School Siting Guidelines

Thispageleftintentionallyblank.
School Siting Guidelines
Contents
1. AbouttheSchoolSitingGuidelines.........................................................................................................................................1 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 2. WhoShouldUsetheGuidelines?............................................................................................................................2 LimitationsoftheGuidelines...................................................................................................................................2 PublicInvolvementintheDevelopmentoftheGuidelines........................................................................4 PrinciplesbehindtheGuidelines...........................................................................................................................5
OverviewoftheSchoolSitingGuidelines.........................................................................................................................13 2.1. 2.2. Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................13 OverviewforConsideringEnvironmentalFactorsintheSchoolSitingProcess...........................14
3.
MeaningfulPublicInvolvement............................................................................................................................................19 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 3.5. 3.6. 3.7. Overview........................................................................................................................................................................19 EstablishingaPublicInvolvementStrategy..................................................................................................20 . SchoolSitingCommittee.........................................................................................................................................20 CommunicationsPlan..............................................................................................................................................22 ConsiderationofCommunityInformationAccessibilityIssues............................................................23 TechnicalAssistanceandTraining.....................................................................................................................24 DesignationofOpportunitiesforMeaningfulPublicInputandBudgetfor PublicInvolvementActivities...............................................................................................................................24
4.
EnvironmentalSitingCriteriaConsiderations...............................................................................................................33 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. Overview........................................................................................................................................................................33 BeforetheSitingProcessBegins.........................................................................................................................34 IdentifyDesirableSchoolLocationAttributes..............................................................................................37 ConsiderEnvironmentalHazards.......................................................................................................................47
5.
EnvironmentalReviewProcess............................................................................................................................................65 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. 5.4. 5.5. 5.6. 5.7. 5.8. 5.9. Overview........................................................................................................................................................................65 WhyIsanEffectiveEnvironmentalReviewofProspectiveCandidate SitesSoImportant?...................................................................................................................................................65 RecommendedEnvironmentalReviewProcess..........................................................................................67 StagesofSiteReview................................................................................................................................................68 Stage1:ProjectScoping/InitialScreenofCandidateSite........................................................................70 Stage2:PreliminaryEnvironmentalAssessment.......................................................................................72 Stage3:ComprehensiveEnvironmentalReview.........................................................................................78 Stage4:DevelopSitespecificMitigation/RemediationMeasures......................................................84 Stage5:ImplementRemedial/MitigationMeasures.................................................................................89 .
Contents |
5.10. 6.
Stage6:LongtermStewardship.........................................................................................................................92
EvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAirPollution..............................................................................................95 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 6.4. 6.5. 6.6. Overview........................................................................................................................................................................95 LocationLayoutandStudyArea.........................................................................................................................97 InitialAssessmentofAreaAirQuality..............................................................................................................97 InventoryofAirPollutantSourcesandEmissions.....................................................................................98 ScreeningEvaluationofPotentialAirQuality............................................................................................100 DevelopmentofanEnvironmentalAssessmentReport........................................................................102
7.
RecommendationsforStatesandTribes.......................................................................................................................105 7.1. 7.2. 7.3. Overview.....................................................................................................................................................................105 RecommendationsforStates.............................................................................................................................105 RecommendationsforTribes............................................................................................................................111
8.
QuickGuidetoEnvironmentalIssues.............................................................................................................................117 8.1. 8.2. 8.3. 8.4. 8.5. 8.6. 8.7. 8.8. 8.9. 8.10. 8.11. AirPollution..............................................................................................................................................................117 NearbyHighwaysandOtherTransportationFacilities(IncludingGoodsMovement)...........118 VolatileOrganicCompounds(VOCs)inSoilandGroundWater........................................................120 Radon...........................................................................................................................................................................121 PetroleumHydrocarbonsinSoilandGroundWater..............................................................................121 LeadbasedPaintHazardsandLeadinSoilandDrinkingWater......................................................122 Polychlorinatedbiphenyls(PCBs)inFluorescentLightBallasts, WindowCaulkingandSoilAssociatedwithOlderBuildings..............................................................123 AsbestosContainingMaterialSurveys..........................................................................................................124 Mold..............................................................................................................................................................................124 ChemicalsinSchools.............................................................................................................................................124 HeavyMetalsinSoilandGroundWater.......................................................................................................125 Pesticides....................................................................................................................................................................125 SecuringSafeSoilandFill..................................................................................................................................126 HistoricFill................................................................................................................................................................126 . InstitutionalandEngineeringControls.........................................................................................................127 CapacityforLongtermMaintenanceofEngineeringandInstitutionalControls......................128
8.12. 8.13. 8.14. 8.15. 8.16. 9.
FrequentQuestions.................................................................................................................................................................129 9.1. 9.2. 9.3. Howdotheguidelinesaddresscommunityinvolvementintheschoolsitingprocess?.........129 Dotheguidelinesapplyretroactivelytoprevioussitingdecisions?................................................130 Dotheguidelinesaddresstheretentionandrenovationofexistingschools?............................130
ii
| Contents
9.4. 9.5. 9.6. 9.7. 9.8. 9.9.
WillEPAsSchoolSitingGuidelinespreventpollutiongeneratingfacilities frombeingbuiltnearexistingschools?........................................................................................................130 WhatcanIdotoprotectmychildrightnowfromenvironmentalhazardsat theircurrentschool?.............................................................................................................................................131 Shouldntschoolsbebuiltasfarawayfrommajorpollutiongeneratingsources aspossible?................................................................................................................................................................132 Isn'tanuncontaminatedsitealwaysthebestlocationforanewschool?.....................................133 Canschoolsbesafelybuiltonsiteswithresidualsoilorgroundwatercontamination?.......134 Incaseswherethebestavailablelocationforaschoolreliesonengineeringand/or institutionalcontrolstopreventpotentialexposures,howcanthecommunitywork withtheLEAandotherresponsibleentitiestoensurethatthosecontrolsareeffective forthelifeoftheschool?......................................................................................................................................134 Whatcleanuporremediationofcontaminationataschoolsiteshouldbe completedbeforetheschoolisoccupied?...................................................................................................134 Towhatcleanupstandardshouldschoolsitesberemediated?........................................................135 DoesEPArecommendbufferorexclusionzones(alsosometimescalleddistance criteriaorseparationdistances)tomakesureschoolsaren'tbuiltclosetomajor sourcesofpollution?.............................................................................................................................................135 Whatisthedifferencebetween"screeningperimeters,"whichareincludedinthe guidelines,and"buffer"or"exclusion"zones?..........................................................................................136 TheSchoolSitingGuidelinesplacealotofemphasisonstateandtribalinvolvement inevaluatingandapprovingsitingdecisionswhereenvironmentalcontaminationis present.Atatimeofshrinkingstateandtribalbudgets,howarestatesandtribesto meettheanticipateddemandformoreinvolvement?...........................................................................136 Dotheguidelinesapplytochildcarecentersorotherfacilitieswherechildren spendtime?................................................................................................................................................................137
9.10. 9.11. 9.12.
9.13. 9.14.
9.15. 10.
Glossary.........................................................................................................................................................................................139
DISCLAIMER:Mentionoftradenames,products,orservicesdoesnotconveyofficialEPAapproval, endorsement,orrecommendation. October2011
Contents |
iii
Exhibits
Exhibit1: OverviewoftheSitingGuidelines.................................................................................................................................15 . Exhibit2: MeaningfulPublicInvolvementPointsandOpportunities................................................................................25 Exhibit3: ExampleEnrollmentAreathatCreatesaProhibitivelyLongWalking/ BikingTripforSomeStudents........................................................................................................................................41 Exhibit4: DesirableAttributesofCandidateLocations............................................................................................................44 Exhibit5: FactorsInfluencingExposuresandPotentialRisks..............................................................................................49 Exhibit6: ScreeningPotentialEnvironmental,PublicHealthandSafetyHazards.......................................................53 Exhibit7: StagesofSiteReview...........................................................................................................................................................69 Exhibit8: Stage1:ProjectScoping/InitialScreenofCandidateSite.................................................................................70 . Exhibit9: Stage2:PreliminaryEnvironmentalAssessment..................................................................................................72 Exhibit10:Stage3:ComprehensiveEnvironmentalReview....................................................................................................78 Exhibit11:Stage4:DevelopSitespecificMitigation/RemediationMeasures.................................................................84 Exhibit12:Stage5:ImplementRemedial/MitigationMeasures............................................................................................89 . Exhibit13:Stage6:LongtermStewardship....................................................................................................................................92

iv | Contents
Acronyms
ADA AHERA AQI ASTM CDC CERCLA CFR CHPAC CHPS DOD DOT EISA EPA ESA FUDS HAPs HealthySEAT HEI HVAC IPM LEA LEED LTSP NAAQS NATA NEI NIOSH PCB QA/QC RCRA SARA SSC USGBC VOCs AmericanswithDisabilitiesAct AsbestosHazardEmergencyResponseAct AirQualityIndex AmericanSocietyforTestingMaterials CentersforDiseaseControlandPrevention ComprehensiveEnvironmentalResponse,Compensation,andLiabilityAct CodeofFederalRegulations Children'sHealthProtectionAdvisoryCommittee CollaborativeforHighPerformanceSchools DepartmentofDefense U.S.DepartmentofTransportation EnergyIndependenceandSecurityAct U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency EnvironmentalSiteAssessment FormerlyUsedDefenseSites Hazardousairpollutants HealthySchoolEnvironmentsAssessmentTool HealthEffectsInstitute Heating,ventilatingandairconditioning Integratedpestmanagement Localeducationagency LeadershipinEnergyandEnvironmentalDesign LongtermStewardshipPlan NationalAmbientAirQualityStandards NationalAirToxicAssessment NationalEmissionInventory NationalInstituteofOccupationalSafetyandHealth Polychlorinatedbiphenyl Qualityassuranceandqualitycontrol ResourceConservationandRecoveryAct SuperfundAmendmentsandReauthorizationAct SchoolSitingCommittee U.S.GreenBuildingCouncil Volatileorganiccompounds
Contents |

vi | Contents
1. About the School Siting Guidelines

InDecember2007,CongressenactedtheEnergy IndependenceandSecurityAct(EISA). 1Among theprovisionsincludedintheActwasa requirementthattheU.S.Environmental ProtectionAgency(EPA)develop,inconsultation withtheDepartmentsofEducationandHealth andHumanServices,modelguidelinesforthe sitingofschoolfacilitiesthattakeintoaccount: 1. Thespecialvulnerabilitiesofchildrento hazardoussubstancesorpollutionexposures inanycaseinwhichthepotentialfor contaminationatapotentialschoolsiteexists; Themodesoftransportationavailableto studentsandstaff; Theefficientuseofenergy;and Thepotentialuseofaschoolatthesiteasan emergencyshelter.
Supportingstates,tribes,communities,local officialsandthepublicinunderstandingand appropriatelyconsideringenvironmentaland publichealthfactorswhenmakingschoolsiting decisions; ! Encouragingmeaningful,broadandinclusive communityinvolvementtoensurecommunity understanding,inputandengagementinschool locationselection; ! Encouragingcomprehensiveevaluationof prospectivelocationsfortheirpotentialpositive andnegativeimpactsonthehealthandsafetyof childrenandschoolworkersandonthe environment; ! Identifyingopportunitiestopromote environmentaljusticeinhowschoolsiting decisionsaremade; ! Encouragingdecisionmakers,where appropriate,toexamineexistingschoolsand thepotentialforrenovation,upgrade, adaptationandexpansionbeforeconcluding newschoolconstructioniswarranted; ! Encouragingdecisionmakers,where appropriate,toexaminenearbyenvironments inlowincome,minority,indigenousandother overburdenedcommunities; ! Demonstratinghowwelllocatedschoolscan allowmorestudents,facultyandstafftowalk, bikeand/orusepublictransittogettoandfrom school; ! Identifyingopportunitiestoservemultiple communitypurposes(e.g.,emergencyshelters, communitycenters,jointschoolandpublic libraries,gymnasiums,playingfields,theaters andcommunitygardens)sothatschoolscan becomeahubforthewholecommunity;and
2.
3. 4.
Incarryingoutthisstatutorymandate,EPAhas developedvoluntarySchoolSitingGuidelinesthat willencourage,informandimproveconsideration ofenvironmentalfactorsinlocalschoolsiting decisionmakingprocesseswithoutinfringingon localdecisionmakingauthority.EPAs overarchinggoalfortheguidelinesistoserve children,staffandthebroadercommunityby:
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Public Law 110140,
HR6, 110th Cong., December 19, 2007. Available at: www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h1106.
AbouttheSchoolSitingGuidelines |
! Encouragingdecisionmakerstoconsidershort andlongtermconstruction,transportationand operationandmaintenancecostsandbenefits indesignandconstructiondecisions. Theguidelinesareintendedtobeusedpriorto: ! Makingadecisionaboutwhethertorenovate theexistingschool,buildanewschoolonthe currentsiteorbuildanewschoolonanewsite; ! Acquisitionoflandforschoolfacilities; ! Useoflegacypropertyalreadyownedbythe LEA; ! Leasingofspaceinneworexistingstructures notownedbytheLEAforuseasaschool; and/or ! Majorrepair,renovationorreuseofexisting propertiesandstructuresalreadyownedbythe LEAforuseasaschool. 1.1.1. Evaluation of Hazards
1.1. Who Should Use the Guidelines?

Thesevoluntaryguidelinesareintendedtoassist localschooldistricts,whichwillbereferredto throughouttheseguidelinesasthelocaleducation agency(LEA)(seeSection10),andcommunity membersinevaluatingenvironmentalfactorsto makethebestpossibleschoolsitingdecisions.The specialvulnerabilitiesofchildrenand considerationsforchildren'shealthunderpinthe recommendationscontainedintheseguidelines, consistentwithEISA,SubtitleEHealthyHigh PerformanceSchools,Section502.Whilethe guidelinesareprimarilyintendedtobeusedby LEAsinevaluatingandselectinglocationsforK12 schools,EPAbelievesthattherecommendations intheguidelinesrepresentasetofbestpractices thatinformandimproveevaluationandselection decisionsforawiderangeofsettingswhere childrenspendtime.Althoughtherearemany differencesinhowlocationsarechosenacrossthe typesofchildoccupiedfacilities,thepractices recommendedwithintheguidelinesmaybe applied,withappropriateadaptation,toawide rangeofschoolrelatedinstitutions,including: ! K12publicschools(includingcharterschools andschoolsinleasedlocations);
Throughouttheseguidelines,referencesaremade tochemicalhazards,contaminants,toxic substancesandothertermsthatidentify chemicalsandcompoundsthatmayposerisksto students,staff,parentsandothers.Theuseofany ofthesetermsisnotintendedtobelimitedtoa statutoryorregulatorydefinition.Theintentof thesevoluntaryguidelinesistoprovideaprocess fortheassessmentofchemicals,compoundsor othermaterialsthatposeathreattoanyonethat spendstimeintheschoolenvironmentat candidatelocationsforschools.
1.2. Limitations of the Guidelines

Decisionsonschoolsitingarecomplicatedandin manyinstanceswillinvolveissueswherethere arescientificandtechnicaluncertainties. Generally,state,tribalandlocalgovernments decidewheretolocateschools.Withfew exceptions(e.g.,aschoollocatedonaDepartment ofDefensebaseorfundedand/oroperatedbythe BureauofIndianEducation),thefederal governmentdoesnothaveauthorityoverschool sitingdecisions. WhileEPAdoesnothavethestatutoryauthority tocontrolschoolsitingdecisionsdirectly,it
! K12privateschools; ! K12schoolsoperatedbytheDepartmentof DefenseorDepartmentoftheInteriorsBureau ofIndianEducation; ! Technicalandvocationalschools; ! Collegesanduniversities;and ! PreKandnonhomechildcare,aftercareand earlylearningsettings(e.g.,HeadStartand EarlyHeadStartprograms).
| AbouttheSchoolSitingGuidelines
administersfederalenvironmentallawsthatmay applytoorberelevanttolocationevaluation, includingsiteassessmentandcleanup.Inmany cases,stateshavesimilarauthoritiestoaddress sitecleanup,andsomestatesandtribesalsohave additionalauthorities(e.g.,certainlanduse authorities)thatmayberelevanttoschool locationdecisions.Nosinglesetofnational guidelinescanreflectthewidelydivergent situationsandinstitutionalrelationshipsthatexist throughouttheeducationsystemintheUnited States.Becauseeachstate,tribeandcommunity hasorwilldeveloptheirownlocationevaluation andselectionprocedures,therecommendations containedinEPA'sSchoolSitingGuidelinesare designedtoprovideageneralguidethatshouldbe adaptedtolocalsituations. Theguidelinesaredesignedtosupportstate, tribalandcommunitydecisionmakersin evaluatingtheirexistingschoolprocessesand policiestoaddressenvironmentalfactorsin schoolsitingandconstructiondecisions, especiallywhenthepresenceofcontamination mayposeathreattoasafelearningenvironment. Theseguidelinesdonotimposelegallybinding requirementsonEPA,states,tribes,local governments,LEAsortheregulatedcommunity, andmaynotapplytoaparticularsituationbased uponthecircumstances.Theseguidelinesdonot preempt,supersedeorserveasasubstitute forstate,tribalorlocalschoolsiteorlocation selectionpoliciesorrequirements. Economic,racialandethnicsegregationisa continuingchallengeacrossthecountry.More diverseschoolscanprovideeducationalaswellas lifeattainmentbenefitstoallschoolagechildren. 2 Whilecommunitycenteredschoolscanbepartof improvededucational,economic,communityand publichealthoutcomesforchildren,familiesand
2
neighborhoods,LEAsshouldbalancetheseissues withmeetingthegoalofdiverseschool populations.Techniquesareavailabletohelp achievethemultiplegoalsofdiversestudent populationsandschoolslocatedwithinthe communitiestheyserve.TheResourcespageof theguidelineswebsite(www.epa.gov/schools/ siting/resources.html#Links_Technical_Assistance) containsinformationabouttechniquesthathave beenidentifiedtosupportthesegoals.Whilethese issuesarebeyondthescopeoftheseguidelines, theResourcespageoftheguidelineswebsitealso containslinkstoselectstudiesonschool segregationtrendsandcauses. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LI NKS_Segregation) Itisbeyondthescopeoftheseguidelinesto discusstherequirementsoffederalcivilrights lawsthatapplytopublicschooldistrictsandmay berelevanttoschoolsitingdecisions.Thesecivil rightslawsincludeTitleVIoftheCivilRightsAct of1964(www.justice.gov/crt/cor/coord/ titlevi.php),whichprohibitsdiscriminationonthe basisofrace,colorornationalorigininfederally assistedprogramsoractivities.EPAsregulations implementingTitleVIprohibitbothintentional discriminationandfaciallyneutralpoliciesand practicesthatresultindiscriminatoryeffects, includingsitingdecisions. 3
EPAs Office of Civil Rights and the Department of Education's Office
for Civil Rights are available to provide technical assistance to districts concerning applicable civil rights laws. See agency regulations implementing Title VI, for example, EPAs Title VI regulations, 40 C.F.R. Part 7, and the U.S. Department of Educations Title VI regulations, 34 C.F.R. Part 100. The Title VI regulations prohibit, among other things, race, color or national origin discrimination in siting decisions. In addition to prohibiting discrimination in siting decisions, among other things, the civil rights laws establish other requirements relevant to the decisionmaking process, such as requirements pertaining to effective communication with limited English proficient persons and individuals with ties and requirements pertaining to access by individuals with disabilities. See U.S. Department of Justice regulations implementing Title II, 28 C.F.R. Part 35, and Title III, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and U.S Department of Educations regulations implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 34 C.F.R. Part 104.
Gary Orfield and Chungmei Lee, Historic Reversals, Accelerating
Resegregation, and the Need for New Integration Strategies, The Civil Rights Project, University of California Los Angeles, August 29, 2007. Available at: http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k12 education/integrationanddiversity/historicreversalsaccelerating resegregationandtheneedfornewintegrationstrategies 1/orfieldhistoricreversalsaccelerating.pdf.
IMPORTANT:TheSchoolSitingGuidelinesare NOTdesignedforretroactiveapplicationto previousschoolsitingdecisions.Theyare designedtoinformandimprovetheconsideration ofenvironmentalfactorsintheschoolsiting decisionmakingprocessgoingforward.In developingtheseguidelines,EPAseeksto strengtheninformationexchangeandcooperation betweenLEAs,stateandtribaleducationagencies andtheirenvironmentalcounterpartstobetter serveschoolchildren,parents,staffandtheir communitiesinprovidingsafeschool environments.Manyschoolsacrossthecountry maybelocatedinproximitytooneormoreofthe potentialhazardsdiscussedwithintheguidelines. Duetomanyfactorsthataffectexposureto environmentalhazards(suchasthoseincludedin Exhibit5)andbasedontheregulationsand protectivemeasuresthatcanbeapplied, proximityofaschooltonearbysourcesof environmentalcontaminantsmaynotpose unacceptablerisks.EPArecommendsthatdistricts periodicallyinspectexistingschoolsforpotential environmentalhealthandsafetyrisksusingtools designedforthatpurposesuchasEPAsHealthy SchoolEnvironmentsAssessmentTool (HealthySEAT;www.epa.gov/schools/ healthyseat/)ortheNationalInstitutefor OccupationalSafetyandHealth(NIOSH)Safety ChecklistProgramforSchools.(www.cdc.gov/ niosh/docs/2004101/)Wheredeficienciesare found,EPArecommendsstepstoreducestudent andstaffexposuretopotentialhazardsbe identifiedandimplemented(seeSection9.13). Keepingchildrensafefromenvironmental exposuresatschooldoesnotendwithsite selection,orevenmaterialsselectionduring construction;thehealthofstudentsandstaffin schoolsissupportedbyanongoingattentionto commitmenttohealthyschoolenvironments.EPA hasaconsiderablebodyofguidanceand regulationsthatarespecificallygearedtoward existingschools,whichisavailableat www.epa.gov/schools.
1.3. Public Involvement in the Development of the Guidelines

