Upload
cally-rivera
View
18
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Creating Child-Safe Learning Zones: Avoiding the Siting of Schools on Contaminated Land or Near Sources of Pollution. Presented by: Steven Fischbach, Esq. Rhode Island Legal Services and Sherman Ludwig Center for Health, Environment and Justice July 14, 2005. Framing the Issue. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Creating Child-Safe Learning Zones: Avoiding the Siting of
Schools on Contaminated Land or Near Sources of Pollution
Presented by:
Steven Fischbach, Esq.
Rhode Island Legal Services
and
Sherman Ludwig
Center for Health, Environment and Justice
July 14, 2005
Framing the Issue
On or off site sources of pollution are an ignored factor in siting schools
Distinguished from other environmental concerns in school siting such as smart growth, safe routes to schools, high performing schools
Issue directly affects children’s health, especially low-income and non-white children who have less access to health care and have higher rates of asthma and lead poisoning
Why would a school ever be sited on contaminated land?
Money – Contaminated land is cheap because it is unsuitable
for housing and most types of businesses– School Districts seek out cheap land due to
declining school budgets and rising unfunded mandates (e.g. No Child Left Behind)
– Urban school districts skimp on cleaning up contaminated sites to save more money
Why would a school ever be sited on contaminated land?
Availability of land– School Districts in rural areas look to site schools on
cheap unused agricultural land contaminated with pesticides
– Urban school districts often have few siting choices due to shortage of undeveloped land and turn to abandoned industrial sites
Children Are More Vulnerable to Environmental Toxins
Children’s systems are still developing Children eat more food, drink more fluids, and
breath more air per pound of body weight Children behave like children Children’s bodies more readily absorb toxins Toxins accumulate in the body
– Exposure at a younger age = higher levels of lifetime buildup of toxins
Health Effects Linked to Environmental Toxins
Lowered intelligence (IQ) Immune dysfunction Reproductive impairment Various learning disabilities Cancer
Hidden Expenses
Students lost earning potential– Estimated $5,000 loss of earning potential for each lost IQ
point Parents lost wages:
– Medical expenses– Therapy – Missed work
School District and Taxpayers– Cost of remediation or repair after construction far exceeds
precautionary action– Lawsuits against the school district from affected families
Types of Existing School Siting Laws
Laws that prohibit school construction on certain sites or near certain land uses such as: – Sites affected by air, motor vehicle and rail traffic – Utility transmission lines – Sites impacted by air and noise pollution – Sites where hazardous or solid waste was disposed – Natural hazards such as flooding or earthquakes
Types of Existing School Siting Laws
Laws that require districts to weigh presence of environmental hazards when selecting school sites
Laws that require environmental investigation of potential school sites (such as Phase I and Phase II Environmental Assessments or Environmental Impact Statements)
Laws that require public involvement in site selection process
Existing State of School Siting Laws
20 states have no laws that either prohibit or restrict in any way the siting of a school on or near environmental hazards (whether man-made or naturally occurring)
Existing State of School Siting Laws
24 of the states do not require local school districts to investigate potential school sites for the presence of pollutants or other environmental hazards or to assess environmental impacts associated with potential school sites
Existing State of School Siting Laws
Only ten (10) States have laws that prohibit the siting of a school on or near sources of pollution
– CA, FL, IN, KY, MS, MT, NJ, OK, UT, and WV Only six (6) states require preparation of environmental
assessments or environmental impact statements for school projects
– CA, MD, MN, NJ, NY, and WA Only twelve (12) states require public notice or public
meetings about proposed school sites– CA, CO, IL, IN, ME, MA, MA, MN, NJ, NY, NC, and PA
Eight (8) states require or authorize the creation of school siting advisory committees
– CA, GA, MA, MS, NC, SC, VT, and WY
What’s Needed: Comprehensive School Siting Laws
Siting laws should contain the following elements:
1.) Laws that restrict school siting on or near sources of environmental hazards
2.) Laws that require thorough investigation and assessment of environmental hazards on potential school sites or environmental impacts to future users of the site
What’s Needed: Comprehensive School Siting Laws
3.) Laws that require public contaminated sites to be properly cleaned up and monitored so as not to pose health risks to future users of the school
4.) Laws requiring public participation in school-siting decisions
*Laws that fail to encompass these three points could result in poor siting decisions
Creating the Guidelines
Creating Safe Learning Zones report (2002) reveals that 1,100 public schools, and over 600,000 students attending public schools within ½ mile of contaminated sites
Grassroots groups voice need for set of guidelines on how to site a school on or near contaminated land when no other land is available
Prohibited Sites
