On Brookline

I’ve yet to find any takers for my proposal to bring the proponents of the St. Aidan’s project on-site while the rectory building is being demolished using the “wet method” of asbestos abatement.

No doubt, the reason for this has to be that they know how the last (alleged*) round of asbestos abatement in the church interior went.

How’s this for competence in matters of handling hazardous materials? Back in November 2004, the Boston Archdiocese hired the firm of Atlas Engineering and Maintenance to remove asbestos from the interior of the church building. Atlas began removing asbestos from the site on November 15th but had to cease operations around November 23rd.

Why? They didn’t have a permit from the Brookline Health Department [click here to view] that:

The applicable interior abatement procedures have been successfully completed. The exterior abatement procedures are to be completed as part of the demolition process. [emphasis added] All exterior abatement procedures will be conducted according as per applicable regulations concerning the removal of exterior asbestos materials.

So how do our town hall flunkies get no more asbestos on site from that? Please God, take me now.

* The Massachusetts DEP has no record in its database that an asbestos abatement occurred at the St. Aidan’s site (though a notice apparently had been filed).

Update: Apparently, the Town of Brookline imposes no penalty on those who fail to obtain the proper permits for asbestos abatement. The contractor above paid the $60 fee and had permit in hand. Then again, it helps that the town is the principal financier of the project.

Update (2): The DEP does have notice of the 2004 abatement, I’m told. The problem they (the DEP) had in finding the form is that the notifier (Atlas) gave them the wrong address for the job. How’s that for a confidence booster?