InJuly2009,EPAconvenedaspecialSchoolSiting TaskGroup(TaskGroup)undertheexisting Children'sHealthProtectionAdvisoryCommittee (CHPAC)toprovideearlyinputtoEPAonthe contentofthesitingguidelines.(http://yosemite. epa.gov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/content/whatwe_advi sory.htm)TheTaskGroupwascomposedof representativesfromawiderangeofnational, state,tribalandlocalorganizations.TheTask Groupwasprovidedwithaninitialdraftand providedcomments(http://yosemite.epa.gov/ ochp/ochpweb.nsf/content/CHPAC_Comments.ht m#14)inApril2010toEPAintheformofaletter fromtheCHPACtoAdministratorLisaJackson (April7,2010)(http://yosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ ochpweb.nsf/content/CHPAC_School_Siting_Letter _web.htm)andareportfromtheSchoolSiting TaskGroup.(http://yosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ ochpweb.nsf/content/CHPAC_SSTG_Report2.htm/ $File/CHPAC_SSTG_Report2.pdf)EPAappreciates theworkoftheTaskGroupandthecontributions madebyallofitsmembers.EPAincorporated manyoftherecommendationsfromtheCHPAC letterandSchoolSitingTaskGroupreportintothe guidelines. InNovember2010,EPAreleasedthedraftSchool SitingGuidelinesforpubliccomment.The commentperiodwasopenuntilFebruary2011. EPAconsideredthesecommentsinrevisingthe guidelines.Asummaryoftheissuesraisedbythe publiccommentersandEPAsresponsescanbe foundonthePublicInvolvementinthe Developmentoftheguidelinespage. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/development) Inaddition,theguidelineshavedrawnfrom,and theResourcespageoftheguidelineswebsite includeslinksto,numerousresourcesthathave alreadybeendevelopedbystateandlocal jurisdictionsandotherorganizations.(See: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources)
1.4. Principles behind the Guidelines

1.4.1. Principle 1. Safe and healthy school environments are integral components of the education process Theoverridingpurposeofaschoolbuildingisto provideasafe,healthyandsupportive environmentinwhichchildrencanlearn.Children spendnearlyathirdoftheirtypicaldayinthe schoolenvironment,wheretheymaybeexposed toarangeofcontaminantsbothindoorsandout. Suchexposurescanimpacthealthandlearning andnegativelyimpactschoolattendance.Student exposuretoenvironmentalhazardsatschoolcan arisefrommultiplepathways,whichmaydiffer betweenlocations.Eachlocationmayhave differentunderlyingcausesofpotentialexposure, suchassitecontamination,neighborhood emissionsourcesorindoorairqualityproblems. (http://yosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/frm chemicals) Poorindoorairqualitycancontributetoillness resultinginabsencefromschoolandacutehealth symptomsthatdecreaseperformancewhileat school. 4Poorindoorairqualitymayalsodirectly reduceaperson'sabilitytoperformspecific mentaltasksrequiringconcentration,calculation ormemory.Althoughchildrenspendmostoftheir schooldayinsidetheschoolbuilding,theyalso spendtimeoutdoors,suchasduringrecess, physicaleducationclass,physicalactivityoutside ofclasstimeandgettingtoandfromschool. Examplesofcontaminantsthatcanbefoundin outdoorschoolenvironmentsincludeairpollution frommotorvehicles,pesticidesandindustrial pollutants.Someofthesepollutantsalso
contributetoexposureswithintheindoor environmentinschools. 5 Childrenaremorevulnerabletoenvironmental exposuresbecausetheirresponsestotoxic substances,bothinseverityandinthenatureof theadverseeffect,candiffermarkedlyfromthose ofadults. 6 ! Childrenbreathemoreair,drinkmorewater andeatmorefoodperkilogramofbodyweight thanadults; ! Childrensbehaviors(e.g.,handtomouth contact)alsomakethemmoresusceptibleto environmentalhazards,especiallyhazardsin soilanddust; 7 ! Childrenexperienceperiodsofgrowthand developmentwhichcanbeadverselyaffected byexposurestotoxicsubstances.Therapid developmentofachild'sorgansystemsduring embryonic,fetalandearlynewbornperiods makeschildrenvulnerablewhenexposedto environmentaltoxicants.Theparticular vulnerabilitiesofinfants,preschoolandyoung childrenmaybeofparticularimportanceto considerwherechildcarecentersare integratedwithoradjacenttoelementaryor otherschools; ! Childrenwithchronicillnessessuchasasthma mayexperienceincreasedvulnerabilityto
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, An Introduction to Indoor
Air Quality IAQ, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Last modified November 29, 2010. Available at: www.epa.gov/iaq/iaintro.html.
6
Developmental Toxicity: Special Considerations Based on Age and
Developmental State, in Pediatric Environmental Health, 2nd Edition, ed. Ruth A. Etzel and Sophie J. Balk, American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Environmental Health 2003 936.
7
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ChildSpecific Exposure
Factors Handbook Final Report, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R06/096F, September 2008. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/ recordisplay.cfm?deid=199243#Download.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Indoor Air Quality and
Student Performance, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA 402F00009, August 2000.
environmentaltoxicants. 8Asthmacontinuesto beasignificantproblemamongschoolage children;and ! Thereispotentialforchildrenwhoareactively engagedinstructuredandunstructured outdoorphysicalactivity,includingsports activities,tobedisproportionatelyaffectedby outdoorairpollutionbecauseintakeofair increasesduringperiodsofincreasedphysical activity.Also,whenmouthbreathingoccurs,the processofdepositionintheupperrespiratory tractisbypassedwithdirectdepositioninthe lungsofanyenvironmentalcontaminants presentintheair. Researchhasconfirmedthatthequalityofa schoolfacilityhasanimpactonstudents experiencesandultimatelyontheireducational achievement.Researchonschoolbuilding conditionsandstudentoutcomesfindsa consistentrelationshipbetweenpoorfacilitiesand poorperformance:higherstudentachievementis associatedwithschoolfacilitiesthatareclean,in goodrepairanddesignedtosupporthigh academicstandards,independentofstudent socioeconomicstatus. 9(www.epa.gov/ schools/siting/resources) 1.4.2. Principle 2. The environmental review process should be rigorous, thorough and welldocumented, and include substantive and ongoing meaningful public involvement onsiteoroffsiteenvironmentalhazardsthatmay poseahealthrisktostudentsandstaff.Ifthereare potentialhazardsassociatedwiththepreferred location,inadditiontoidentifyingthepotential hazards,theLEAandtheschoolsitingcommittee (SSC)(seeSection3.3)withmeaningfulpublic involvement(seeSection3)canusethe environmentalreviewprocess(seeSection5)to determinewhatcleanup,mitigationandlongterm stewardshipshouldbeimplementedtoensurethe safetyandhealthofallschooloccupants. Athoroughandtransparentenvironmental reviewprocesswillhelpreducethelikelihoodthat naturalhazards(e.g.,flooding)orenvironmental hazards(e.g.,sitecontamination)willbe discoveredaftertheschoolislocatedand operating,thusreducingpotentialadverse environmentalandpublichealtheffectson children,legalandfinancialliabilityand/orpublic backlash.Therationaleforchoosingonelocation overanothershouldbeclearlyarticulatedbased onarobustreviewofcandidatelocations, especiallyiftheenvironmentalreviewisa decidingfactor.Moreover,allengineeringand scientificreportingmustcomplywithapplicable federal,state,tribalandlocalregulations. Stakeholdergroupssuchasparents,teachersand otherschoolpersonnel,andnearbyresidentsare mostdirectlyimpactedbyschoolsitingdecisions andshouldbefullyengagedinthereviewand decisionmakingprocess.Theseguidelines provideimportantinformationandlinks throughout,especiallyintheQuickGuideto EnvironmentalIssues(seeSection8)andonthe Resourcespageoftheguidelineswebsite,to addresstheneedfortechnicalassistanceand trainingtoenablemeaningfulparticipationby parentsandnearbyresidents,includingminority andlowincomepopulations. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources) Stateandtribalenvironmentalregulatory agenciesmayplayacentralroleinoversightand approvaloftheenvironmentalreviewwhere contaminatedsitesarebeingconsidered(see Section7).Theirinvolvementiscriticalinanysite
Selectingsiteswhereenvironmentalreviewshave recentlybeenconductedanddocumented(within thepastsixmonths)orperformingan environmentalreviewoncandidatelocationsis theonlymeansofdeterminingifthereareany

8
World Health Organization, The Physical School Environment: An
Essential Component of a HealthPromoting School, The World Health Organization's Information Series on School Health Document No. 2 2004. Available at: http://www.who.int/school_youth_health/media/en/physical_sch_envir onment_v2.pdf.
9
M.J. Mendell and G.A. Heath, Do indoor pollutants and thermal
conditions in schools influence student performance? A critical review of the literature, Indoor Air 2005 15:1. 2752. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600 0668.2004.00320.x/full.
remediationandsitemanagementplansaswellas ensuringtheintegrityoflongtermstewardship plans(seeSection5.10),includingany institutionalandengineeringcontrols(seeSection 8.15)inplacetopreventexposures,sotheycanbe relieduponoverthelongterm. 1.4.3. Principle 3. Schools should be located in environments that contribute to the livability, sustainability and public health of neighborhoods and communities Investmentsineducationalfacilitiesrepresentone ofthelargestcapitaloutlaysthatmanystates, tribesandlocalgovernmentsmake.Decisions abouttheconstructionandrenovationofschools willhaveimportantimplicationsforcommunities beyondeducationaloutcomes.Communitiesmay choosetousetheseinvestmentstomeetmultiple goalseducation,health,environmental, economic,socialandfiscal.Boththelocationand designofaschoolanditsaccessibilitytoresidents outsideofclasshours,includingresidentswith disabilities,playamajorroleindeterminingwhat benefitsitprovidestothecommunity.Many communitiesthatarereevaluatingtheirgrowth patternsandinfrastructureinvestmentsarealso assessinghowandwheretheyspendtheir educationdollars.Integratingschoolplanning withbroadercommunityplans,visionsandgoals canproduceneighborhoodcenteredschoolsthat offerhighqualityeducationalprogramswhile benefitingtheenvironment,healthandwellbeing inmanyways. Nationaltrendsinschoolsitingandsizehave largelyfollowedthemodelofbuildingnew schoolsattheedgesofcommunitiesonlarge, undevelopedparcelsoflandawayfromthe neighborhoodsandtownstheyserve.Average schoolsize(intermsofstudentpopulationper school)hassteadilygrown.Accordingtothe NationalCenterforEducationStatistics,the numberofschoolsintheUnitedStatesdecreased from262,000in1930to95,000in2004. 10 (http://nces.ed.gov/)Studentpopulationoverthe sameperiodrosefrom28millionto54.5million. Thisapproachofconstructinglargeschoolson undevelopedlocationsoftenleadsto underinvestmentinthecommunitycoreand existingfacilitiesandincreasespublic expenditures,vehiculartravel,trafficcongestion, pollutionandlossofopenspace.Accordingly, manyresidentsinolderneighborhoodshave loweraccesstopublicinfrastructureand recreationallocations,suchasschoolplaygrounds andathleticfields.Instead,schoolsshouldbea hubforthewholecommunity,byprovidingpublic spacesforrecreationandlearning,extended hoursbeforeandafterschoolandduringthe weekendsandsummer,andspaceforacademic andnonacademicservicessuchassocialservices andactivitiesthatengageparentsandtheentire community.TheNationalTrustforHistoric Preservations2009reportHelpingJohnnyWalk toSchooloutlinesthebenefitsofretaining communitycenteredschools. 11Itcanbefound here:www.preservationnation.org/ issues/historicschools/. Encouraging physical activity Thelocationofaschoolandtheschool environmentcaninfluencelevelsofphysical activity.Further,theAmericanAcademyof PediatricsCommitteeontheEnvironmentwrote in2009,Themostuniversalopportunityfor incidentalphysicalactivityamongchildrenis gettingtoandfromschool. 12Manystudiesshow thatthedistancebetweenhomeandschoolisthe
10
U.S. Department of Education Institute of Educational Sciences,
National Center for Educational Statistics Fast Facts. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/ display.asp?id=84.
11
Renee Kuhlman, Helping Johnny Walk to School: Policy
Recommendations for Removing Barriers to CommunityCentered Schools, National Trust for Historic Preservation 2010. Available at: www.preservationnation.org/issues/historicschools/helpingjohnny walktoschool/helpingjohnnywalktoschool.pdf.
12
American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Environmental
Health, The Built Environment: Designing Communities to Promote Physical Activity in Children. Pediatrics June 2009 123:6. 1593. Online article available at: http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/ cgi/content/full/pediatrics;123/6/1591.
strongestpredictorofwhetherstudentswalkor biketoschool. 13TheU.S.Departmentof Transportationreportsthatthenumberof studentsages5to18whowalkorbiketoschool hasdeclineddramaticallyoverthepastfew decades,from41percentin1969toonly 13percentin2001. 14Thishascoincidedwitha sharpincreaseinobesityratesamongchildren. AccordingtotheCentersforDiseaseControland Prevention(CDC),theprevalenceofobesity amongchildrenages6to11nearlytripledinthe pastthreedecades,increasingfrom6.5percentin 19761980to19.6percentin20072008.The rateamongadolescentsages12to19morethan tripled,increasingfrom6.5percentto 18.1percentoverthesameperiod. 15 Obesityratesandassociatedchronicdiseaserates aresubstantiallyhigherinminoritypopulations. Yet,thesecommunitiesoftenlackaccessto opportunitiesforphysicalactivityandto affordableandnutritiousfood. 16Wellsited schoolswithintheseneighborhoodscombined withSafeRoutestoSchools 17(seeSection4.3.4) effortsandreinvestmentininfrastructurethat increasespedestrianandbikesafetycanincrease theopportunityforincidentalphysicalactivity andmayhelpaddressthisenvironmentalinequity
13
andhealthdisparity.Numerousstudieshave shownthatwhenschoolsarewithinaneasy walkingorbikingdistanceofresidentialareasand theroutestoschoolaresafe,studentsincrease theirparticipationinphysicalactivity.18 (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources)Ina studyofadolescents,100percentofstudentswho walkedbothtoandfromschoolmetthe recommendedlevelsof60ormoreminutesof moderatetovigorousphysicalactivityon weekdays. 19Communitycenteredschoolsthat encouragedailyphysicalactivityleadtobetter healthforchildren,forexamplebetter cardiovascularfitness,andhealthiercommunities andmayreduceriskofobesityandchronic disease. 20 Schoolsitingthatsupportswalkingorbikingto schoolcanalsocontributetoacademic achievement.The2010CDCreport,The AssociationbetweenSchoolbasedPhysical Activity,includingPhysicalEducation,and AcademicPerformance(www.cdc.gov/ healthyyouth/health_and_academics/pdf/pape_ex ecutive_summary.pdf),synthesizedthescientific literatureexaminingindicatorsofcognitiveskills andattitudes,academicbehaviorsandacademic achievement.Thereportfoundsubstantial evidencethatphysicalactivitycanhelpimprove academicachievement,includinggradesand standardizedtestscores.Thereviewsuggeststhat physicalactivitycanhaveanimpactoncognitive skillsandattitudesandacademicbehavior,allof whichareimportantcomponentsofimproved academicperformance.Theseincludeenhanced
Safe Routes to School National Partnership, The Influence of the
Built Environment on Travel Behaviors. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: www.saferoutespartnership.org/mediacenter/ research/231317.
14
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services at Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, Kids WalktoSchool: Then and NowBarriers and Solutions, Last modified February 25, 2008. Available at: www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/kidswalk/ then_and_now.htm.
15
Cynthia Ogden and Margaret Carroll, Prevalence of Obesity Among
Children and Adolescents: United States, Trends 19631965 Through 20072008, National Center for Health Statistics Health EStat Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Last modified June 4, 2010. Available at: www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ hestat/obesity_child_07_08/obesity_child_07_08.htm.
16
18
Active Living Research, Walking and Biking to School, Physical
Activity and Health Outcomes, Research Brief May 2009. Available at: www.activelivingresearch.org/files/ALR_Brief_ActiveTransport.pdf.
19
Leslie M. Alexander, Jo Inchley, Joanna Todd, Dorothy Currie, Ashley
R. Cooper and Candace Currie, The broader impact of walking to school among adolescents: seven day accelerometry based study, British Medical Journal 2005 331:7524. 10611062. Available at: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1283187/
20
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC Health Disparities
and Inequalities ReportUnited States, 2011, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report January 14, 2011 60 Suppl. Available at: www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/other/su6001.pdf.
17
American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Environmental
Safe Routes to School National Partnership, Impact of Physical
Health, The Built Environment: Designing Communities to Promote Physical Activity in Children, Pediatrics June 2009 123:6. 15911598. Online article available at: http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/ cgi/content/full/pediatrics;123/6/1591.
Activity on Obesity and Health. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: www.saferoutespartnership.org/mediacenter/ research/230339.
concentrationandattentionaswellasimproved classroombehavior. 21 Reducing environmental impacts on air, water and land Thelocationofaschoolaffectstheenvironmentin complexways.Locatingschoolsinthe neighborhoodstheyserve,reusinginfrastructure andrenovatingbuildingsconserveenergyand resources.Integratingschoolsintoneighborhoods insteadofbuildingthemonundevelopedlandon thefringeofthecommunitypreservesthenatural environment,includingfarmland,fieldsand wildlifehabitat.Byusingexistingbuildings,roads, parkinglotsandotherinfrastructure, communitiescanavoidbuildingmoreimpervious pavedsurfaces,whichinturnreduces contaminatedwaterrunoffintonearbylakes, riversandstreams.Appropriateconsiderationofa schoolspotentialenvironmentalimpactcanhelp topreserveandnourishthenaturalandhuman resourcesofacommunity. Asnotedearlier,thepercentageofchildrenthat walkorbiketoschooldroppedfrom41percentin 1969toabout13percentin2001.Busridership hasremainedrelativelystableduringthesame period,withabout55percentofstudentsridinga schoolbusin2004. 22Thismeansthatthe proportionofchildrenarrivingatschoolin privatelyownedvehicleshasincreasedachange thathasimplicationsforoveralltrafficand emissions.Increasesintrafficcanraiseemissions ofnumerouspollutants,includingcriteriaair pollutants,airtoxicsandgreenhousegases.In addition,trafficcongestionaroundschools decreaseschildsafety.Datafromthe2001 NationalHouseholdTransportationSurveyshow thatthedistanceachildlivesfromschool
21
influencesthechoiceofwhethertowalk,bike,ride abusorgetarideinacar.Fortripsoflessthan ofamile,walkingorbikingisthedominantmode. Fortripsoftoamile,privateautomobiles accountforabouthalfthetripstoandfromschool. Atadistanceof1mileandbeyond,themajorityof thetripsarebyprivateautomobile. 23 Additionally,schoolsthatapplyintegratedsite andbuildingdesignpracticesincorporatinggreen principlesandstandards(See:www.epa.gov/ schools/siting/resources)suchasthosefrom theCollaborativeforHighPerformanceSchools (CHPS)(www.chps.net/dev/Drupal/node)and theEPAsENERGYSTARprogram (www.energystar.gov/k12)improve educationalopportunitiesthroughuseofthe buildingandpracticesasteachingtools;improve energy,materialandresourceefficiency;improve indoorenvironmentalquality;andhelpcreate modelsofsustainableneighborhoods. 1.4.4. Principle 4. The school siting process should consider the environmental health and safety of the entire community, including disadvantaged and underserved populations Agrowingbodyofresearchsuggeststhatminority andlowincomechildrenaremorelikelytoattend schoolsthatareinpoorconditionorhave receivedinadequatemaintenanceduetolackof resources. 24Studiesalsohighlightthe disproportionatepercentageofminorityandlow incomechildrenthatareexposedtomultiple environmentalhazardsincloseproximitytothe schoolstheyattend. 25Theseenvironmental
23
U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration,
National Household Travel Survey, NHTS Brief January 2008. Available at: www.saferoutespartnership.org/media/file /Travel_To_School.pdf.
24
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, The Association
Daria E. Neal, Healthy Schools: A Major Front in the Fight for
Between SchoolBased Physical Activity, Including Physical Education, and Academic Performance, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services April 2010. Available at: www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/ health_and_academics/pdf/pape_executive_summary.pdf.
22
Environmental Justice. Lewis & Clark Law School's Environmental Law Online n.d. 38:2 Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: www.elawreview.org/elaw/382/healthy_schools_a_major_front.html.
25
David Salvesen, Peter Zambito, and Dylan McDonnell, Safe
Safe Routes to School National Partnership, National Statistics on
Schools: Identifying Potential Threats to the Health and Safety of Schoolchildren in North Carolina, Center for Sustainable Community Design Institute for the Environment, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina November 2010. Available at: www.ie.unc.edu/cscd/pdf/Safe_Schools_Final_Report.pdf.
School Transportation, Safe Routes to School: Creative and Safe Solutions to School Bus Cuts. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: www.saferoutespartnership.org/media/ file/school_bus_cuts_national_stats_FINAL.pdf.
hazardsrangefromexposurestooutdoorair toxicstovariousexposuresthatoriginatewithin theschoolboundaries.Minorityandlowincome childrenmaybeevenmoreatriskfromthese environmentalhazardsgiventhepresenceof otherfactors,suchaspoornutrition,lackofaccess tohealthcareandpreexistinghealthconditions. Theadversehealtheffectsfromtheseexposures mayresultinbothshorttermeffects,suchaspoor schoolperformanceduetoincreasedabsenteeism, andpossiblelongtermeffects,suchasthe developmentofaseriouslearningdisability, respiratoryillnessorotherdisease. Policiesthatencouragetherenovationofexisting schools,withappropriatemitigationof environmentalhazardsifnecessaryandthesiting ofnewfacilitieswithinexistingneighborhoods cancontributetosolvingmultiplechallengesin oldercommunities.Conversely,policiesthat discouragerenovatingexistingschoolsorsiting schoolswithinthecommunitycanleadtoa disinvestmentinthecommunitythatmay contributetophysical,socialandeconomic declineinthecommunity.Sitingschoolsinthe communitiestheyserveparticularlyinurban areaswheredisinvestmentinneighborhoodshas ledtochronicenvironmental,economicandpublic healthdisparitiescanbepartofarevitalization strategyaimedatawiderangeofimproved communityoutcomes.Schoolgroundscanprovide importantplayandrecreationalspacefor children. 26Researchshowsthatininnercity neighborhoods,childrenaremorelikelytobe physicallyactivewhenthereisasafe,easily accessibleplayspacesuchasaschoolyardthan whentheirneighborhooddoesnothaveasimilar space. 27Becausethesefacilitiesarelocatedwithin walkingdistance,familiesandchildrenaremore likelytousethem. 28Schoollocationsthatare accessiblebywalkingorbikingmakeiteasierfor familieswithoutcarstobepartoftheirchildrens schoolcommunityandhelpstoreduce transportationexpenses.Ratesofautoownership areloweramonglowincomeandminority populationsandbeingclosertotheschoolmakes iteasierforparentstobeinvolvedintheschool community. 29Thebenefitsoflocatingschoolsin thecommunitiestheyserveshouldbeconsidered, especiallyincaseswheretheschoolwillbe servingdisadvantagedorunderserved populations. Whenrenovationornewconstructionofschool facilitiesinexistingcommunitiesispairedwitha jointuseprogramusingthelocationforK12 educationaswellasanadultvocationaltraining centerintheevenings,forinstancecommunities benefit.Jointuseschoolscanalsoincludepublic libraries,amenitiessuchasswimmingpoolsand gyms,publichealthcenters,andcounselingclinics. Colocatingtheseusesleveragespublicand privatedollarsmoreefficiently,reusesexisting infrastructureandcontributestothevibrancyof existingcommunities.Jointuseagreementscanbe usedtoaddressLEAorcommunityconcerns aboutcosts,vandalism,security,maintenanceand liabilityintheeventofinjury.Formoreonjoint useandjointuseagreementsseetheCenterfor CitiesandSchools(http://citiesandschools. berkeley.edu/)andtheNationalPolicyandLegal AnalysisNetworktoPreventChildhoodObesity (www.nplanonline.org/nplan/jointuse)websites.
27
Thomas A. Farley et al., Safe Play Spaces To Promote Physical
Activity in InnerCity Children: Results from a Pilot Study of an Environmental Intervention, American Journal of Public Health September 2007 97:9. 16251631. Available at: www.njafter3.org/edu/docs/Reports_SafePlacestoPlayReport.pdf.
28
National Policy and Legal Analysis Network to Prevent Childhood
26
Obesity, Healthy School Siting. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: www.nplanonline.org/nplan/healthyschoolsiting.
29
AdHoc Coalition for Healthy School Siting, Revising CDE School
Siting Policy Documents: How Californias School Siting Policies Can Support a WorldClass Educational System, Submitted to the California Department of Education by the AdHoc Coalition for Healthy School Siting January 31, 2008. Available at: http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/School_Siting_Policy_Brie f_013108.pdf.
Adam Carasso and SigneMary McKernan, The Urban Institute, The
Balance Sheets of LowIncome Households: What We Know about Their Assets and Liabilities, Prepared for U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation November 2007. Available at: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/07/PoorFinances/balance/index.shtml.
10
Therenovationofanexistingschoolorthesiting ofanewschoolfacilityonapreviouslydeveloped sitecanreduceoreliminateexpensesthatmight haveotherwisebeenincurredfornew infrastructurelikeroadsandsewers,separate locationsforthedifferentuses,andthecostsof transportingchildrenoutoftheirneighborhoodto thenewfacility. 30Itcanalsomeanthatafacilityor sitethatwasonceseenasablightorblemishona communityorneighborhoodhasbeen transformedintoacommunityasset. 31When prospectivelocationsforschoolsaretakenoutof thediscussionsolelybecausetheywere previouslyusedorareindisrepair,orwhen recenttrendstowardslarger,dispersed,andauto orbusaccessonlyschoolsarefollowed, communitiesinmostneedofreinvestmentcan missoutonsignificantopportunitiesforcatalytic investments. 32,33Linkstomoreinformationon disparitiesandenvironmentaljusticeare providedintheResourcespageoftheguidelines website.(www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources)
30
National Trust for Historic Preservation, Older and Historic Schools:
Restoration vs. Replacement and the Role of a Feasibility Study, Last updated January 2010. Available at: www.preservationnation.org/issues/historicschools/additional resources//school_feasibility_study.pdf.
31
Ariel H. Bierbaum, Jeffrey M. Vincent and Erika Tate, Building
Schools and Community, Race, Poverty and the Environment Spring 2008 15:1. Available at: http://urbanhabitat.org/files/ 15.Bierbaum.et_.al_.pdf.
32
33
Constance E. Beaumont and Elizabeth G. Pianca, Why Johnny Cant
Walk to School: Historic Neighborhood Schools in the Age of Sprawl, 2nd ed. National Trust for Historic Preservation October 2002. Available at: www.preservationnation.org/issues/historic schools/additionalresources/schools_why_johnny_1.pdf.
11