Sites that are located on top of, or within 1,000 feet of land where hazardous or household garbage waste was landfilled, or where disposal of incinerator ash or construction and demolition materials occurred
Sites where the groundwater discharges at the surface of a site or where the groundwater rises to a level that is above any barrier or other underground remedial measure installed at the site
Prohibited Sites
Hazardous substance release sites where the release of contaminants exceeds strictest residential exposure guidelines (such as those adopted by State of New York) unless no other site is available (the site of “Last Resort”)
*The New York State guidelines are contamination levels for specific media
Thorough Investigation and Assessment of Environmental Hazards and Impacts
Conduct ASTM Phase I assessment to determine whether there is likelihood of contamination at a proposed school site
Review the history of the site as well as nearby land uses (i.e. what previously existed at the site)
Identify any environmental hazards within 2 miles of the site, for example:
– Landfills– Hazardous waste sites– Air pollution sources– Industrial sites– Military sites– Gasoline tanks
Thorough Investigation and Assessment of Environmental Hazards and Impacts
If within 1,000 feet of a landfill: Exclude If within 1,000 ft. of an environmental hazard
other than a landfill: – Conduct a Preliminary Endangerment Assessment
(PEA): involves thorough testing of soil, soil gases, groundwater, surface water and air to accurately assess the nature and severity of contamination existing at the site.
If PEA reveals that contaminants do not exceed NY State guidelines, the site is useable with no further cleanup
Thorough Investigation and Assessment of Environmental Hazards and Impacts
If site is between 1,000 ft and 2 miles of an environmental hazard: – Conduct a PEA if in the professional opinion of the
preparer of the ASTM Phase I assessment those hazards may have caused site to be contaminated
– If PEA reveals that contaminants not in excess of the NYS guidelines, the site is useable without further clean up
Thorough Investigation and Assessment of Environmental Hazards and Impacts
PEA’s that reveal contaminants in excess of the NY State guidelines have two options:1.) Abandon the site
2.) Take “Last Resort” measures before using the site
*Must include:
- Child-protective cleanup plan
- Certification that there are no other available sites
Proper Clean Up and Monitoring of Contaminated (“Last Resort”) School Sites
Identify all existing and potential exposure pathways Identify all areas that exceed the New York State
cleanup guidelines– Soil with contamination levels that exceed the NY State
cleanup guidelines completely removed to a depth below which there is no anticipated excavation
Design clean up plan that eliminates all exposure pathways
– No exposure = no risk of injury
Proper Clean Up and Monitoring of Contaminated (“Last Resort”) School Sites
Clean up must prevent mixing of clean and contaminated soil
Build as much redundancy as possible into the clean up plan– Maximizes risk reduction– Increases public confidence in the safety of the site
*A list of remediation steps will be released in our fall report (research is currently ongoing)
Proper Clean Up and Monitoring of Contaminated (“Last Resort”) School Sites
Put in place institutional controls and long term monitoring of school site to ensure ongoing safety of school
Controls and monitoring should include notice of where residual contamination is located, what contaminants are present and how to monitor the integrity of the barriers or other exposure prevention steps taken at the site
Involve the public in School Site Selection Process
Local school boards or school committees are typically the public body in charge of school siting
The public body shall establish a school siting committee whose job it is to recommend possible building/expansion sites to the local body
A facilities planning committee (which may already exist in your district) could act as the school siting committee
Involve the public in School Site Selection Process
The committee should be broadly composed of a range of stakeholders: e.g. parents, teachers, school health officials, community members, local public health professionals, environmental advocacy groups and age appropriate students
School Siting Committee must give good faith consideration to at least three sites, and recommend best site to the public body
Involve the public in School Site Selection Process
Public body may only choose a contaminated site (i.e., a site where levels of contaminants exceed NYS standards) if body certifies there is no other site available (a “last resort” site)
Recap
Due to overcrowding and budget cuts, an increasing number of schools are being sited on contaminated land
Low-income communities and communities of color are disproportionately affected
Children’s developing bodies are especially vulnerable to the damaging effects of environmental toxins
Recap
School siting laws are needed to address siting on contaminated land
If a school must be sited on contaminated land (a last resort) it must be properly characterized, remediated and monitored
Resources Available on School Siting
- www.childproofing.org- Creating Safe Learning
Zones (2002) - Fifty State Survey of
School Siting Laws, Regulations and policies (2005)
- School Location Matters – Preventing School Siting Disasters (2005)