Ozark_Sophist
Senior Member
What is the name of your state? Missouri
I covered the state capitol for my university newspaper. While I was there, the governor's office was remodeled. There were large trash bins outside his office, and a 40cu yard dumpster rollon/off outside. The bins and dumpster were open air. At the end of the renovation, the Gov. and staff held a news conference about how much little it cost and that a "large amount" of asbestos had been removed from his office. There was asbestos remediation where I had previously worked with plastic barriers, 'space suits', and before, during, and after air monitoring stations. At no point did I see any of this activity while I was working (the news office is on the first floor below the gov.'s office).
I thought this was odd so at I did some research, but ended up handing off the story to a graduate journalism intern from a large paper (I'm not a journalism major and I was more interested in an A in my 8hr block course, so I didn't want to spend that much time on it). The KC Star picked it up and questions were asked at a press conference (on an unrelated topic, yet much more newsworthy topic). The gov. said that yes asbestos was removed, a significant amount, but did not elaborate before his aide ended the press conference.
I looked up the Missouri law on asbestos and the threshold I found was 10sq ft. More than that one needs the air monitoring stuff, certified contractor, etc. Evidently the asbesto removed was pipe insulation. The ceilings are more than 10 feet high; the pipes run floor to ceiling and then some, so I figure even if they took the stuff off of just one pipe, they had more than 10sqft.
Since this was a public building, should the records exist and be made available? If there was exposure, especially if state law wasn't followed, is there liability?
This is not homework, and I'm no longer a reporter. I'm just interested and second guessing myself about the story that might have been
I covered the state capitol for my university newspaper. While I was there, the governor's office was remodeled. There were large trash bins outside his office, and a 40cu yard dumpster rollon/off outside. The bins and dumpster were open air. At the end of the renovation, the Gov. and staff held a news conference about how much little it cost and that a "large amount" of asbestos had been removed from his office. There was asbestos remediation where I had previously worked with plastic barriers, 'space suits', and before, during, and after air monitoring stations. At no point did I see any of this activity while I was working (the news office is on the first floor below the gov.'s office).
I thought this was odd so at I did some research, but ended up handing off the story to a graduate journalism intern from a large paper (I'm not a journalism major and I was more interested in an A in my 8hr block course, so I didn't want to spend that much time on it). The KC Star picked it up and questions were asked at a press conference (on an unrelated topic, yet much more newsworthy topic). The gov. said that yes asbestos was removed, a significant amount, but did not elaborate before his aide ended the press conference.
I looked up the Missouri law on asbestos and the threshold I found was 10sq ft. More than that one needs the air monitoring stuff, certified contractor, etc. Evidently the asbesto removed was pipe insulation. The ceilings are more than 10 feet high; the pipes run floor to ceiling and then some, so I figure even if they took the stuff off of just one pipe, they had more than 10sqft.
Since this was a public building, should the records exist and be made available? If there was exposure, especially if state law wasn't followed, is there liability?
This is not homework, and I'm no longer a reporter. I'm just interested and second guessing myself about the story that might have been