12 | AbouttheSchoolSitingGuidelines
2. Overview of the School Siting Guidelines

2.1. Introduction
Schoolbuildingsarefundamentalcomponentsof theeducationalprocess,andchildrenspendmore timeinschoolthaninanyotherenvironment excepttheirhome.Awelllocated,thoughtfully designed,soundlybuiltandefficientlyoperated schoolenhancestheeducationalprocessby providingasafeandhealthyenvironmentfor children,teachersandotherstaffandprovides manyopportunitiestomeetmultiplecommunity goals.Thesevoluntaryguidelinesareintendedto assistlocalschooldistricts,whichwillbereferred tothroughouttheseguidelinesasthelocal educationagency(LEA)(seeSection10),and communitymembersinevaluatingenvironmental factorstomakethebestpossibleschoolsiting decisions. Theguidelinesareintendedtobeusedpriorto: ! Makingadecisionaboutwhethertorenovate theexistingschool,buildanewschoolonthe currentsiteorbuildanewschoolonanewsite; ! Acquisitionoflandforschoolfacilities; ! Useoflegacypropertyalreadyownedbythe LEA;
! Leasingofspaceinneworexistingstructures notownedbytheLEAforuseasaschool; and/or ! Majorrepair,renovationorreuseofexisting propertiesandstructuresalreadyownedbythe LEAforuseasaschool. Indevelopingtheguidelines,theEnvironmental ProtectionAgency(EPA)focusedonfour underlyingprinciplesforaddressing environmentalfactorsinschoolsitingdecisions (describedindetailinAbouttheSchoolSiting Guidelines): 1. Safeandhealthyschoolenvironmentsare integralcomponentsoftheeducationprocess (seeSection1.4.1); Theenvironmentalreviewprocessshouldbe rigorous,thoroughandwelldocumentedand includesubstantiveandongoingmeaningful publicinvolvement(seeSection1.4.2); Schoolsshouldbelocatedinenvironments thatcontributetothelivability,sustainability andpublichealthofneighborhoodsand communities(seeSection1.4.3);and
2.
3.
4.
Theschoolsitingprocessshouldconsiderthe environmentalhealthandsafetyoftheentire community,includingdisadvantagedand underservedpopulations(seeSection1.4.4).
OverviewoftheSchoolSitingGuidelines |
13
2.2. Overview for Considering Environmental Factors in the School Siting Process
Thedecisionaboutwheretolocateaschoolis fundamentallylocalinnature,althoughstate, tribalandfederallawsandprogramsoften influencethedecisionmakingprocessinboth directandindirectways.Forexample,the presenceofenvironmentalcontaminationand threatofexposureofchildrenand/orstaffto unsafelevelsofcontaminantsonschoolproperty maytriggertheneedforstateandpossiblyfederal involvement. Theseguidelinespresentrecommendationson evaluatingtheenvironmentalandpublichealth risksandbenefitsofpotentiallocationsaspartof theschoolsitingprocess.Examplesofpotential environmentalandpublichealthrisksinclude onsitecontamination,suchasradon,volatile organiccompoundsorpetroleumhydrocarbonsin soilandgroundwater,orimpactsfromnearby sourcesofpollution,suchasindustrialfacilities andtransportationfacilities(seeExhibit6: ScreeningPotentialEnvironmental,PublicHealth andSafety).Someexamplesofenvironmentaland publichealthbenefitsincludethelocations proximitytoresidenceswherefuturestudentslive (sostudentswouldbeabletowalkorbiketo school)andtheavailabilityofpublic transportationtoandfromthesite(seeExhibit4: DesirableEnvironmentalAttributesofCandidate Sites). Thesitingprocessiscomplexandinvolvesmany considerationsthatextendbeyondthescopeof theseguidelines,forexample: ! Educationalandextracurricularprogramsand services;
! Anticipatedsizeanddemographicsofthe studentbody; ! Needsofindividualswithdisabilities; ! Locationsize(acreageandfacilityspace); ! Communitypartnershipsandplannedor potentialcommercialdevelopmentinthe community; ! Costoflandandlocationpreparation; ! Availabilityofinfrastructure(e.g.,roadsand utilities); ! Requirementsthatmustbemettoreceivelocal, stateandtribalfundingassistance;and ! Economicimpacttothecommunity. Whiletheseissuesarebeyondthescopeofthe guidelines,someresourcesrelatedtotheseother considerationshavebeenprovidedonthe guidelineswebsite.(www.epa.gov/schools/ siting/resources) ManyLEAsdeveloplongrangeschoolfacilities planstohelpdeterminefuturefacilitiesneeds. Theselongrangeplansprovidethecontextwithin whichtheschoolsitingdecisionsaremade.To makeinformeddecisions,theLEAshouldconsider consultingwithmunicipalofficialsonthe communitysplansforfuturelanduseandcapital expenditures(oftenoutlinedinacomprehensive planorsimilardocument)(seeSection4.2.1). Althoughtheactualprocesstoconsider environmentalfactorsinschoolsitingdecisions variesfromcommunitytocommunity,Exhibit1 givesageneralpictureoftheissuesthatare addressedintheguidelines.
14
| OverviewoftheSchoolSitingGuidelines
Exhibit1:OverviewoftheSitingGuidelines
OverviewoftheSchoolSitingGuidelines |
15
Atthebeginningandthroughouttheprocessof consideringenvironmentalfactorsintheschool sitingprocessitisessentialfortheLEAtoinvolve thepublicbyreachingouttostakeholdersinthe community,especiallythosemostimpactedbythe decisiontobuildanewschoolorrenovatean existingschool.Stakeholderscanincludeparents, teachers,schoolpersonnel,schoolhealthcouncil orteammembers,communityandbusiness leaders,andnearbyresidents.Itisimportantto developacommunicationsplan(seeSection3.4) andtoidentifyopportunitiesformeaningful publicinvolvement(seeSection3)toensurethe publicisengagedthroughouttheentireschool sitingprocess.Itisalsoimportanttoenhancethe capacityofdisadvantagedandothercommunity memberstoparticipateintheprocessthrough facilitatingaccesstotechnicalinformationand assistanceandprovidingaccesstoinformationfor individualswithdisabilitiesandlimitedEnglish proficiency.Toensurepublicinvolvementin considerationofenvironmentalfactorsinschool sitingdecisions,EPArecommendsthattheLEA establishaschoolsitingcommittee(SSC)(see Section3.3).Thiscommitteeshouldgenerally consistofrepresentativesoftheLEAandits governingbody,localgovernmentortribalstaff, andrepresentativesfromstakeholdergroupsthat canhelptheLEAidentifyandevaluatepotential schoollocations(bothnewandexisting). Beforebeginningthesitingprocess,aninitial decisionshouldbemadeonwhetheranewschool facilityisneeded.IftheLEA,advisedbytheSSC, determinesthatanewfacilityisneeded,the locationwillplayanimportantroleindetermining whethertheLEAsgoalsforthefacilitywillbemet (seeSection4.2.1). becompatiblewithschoolsbecauseofonsite and/oroffsitepollutionand/orsafetyhazards? ! Howcanprospectivelocationscomplementand leveragelocalandregionalgrowthand developmentplansandstrategies? ! Whatarethedesirableculturalorhistoric preservationattributesthatshouldbe considered? ! Whatenvironmentaljusticeconsiderations shouldbeincludedinthedesirablelocation attributes?(www.epa.gov/environmental justice) ! Howwillstaff,studentsandcommunity membersgettotheschool? ! Whatarethepotentialimpactsthattheschool mighthaveontheenvironment? ! Whatattributeswillallowtheschooltoserveas anemergencyshelterforthecommunity? Oncepotentiallocationshavebeenidentified (seeSection5.5)bytheLEAandtheSSCwiththe communitysinput,theLEAandtheSSCshould determinewhichpotentiallocationsbestmeetthe stateddesiredenvironmentalattributes. Questionsthatcanbeusedtofurtherevaluate potentiallocationsinclude,butarenotlimitedto: ! Whichlocationspresenttheleastriskof exposuretopollutantsoriginatingeitheronsite oroffsite? ! Whichlocationshaveopportunitiesforshared orjointuseofschoolfacilities(suchasalibrary, classrooms,physicalactivityfacilitiesora healthclinic)orcommunityfacilities(suchas anathleticcenterorpark)? ! Whichlocationsbestfitwithlocal,tribal, regionalandstatedevelopmentplans? ! Whichlocationswouldgivethemoststudents additionalphysicalactivityopportunitiesby beingabletowalkorbiketoschool?
ItiscriticalfortheLEAandtheSSCwiththe communitysinputtoidentifyenvironmental factorsrelatedtodesirableschoollocation attributesthatcanbeusedtoprioritizepotential newsites(seeSection4.3).Questionsthatcanbe askedtodeterminethesecharacteristicsinclude, butarenotlimitedto: ! Whatenvironmentalandpublichealthcriteria shouldbeusedtoevaluateeachpotential location(seeSection4.4)? ! Howcanlocationsbeavoidedthatareeitheron orincloseproximitytolandusesthatmaynot
16
| OverviewoftheSchoolSitingGuidelines
! Whichlocationswouldresultinthelowest potentialfornegativeimpactsonthe environment? Afterdecidingwhichlocationsbestmeetthe desiredpositiveenvironmentalattributes,LEAs shouldconductapreliminaryenvironmental assessment(seeSection5.6)ontheselocations, whichisthefirststageintheenvironmental reviewprocess(seeSection5.3).EPA recommendsconsultingwithstateandtribal(see Section7)environmentalandeducationagencies duringtheenvironmentalreviewprocessto ensurecompliancewithrequirementsandpolicies andtoobtaintechnicalassistance.Examplesof topicstheLEA,theSSCandthecommunitycan considerduringtheenvironmentalreviewprocess include,butarenotlimitedto: ! Theenvironmentalhistoryofeachlocation, whichcanincludesolicitingpublicinputabout thepastuseofeachlocation; ! Assessmentsofpotentialonsite environmentalhazardsfromcontaminated soilandwateratthesite; ! Assessmentsofpotentialoffsite environmentalhazardsfromnearbysources; ! Thetechnicalfeasibilityandthecosts associatedwithpreventingorreducing environmentalexposures,ifpresent,froma shortandlongtermperspective; ! Theenvironmentalimpactofbuildingor renovatingaschoolonthesite(e.g.,lossto habitatorgreenspace);and ! Otherphysicalcharacteristicssuchasoverall safetyandproximitytonoiseandtraffic. Oncethepreliminaryassessmenthasbeen conductedandtheassessmentreportshavebeen reviewedbythepublicandtheSSC,ifno environmentalconcernsexist,adecisioncanbe madetomoveforwardwiththepreferredschool location. Ifpotentialenvironmentalconcernsarefoundin thepreliminaryassessment,EPArecommends Cost Considerations for School Siting During the siting process, the LEA will need to consider costs related to comparing desirable attributes of candidate sites, performing the assessments recommended in these guidelines and acquiring the site or structure. Some of these cost considerations include: Cost of land and location preparation; Short and longterm construction or renovation costs; Transportation costs for students and staff; and Cost estimates for mitigating or reducing environmental risks and long term stewardship of remediation measures. performingamorecomprehensiveenvironmental reviewforthelocationfoundtohavepotential concerns(seeSection5.7).Thecomprehensive environmentalreviewshoulddetermineif hazardousmaterialsarepresentorifthereis potentialforareleaseoforexposurestoa hazardousmaterialorsubstancethatcouldposea healththreattochildren,stafforcommunity members.Thisreviewcouldalsoassesstheneed forcleanupbasedonlevelsofcontamination foundandidentifythecleanupstandardsthatwill beused.Oncethecomprehensiveenvironmental reviewiscompletedandthepublichasbeengiven theopportunitytocomment,theLEA,theSSCand thecommunityshouldhavetheinformation relatedtotheschoolenvironmentneededtomake afinaldecisionaboutwheretolocatetheschool.If thereareonsiteand/oroffsiteenvironmental hazards,sitespecificremediation/mitigation measuresandalongtermstewardshipplan shouldbedeveloped,reviewedbythepublicand implemented.(www.epa.gov/schools/ siting/resources) OverviewoftheSchoolSitingGuidelines | 17

