Skip to comments.UMass, EPA agree-plan to replace contaminated windows at Lederle Grad Research Ctr over 15 yr period
Posted on 09/12/2012 4:58:08 PM PDT by matt04
Federal environmental officials and the University of Massachusetts have entered into a consent agreement for which the university will remove windows contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyl at the John W. Lederle Graduate Research Center over 15 years.
According to a prepared statement from the Environmental Protection Agency, UMass discovered that the window glazing at the research center was contaminated with high levels of contaminants after finishing a window-caulking project in 2009.
UMass has agreed to replace and dispose of all 900 PCB-contaminated windows over the next 15 years at a cost of about $3 million.
The university will complete window cleaning, encapsulation, verification and baseline sampling within 24 months, according to the release and to start removing windows in Tower A on floors 3, 7 and 8 by Dec. 31, according to a UMass statement.
The cost of these interim measures is about $560,000. The settlement agreement also includes a $75,000 civil penalty that will be waived if both the long-term remediation plan and interim encapsulation plan are completed, according to the release.
The window-glazing compound was commonly used in construction from the 1950s through the mid-1970s. The Lederle complex at UMass Amherst was constructed in the early 1970s.
(Excerpt) Read more at masslive.com ...
Full title: UMass, EPA agree on plan to replace contaminated windows at Lederle Graduate Research Center over 15 year period
Average window $3,333.00
Well that’s a freaking’ relief, I was really worried for awhile there.
my kid just moved into a dump at Zoo Mass with the same windows! Hope you are still burning in hell Teddy!
All that leaded gasoline I pumped as a teenage gas jockey, and the mercury I played with as a kid have made me what I am today LOL.
Where is the contamination? In the glass? In the caulk?
Sounds like bedwetting...its not going to leach out of the glass and the caulk can be encapsulated/replaced.
Don’t understand this one.
If I remember correctly, the article stated it was in the glazing (caulk).
My question is: If it's so freakin' important, why is it OK to replace over them over 15 years? I think the obvious answer is that it's not important but the EPA feels the need to throw its weight around for any violation it finds regardless of the health risk.
It’s a money generator. People go around looking for this type of stuff, and when it’s found they rat to the EPA or file a suit. The end result is that either lawyers, or consultants with “ins” amongst the EPA and associated contractors get to make bank on jobs that are usually pretty restricted to a small clique of remediators. The agency gets billable time hours and fines.
If you piss off an agency they will hound you over an oil stain on pavement. If you have an “in”, they will let you slide on $10,000,000 in fines and let you “keep them appraised of the situation” with actual hazardous waste well past the disposal “expiration date” (and I have been close to that exact type of situation).
Many, many summers ago a now bankrupt company I knew of actually bought a facility that supposedly recycled certain nasty (but very useful) substances but was actually driving them around a certain metropolitan area in trucks to get them out of the facility when their inside friend at [insert large government environmental agency here] called them and told them an inspection was coming. Said bankrupt companies BK was greatly exacerbated by the multimillion dollar cleanup they purchased with their 3rd grader due dilligence.
UMass students are know worldwide for their window caulking licking fetish. I am really pleased to hear that the EPA stepped in and for only a few million dollars and 15 years or so will remedy this horror.