After two months, missing PRHS asbestos test results released to public. Despite consultant claims of “all clean,” two of sixteen samples “overloaded.”

Written by Jeff Epstein, editor of Citizens’ Media TV

On Wednesday, December 13, 2017, Citizens’ Media TV revealed that an asbestos test was conducted in Pinelands Regional High School on the weekend of September 29th, but its results were never seen by the public. Today, December 14, 2017, that test can now be found on the district’s website. The letter is dated December 6th, but its samples were taken between September 29th and October 2nd. According to one source who attended last night’s Board of Education meeting, the test was not on the website before the meeting, but was after.

Jim Guilardi of TTI Environmental is the author of the December 6th letter. At the October 2nd Board meeting, he stated that:

[M]aybe five, six air samples [were taken inside the building] while they were doing the work [on the roof]. The PCM air samples were tested for asbestos. All those samples came back clean.

In the results, however, although sixteen samples showed extremely low levels of asbestos, the remaining two came back “overloaded.” Overloaded means that the air-sampling cartridges were so clogged with dust, it was impossible for the instruments to measure.


Overloaded samples from the weekend of September 29

(A second asbestos test was also posted within the past 24 hours, this one showing no overloaded results. This particular test’s samples were taken October 11th, with the letter itself dated October 12. Why this test was not released until now is unknown.)

We have requested the emails from the district in which both of these test results were originally received. We have also written an email to TTI, asking the following questions:

  • Why did it take so long for these results to be delivered? The samples were taken on the weekend of September 29th, but the letter is dated December 6th.
  • At the October 2nd Board of Education meeting, Jim Guilardi, the author of the now-posted asbestos test, stated that “all results came back clean.” In the now-posted results, two of the 18 samples came back “overloaded.” This seems like a contradiction. Can you please respond?
  • Finally, regarding the two overloaded results: were any dust samples taken in those locations, and where are the results of those tests?

When and if we receive answers, this article will be updated.

Please support independent journalism: Contribute financially to Citizens’ Media TV, or buy a t-shirt or tchochke.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s