18 | OverviewoftheSchoolSitingGuidelines
3. Meaningful Public Involvement

3.1. Overview
Ameaningfulpublicinvolvementprocessrequires thoseadministeringtheprocesstobefamiliar withandusegoodpublicinvolvementandrisk communicationpractices. Publicinvolvementpromotescivicengagement andbuildspublictrustinschoolsitingdecisions. In2003,theEnvironmentalProtectionAgency (EPA)updatedthe1981PublicParticipation PolicyandissueditsPublicInvolvementPolicy. (www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/policy2003/in dex)Itsfoundationisthesevenbasicstepsto supporteffectivepublicinvolvement: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Planandbudget; Identifythosetoinvolve; Considerprovidingassistance; Provideinformation; Conductinvolvement; Reviewanduseinputandprovidefeedbackto thepublic;and Evaluateinvolvement.
Tohelpimplementthesteps,EPAdevelopeda seriesofHowTobrochuresforeffectivepublic involvement(www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/ brochures/index)asresourcesonhowtobudget for,planandevaluatepublicinvolvement, includingTheRiskCommunicationWorkbook. (www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/625r05003/625r050 03.pdf)
Seven Cardinal Rules for Risk 34 Communication There are seven cardinal rules for risk communication that may be helpful when planning public involvement strategies: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner; Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts; Listen to the public's specific concerns; Be honest, frank and open; Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources; Meet the needs of the media; and Speak clearly and with compassion.
7.
34
34
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
"Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, OPA87020, April 1988. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: www.epa.gov/care/library/7_cardinal_rules.pdf.
MeaningfulPublicInvolvement |
19
3.2. Establishing a Public Involvement Strategy

Providingmeaningfulpublicinvolvement throughouttheschoolsitingprocessisofcritical importanceandshouldbeformalizedpriorto initiatingschoolsiteselection.Stakeholdergroups suchasparents,representativesofstudents, teachersandotherschoolpersonnel,andnearby residentsaremostdirectlyimpactedbyschool sitingdecisions.Thecommunityshouldbefully engagedthroughoutthesitingprocessandfully informedofthepresenceofcontaminantsator nearschoolsites,ofanyremedialmeasures employedtoeliminateexposuretosuch contaminants,andoftestingresultsevaluating suchmeasuresoverthelongterm.Thesegroups alsoplayacriticalroleintheinitialsiteselection process.Documentationofcontaminatedsitescan behousedinmanydifferentlocations(e.g., federal,tribalorstateenvironmentalregulatory agency,localhealthorplanningdepartment, privatepropertyowner).Thiscanmakeitdifficult tofindacompleterecordofthecontamination historyatthesite.Effortsareunderwayto consolidatethesedifferentinformationsources throughgeospatialandInternetaccessible methods.Currentlymembersofthepubliccanuse EPAsMyEnvironmentsearchapplication (www.epa.gov/myenvironment)tofindacross sectionofenvironmentalinformationbasedon location.Additionally,membersofthepubliccan contributetotheinformationcollectioneffort throughtheirownrecollectionsasneighborsor employees.Thepublicshouldbeengagedtohelp establishhistoricalusesofpotentialschoolsites andadjacentsitesandtoassessthelikelihoodand possiblepresenceofcontamination.Becausethese groupsmayalsohavefrequentcontactwiththe site,theycansignificantlycontributetoeffortsto ensurecompliancewithsiteuserestrictionsas partoflongtermsitemanagementplans.Finally, transparencyandmeaningfulpublicinvolvement areessentialtounderstandingdecisionsabout risktradeoffsandtobuildingtrustinthesafetyof specificschoolsitesandthesitingprocessin general.
Apublicinvolvementstrategyincludesproactive andmeaningfulapproachestoencouraging informedpublicparticipation.Theroleofthe publicinfacilityplanningandsiteselectionshould beestablishedearlyintheschoolsitingprocessto ensureeffectivecollaborationandpublic participation.Keycomponentsforimplementinga meaningfulpublicparticipationstrategyinclude: ! ! ! ! ! ! Schoolsitingcommittee(seeSection3.3); Communicationsplan(seeSection3.4); Considerationofcommunityinformation accessibilityissues(seeSection3.5); Technicalassistanceandtraining (seeSection3.6); Designationofopportunitiesforpublicinput (seeSection3.7);and Budgetforpublicinvolvementactivities (seeSection3.7).
3.3. School Siting Committee

Ifnotalreadyinplace,EPArecommendsthatlocal educationagencies(LEAs)(seeSection10) establishaschoolsitingcommittee(SSC)whose responsibilitiesincludemakingrecommendations totheLEAsgoverningbodyonsitesfor renovatingexistingbuildingsforeducational purposes,buildingnewschoolsand/orleasing spacefornewschools.SSCresponsibilitieswould alsoincludeparticipatingintheenvironmental reviewofpotentialsitesandstructuresfor existingandnewuseconversions.EPA recommendsthattheformationoftheSSCbea publiclytransparentprocessandthattheSSC include: ! RepresentativesoftheLEAanditsgoverning body(suchaselectedschoolboardmembers, facility,healthandsafetystaff); Localgovernmentortribalstaff(suchascity planners,governmentenvironmentalhealth specialists,countyauditors,parksand recreationdepartmentstaff);and
20
| MeaningfulPublicInvolvement
! Representativesfromstakeholdergroupsthat reflectthedemographicsofthecommunity, suchas: Parentsofchildrenlikelytoattendthe school; Teachersandschoolstaff; Publichealthorganizations; Communitymembersandneighborhood groups; Environmentaladvocacyand environmentaljusticegroups; Communityplanningorganizations; Locallybasednonprofits; Ageappropriatestudents; Localbusinessesandtrade/building associations; Emergencyplannersandresponders;and Preservationorganizationsandagencies. Longrange School Facilities Plan School siting decisions should be integrated with broader community planning efforts, including transportation, health care, libraries, parks and historic districts, to name a few. A longrange school facilities plan functions as a way for LEAs to identify important projections of longterm school and community needs such as student enrollment, operational costs and infrastructure to use in making school siting decisions. The LEA's longrange plan should be reviewed and commented on by the public, including other local public entities e.g., municipalities, planning departments. More information on the longrange school facilities plan can be found in the Environmental Siting Criteria Considerations section see Section 4. ! ! recommendedthatthelocalschoolboard,ora similargoverningbody,formalizetheprocessof conveningtheSSCanddeveloplanguagethat clearlyarticulatestheSSCscharge.EPA recommendsthataneutralpartyhelporganize, administerand/orfacilitatetheworkofthe committee. TheSSCcanplayanintegralroleinmaking decisionsaboutthemostenvironmentallysound schoollocation.Oneofthefirstresponsibilitiesfor anSSCcanbecontributingtothedevelopmentof aplanformeaningfulpublicengagementinthe decisionmakingprocess,includingampletime (e.g.,3090days)forpubliccommentby membersoftheaffectedcommunity.TheSSCcan alsoassistwithotherkeystepsinidentificationof environmentallydesirablepotentialschool locations,including: ! ! Establishingdesirablelocationcriteria; Identifyinginitialcandidatelocations, includingtheexistingschools; Weighingtheprosandconsofacommunitys experiencewiththeexistinglocation; Workingwithenvironmentalprofessionalsto reviewthesuitabilityofcandidatelocations (seeSection10); Reviewingrecommendationsandreports fromtheenvironmentalreviewprocess; Consideringthesuitabilityofpotentialschool sitesinlightofthelocations;
! ! !
Givingrecommendationstothedecision makingauthoritybasedondataandpublic input; Makingformalpresentationsandproviding reportstotheLEAandgeneralpublic; Providingthepublicwithallofthe appropriatedata,aforumtoexpresstheir opinionand/ortomakearecommendationon theavailableoptions;and Facilitatingpublicaccesstorelevanttechnical andlegalinformationthroughtechnical assistanceandothermeasures.
! !
LEAsshouldseektoavoidconflictsofinterestin selectingcommitteemembersandshouldmanage anyconflictstransparently,asneeded.Itis
21
SSCmembersshouldcollaboratewithLEAsand otherlocalgovernmentagenciesandstakeholders toensureschoolsitingdecisionsaccountforfiscal constraintsandfitwiththeobjectivesoflarger communityandregionaldevelopmentplans. Communityinvolvementinschoolfacility assessment,planning,designandconstruction providesthecommunityanopportunityto improvelocalschools,increasetheirsuitabilityfor communityuseandbuildandstrengthen connectionsamongcommunitymembers.The SmartGrowthSchoolsReportCard (www.smartgrowthschools.org/ about.html),ForGenerationstoCome:The LeadershipGuidetoRenewingPublicBuildings (www.21csf.org/csfhome/Documents/ Organizing_Manual.pdf)aswellasotherresources identifiedintheResourcepageoftheguidelines website(www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources) canserveasusefultoolstosupportcollaboration andcommunityinvolvement. TheSSCshouldbemindfulofitsmembers knowledgeandexpertisetoeffectively participateindecisionmaking.TheSSCshould alsoensurethatitsmemberseffectivelyreachout toenvironmentaljusticeandlowincome communities,aswellasotherstakeholders,with technicalassistanceand/ortrainingsupportto ensurethattheyhavethenecessaryskillsand knowledgetoaddressrelevantissues.(seelinksto CommunityInvolvementandTrainingresources atwww.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources) Engineeringandinstitutionalcontrols,suchas leadencapsulationsystems,canbeusedto preventexposuretocontaminationandtypically requirespecializedexpertise.TheSSCshould carefullyevaluateifthereissufficientcapacityat theLEAtosafelyoperateengineeringand institutionalcontrolsystemsortoundertakelong termstewardshiptaskstopreventenvironmental exposuresatschools.IftheLEAstaffdonothave theexpertise,EPArecommendsthatLEAsobtain trainingorsupportfromagovernment environmentaldepartmentand/oradditional contractedtechnicalservicestoeffectively manageinstitutionalandengineeringcontrols.
3.4. Communications Plan

LEAsshoulddevelopacommunicationsplanto ensuremeaningfulpublicinvolvementinschool siting.Theplanshouldincludeascheduleand methodsofdeliveryofinformationtothepublic andidentifywaysforthepublictoparticipate throughouttheschoolsitingdecisionmaking process.Itisessentialthatthepublicreceives timelynoticeabouttheLEAsplansforschool facilitiesandcriticaldecisionpointsinthe process.Toensurethatkeystakeholdersreceive suchnotice,LEAsshouldpublicizethereleaseof plansandreports,thecommencementofpublic commentperiods,andthedatesofpublichearings throughwrittennoticesthatare: ! Composedinlayaccessiblelanguageto communicateeffectivelywithallstakeholders inthecommunity,includingnonEnglish speakingstakeholdersandindividualswith disabilities; Publishedinnewspapersofgeneral circulationwithintheLEAsjurisdiction (includingforeignlanguagenewspapersfor anynonEnglishspeakingpopulation); Placedconspicuouslyinschoolswithinthe LEA; Deliveredtoeachparentteacher organizationandeachlaborunioncovered byacollectivebargainingagreementwithin theLEA; Deliveredtobusinessesandresidents locatedwithin1,000feetofpotentialschool locations; Deliveredtoplacesofworshipand communitycenterswithintheLEAs jurisdiction; Deliveredtoorganizationsrepresenting neighborhoodswithinpotentialcatchment areas; Providedtoelectedrepresentativesin jurisdictionareas;and DisseminatedontheInternetthrough websitesandsocialmedia(e.g.,Facebook, Twitter,blogs).
! !
! !
22
Publiccommentsreceivedonplansandreports shouldbemadeavailableonallnonfinalactions, andtheLEA,SSCandothergoverningbodies shouldbeencouragedtoprovideresponsesto thesecomments. LEAsand/orstateortribalenvironmental agenciesshouldalsoestablishandmakepublic keycontactpersons,includinglocalplanning, publicworks,parksandrecreation,andlibrary directors,andcreatecentralinformation repositories(e.g.,aprojectwebsiteandother centralizedsourcessuchascommunitylibraries) forkeydocumentsandnoticesrelatedtoschool sitingandmonitoring.Foreachongoingschool sitingprocess,theserepositories,includingthe website,shouldprovide: ! Documentsthatareorhavebeensubjectto reviewandcommentsreceivedonsuch documents; RelevantcorrespondencebetweenLEAsand thestateortribaloversightagency,including anysupplementalinformationprovidedasa resultthereof; Atimelineforthereviewprocessthat specificallynotesopportunitiesforpublic commentandpublichearings; Copiesofanypublicnotices; Keyschoolsitingresources,includinglaws, regulations,guidancedocumentsand appropriateagencycontacts; Foranyschoolswhereenvironmental remediationmeasures(seeSection5.8)are putinplaceand/orlongtermstewardship plans(seeSection5.10)areimplemented, copiesofsuchmeasuresorplansandthe resultsofanymonitoringresultsorreports generatedunderthosemeasuresorplans;and Howtheprojectsupportsthecommunity's longrangeplans.
3.5. Consideration of Community Information Accessibility Issues

Anumberoffactorscanimpedeeffective communicationincommunitysettings,includinga lackoftrustbetweenstakeholdersand communitymembers,alackofeasilyaccessible informationrelatedtodecisionsinlanguages spokenbylocalresidents,sociocultural differences,lackofaccesstoelectronic communicationresources,limitedaccessto scientificinformationandlegalresources,anda lackofavailabletimeformeetingsandreviewof documents. Thesefactorscanbeespeciallyprominentin populationsdisproportionatelyburdenedby environmentalhazardsaswellasthosevulnerable subgroupsthatareatparticularrisktothreatsto humanhealthandtheenvironment.Theseinclude minorities,lowincomeandindigenous populations,childrenandpeoplewithdisabilities. Althoughthesefactorscanfrequentlybe overcome,theLEAmayneedtoenhance informationdeliveryandcommunicationmethods andconsiderprovidingassistancetocommunities thatareaffectedbyacombinationofanyorallof thesefactorstoensuretheirmeaningfuland informedparticipationintheprocess. Everyeffortshouldbemadetoprovide informationthatwillbeaccessibletothe community.Someactivitiesthatshouldhelpmake informationmoreaccessibleinclude: ! Seekingoutcommunityleaderstoobtain theirviewsonhowtobestcommunicateand followtheiradvice; Holdingpublicmeetingsthatareconvened attimesandlocationsavailableandaccessible tocommunitymembers(providetheservices ofaninterpreterforthosewhoneedit); Publicizingmeetingsandtheavailabilityof information;
! !
23
! PostinginformationontheInternetand makingitavailableinmultiplelanguages,if needed,toreachallmembersofthe community; MeetingInternetaccessibilitystandards formakinginformationontheInternet accessibletouserswithdisabilities(e.g.,for thefederalgovernmentthiswouldbe508 compliance);and Organizingacommunitytourofexisting sitesand/orpotentialandproposedlocations. Addressingaccessibilityissuesisimportantto ensureeffectivecommunicationand communitysupportforprojects.Intheend, communitysupportwillbecriticaltohelp gainsupportforschoolfundingandsiting decisions. resources.Examplesoftheseprogramsand trainingopportunitiescanbefoundonthe Resourcespageoftheguidelineswebsiteunder TechnicalAssistanceandCapacityBuilding. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources) Communitiesmayalsoconsiderreachingoutto localcollegesanduniversities,state,tribaland localgovernments,orprofessionalorganizations forassistanceandtrainingonspecificscientificor technicaltopics.
3.6. Technical Assistance and Training

Abroadrepresentationofstakeholdergroupsis importantformeaningfulpublicinvolvement. However,itshouldnotbeassumedallmembersof theSSChavethenecessaryskillsandknowledge tofullyparticipateontheSSC.Similarly, communitymembers,particularlythoseaffected byenvironmentalinjustice(e.g.,minorityandlow incomepopulations,andtribes),maylackthe resourcestoeffectivelyaddressthescientific, technicalandlegalinformationpresentedduring theschoolsitingprocess.Forthesereasons,itis criticalthatallmembersoftheSSCandthe communityhavetheopportunitytoaccess technicalassistancethatprovidesabasisfor commonknowledgeandunderstandingonfactors thatarecriticalintheschoollocationdecision, includingpublichealth,transportationoptions, environmentalreview,sitereviewissues,site specificmitigation/remediationstrategiesand legalconsiderations.Manyfederalagenciesand nonprofitorganizationsoffertrainingatlittleto nocostandalsohaveprogramswithfunding availableforvarioustechnicalassistance
3.7. Designation of Opportunities for Meaningful Public Input and Budget for Public Involvement Activities
Itiscriticaltobudgettimeandresourcesfor meaningfulpublicinvolvementduringtheearliest stagesofplanning.Thetablebelowpresents examplesofpointsintheprocesswherepublic engagementshouldbeconsidered,aswellas strategiesforengagementandthetypesof informationthatmaybepresentedtoor requestedfromthepublic.SSCsshouldalso considerincludingapubliccommentperiodand publichearings,whenappropriate,toallowthe publictoseekclarificationandprovideinput. Beforefinalizingitsaction,EPAencouragesthe LEAtorespondtocommentsinwriting. EPArecommendsthatallpropertiesorstructures proposedforuseasaschoolbecarefully evaluatedforpotentialenvironmental contaminantsandpotentialexposuresofchildren, staffandvisitorsbeforemakingfinaldecisionsto useasiteorstructureforaschool.Thesite evaluationprocessshouldidentifyandevaluateall potentialsafetyhazardsandsourcesof environmentalcontaminationthatmaybepresent atthesiteorwhichmaymigratetothesitefrom nearbysources.
24
Exhibit2:MeaningfulPublicInvolvementPointsandOpportunities
Before the Siting Process Begins

LEA Activity Description of Activity A longrange school facilities plan functions as a way for local education agencies LEAs to identify important projections of longterm school and community needs such as student enrollment, operational costs and infrastructure to use in making school siting decisions. If not already in place, EPA recommends that LEAs establish a SSC whose responsibilities include making recommendations to the LEAs governing body on locations for building new schools, leasing space for new schools, and/or renovating or expanding existing schools, and considering environmental, public health and sustainable communities objectives see Section 3.3. LEAs should develop a communications plan to ensure meaningful public involvement in school siting. The plan should include dates and methods of delivery of information to the public, and identify ways for the public to participate in school siting decisions. The plan should also ensure sufficient funds are allocated for meaningful public involvement activities in the school siting budget. ! Opportunities for Meaningful Public Involvement Review and comment on the longrange facilities plan
Develop Long range School Facilities Plan (see Section 4.2.1)
Provide nominations for stakeholder/community representatives on the SSC Request a community meetand greet with SSC representatives, once selected
Establish School Siting Committee (see Section 3.3)
Develop Communications Plan (see Section 3.4)
Voice expectations for informed and meaningful involvement while addressing potential communications barriers and considerations for underrepresented community members, including translation services Provide recommendations for the location of an information repository and information delivery needs, and ensure that the communications plan and public involvement budget will meet these needs
25
Before the Siting Process Begins

LEA Activity Description of Activity A broad representation of stakeholder groups is important for meaningful public involvement. However, it should not be assumed all members of the SSC have the necessary skills and knowledge to fully participate on the SSC. For these reasons, it is critical that all members of the SSC and the community have the opportunity to access technical assistance and/or training resources that provide a basis for common knowledge and understanding of factors that are critical in the school location decision, including public health, transportation options, environmental review, site review issues, sitespecific mitigation/remediation strategies and legal considerations. ! Opportunities for Meaningful Public Involvement Ensure that all community members including the SSC have the ability to access and utilize available independent technical assistance options and training resources This may be accomplished by inquiring about grant funding for technical assistance and/or the availability of lowcost or free online training resources Consider reaching out to local colleges and universities, state, tribal and local governments, or professional organizations for assistance and training on specific scientific or technical topics Engage in discussions with the LEA and SSC regarding the pros and cons of using an existing school building versus building a new school facility. These discussions may include getting community input on the influence of the existing school on the well being of the overall community, including disadvantaged/ underserved, minority and low income populations
Provide Opportunities for Training and Technical Assistance (see links to resources at www.epa.gov/ schools/siting/ resources)
Determine if a New School Facility is Needed (see Section 4.2.2)
LEAs should consider renovation, repair and/or expansion options before deciding to build a new school facility. "Old" and "obsolete" are not synonymous. Many existing schools can be retrofitted with new technologies to expand their useful life, possibly at a lower cost and lower environmental impact than new construction.
26
Environmental Siting Criteria Considerations

