacing light fixtures.
Jim Porter, the district鈥檚 facilities director, said old light ballasts that had been discarded after a recent replacement of lights weren鈥檛 properly disposed of. Instead, they were lodged in the ceiling.
鈥淚t鈥檚 not like any of them were leaking or anything,鈥� Porter said. 鈥淭here were no signs of damage; it鈥檚 just that they were there and should have probably been removed when they did the light retrofit.鈥�
Getting rid of those lights, 36 feet above the ground, took two people 60 hours and cost $6,000. The district paid upfront and got reimbursed by the state.
I feel that there鈥檚 a real issue in pointing at school districts with a problem unless we are equipped right away to help them solve that problem.
Why haven鈥檛 others taken the state up on its offer? They may be put off by the cost of identifying the problem in the first place.
Hiring contractors to inspect schools鈥� light ballasts doesn鈥檛 come cheap.
鈥淭hese kinds of surveys are 5 to 25 cents per square foot. I start multiplying that out, pretty soon I鈥檓 looking at $5 million just to find a problem, and I wouldn鈥檛 have spent a penny to solve it,鈥� said Fanning, the toxicologist.
Bob Herrick, a senior lecturer of public health at Harvard University, believes the federal government needs to take charge with a survey of its own.
鈥淓PA has the authority to do this, but they have failed for almost 20 years to take meaningful action, so people are left to fend for themselves,鈥� he said.
Beyond quantifying the problem, Fanning believes efforts to test and remediate should be happening simultaneously.
鈥淚f I go into schools with an air monitor and I鈥檓 standing there and I find PCBs, I should have a truck with me with a contractor right there,鈥� Fanning said. 鈥淚 feel that there鈥檚 a real issue in pointing at school districts with a problem unless we are equipped right away to help them solve that problem.鈥�
How PCBs Disrupt School Districts: A Vermont high school shut down and sent students and staff to a former Macy鈥檚 after high levels of PCBs were discovered. Here鈥檚 what unfolded.
Rural 69传媒 Should Expect Confusion: Administrators at a rural Vermont school were flummoxed on how to move forward鈥攁nd how to pay鈥攁fter the state told them they鈥檇 need to remediate PCBs.
A PCB Primer: What you need to know about polychlorinated biphenyls, where they鈥檙e found, the threats they pose, and what can be done about them.
A Visual Guide to PCBs: How do these chemicals move from one part of a school building to another? How does exposure affect humans? An animated guide.
What 69传媒 Can Do Now: 69传媒 are often reluctant to test for PCBs because they鈥檙e afraid of what they might find. These proactive steps can make a difference.
The Human Toll of PCBs: A former teacher in Washington state shares the illnesses that ended her full-time teaching career and the lawsuit she pursued as a result.
