Last week I posted news that the federal Bureau of Land Management, under the direction of the Environmental Protection Agency, closed a 48-acre recreational area in California known as Clear Creek due to concerns about high levels of asbestos in the area. The land is a popular area for off-road hiking, biking and ATV adventures, with about 35,000 visitors a year. But now it seems that asbestos is a growing concern throughout a wide swath of California, where naturally occuring asbestos is prevalent. The Los Angeles Times reported May 2 about a community in El Dorado Hills, Calif., that is being investigated by the EPA for high asbestos levels.

Inspectors donned air filters and protective gear while running, biking and playing baseball and other sports in areas of the town to monitor asbestos levels. The paper reported that initial EPA assessments were worst along a creek-side trail in El Dorado Hills Community Park, where asbestos levels were 22-43 times higher than ambient air levels when stirred up by the common recreational activities tested.

It shouldn’t come as a complete surprise to the town. Already, the newspaper reported, asbestos concerns were responsible for a $2.5-million cleanup at Oak Ridge High School, including replacing the running track with a new all-weather surface.

Still, there is active ground clearing and new home construction throughout the town, with an affluent population and fine homes priced in the $700,000 range.

While some residents expressed concern, I was struck by the comments of residents who seemed to want to ignore the threat, or who refused to believe there would be a problem as a result of the asbestos. The Times quoted residents who “shrugged off” the news, saying “the whole thing seems like overkill.” Others objected to “the government” “overreacting,” saying “there’s risk in life whatever you do.”

One resident, who is worried about the effects on her children, recalling how her daughter brushed up clouds of asbestos-laden dust after a cheerleading routine, said, “Most people around here seem more worred about home values than health.”

The same types of risk dismissals are found in the Clear Creek story, where outdoor enthusiasts are vowing to fight the recreational area’s closing, telling the government to stop meddling and let them take the risk.

I just don’t understand this attitude. Asbestos is proven to be a danger, causing asbestosis, mesothelioma and other lung and stomach cancers. If people were told they were building their homes on radioactive land, or bike riding through Chernobyl, they would be concerned. Why is this deadly threat so much less apparent to them? Most seem to have the attitude that they will “worry about it later.”

What about the children? With the often long latency period for asbestos damage, youngsters exposed to asbestos now are at risk of developing problems in the prime of life. Are parents really willing to risk the lives of their children in order to not be “inconvenienced” or to “make their own decisions” independent of government recommendations?

If the EPA were to turn away from this danger, to issue a warning but not aggressively pursue closures and clean-up, what would the public say years from now, when people are affected with asbestosis and mesothelioma? “Where was our warning?” “Where was the government, to tell us there was danger?”

You can’t have it both ways.

Yesterday officials with the U.S. Justice Department and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced an agreement with W.R. Grace & Co. in which the company agrees to pay $250 million for government cleanup costs in the town of Libby, Montana.

W.R. Grace operated a vermiculite mine and processing plant in and near Libby from 1963 to 1990. The vermiculite was contaminated with high levels of asbestos.

According to a story by Tristan Scott in the Missoulian, the agreement settles the 2001 claim brought by the federal government under the Superfund law to recover past and future costs related to asbestos removal from homes, businesses, schools and playgrounds in Libby. More than 200 Libby residents have died from asbestos-related diseases.

It is estimated that the EPA has spent about $168 million removing asbestos-contaminated soils and other materials near Libby, according to the Missoulian story.

Reporter Scott said the settlement requires W.R. Grace to pay the $250 million within 30 days of approval by a federal bankruptcy court.

The money also will be used to resolve a 2003 judgment against Grace in which a judge ordered the company to pay the EPA $54.5 million to cover costs of asbestos cleanup in Libby, but which the company could not pay due to bankruptcy status.

This settlement will not have a bearing on pending criminal charges against W.R. Grace, whose senior corporate officials allegedly conspired to hide the dangers of asbestos and obstructed justice during the EPA’s investigation and cleanup. The criminal trial is expected to open in Missioula, Montana, in April or June, Scott reports.

For more information, read the complete story online.

To learn more about Libby and what happened there, visit this PBS web site, which has a wealth of information about the town.

High Plains Films, a documentary production company, produced an excellent film about the town, which you can view or purchase by visiting their web site.

This story is so sad. A whole town was basically destroyed by asbestos. People brought asbestos home from the factory and put it in their gardens. It was used to pave a running track at the school. It was everywhere. Still is.

The EPA estimates they’ll be cleaning in and around Libby for at least another 5 years, and even then they doubt they’ll be able to remove all the asbestos.