LEA Activity Description of Activity The LEA, in concert with the SSC and with meaningful public involvement, should identify the criteria that will be used to evaluate both the present characteristics and the possible future characteristics of all locations being considered for use as a school. In addition, the SSC should weigh those location characteristics that may adversely affect the decision, including exposure to onsite contamination and offsite pollution. ! Opportunities for Meaningful Public Involvement Discuss the characteristics of the community's preferred school site, including location both proximity to students and other community buildings and compatibility space and accessibility with student and staff activities Help to identify environmental or public health siting considerations with a basis for common knowledge and understanding on factors that are critical in the school location decision, including public health, community health environmental review, site review issues and site specific mitigation/remediation strategies, legal considerations as well as green building techniques that are important to the community Provide insight into key community characteristics that could influence the siting decision e.g., demographics, income
Evaluate Desirable Environmental Attributes of Candidate Locations and Appropriate Environmental Criteria (see Section 4)
27
Environmental Review Process

LEA Activity Description of Activity This portion of the environmental review process begins when the LEA decides to proceed with a school facility project ideally identified in a longrange school facility plan. This decision includes such considerations as the project size number of students to be served, scope type of school to be built and target date for completion. At this point, the SSC should be tasked with identifying candidate sites for the school project and should plan to give the public an opportunity to comment on the preferred site that is selected. ! Opportunities for Meaningful Public Involvement Review/comment on the screening criteria proposed by the LEA, as well as the top three sites proposed for preliminary environmental review Recommend additional sites for consideration that the community deems as candidates for preliminary environmental review Offer community knowledge regarding historic land use on candidate sites e.g., the site was used for agricultural or industrial purposes in the past Review/comment on each preliminary environmental review report as they become available and request LEA response to comments received Identify community needs for technical assistance to explain the technical/scientific information in the reports Request tours of candidate sites for community members/representatives, if possible Notify the LEA of the community's perspectives on the preferred sites and request a response to community recommendations Request changes to the public involvement plan e.g., to extend the public comment period, if necessary
Project Scoping/Initial Screening of Candidate Site Locations (see Section 5.5)
The LEA should engage environmental professionals or professional firms to conduct the necessary environmental reviews for the project. The LEA should solicit public comment on the preliminary environmental assessment and proposed next steps based on review findings. A public comment period is recommended and may be required by the tribal or state regulatory agency, particularly if the preliminary review indicates that no further environmental review is necessary and no other methods of securing public comment are likely.
Preliminary Environmental Review (see Section 5.6)
28

LEA Activity Description of Activity The purpose of the comprehensive environmental review is to gather and analyze data on environmental and public health hazards and impacts identified in the preliminary environmental review, and evaluate the risks posed to childrens health, public health, and the environment based on the contamination or impacts found. The comprehensive environmental review also includes developing preliminary plans and cost estimates for mitigating or reducing risks. The environmental professional should prepare draft reports of onsite contamination, investigation results, offsite hazards and project environmental impacts. The LEA should release those drafts for public comment. The environmental professional should then prepare final drafts that take into account public comments. The final drafts should be subject to review and approval by the SSC and LEA. ! Opportunities for Meaningful Public Involvement Review and comment on the draft versions of the comprehensive environmental review report Request a response to public comments from the LEA and review the resulting final draft of the comprehensive environmental review report Request and attend any scheduled public meetings to discuss project impacts If the final comprehensive environmental review report includes proposals for mitigation measures e.g., additional sidewalks, enhanced filtration in the heating, ventilating and air conditioning system, institutional controls, review preliminary cost estimates and schedules of implementation for any remediation of onsite contamination and provide input on implications of the suitability of that site for a school
Comprehensive Environmental Review/Site Selection (see Section 5.7)
29

LEA Activity Description of Activity If the LEA decides to proceed with a site where contamination will be cleaned up, a remedial action workplan should be developed and submitted to the state or tribal regulatory agency for approval, typically with the help of an environmental professional. The remedial action workplan should identify and recommend methods for cleaning up the site to contaminant levels that meet the applicable safety standards and should clearly describe the responsibilities and longterm environmental stewardship obligations of the LEA or other responsible parties for inspection, maintenance and reporting associated with any engineering or institutional control implemented as part of the cleanup. The remedial action workplan should also include a preliminary longterm stewardship plan LTSP. ! Opportunities for Meaningful Public Involvement Participate in the public hearing on the draft remedial action workplan, which the LEA should conduct in the neighborhood or jurisdiction where the candidate site is located, at a time and location convenient for community residents, with interpretation services provided as needed Review and comment on the draft remedial action workplan during the public comment period and request a response to comments from the LEA Community input is important on remedial action workplan issues such as: ! Sufficiency of remedial response Timeline for remedial work Cost estimates for remedial work Effects of remedial actions on the community and daily life traffic, noise, etc.
Develop Site specific Mitigation/ Remediation (Cleanup) Measures (see Section 5.8)
! !

30 | MeaningfulPublicInvolvement

LEA Activity Description of Activity Prior to the onset of any school construction on the candidate site, EPA recommends that the remediation of the site, as defined in the remedial action workplan, be completed. If engineering or institutional controls are required as part of remediation, construction of those controls may begin following approval by the state or tribal environmental regulatory agency. ! Opportunities for Meaningful Public Involvement Review and comment on documentation regarding the implementation of the plan and all final sampling results Any modifications to the remedial action workplan should also go through the appropriate public review processes Review and comment on the revised LTSP, which should detail specific engineering and institutional controls, if applicable see Section 8.14 Suggest adding a public accountability/oversight plan to the LTSP to ensure longterm public and institutional memory of the LTSP through activities designed to promote awareness by students, staff and the community, including signage at the site and reporting measures Consider forming a public oversight committee to ensure that periodic reviews are conducted on the effectiveness of remedial measures and any engineering and institutional controls that are used at the site Provide the LEA and tribe or state with a list of community contacts to be notified if a problem arises. Ensure there is a contact person for the community to go to with concerns related to facility maintenance or monitoring
Implement Remedial/ Mitigation Measures (see Section 5.8)
Longterm Maintenance and Monitoring (see Section 5.10)
LEAs should incorporate key components of the longterm stewardship plan into other facilities and operational plans and training materials for principals, facilities staff, groundskeepers and contractors. This plan describes in detail the specific manner in which institutional and engineering controls will be employed in the future, and by whom.
31

32 | MeaningfulPublicInvolvement
4. Environmental Siting Criteria Considerations

4.1. Overview
Schoollocationplaysanintegralroleincreating healthy,safeschoolsthatsupporthighquality educationandpromotesustainableandhealthy communities.Inordertoreachthesegoals,the localeducationagency(LEA)(seeSection10),in concertwiththeschoolsitingcommittee(SSC) (seeSection3.3)andwithmeaningfulpublic involvement(seeSection3),shouldidentify criteriathatwillbeusedtoevaluateboththe presentcharacteristicsandpossiblefuture characteristicsofalllocationsbeingconsidered fortheschool.Characteristicsofsurrounding propertiesandcurrentandplannedzoningand landusesnearthelocationshouldbeevaluated. Carefulassessmenttakestime,buttheimportance ofschoolsitingdecisionsjustifiestheattention andtheneedforsustainedpublicinvolvementto ensurethatthelocationmeetstheneedsofthe communityandhascommunitysupport. Thissectionincludesinformationonthefollowing generalareasofconsiderationfordecidingwhere tolocateaschool: ! ! Whetheranewschoolisneeded (seeSection4.2.2); Whetherthenewschoolwillbeahigh performance/greenschool(seeSection4.2.3);
Whethersomecandidatelocationsincrease environmentalhealthorsafetyrisks (seeSection4.3.1); Implicationsoftheschoollocationfor transportationoptions(seeSection4.3.3); OptionsfordevelopingSafeRoutestoSchool Programsthatcansupportalternativemodes oftransportation(seeSection4.3.4);and Thepotentialuseoftheschoolasan emergencyshelter(seeSection4.3.5).
! !
Balancingthemanycriteriaandpotentially conflictingcharacteristicsofcandidatelocations canbeverycomplex.Forexample,inmosturban areas,potentialschoollocationsthatare accessibletothecommunitymayhavebeen previouslyusedforotherpurposesthatmay presentenvironmentalhazards.Further,theymay belocatedinproximitytosourcesofpotential environmentalhealthandsafetyconcerns,suchas highways,railyards,awiderangeoflightand heavyindustriesandotherfacilitiesthat,under idealcircumstances,wouldnotbelocatedneara schoolorotherfacilitiesusedforchildren'scare. Sitesthathavenotpreviouslybeendeveloped oftencalledgreenfields(seeSection10)are oftennotideallylocatedintermsof environmentalimpactandtransportationoptions. Integratingcommunitycenteredschoolsinto existingresidentialneighborhoodsoftenallows forbetterenvironmental,community,economic, educationalandpublichealthoutcomes.These communitycenteredschoolsallowchildren, facultyandstafftowalkorbiketoandfromthe schoolandusepublictransportationoptions, whenavailable.Theseschoolsalsooftentake advantageofpreviousinvestmentsin infrastructureandaddtothevibrancyandvitality ofacommunity.
EnvironmentalSitingCriteriaConsiderations |
33
Somecandidateschoollocationsmayhaverealor perceivedenvironmentalchallenges.Whilethe priorusesandpotentialforonsitecontamination andimpactsfromnearbysourcesforsome candidatelocationsmaybeknown,inothercases, determiningtheseissuesatcandidatesites requiresinvestigation.Thechallengesofpotential environmentalhazardsassociatedwithsitescan beovercomeinmany,althoughnotallinstances. Technicalassistanceandoversightfromstate, tribalandlocalenvironmental,publichealthand planningagenciescanhelpcommunitiesevaluate potentialenvironmentalandpublichealth concernsatspecificsites.Athoroughevaluationof suchconcernswillhelpcommunities,LEAs,and local,tribalandstateleaderschooselocationsthat canachievemultipleobjectivesfromschool facilityinvestmentswhileminimizingpotentially adverseenvironmentalandhealthissues. Assessingandbalancingmultiplepotentialrisks andbenefitswhileconsideringrenovationor expansionofanexistingfacilityorprospective newsitesisnotasimpletask,andthereisno singletoolavailabletoaccomplishit.The followingsections,IdentifyDesirableSchool LocationAttributes(seeSection4.3),and ConsiderEnvironmentalHazards(seeSection 4.4),highlightconsiderationsthatshouldbetaken intoaccountaslocalcommunitiesestablishtheir ownschoolsitingcriteria,andtheEnvironmental ReviewProcesssection(seeSection5)ofthe guidelinesdescribesaprocessforidentifyingand assessingenvironmentalhazards. strategiesandpoliciesthatsupportfuturegrowth anddevelopment. 35Developmentofalongrange schoolfacilitiesplancanhelpLEAstoidentify importantprojectionsoflongtermschooland communityneedssuchasstudentenrollment, operationalcostsandinfrastructuretousein makingschoolsitingdecisions.LEAsshould engagewithplanningcommissions,boardsof supervisorsand/orcitycouncilsfromtheoutset todeveloplongrangeschoolfacilitiesplansthat linktoandcomplementcomprehensive communityplans.Throughthislinkage,thelong rangeschoolfacilitiesplanwouldincorporate communitygrowthandtheschooldistrictatlarge intheschoolsitingprocess,ratherthan consideringthepotentialschoollocationsin isolationfromotherimportantcommunity planningissues. EPAencouragesLEAstopreparealongrange schoolfacilitiesplanthatdoesthefollowing: ! ! ! Projectsschooldistrictenrollmentsforthe foreseeablefuture(e.g.,520years); Identifiesexistingschoolinfrastructure thatmayneedtobeimprovedorreplaced; Establishestheneedforadditional instructionalormultiusespace,ifany, basedonprojections; Workswithlocalauthoritiestoconsider broadercommunityneedssuchasemergency shelters,communitymeetingspace,sports andrecreation; Developsaplanformeetingnewspace needsthatincludesvariousapproachessuch asrenovatingorreconstructingschool facilitiesonexistingschoolgrounds, constructingschoolbuildingsonnewly acquiredsitesandleasingspaceinexisting buildings; Includesapproximatedatesforopening newschoolfacilities;
San Diego Unified School District, LongRange Facility Master
4.2. Before the Siting Process Begins

4.2.1. Develop a Longrange School Facilities Plan Schoolsitingdecisionsshouldbeintegratedwith broadercommunityplanningefforts,including transportation,healthcare,libraries,parksand historicdistricts,tonameafew.Many communitiesacrossthecountryusedatadriven, communitybasedprocessestocreateand implementcomprehensiveplansthatsetforward
35
Plan." Available at: http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/82/Lon g_Range_Facilities_Master_Plan/Section_1/ALL_Section1.pdf.
34
| EnvironmentalSitingCriteriaConsiderations
! ! Targetsenrollmentsizebytypeoffacility; and Factorsinotherlocalandregional planningcyclesandpotentialfundingor resourcestreams,suchasconnectionswith existingornewstreet,park,residentialor commercialinfrastructure. trafficcongestion,operationandmaintenance, environmentalcleanup,necessaryinfrastructure improvementsandlongtermmonitoringand maintenancecosts.Inaddition,renovationand/or expansionofanexistingbuildingcanbepartofa communityrevitalizationeffortorserveasan impetusforstartingabroaderrevitalizationeffort. Sitingpoliciesthatdiscouragerenovationor expansionofexistingschoolsandfavorbuilding largernewschoolscancontributeto disinvestmentinexistingneighborhoods.This disinvestmentfurthercontributestothephysical, socialandeconomicdeclineseeninmany neighborhoodswherealargepercentageoflow income,AfricanAmericanandHispanicorLatino studentslive. 36 Considertakingthefollowingactionstodecide whetheranewschoolisneeded: ! Evaluatetheexistingschoolscurrent facilitiesandpotentialfacilities(through renovation/rehabilitation)andthefullcosts ofalternatives,includingeducational,fiscal, environmentalandpublichealthimpacts. Evaluatetheschoolforhealth, environmentalandsafetyrisksfromboth onsiteandoffsitesourcesofpotential contamination. NOTE:TheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency (EPA)recommendsthatdistrictsperiodically inspectexistingschoolsforpotential environmentalhealthandsafetyrisksusing toolsdesignedforthatpurposesuchasEPA's HealthySchoolEnvironmentsAssessment Tool(HealthySEAT;www.epa. gov/schools/healthyseat/)ortheNIOSH SafetyChecklistProgramforSchools.(www .cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2004101/)Where deficienciesarefound,EPArecommends identifyingandimplementingstepstoreduce studentandstaffexposuretopotential
36
TheLEA'slongrangeplanshouldbereviewedand commentedonbythepublic,includingotherlocal publicentities(e.g.,municipalities,planning departments).Finally,thelongrangeplanshould beapprovedbytheLEA. 4.2.2. Consider Whether a New School Is Needed Thefirstcriteriontoconsideriswhetheranew schoolisneeded.Communitiesshouldconsider renovation,repairand/orexpansionoptions beforedecidingtobuildanewschool.Theterms oldandobsoletearenotsynonymous.Many existingschoolscanberetrofittedwithnew technologiestoexpandtheirusefullife,possiblyat alowercostandwithfewerenvironmental impacts(e.g.,energysavings,lessimpactonopen space)thannewconstruction.Aschoolthatistoo smallforanexistingpopulationmaybeexpanded ormayserveanarrowergradeconfigurationora specialprogram.Usingexistingfacilitiesoffers otherbenefitsthatnewconstructionoftencannot. Forexample,manyolderschoolfacilitieswere builtatatimewhenschoolswereplannedto serveasthefocalpointinaneighborhoodnotonly foreducationbutalsoforcommunityevents, librariesandopenplayfields.Continueduseof existingschoolscanencouragephysicalactivity becausetheyareoftenlocatedinthemost walkableandbikeablepartsofacommunity. Renovatingexistingneighborhoodschoolfacilities canprovideanimpetusforcommunity revitalization,haveanimpactonneighboring propertyvalues,encourageinvestmentinschools bycommunitymembers,andpreserve irreplaceablecommunityassets. Itisimportanttoconsiderbothdirectandindirect costsassociatedwithbuildinginanewlocation, suchasthecostofsiteacquisition,transportation,
AdHoc Coalition for Healthy School Siting, Revising CDE School
Siting Policy Documents: How Californias School Siting Policies Can Support a WorldClass Educational System, Submitted to the California Department of Education by the AdHoc Coalition for Healthy School Siting January 31, 2008. Available at: http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/School_Siting_Policy_Brie f_013108.pdf.
35
hazards,tothemaximumextentpractical(see Section9.14). ! Evaluatethephysicalcharacteristicsof existingschoolsfortheirpotentialtomeet changingcommunityneeds.Istheschool ideallylocatedtoserveresidentsofthe community,includingseniorcitizens? Evaluatetheeffectontheeducationaland socialdevelopmentofthestudentsinthe communityofconstructinganewbuilding, renovatingorexpandinganexistingfacilityor closingaschool. Evaluatetheongoingvalueofaschool buildingasapublicassetandidentifyhow thecommunityintheimmediatevicinityof theschoolwillbeaffectedbyrenovatingthe school,buildinganewschoolorclosingthe school.Istheschoolatreasuredpartofthe town?Isthebuildingalandmarkthatdefines theneighborhood? Conductananalysisofschoolsystem operationsavingsandcoststhatwouldbe anticipatedfromrenovating,buildingor closingaschool. Considerpotentialincreasesin transportationcoststhatwouldcomefrom movingtheschooltoanew,moredistant location,includinginfrastructure(additional buses,busstops,streetimprovements,traffic signals,etc.),fuel,increasedairpollutant emissionsfrombusesandprivatelyowned vehiclesandtrafficcongestion. Determineiftheschoolisaccessibleto students,facultyandotheremployeeswith disabilities(i.e.,AmericanswithDisabilities Act(ADA)andSection504compliant).Ifnot, whatwouldbethecostofretrofittinganolder inaccessiblebuildingsothatitmeetsADAand Section504requirements? Evaluatestatedpreferences,goalsand alternativeswithinacommunitys comprehensiveplan,projectedcapital investmentsininfrastructureandother strategicinvestmentcommitments. Evaluatethecapacityofexisting infrastructure.Ifyoubuildanewschool,will thefacilitybeonpublicwaterandsewer?If theLEAexpandsanexistingschoolonawell ! andsepticsystem,canthesepticfieldbe expanded? Consideropportunitiestopartnerwith othergovernmentservices(e.g.,parks, healthclinicsandlibraries)thatcanhelp promotewellnessandactivetransportation choices. Planhowtoensurethesafetyofthe childrenintheexistingschoolduring renovationandconstruction.Ifmajor renovationisundertakenoranewbuildingis builtonanexistingsite,thereisthepotential forsignificantdisruptionofconstructionand demolitionmaterials.Itisimportantthatbest managementpracticesareusedduring renovationandconstructiontoprevent exposuretothesematerials.
Moreinformationonrenovatingolderandhistoric buildings,environmentalcleanupandcommunity planningcanbefoundontheResourcespageof theguidelineswebsite.(www.epa.gov/ schools/siting/resources.html#LINKS_community _planning) 4.2.3. Consider Whether the New School Will Be a High Performance/Green School Morethanever,technology,expertiseandpublic supportexisttoallowcommunitiestobuild superiorlearningenvironmentsthatcansupport higherachievementandprovidehealthier learningenvironmentswhilealsosavingenergy, resourcesandsignificantamountsofmoney.Often referredtoashealthyhighperformanceschools orgreenschools(seeSection10),theseare facilitiesthatintegrateallaspectsofthedesign processstartingwithselectionofthedesignteam andtheschoollocationtodesignschoolsthat meetmultipleeducational,environmentaland communitygoals.Theenvironmentalgoalsofsuch facilitiesincludeenergyandwaterefficiency, healthyindoorair,safermaterialsselection (includinglifecyclecostconsideration),and reducedenvironmentalimpactfromtheschool. Thetechnologiesandpracticesusedtoachieve thesegoalsareoftenintegratedintothe curriculumandotherstudentlearning opportunities.
36
LEAscanuseelementsfromgreenratingsystems, suchastheU.S.GreenBuildingCouncils LeadershipinEnergyandEnvironmentalDesign (LEED;www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx? CategoryID=19)forSchoolsRatingSystemandthe CollaborativeforHighPerformanceSchools. (CHPS;www.chps.net/dev/Drupal/node)Both LEEDandCHPSrateschoolsbasedonsustainable siteselectionanddevelopment,indoor environmentalquality,materialsandresources, energyatmosphere,waterefficiencyand innovation.Becausehighperformance/green schoolsarebasedontheprincipleofintegrated design,inwhichallaspectsoftheschoolare designedwithaclearunderstandingofhowthe varioussystemsanddecisionsaffecteachother, thedecisiontobuildagreenschoolorrenovatean existingschooltomeetgreenstandardsshouldbe madebeforeestablishingsitingcriteria. Toensurethatanewschoolisenergyefficient, LEAscandesignittoearntheENERGYSTAR(see www.energystar.gov/newbuildingdesign).Building orientationandshadingstrategiesandrenewable energytechnologies,suchasgeothermalheat pumps,windturbinesandsolarpanels,canhelp increaseenergyefficiencyandreducegreenhouse gasemissions.EPAencourageslocalgovernments andcommunitiestoinvestigateand,where appropriate,integratehealthyhighperformance schoolorgreenschoolprinciplesintotheirlocation selectionandschoolplanningandoperation processes.Linkstomoreinformationongreen building(www.epa.gov/greenbuilding)are availableontheResourcespageoftheguidelines website.(www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources) Thefocusoftheseguidelinesisonschoolsiting, buttherearemanytoolsandresourcesavailable toensurethatschoolenvironmentsarehealthy throughoutthelifecycleoftheschoolbuilding. EPAhasaconsiderablebodyofguidanceand regulationsthatarespecificallygearedtoward existingschools,whichisavailableat www.epa.gov/schools.EPArecommendsthat districtsperiodicallyinspectexistingschoolsfor potentialenvironmentalhealthandsafetyrisks frombothonsiteandnearbyhazardsusingtools designedforthatpurpose.TheseincludeEPA's HealthySchoolEnvironmentsAssessmentTool (HealthySEAT;www.epa.gov/schools/ healthyseat/)ortheNIOSHSafetyChecklist ProgramforSchools.(www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/ 2004101/)Wheredeficienciesarefound,EPA recommendsidentifyingandimplementingsteps toreducestudentandstaffexposuretopotential hazards(seeSection9.14),tothemaximumextent practical.Insomecases,schoolspecific improvementscanreducepotentialhazards;in othercases,suchaswidespreadairpollutionor waterqualityissues,acommunitywideapproach maybecalledfor.
4.3. Identify Desirable School Location Attributes

Stateandlocalpoliciesandpracticesshould supportschoollocationsthatpromotehealthy peopleandhealthybehaviors,includingphysical activity,healthyenvironments,andhealthy communities.Schoolsitingdecisionsinfluence growthanddevelopmentpatternsandare influencedbythesepatterns.Manycommunities acrossthecountryareincreasinglyinterestedin ensuringthatgrowthanddevelopmentmeet multiplecommunitygoals,includingimproving publichealth;supportingrevitalizationefforts; strengtheningfiscalresponsibility;increasing transportationchoices;providingopportunitiesto live,work,playandattendschoolinconvenient locations;andlimitingemissionsofgreenhouse gases,criteriaairpollutantsandairtoxics. Selectinghealthy,safeschoollocationsinthe neighborhoodsofthestudentstheschoolsserve helpsmeetmanyofthesegoals(seeExhibit4: DesirableAttributesofCandidateLocations). Communitycenteredschoolsencouragestudents towalkandbikebetweenhome,schooland centersofcommunityactivity.Inaddition, locationsthatallowcommunityaccesstoschool playgroundsandfacilitiesencouragephysical activityoutsideofschooltime.Thelocationof schoolsinneighborhoodsmayallowmore childrentoparticipateinafterschoolactivities suchasclubs,intramuralandphysicalactivity
37
clubs,interscholasticsportsoractivities sponsoredbythecommunityatlocallibraries, parksandcommunitycenters.Asdiscussedin Principle3(seeSection1.4.3)intheAboutthe Guidelinessection(seeSection1),schoolslocated withinneighborhoodscanalsoincreaseaccessto publictransportationforstudents,facultyand staffintheneighborhoodandinsurrounding communities. 37,38 4.3.1. Select Locations That Do Not Increase Environmental Health or Safety Risks Duringtheinitialscreenofcandidatelocations, theLEAandSSCshouldseektoavoidlocations thatareeitheronorareincloseproximitytoland usesthatmaybeincompatiblewithschools,if acceptablealternativesitesexistwithinthe neighborhood(s)beingservedbythenewschool. Theseincompatiblelandusesmayinclude contaminatedsitesthathavenotbeenremediated (i.e.,cleanedup)toatleastaresidentialuse standard,clustersofindustrialfacilities,orother potentialhazardsidentifiedinExhibit6:Screening PotentialEnvironmental,PublicHealthandSafety. Thesection,ConsiderEnvironmentalHazards(see Section4.4),describessomeprinciplesusedto defineenvironmentalcriteriaandthetypical environmentalandsafetyissuesthattheschool sitingprocessshouldconsiderandaddressto ensurethatthelocationchosendoesnotpose unacceptableenvironmentalandpublichealth risks. implementingbothsitespecificandcommunity wideexposureandriskreductionstrategiesto protectthehealthandsafetyofstudentsandstaff. TheLEAandSSCshouldconsultwithregional planningauthoritiestobecognizantoffuture plansfordevelopmentorfacilitiesthatmayresult inenvironmentalorhealththreatstotheschool location(e.g.,largeindustrialfacilities).Exhibit5: FactorsInfluencingExposuresandPotentialRisks, introducessomepotentialmitigationoptionsfor potentialenvironmental,safetyandhealth hazards. 4.3.2. Locate Schools Near Populations and Infrastructure Considerestablishingcleargoalsandcriteriato givepreferencetolocationsnearexisting populationsandclosetofacilitiesand infrastructurethatsupportschoolprogramsto minimizetransportationandinfrastructurecosts andtheirrelatedenvironmental,economic,public healthandsustainabilityimpacts.Additional schoolcapacityandthelocationofnewschools ofteninfluencethelocationofresidential development. 39Schoollocationisacriticalaspect ofqualitycommunityplanning.Schoolsbuilton thefringesofcommunitiescancontributeto outwardmigrationfromcitycenters,whichcan causedisinvestmentinexistingneighborhoods andcanhurtlocaleconomies.Thisphenomenonis particularlycommonwhennewschoolsites requiretheextensionofinfrastructure,making undevelopedareasmoreattractiveforresidential andcommercialdevelopment. Flexibilitywithrespecttoschoolsizeandsitesize allowscommunitiestoretainandupgrade(or replaceonthesamesite,whennecessary)existing schools.Smallerschoolstendtobeeasiertolocate nearpopulationcenters,minimizing transportationneedsandcommutingexposuresto trafficrelatedairpollution.Goalsandcriteriato
Ifnoalternativelocationsexist,itiscritically importantthattheLEAandSSCfullyexplainthe absenceofalternativesinatransparentmanner andfullyengagethepublicinidentifyingand

37
Ariel H. Bierbaum, Jeffrey M. Vincent and Deborah L. McKoy,
Putting Schools on the Map: Linking TransitOriented Development, Families, and Schools in the San Francisco Bay Area, Center for Cities and Schools, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California Berkeley (June 2010. Available at: http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/Putting%20Schools%20o n%20the%20Map_Final_Jul10_appendices.pdf.
38
Ariel H. Bierbaum, Jeffrey M. Vincent and Deborah L. McKoy,
Linking TransitOriented Development, Families and Schools. Community Investments Summer 2010 22:2. 1821. Available at: www.frbsf.org/publications/community/investments/1008/A_Bierbau m.pdf.
39
Upper Grand District School Board, Planning Department
Frequently Asked Questions. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: http://www.ugdsb.on.ca/planning/article.aspx?id=4722.
38
givepreferencetolocationsnearexisting populationsinclude: ! Avoidingbuildingschoolsinremote locationsthatarenotaccessiblebywalking, bikingandpublictransportation; Maximizingproximitytoprogramsupport facilitiessuchascommunitymuseums, theaters,libraries,programcenters, recreationalandenrichmentactivitiesand downtowncommercialareas; Developingjointuseagreements(see Section10)tofacilitateschoolaccessto communityfacilitiesandtoallowcommunity accesstoschoolfacilities; Consideringproximitytootherschools. Theremaybelocalreasonstominimizeor maximizedistancebetweenschools,suchas thedesiretopromotediversityorreduce isolationintheLEA'sschools;and Avoidinglocationsthatwillrequirenew infrastructuresuchasroads,water/seweror utilities. isthatthechildwillwalkorbiketoschool,and thatvirtuallynochildrenwalkovertwomilesto school. 40,41Connectingaschooltoanetworkof sidewalks,bikepathsandotherinfrastructure encouragesphysicalactivitybymakingwalkingor bikingsafeandenjoyable.Itisalsoimportantto providewalkingandbikingroutesthatdonot bringchildrenclosetolargeroads,highwaysand othermajorpollutionsources(forbothhealthand safetyconcerns).Sitesize,locationanddesignall playaroleindeterminingwhetherwalkingor bikingwillbeanoptionforstudents.Locations thatprovideaccessforstudentsandstaffvia publictransitwillalsoreducevehicleuseaswell aspotentiallypromoteincreasedphysicalactivity ingettingtothetransitstopsfrombothhomeand school. Transportationcosts,eithertotheschooldistrict ortothefamiliesitserves,arealsoimportantto consider.Forexample,transportationcoststothe districtcanincludethecosttopurchase,maintain andstorebuses;thecostoffuelandpersonnel; andthecostassociatedwithanincreaseinschool busmileage.Thecoststofamiliesmaybedirect (e.g.,afeeforstudentstoridethebus)orindirect (e.g.,transportationrelatedtaxesandfuelcosts associatedwithpersonallytransportingtheir childrentoschool).Thesitingprocessshouldalso accountfortransportationcostexternalities,such asthehealthimplicationsofexposuretoexhaust whileridingtheschoolbusorfromidlingvehicles. Lowincomeandminorityfamiliescanbe especiallyimpactedbytransportationcostssince childrenmaynothavetheoptionofbeingdriven toschoolandoftenneedtowalk,bike,usethe schoolbusortakepublictransportation.This reinforcestheneedtolocateschoolswithin reasonabledistanceandprovideasafebikingand
40
Locatingaschoolinthecommunityitservesmay resultinproximitytopollutionsources.Such situationsshouldbeaddressedbyconsidering informationonassociatedhazardsandthe availabilityandeffectivenessofmitigationoptions foraddressingtheenvironmentalhazards,aswell asthepotentialadditionalcostandtimeinvolved. Similaranalysesforalternativeoptionsfor locatingtheschoolshouldbemade.Withthat information,communitiesshouldseektobalance thebenefitsofacommunitycenteredschoolwith anypotentialenvironmentalandpublichealth risks. 4.3.3. Consider Implications of the School Location on Transportation Options Transportationisamajorfactorinaschools overallenvironmentalimpact.Schoolsthatoffer moretransportationchoicescanreducethe amountoflandthatispaved,reduceautomobile andbustrafficandpollutionandencourage walkingorbikingtoschool.Scientificliteratureon schooltravelshowsclearlythatthefarthera schoolisfromachildsresidence,thelesslikelyit
Lawrence Frank and Company, Inc., Youth Travel to School:
Community Design Relationships with Mode Choice, Vehicle Emissions, and Healthy Body Weight, Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, December 2008. Available at: www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/pdf/youth_travel.pdf.
41
Noreen C. McDonald, Active Transportation to School: Trends
Among U.S. Schoolchildren, 19692001, American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2007 32:6. 509516. Available at: http://dot.ga.gov/localgovernment/FundingPrograms/srts/Document s/news/Trends_Among_US_School_Children.pdf.
39
walkingenvironmentforthesepopulations.LEAs shouldalsoconsiderhowthesecostsmaychange overthelifeoftheschool. Communitiesshouldconsiderestablishinggoals andcriteriatogivepreferencetolocationsthat willpromotealternativemodesoftransportation, includingwalkingorbiking.Minimumacreage requirements,schoolfundingformulasand buildingcodesoftenfavorconstructionofnew schoolsovertherenovationofexisting neighborhoodschools;however,givingpreference tolocationsthatwillpromotetheuseofpublic transportation,walkingorbikingorthatrequire shorterdrivingdistanceswillreduce transportationcostsforlocalgovernment,aswell asparentsandcaregivers. 42Schoolconsolidation policiesshouldbecarefullyexaminedfortheir impactonschooltransportationandstudents' physicalactivity. Innewlocations,schoolscanbedesignedto encourageintegrationwithfuturedevelopments byestablishingstreetpatterns,sidewalksandtrail networksthatsupportwalkingandbikingas surroundingdevelopmentsareconstructed.This canhappenbothaspartofthedesignand constructionoftheschoolcampusandasaresult ofsubdivisionregulationsguidingdevelopment withinpotentialwalkingandbikingdistancefrom aschoolsboundary. TheSSCshouldassesswalkabilityandbikeability oftheareasurroundingeachschoollocation underconsiderationandevaluatethepotential longtermhealtheffectsofcandidatelocationson thestudentsandstaff. 43Adetailedexampleof howtoassessthebikeability/walkabilityof candidatelocationscanbefoundintheActive
42
SchoolNeighborhoodChecklist (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LI NKS_cleanup_regulations_and_processes) developedinArizona.Theaimofthechecklististo providedecisionmakerswithaquantitativetool forevaluatingthepotentiallongtermhealth impactsofcandidateschoollocationsonthe childrenwhowillattendthem.LEAsmayalso wishtoconsiderconductingahealthimpact assessmentthatseekstobalancethehealth impactsofplanningprojectalternatives,for examplechangesoftransportationonair pollutionandhealthrisks.Informationabout healthimpactassessmentscanbefoundonthe Resourcespageoftheguidelineswebsite. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LI NKS_health_impact_assesments) Bycompletinganassessmentforproposedor existingschoollocationsandcomparingthem, LEAsmayfindthatonelocationisclearly preferabletootherswithregardtobikingand walkingpotentialand/orhealthimpacts.LEAs shouldtaketheresultsofsuchassessmentsinto considerationwhenselectingschoollocationsor decidingwhethertomovefromanexisting location.Ifthereisonlyonecandidatelocation,it isstillrecommendedthatanassessmentof walkability/bikeabilitybeconducted. Ifwalkingroutesforalocationareunsatisfactory, theschooldistrictshouldconsideranother locationorworkwiththecityorcountytohave safewalkingroutesinstalledbeforeopeningthe school.Neworrenovatedschoolscanactasan impetusforretrofittingorrepairingsidewalkand biketrailnetworksinexistingcommunities.Some localitiesmayusedifferentmetricsandrulesfor determiningwalking/bikingboundaries,and somemayprioritizecompletionorrepairof sidewalksandtrailnetworksnearschool locations.Streetswithinrealisticwalkingor bikingdistanceofthelocationshouldincludeclear pedestrianpathways,bicycleroutes,andspeed controlmeasures(e.g.,trafficcalming,design speeds).
43
Safe Routes to School Program Arizona Department of
Transportation, Active School Neighborhood Checklist, Arizona Department of Transportation, ver. 14, August 6, 2010. Available at: http://www.adotenhancement.com/SafeRoutes/PDF/Documents_Activ e_School_Neighborhood_Checklist.pdf.
40
Commonlyacceptedmaximumwalking/biking distancesare: ! ! ! Elementaryschools:mileradiusaround school; Middleschools:1mileradiusaroundschool; and Highschools:1mileradiusaroundschool.
4.3.4. Plan for and Develop Safe Routes to School Programs that Can Support Alternative Modes of Transportation Agrowingnumberofcommunitiesare implementingmeasurestoimprovethesafetyof walkingandbikingtoschool.Manyschools participateinaprogramfundedbytheU.S. DepartmentofTransportation(DOT)calledSafe RoutestoSchool(www.nhtsa.gov/People/ Injury/Pedbimot/Bike/SafeRoutes2004/Index), whichencouragesbothinfrastructure improvementsandeducationprogramstohelp morechildrensafelywalkorbiketoandfrom school.Inadditiontothefederallyfunded program,manyschoolsoffersimilarprograms (alsocalledsafepassagesorwalktoschool programs)thatfacilitateandencouragesafe walkingandbikingtoschool.Theseprograms ofteneducatecommunitymembers,families, students,administrators,facultyandstaffonthe benefitsofwalkingandbikingtoschoolandon approachestomakewalkingandbikingtoschool asafealternative.Relatedeffortsinclude improvementstoexistinginfrastructurethat
TheexampleinExhibit3,adaptedfromthe ActiveSchoolNeighborhoodChecklistcreated bytheArizonaDepartmentofTransportation (www.adotenhancement.com/SafeRoutes/PDF/D ocuments_Active_School_Neighborhood_Checklist. pdf),showsamiddleschoolenrollmentareathat exceedsonemileinradiusandcreatesa prohibitivelylongwalking/bikingtripforstudents wholiveintheshadedareas.
Exhibit3:ExampleEnrollmentAreathatCreatesaProhibitivelyLongWalking/Biking TripforSomeStudents
41
makeroutestoschoolsaferandmoreconvenient forwalkingandbiking.Moreinformationabout SafeRoutestoSchoolsProgramscanbefoundon theResourcespageoftheguidelineswebsite. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LI NKS_Community_planning) Whenplanningforanewschoollocation,theLEA andtheSSCshouldconsiderensuringthatsafe routestoschoolexistforchildrentobikeand walk.Inaddition,transitconnectionsnearwalking andbikingroutesmayfacilitatetheiruseoutside oftheimmediateschoolneighborhood.Factors relatedtowalkingandbikingthatshouldbe consideredinclude: ! Thelikelihoodthatbikelanesandpaths, adequatesidewalksandcrosswalkswill bedeveloped; Relevance of Childhood Obesity to School Locations Today, nearly one in every three or more than 23 million children in the United States is overweight 44 or obese, and physical inactivity contributes to this. Children who carry their obesity into adolescence have up to an 80percent chance of developing an associated chronic disease e.g., high 45 blood pressure, high cholesterol and diabetes. This childhood obesity epidemic is the result of the 46 interaction of three identified factors: genetics, behavior and environment. Two of these factors are associated with an everdecreasing amount of physical activity in the lives of our children due, in part, to how our communities are built. For example, a lack of sidewalks, safe bike paths and parks in neighborhoods can discourage children from walking or biking to school as well as from participating in physical activity. While childhood obesity does not discriminate across race and ethnicity, studies show that a disproportionate number of minority children are overweight and obese; while 30.7 percent of white children ages 2 to 19 are considered obese or overweight, 34.9 percent of AfricanAmerican children and 38 percent of MexicanAmerican children are considered 47 so. Physical activity is especially important for youth not only because of its immediate health and academic benefits, but also because participation in physical activity tracks from youth into 48 adulthood. See Principle 3 see Section 1.4.3 in the About the Guidelines section for further discussion see Section 1.
44
Accesstobuildingentrancesforpedestrians andbikerswithoutcrossingbuszones, parkingentrances,orstudentdropoffand pickupareas; Connectivitytotransitlinesforstudents outsidetheimmediateneighborhoodofa school; Busflowplansthatensurepedestrianand bikesafety; Accessibilityforparents,students,teachers andstaffwithdisabilities;and Walkingandbikingroutesthatdonotcrossor runadjacenttohighways,otherlarge roadwaysandtransportationfacilities(e.g., raillines),andotherlargepollutionsources.
! ! !
American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Environmental Health, The Built Environment: Designing Communities to Promote Physical Activity in Children, Pediatrics June 2009 123:6. 15911598. Online article available at: http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;123/6/1591.
45 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, The Surgeon Generals Call to Action to Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, 2001. Available at:: www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/CalltoAction.pdf. 46 47
Ibid.
Cynthia L. Ogden, Margaret D. Carroll and Katherine M. Flegal, High Body Mass Index for Age Among U.S. Children and Adolescents, 2003 2006, Journal of the American Medical Association, Washington, DC May 2008 299:20. 24012405.
48
R.M. Malina, Institute for the Study of Youth Sports, Michigan State University, Tracking of physical activity and physical fitness across the lifespan, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport September 1996 67Suppl 3. S4857. Available at: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8902908.
42
4.3.5. Consider the Potential Use of the School as an Emergency Shelter Althoughschoolsarebuiltwithaprimarymission ofprovidingeducationservicestoyouth,schools can,andoftendo,servemultiplepurposesfor theircommunities.Schoolslocatedanddesigned towithstandnaturaldisastersandterrorist attacksnotonlyprotectstudents,facultyandstaff fromharm,butcanalsoserveasemergency sheltersintheimmediateaftermathofadisaster, particularlywhenproperemergency preparednessplansarecoordinatedamongschool officials,localemergencymanagementauthorities andvoluntaryrelieforganizations(suchasthe AmericanRedCross).Insomejurisdictions,itmay berequiredorencouragedforcertainschool facilitiestobedesignedoravailabletoserveasan emergencyshelterforthecommunity. Forsomecommunities,schoolsmaybethebest suitedstructuretoserveasapostdisastershelter. Schoolsfrequentlycontaingymnasiumsorother largemultipurposespacesthatcanshelterlarge numbersofresidentsandfrequentlyhavefood preparationandstoragecapacity.Further,school buildinglocationstendtobewellknownamong residentsandsitedwithinthecommunitiesthey serve.Becauseschoolsarepublicproperty,the financialcostsofusingschoolfacilities temporarilyareoftenminimal.Thus,choosinga schoollocationthatiscentraltothecommunity andeasilyaccessibletoresidentscanaidin disasterpreparedness,planningandrecovery.
4.3.6.
Summary
Exhibit4:DesirableAttributesofCandidate Locationsisintendedtosummarizesomeofthe importantattributesforcommunitiestoconsider inidentifyingcandidatesitesforschool.
TheFederalEmergencyManagementAgency,the DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,the RedCrossandothergovernmentalandnon governmentalentitieshavetranslatedthelessons learnedfromHurricaneKatrinaandsubsequent disastersintobetterplanningandoperational considerationsforbothemergencyandlonger termcommunityshelters.Linkstotheseresources areavailableintheemergencyplanningsectionof theResourcespageoftheguidelineswebsite. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.htmll#LI NKS_emergency_planning_and_response)
43
Exhibit4:DesirableAttributesofCandidateLocations Feature No unacceptable environmental or public health risks Description Poses the least potential for exposure and risks to children and staff from pollutants in air, soil and water Distance Site specific Recommendation Conduct thorough and transparent environmental review of environmental risks Potential Benefit ! Reduced risks to children and staff ! Avoid remediation costs ! Reduced potential liability and disruption due to environmental issues References and 49 Resources Meaningful Public Involvement (see Section 3) Environmental Review Process (see Section 5) Evaluating Impacts of Nearby Sources of Air Pollution (see Section 6) Quick Guide to Environmental Issues (see Section 8) Community facilities Nearby community facilities, parks, public pools, etc. mile Locate school such that neighborhood resources are within walking/biking distance of schools and/or joint use is available onsite ! Ability to walk or bike to compatible student resources ! Reduced space required for parking ! Less air pollution ! Increased exercise Community Centered Schools Resources Emergency Planning Resources Green/High Performance School Resources
49
44
Visit the Resources website for additional information www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html.
45
Feature Attendance boundary
Description Area in which most students live
Distance mile to 1 miles
Recommendation Locate school such that a large portion of the student body lives within mile elementary to 1 miles high school of school
Potential Benefit ! Ability to walk or bike to compatible student resources ! Reduced space required for parking ! Reduced bus transportation costs ! Less air pollution ! Increased exercise
References and 49 Resources Community Centered Schools Resources
Neighborhood Presence of sidewalks, access via bike lanes, crosswalks, street transit stops, etc. connectivity and infrastructure
mile
Ensure that safe routes to and from school are available for students
! Ability to walk or bike to compatible student resources ! Reduced space required for parking ! Reduced bus transportation costs ! Less air pollution ! Increased exercise ! Increased pedestrian and bike safety
Community Centered Schools Resources
Sensitive land preservation
Critical habitats, important farmland, parks, etc.
Site specific
Avoid siting new schools ! Preservation of critical land uses on or in close proximity to existing sensitive land uses
Green/High Performance School Resources
Feature Renewable energy
Description Potential to use alternative energy sources such as geothermal heat pumps, solar or wind
Distance Site specific
Recommendation Make use of renewable natural resources for energy generation
Potential Benefit ! Contributes to green energy and sustainability
References and 49 Resources Energy Efficiency/Renewable Energy Resources Green/High Performance School Resources
Public water and sewer
Ability to tap into the Site public water supply and specific sanitary services; review the county sewer and water plan for boundary areas
If your school has to drill a ! Little maintenance or upkeep well and become its own ! No added regulatory or technical water source, it is a Public expertise needed to maintain a Water System and subject water and septic system to the regulations of the ! Less costly to have municipal services Safe Drinking Water Act. If your school is on a septic system, you will need to determine if the soils are suitable according to tribal, state, municipal and/or county regulations.
Water
Other infrastructure
Presence or absence of Site adequate roads, specific adequate traffic lights and telecommunication infrastructure
Take advantage of previous investments in infrastructure
! Avoided or reduced costs of building or extending infrastructure
Community Centered Schools Resources
46
4.4. Consider Environmental Hazards

Theprimarypurposeofestablishing environmentalcriteriaforschoolsitingistoguide thescreeningandevaluationofcandidateschool locationsfornatural,safetyandenvironmental hazardstoidentifythelocationthatposesthe leastpotentialhealthandsafetyrisktostudents andstaffandfinancialrisktothecommunity. Whilethetypicalstepsandproceduresthat shouldbeincludedinaneffectiveenvironmental reviewaredescribedintheEnvironmental ReviewProcesssection(seeSection5),this sectiondescribessomeprinciplesusedtodefine environmentalcriteriaandthetypical environmentalandsafetyissuesthattheschool sitingprocessshouldconsiderandaddressto ensurethatthelocationchosendoesnotpose unacceptableenvironmentalandpublichealth risks.EPAstronglyrecommendsidentifying andevaluatinghazardsassociatedwitha locationpriortotakingtitleorownershipof thatproperty,orinthecaseofleasedspace, priortoexecutingthelease. 4.4.1. Potential Onsite Hazards
Applicability of the Guidelines The school siting guidelines are NOT designed for retroactive application to previous school siting decisions. They are designed to inform and improve the school siting decisionmaking process from this point forward. In developing these guidelines, EPA seeks to strengthen information exchange and cooperation between LEAs, state and tribal education agencies and their environmental counterparts to better serve school children, parents, staff and their communities in providing safe school environments. EPA recommends that districts periodically inspect existing schools for potential environmental health and safety risks using tools designed for that purpose such as EPA's Healthy School Environments Assessment Tool HealthySEAT; www.epa.gov/schools/ healthyseat/ or the NIOSH Safety Checklist Program for Schools. www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2004101/ Where deficiencies are found, steps to reduce student and staff exposure to potential hazards should be identified and implemented see Section 9.13. Documentationofcontaminatedsitescanbe housedinmanydifferentlocations(e.g.,federalor stateenvironmentalregulatoryagency,local healthorplanningdepartment,privateproperty owner).Thiscanmakeitdifficulttofinda completerecordofthecontaminationhistoryat thesite.Effortsareunderwaytoconsolidatethese differentinformationsourcesthroughgeospatial andInternetaccessiblemethods.Currently membersofthepubliccanuseEPAs MyEnvironmentsearchapplication (www.epa.gov/myenvironment)tofindacross sectionofenvironmentalinformationbasedon location.Additionally,membersofthepubliccan contributetotheinformationcollectioneffort throughtheirownrecollectionsasneighborsor
Current or prior site uses AlargenumberofpropertiesintheUnitedStates havebeencontaminatedbypastusesornaturally occurringhazards,suchashighlevelsofarsenicin groundwaterorradoninrockformations.Some ofthesepropertiesfallundertheoversightofEPA, inwhichcaseEPAworkstogetherwithstate, tribalandlocalauthoritiestoassessand remediatethesite.Otherknowncontaminated propertiesmaybeunderthejurisdictionofthe DepartmentofDefense,theDepartmentofEnergy orotherfederallandmanagers,suchasthe BureauofLandManagementortheBureauof IndianAffairsintheDepartmentofInterior,while othersmaybedealtwithdirectlybystate,tribal andlocalauthorities.Thereisalsoanunknown numberofsitesthatmaybecontaminatedbut havenotyetbeenidentifiedbyfederal,state,local ortribalauthorities.
47
employees.Thepublicshouldbeengagedtohelp establishhistoricalusesofpotentialschoolsites andadjacentsitesandtoassessthelikelihoodand possiblepresenceofcontamination.Becausethese groupsmayalsohavefrequentcontactwiththe site,theycansignificantlycontributetoeffortsto ensurecompliancewithsiteuserestrictionsas partoflongtermsitemanagementplans.The MeaningfulPublicInvolvementsectionprovides moreinformationonengagingthepublicinthe schoolsitingprocess(seeSection3). Existing structures Whilethereareeconomic,socialand environmentalbenefitstorenovating/reusingan existingstructureforaschool,itisimportantfor theLEAandtheSSCtobeawarethatanumberof productsusedhistoricallyinbuildingconstruction (e.g.,asbestos,lead,PCBs)arenowrecognizedto bepotentiallyhazardoustothehealthofchildren andadultsincertainsituations,suchaswhen disturbedormanagedunsafelybyimproperly trainedstafforcontractors.LEAsconsidering renovatingexistingschoolsorstructuresfor schooluseoradaptingotherexistingstructures foreducationalpurposesshouldweighthe hazardsandthecostsofthesaferemovalor managementofthesehazardousmaterials comparedtothestepsandcostsassociatedwith evaluatingandacquiringsitestoconstructnew schoolfacilities.Linkstomoreinformationon considerationsrelatedtoexistingbuildingsare providedintheResourcespageoftheguidelines website. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LI NKS_maps_and_mapping) Natural hazards Thepotentialfornaturalhazardsshouldbe exploredindecisionstorenovateexistingschools, aswellasallpotentialnewschoollocations.The naturalhazardsmaybecommonoruniquetothe areaandmayincludethesitesgeology(naturally occurringhazardssuchaselevatedlevelsofradon, arsenicorothernaturallyoccurringtoxic materials),areasofseismicactivity,floodingor frequentwildfires,orareaspronetoextreme weatherevents.Additionalconsiderationmay needtobegiventonaturalhazardswhereschool facilitiesarealsoplannedorrenovatedtoserveas temporaryorlongertermemergencyshelters. Linkstomoreinformationonnaturalhazardsare providedintheResourcespageoftheguidelines website.(www.epa.gov/schools/siting/ resources.html#LINKS_natural_hazards) 4.4.2. Potential Nearby Hazards
Thereisawiderangeofpotentialenvironmental andsafetyhazardsthatmaybelocatedinclose proximitytoaprospectiveschoollocation.The offsitehazardsmaychangeovertimeasareasare developedforindustrial,transportationorother newuses;existingfacilitieschangeproduction processes,activityorconfiguration;orunforeseen events,suchasspills,occur.Identifying,evaluating andplanningforpotentialhazardsfromnearby sourcesisacriticalcomponentofsuccessful schoolsiting.Characterizingpotentialrisksfrom nearbyhazardsischallengingbecauseofthewide rangeofvariablesthatinfluencewhetherthereis anactualexposuretoapotentialhazardthatmay posearisk.Additionalfactorstoconsiderare whetherphysical,engineeringorothercontrols canreduceorremoveexposures,thusreducing risk,ifsuchmeasuresareproperlymaintained. Exhibit5:FactorsInfluencingExposuresand PotentialRisks,presentssomeofthe environmentalhazardsthatmaybeonorlocated nearcandidatesites,thevariablesthatinfluence thepotentialforexposureandrisk,andmitigation optionsforeachhazard.Insomecases,the mitigationoptionsdifferiftherewillbeanew schoolfacilityconstructed(N)orifthereisan existingstructurethatisbeingrenovated(E). Thesedifferencesaredesignatedinthetable.
48
Exhibit5:FactorsInfluencingExposuresandPotentialRisks Potential Hazard Air Pollution see Section 8.1 Potential Variables ! Type and volume of contaminant released ! Distance from the source ! Nearby traffic type, fuel, volume and speed mobile sources ! Stack height, facility practices and type of pollution control employed stationary/point sources ! Timing of operations stationary/point sources ! Meteorological conditions e.g., prevailing wind direction and wind speed ! Atmospheric stability and mixing ! Regulatory compliance ! Intensity of use ! Presence of natural or manmade buffers e.g., trees, hills, buildings ! Planning and zoning Potential Mitigation Options N=New schools E=Existing structure ! Adopt an areawide approach to address air pollution issues N/E ! Maximize distance from transportation or other pollution sources N ! Vegetation buffers N/E ! Antiidling policies N/E ! Limiting bus or personal car use on and near campus N/E ! Enhanced indoor filtration/air cleaning N/E ! Locating sensitive activities and outside air intakes away from sources e.g., locate playgrounds and classrooms away from source; place parking lots, utilities closer N/E ! Timing of HVAC system operations N/E or industry operating periods N/E ! Limiting outdoor activities during high exposure periods N/E Soil Contamination ! Type of contamination ! Extent of contamination ! Concentration of contamination ! Depth of contamination ! Potential transport e.g., runoff or migration to ground water, air transport ! Geology and soil characteristics ! Water table ! Access or exposure potential e.g., dermal contact/ingestion ! Barriers e.g., plants, grass, ground cover, pavement ! Site cleanup and removal N/E ! Onsite treatment N/E ! Engineering controls e.g., cap, venting systems, vapor barriers N/E ! Institutional controls N/E
49
Potential Hazard Use of Agricultural Pesticides see Section 8.12 Potential Variables ! Use pattern application rate, crop type ! Environmental conditions wind, temperature, etc. ! Toxicity of the pesticide ! Volatility ! Persistence Potential Mitigation Options N=New schools E=Existing structure ! Application of Integrated Pest Management measures to reduce pesticide use N/E ! Choice of pesticide active ingredients N/E ! Oversight and strict enforcement of product label use directions and 50 drift restrictions N/E ! Use of drift reducing application technologies and best management practices N/E ! Enhanced indoor filtration/air cleaning N/E ! Locating sensitive activities and outside air intakes away from sources e.g., locate playgrounds and classrooms away from source; place parking lots, utilities closer N/E ! Timing of HVAC system operations N/E ! Limit opening of classroom doors and windows during periods of potential spray drift E
! Limiting outdoor activities during high potential exposure periods E ! Notification when pesticides are applied N/E
50
Buffer zones are specified on all pesticide product labels. The buffer zones provide flexibility based on several factors such as
application rate, field size, application method, and soil characterization.
50
Potential Hazard Ground Water Contamination
Potential Variables ! Type of contaminants ! Type and frequency of contact with contaminated water
Potential Mitigation Options N=New schools E=Existing structure ! Seek alternative drinking water sources or install water treatment systems N/E
! Type of contact with contaminated water/route of exposure e.g., ingestion ! Restrict access to water bodies N/E ! Extent of contamination ! Phytoremediation N/E ! Concentration of contaminants ! Mitigation system for vapor ! Extent of vapor intrusion for certain intrusion N contaminants Surface Water Pollution ! Type of contaminants ! Type and frequency of contact with contaminated water/route of exposure e.g., dermal ! Extent of contamination ! Concentration of contaminants ! Stormwater runoff Safety Hazards ! Frequency ! Intensity of hazard e.g., explosion vs. flooding ! Emergency response plans N/E ! Emergency shelter design incorporated N ! Active noise control N/E ! Install or preserve noise barriers e.g., highway barriers or other noise buffers N/E ! Locating sensitive activities and outside air intakes away from sources e.g., locate playgrounds and classrooms away from source; place parking lots, utilities closer N/E ! Enhanced indoor filtration/air cleaning N/E ! Improve riparian buffers N/E ! Restrict access to water bodies N/E ! Green roof, rain gardens and barrels N/E
Noise (www.epa.gov/ schools/siting/ resources.html# LINKS_noise) Odors
! Distance ! Timing and intensity of source ! Presence of natural or manmade buffers e.g., hills, noise barriers ! Timing of operations ! Meteorological conditions e.g., prevailing wind direction and wind speed
51
sourcesofair,waterandlandcontaminationaswell asfeaturesoractivitiesthatmayposesafetyrisks fromaccidentalreleases.Forpotentialschool locationsidentifiedwithinthescreeningperimeter ofanenvironmentalfeature,furtherstudyis warrantedtoensurethatthepotentialrisks associatedwiththatfeaturearenotsignificant. Screeningperimetersareintendedtofacilitate: ! Rapididentificationoflandusesnearcandidate schoollocationsthatcouldpotentiallypose healthandsafetyhazardstostudentsandstaff; ! Consultationwithappropriatestate,tribal,local andotherauthorities,localstakeholdersand thepublictoassistwiththeevaluation;and ! Considerationofappropriatemitigationor separationstrategiestoreducepotentialrisks withinthecontextofthebroaderschoolsiting decisionmakingprocess. Determiningscreeningdistancesforvarious hazardsis,toalargedegree,amatterofbest professionaljudgment.Severaljurisdictionshave adoptedscreeningdistancesbasedprimarilyon existingstateorlocalrules,law,ordinance,policy orguidance.Linkstothisinformationare providedontheResourcespageoftheguidelines website(www.epa.gov/schools/siting/ resources).Inthefollowingtable,EPAhas includedrecommendedscreeningdistancesbased onexistingapproachesatthestateandlocallevel asapproximatedistanceswithinwhichEPA recommendsthatpotentialhazardsshouldbe identifiedandconsideredforadditionalstudy. NOTE:Screeningdistancesareintendedto identifypotentiallandusesnearcandidateschool locationsthatwarrantfurtherconsideration ratherthantoidentifylandusesthatmaybe incompatiblewiththelocationofschools. Screeningdistances,alone,maynotbepredictive oftheactualpotentialforasourcelocatedwithin thatdistancetopresentanenvironmentalor healthhazard.Potentialhazardsassociatedwith candidateschoollocationsshouldbeevaluatedas partofthesitescreeningandevaluationprocess.
4.4.3. Screening Locations for Potential Environmental Hazards Theinitialscreeningprocessofidentifyingand narrowingpotentialschoollocationchoicestakes intoaccountawiderangeofschoolsiting considerationsandchallenges.Amongthemost importantoftheseistoidentifypotential environmentalandpublichealthconcernsasearly intheprocessaspossibletofullyunderstandthe potentialcostsandbenefitsofcandidatelocations beforedecidingtopursueaparticularsite. Unanticipatedenvironmentalissuescanbe extremelycostlyintermsofcleanupcosts,time delays,communityconcernandpotentiallossof supportforsitingchoices.Afullunderstandingof thepotentialrisksofcandidatesitestoensurethat aprospectiveschoolsitedoesnotpose unacceptablehealthandsafetyriskstostudents andstaffisveryimportantbutcanbecostlyand timeconsuming.Forthisreason,itmaybe desirabletotrytoavoidsitesthathaveonsite contaminationorareinverycloseproximityto pollutiongeneratinglandusesattheinitialstage ofidentifyingcandidatesitesifotheracceptable locationsexistinthecommunitythatmaypose fewerenvironmentalchallenges. Exhibit6:ScreeningPotentialEnvironmental, PublicHealthandSafetyHazards,below,contains alistofpotentialenvironmentalandsafety hazardsthatshouldbeidentified,evaluatedand weighed,alongwithotherfactors,inchoosinga schoollocation.Ingeneral,thecloserapotential hazardistoacandidatelocationforaschool,the moreimportantitistogainanearly understandingofthepotentialrisksthatmaybe associatedwiththathazard.Exhibit6isintended tobeusedinconjunctionwiththeexample EnvironmentalReviewProcess(seeSection5) andwithEvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesof AirPollution(seeSection6). ScreeningperimeterscanhelptheLEAandSSC quicklyidentifyactivitiesorfeaturesonorinthe areasurroundingaprospectiveschoollocation thathavethepotentialtoposeahazardto studentsandstaffandwarrantfurtherevaluation. Theseincludeawiderangeofpotentialongoing
52
Exhibit6:ScreeningPotentialEnvironmental,PublicHealthandSafetyHazards 53
Additional 51 Information ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Lead Heavy Metals Asbestos PCBs Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs) Mold Radon Mercury Pesticides Air Pollution Risk Assessment
IMPORTANT:ThistableisintendedtoassistwiththeinitialscreeningofcandidatelocationsbutisNOTasubstituteforcaseandsitespecific evaluationofpotentialrisksandhazards.ItisintendedtobeusedinconjunctionwiththeexampleEnvironmentalReviewProcess(seeSection5)and EvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAirPollution(seeSection6).Formoreinformationontypicalenvironmentalhazardsthatmaybeencountered duringtheschoolsitingprocess,seetheQuickGuidetoEnvironmentalIssuesinSection8).Existingapplicablefederal,state,tribalorlocalstatutes, ordinances,codesorregulationstakeprecedenceovertherecommendationscontainedinthistable.Usersshouldcheckwithstate,tribalandlocal authoritiesforapplicablerequirementsorotherrecommendations.

Feature/Land Use Onsite buildings or structures including all leased space Description ! All onsite or adjacent buildings/structures slated for reuse, renovation or demolition. Potential Hazard(s) ! Legacy contaminants in existing structures including lead and other heavy metals, asbestos, PCBs, vapor intrusion/VOCs, mold, radon, pesticides, pests ! For existing school buildings, chemicals from laboratory, art, shop, drama, maintenance, cleaning, grounds ! Structure may not meet current building codes e.g., for seismic activity Recommendations Screening Perimeter ! All onsite structures slated for demolition, reuse or renovation Evaluation ! Evaluate for the presence of hazardous materials or conditions. Age, location, condition and type of structure, and the history of use are critical factors to consider in assessing potential risks. Identify all potential hazards and remediate as appropriate.
51
See the Resources page of the guidelines website for links related to the topics listed under the Additional Information. www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources

Feature/Land Use Description Potential Hazard(s) ! Air pollution ! Dust ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Vapor intrusion into structures ! Surface water contamination ! Odors ! Accidental release/spill of hazardous chemicals Recommendations Screening Perimeter Evaluation Additional 51 Information ! Air Pollution ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs) ! Heavy Metals in Soil and Ground Water ! Water
Contaminated ! Properties that have or sites formerly or are managing currently hazardous waste regulated under onsite, or have had Superfund, RCRA releases of hazardous hazardous waste waste in the past, and sites, state are under federal regulated CERCLA, RCRA Subtitle hazardous waste C, tribal or state sites, or regulation. unremediated sites under federal, tribal or state orders or agreements for cleanup
! Identify and evaluate all ! Evaluate on a case and facilities within~1 mile of sitespecific basis. See prospective locations Exhibit 5 for potential ! Applies to both onsite as well variables and mitigation as adjacent or nearby sites options. ! Regulating agencies should be consulted to obtain environmental status of the site, if it has been assessed. The site may have had contamination removed or addressed, and be safe for use, or the site may still need additional cleanup. The site should not be used for a school unless regulating agencies can confirm that the potential for unsafe human exposures has been prevented.
54
55
Feature/Land Use Solid waste landfills and transfer stations
Description ! Properties that have or are managing non hazardous solid waste.
Potential Hazard(s) ! Air pollution ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Vapor intrusion into structures ! Surface water contamination ! Odors ! Pests and disease vectors ! Diesel emissions and heavy truck traffic ! Fires
Recommendations Screening Perimeter ! Identify and evaluate all facilities within ~1 mile of prospective locations ! Applies to both onsite as well as adjacent or nearby sites Evaluation ! Evaluate on a case and sitespecific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options. ! Regulating agencies should be consulted to obtain environmental status of the site, if it has been assessed. The site may have had contamination removed or addressed, and be safe for use, or the site may still need additional cleanup. The site should not be used for a school unless regulating agencies can confirm that the potential for unsafe human exposures has been prevented.
Additional 51 Information ! Air Pollution ! Heavy Metals in Soil and Ground Water ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs) ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Water
Feature/Land Use Formerly Used Defense Sites FUDS
Description ! Properties formerly owned, leased, possessed or used by the Department of Defense DOD or its components that were transferred from DOD control prior to the enactment of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act SARA. The FUDS program communicates with regulatory agencies, tribes and the public to ensure proper characterization and cleanup of past DOD lands.
Potential Hazard(s) ! Unexploded ordnance FUDS ! Discarded military munitions ! Munitions constituents ! Surface water contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Legacy contaminants in existing structures including lead and other heavy metals, asbestos, PCBs, vapor intrusion/VOCs, mold, radon, pesticides, pests
Recommendations Screening Perimeter ! Identify and evaluate all facilities within ~1 mile of prospective locations ! Applies to both onsite as well as adjacent or nearby sites Evaluation ! Consult with state, tribal and local authorities to identify sites.
Additional 51 Information ! Formerly Used Defense Sites ! Maps and Mapping ! Water
56
57
Feature/Land Use Hightraffic roads and highways
Description
Potential Hazard(s)
Recommendations Screening Perimeter ! Identify and evaluate all high traffic roads and highways within ~ mile ! Roads farther away with a high likelihood of accidental releases should also be considered Evaluation ! In general, air pollutant concentrations will be highest closer to the source, decreasing with distance from the road. Many factors affect the magnitude and extent of impacts, so the potential variables and mitigation options described in Exhibit 5 should be evaluated. Consider additional mitigation strategies for locations near hightraffic roads. Also, consider potential adverse consequences related to inability of students to walk/bike to school, etc. ! ! ! ! !
Additional 51 Information Roads Air Pollution Noise Risk Assessment Water
! Hightraffic roads or ! Air pollution roads with heavy diesel ! Noise truck traffic. ! Accidental releases/spills of hazardous chemicals ! Pedestrian and bike safety
Distribution centers, bus terminals, bus garages and truckstops
! Facilities with more than 100 trucks/buses per day, or more than 40 refrigerated trucks per day.
! Air pollution, including diesel emissions ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Surface water contamination ! Vapor intrusion ! Heavy truck or bus traffic
! Identify and evaluate all major ! Evaluate on a case and distribution centers within ~ sitespecific basis. See mile Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation ! Centers farther away with a options. high likelihood of accidental releases should also be considered
! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs)

Feature/Land Use Large industrial facilities Description ! Fossil fuel power plants more than 50 MW, incinerators, refineries, chemical/ pharmaceutical/rubber and plastics plants, cement kilns, metal foundries and smelters, other large industrial facilities. Potential Hazard(s) ! Air pollution ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Surface water contamination ! Accidental releases/spills of hazardous chemicals ! Odors ! Heavy vehicular traffic Other large sources ! Metal platers especially chrome, rendering plants, sewage treatment plants, composting operations, fertilizer or cement plants, large manufacturing facilities. ! Air pollution ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Surface water contamination ! Accidental releases/spills of hazardous chemicals ! Odors ! Identify and evaluate all other large sources within ~ mile ! Evaluate on a case and sitespecific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options. ! Consult with local air quality agencies to determine appropriate separation. ! Air Pollution ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs) ! Water Recommendations Screening Perimeter ! Identify and evaluate all large industrial facilities within ~ mile Evaluation ! Evaluate on a case and sitespecific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options. ! Consult with local air quality agencies to determine sites with high concentrations nearby. Additional 51 Information ! Air Pollution ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs) ! Water
58
59
Feature/Land Use Gas stations and other fuel dispensing facilities
Description
Potential Hazard(s)
Recommendations Screening Perimeter Evaluation ! Evaluate on a case and sitespecific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options. ! Consult with state, tribal and local authorities for applicable requirements. ! Evaluate for spills, leaking underground storage tanks, potential air emissions. ! Evaluate on a case and sitespecific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options. ! Consult with state, tribal and local authorities for applicable requirements. ! Consult with local environmental agencies to determine locations with high concentrations.
Additional 51 Information ! Air Pollution ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Underground Storage Tanks ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs)
! Large gas station ! Air pollution dispense more than 3.6 ! Soil contamination million gallons per ! Ground water year. contamination
! Identify and evaluate gas stations and other fuel dispensing facilities within ~1,000 feet of prospective school locations ! Applies to both onsite as well ! Vapor intrusion into as adjacent or nearby structures locations ! Heavy vehicular traffic
Dry cleaners
! Facilities using perchloroethylene or similarly toxic chemicals.
! Air pollution ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Vapor intrusion into structures
! Identify and evaluate dry cleaning operations within ~1,000 feet of prospective school locations ! Applies to both onsite as well as adjacent or nearby locations
! Air Pollution ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs)
Feature/Land Use Other area/small sources
Description ! Auto body shops, furniture manufacturing and repair; wood product manufacturing or processing; printing, electronics and chip manufacturing; charbroilers, commercial sterilization, backup generators; small neighborhood metal platers
Potential Hazard(s) ! Air pollution ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Surface water contamination ! Odors ! Vapor intrusion into structures
Recommendations Screening Perimeter ! Identify and evaluate other small sources within ~1,000 feet of prospective school locations ! Applies to both onsite as well as adjacent or nearby locations Evaluation ! Evaluate on a case and sitespecific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options. ! Consult with local health and/or environmental agencies to determine locations with high concentrations.
Additional 51 Information ! Air Pollution ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping
Large agricultural ! Operations employing growing aerial pesticide spraying operations
! Air pollution from volatilization and drift ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Surface water contamination
! Identify and evaluate all large agricultural growing operations within ~3 miles
! Evaluate on a case and sitespecific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options.
! Air Pollution ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Water
Large concentrated animal feeding operations
! Animal feeding operations
! Air pollution ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Surface water contamination ! Odors
! Identify and evaluate all animal feeding operations within ~1 3 miles
! Evaluate on a case and sitespecific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options. ! Consult with local health and/or environmental agencies to determine locations with high concentrations.
! Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations ! Air Pollution ! Risk Assessment ! Maps and Mapping ! Water
60
61
Feature/Land Use Ports
Description
Potential Hazard(s)
Recommendations Screening Perimeter Evaluation ! ! ! !
Additional 51 Information Air Pollution Noise Risk Assessment Maps and Mapping ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs)
! Marine ports with more ! Air pollution than 100 truck ! Noise visits/day ! Soil contamination ! Surface water contamination ! Heavy vehicular traffic ! Accidental releases/spills of hazardous chemicals
! Identify and evaluate all ! Evaluate on a case and site port facilities within ~1 mile specific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and ! Ports farther away with a mitigation options. high likelihood of accidental releases should also be considered
Rail yards, intermodal freight terminals and major rail lines
! A major service and maintenance rail yard; Rail lines serving more than 50 trains/day excluding electric light rail, except for safety
! Air pollution ! Noise ! Odors ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Vapor intrusion into structures ! Accidental releases/spills of hazardous chemicals ! Fire/explosions ! Safety ! Large truck traffic
! Identify and evaluate all major rail yards, intermodal freight terminals and rail lines within ~1 mile ! Rail facilities farther away with a high likelihood of accidental releases should also be considered
! Evaluate on a case and site specific basis. See Exhibit 5 for potential variables and mitigation options. ! Consult with local air quality agencies to determine locations with high concentrations. ! Consider additional mitigation approaches.
! ! ! !
Air Pollution Noise Risk Assessment Maps and Mapping ! Vapor Intrusion/ (VOCs)
Feature/Land Use Rail lines
Description ! All rail lines excluding electric light rail
Potential Hazard(s) ! Air pollution ! Noise ! Odors ! Soil contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Physical hazards due to derailment ! Hazardous cargo spills ! Train road crossings and access to rail tracks
Recommendations Screening Perimeter Evaluation
Additional 51 Information
! Identify and evaluate all rail ! Evaluate on a case and site ! Rail Yards and lines within ~1/2 mile specific basis. Evaluate Rail Lines safety based on cargo, ! Rail lines farther away with a ! Maps and speed, traffic, etc. See high likelihood of accidental Mapping Potential Variables under releases should also be ! Noise considered Exhibit 5. ! Consult with local air quality agencies to determine locations with high concentrations. ! Consider additional mitigation approaches.
Airports and heliports
! All commercial and military airports, consider flight patterns/runway configuration
! Safety concerns near runways ! Noise ! Air pollution
! Identify and evaluate all locations within ~2 miles from runways
! Evaluate on a case and site ! Airports specific basis. See Exhibit 5 ! Maps and for potential variables and Mapping mitigation options. ! Noise ! Consult with state, tribal and local authorities for applicable requirements. ! Consult with local air quality agencies to determine locations with high concentrations.
62
63
Feature/Land Use Power lines
Description ! High voltage power lines more than 50 kV.
Potential Hazard(s)
Recommendations Screening Perimeter Evaluation
Additional 51 Information ! Power Lines ! Electromagnetic Fields
! Exposure to ! Identify and evaluate all ! Consult with state, tribal high voltage power lines and/or local authorities for electromagnetic fields within ~500 feet of requirements. ! Safety concerns if prospective school locations ! Variable, depending on power lines fall voltage and if lines are ! Applies to both onsite as above ground or below well as adjacent or nearby locations ground. ! Exposure to ! Identify and evaluate cell ! Review and apply Federal towers within ~200 feet of Communications electromagnetic fields prospective school locations Commission regulatory ! Fall distance of guidance. ! Applies to both onsite as towers well as adjacent or nearby locations ! Identify and evaluate hazardous material pipelines within ~1,500 feet of prospective school locations ! Applies to both onsite as well as adjacent or nearby locations ! No hazardous pipelines on site except natural gas serving school.
Cellular phone towers
! All cellular phone towers and antennas.
! Electromagnetic Fields
Hazardous material pipelines
! Oil pipelines, high ! Soil contamination pressure natural gas Ground water pipelines, chemical contamination pipelines, high pressure ! Accidental water lines. release/spills of hazardous materials ! Fire/heat from flammable fuels ! Flooding/erosion from water ! Explosion hazard
! Pipelines ! Maps and Mapping ! Water
Feature/Land Use Reservoirs, water or fuel storage tanks
Description ! All aboveground large volume liquid storage tanks
Potential Hazard(s) ! Potential for inundation in an accident ! Surface water contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Vapor intrusion into structures ! Air pollution
Recommendations Screening Perimeter ! Identify and evaluate reservoirs, water or fuel storage tanks within ~1,500 feet of prospective school locations ! Applies to both onsite as well as adjacent or nearby locations Evaluation ! Evaluate drainage direction and emergency planning options.
Additional 51 Information ! Aboveground Storage Tanks ! Maps and Mapping ! Water
Geologic features ! Earthquake faults, liquefaction zones, volcanic/geothermal activity, landslide/lahar zones, flood zones, methane zones, naturally occurring hazardous materials examples: asbestos, uranium, radon areas, etc., reservoirs, high water table
! Natural hazards ! Air pollution ! Soil contamination ! Surface water contamination ! Ground water contamination ! Dust ! Moisture intrusion
! Identify and evaluate ! Evaluate geologic/ potential geologic hazards geotechnical hazards for within ~ mile of every location. prospective school locations ! Applies to both onsite as well as adjacent or nearby locations
! Natural Hazards ! Maps and Mapping
64
5.
5. Environmental Review Process

5.1. Overview
Whilethedecisiontobuildanewschoolis primarilyfocusedontheeducationalneedsof childreninthecommunityandreflectsagreat manylocalfactorsandconsiderations,afull understandingoftheenvironmentalissues associatedwitheachcandidatesiteisessentialfor afullyinformedschoolsitingdecision. Theexampleenvironmentalreviewprocess presentedinthissectiondescribesaprocessof evaluatingcandidatesitesthatareunderserious considerationasalocationforaschool.EPA recommendsthatallsitesunderserious considerationundergoaninitialscreen(see Section5.5)andpreliminaryenvironmental assessment(seeSection5.6).Ifnoenvironmental concernsarefoundinthepreliminaryassessment, nofurtherassessmentisneeded.Ifpotential environmentalconcernsarefound,thelocal educationagency(LEA)(seeSection10)should selectadifferentsiteorperformacomprehensive environmentalassessment(seeSection5.7)to ensurethatenvironmentalconcernsareidentified andremediated(i.e.,cleanedup)ormitigated,as You will see the word site mentioned throughout this section, which is an established term in the environmental profession. Its use should not be interpreted to reference only vacant sites or greenfields; it includes locations sites with existing buildings.
appropriate.Ifremediationormitigationis necessarytopreventexposures,sitespecific remediation/mitigationmeasures(seeSection5.7 and5.8)andalongtermstewardshipplan(see Section5.9)shouldbedeveloped,reviewedbythe publicandimplemented. Afullunderstandingofthepotentialrisksof candidatesitestoensurethataprospectiveschool sitedoesnotposeunacceptablehealthandsafety riskstostudentsandstaffisveryimportantbut canbecostlyandtimeconsuming.Forthisreason, itmaybedesirabletotrytoavoidsitesthathave onsitecontaminationorareinveryclose proximitytopollutiongeneratinglandusesatthe initialstageofidentifyingcandidatesitesifother acceptablelocationsexistinthecommunitythat mayposefewerenvironmentalchallenges.
5.2. Why Is an Effective Environmental Review of Prospective Candidate Sites So Important?

Children,particularlyyoungerchildren,maybe morevulnerablewhenexposedtocontaminants inbothindoorandoutdoorenvironments.There aremultiplepathwaysforpotentialexposuresto contaminantsinair,waterorsoilthatshouldbe consideredduringthesiteevaluationprocess. Indoorpathwayscanincludevaporintrusioninto structuresfromsoilandgroundwaterandpoor indoorairqualityfrominfiltrationofair contaminantsthroughwindows,doorsand ventilationairintakes.Childrencompetingin outdoorsportsorplayingonschoolgroundscould beexposedtocontaminantspresentinsoil,water andoutdooraironschoolgrounds.Therefore,itis importanttodeterminewhetherasiteis
EnvironmentalReviewProcess |
65
contaminatedorcouldbeimpactedby contaminantsthatmaymigratetothesitefrom nearbyair,landandwatersources.Ifthese contaminantsreachalevelthatposesathreatto thehealthofchildrenandstaff,cleanuporother mitigationactionsmayberequiredtoprevent unacceptableexposures.Thesecontaminantsmay bepresentduetohistoricalandcurrentindustrial activity,unsafedemolitionpractices,illegal dumpingorthroughmaterialbroughttoasite, suchasfill,whichcouldhaveresultedinsoil, groundwaterorsurfacewatercontamination. EPArecommendsthatallpropertiesorstructures proposedforuseasaschoolbecarefully evaluatedforpotentialenvironmental contaminantsandpotentialexposuresofchildren, staffandvisitorsbeforemakingfinaldecisionsto useasiteorstructureforaschool.Thesite evaluationprocessshouldidentifyandevaluateall potentialsafetyhazardsandsourcesof environmentalcontaminationthatmaybepresent atthesiteorwhichmaymigratetothesitefrom nearbysources. Theenvironmentalreviewprocessforcandidate schoolsitesisdesignedtoanswerthefollowing questions: ! Aresitesurfacesoils,subsurfacesoils,soil gases,groundwaterorsurfacewater contaminatedwithhazardousmaterialsand substancestoadegreethatthesiteshouldbe remediatedbeforeuseorshouldnotbeusedfor schoolpurposes(i.e.,onsitecontamination); NOTE:LEAs,aswellasstatesandtribes(see Section7),areencouragedtoadoptandusean environmentalreviewprocesscomparabletothe processoutlinedinthissectiontothemaximum extentpossible.However,EPArecognizesthat elementsoftheprocessoutlinedmaybebeyond thecurrentcapacityofsomeLEAs,states,tribes andotherparticipantsintheprocesstofully implementwithexistingauthorities,expertiseand resources.EPAencouragesLEAs,states,tribes, communitiesandotherinterestedorganizations toworkcollaborativelywitheachothertoidentify opportunitiestoleverageexistingresourcesas wellastoidentifyandworktowardfulfilling needsforimprovinglocal,stateandtribalcapacity toconductarigoroussiteevaluationprocessand tosafelyoperateriskreductionmeasuressuchas leadencapsulationsystems. Existing State Requirements Some states, such as California, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Washington, require sponsors of new school construction projects to assess the environmental impact of the project as part of a state environmental review process. Other states have environmental review laws including Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia and Wisconsin. The extent to which human health impacts are considered in such reviews varies. More information can be found on the Resources page of the guidelines website. www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.ht ml#LINKS_States
! Arethereoffsitesourcesofpollution, contaminantsorotherenvironmentalhazards affectingthesitesuchthatthehazardsshould bemitigatedbeforeuseofthesiteorthe locationshouldnotbeusedforschoolpurposes (i.e.,offsiteenvironmentalimpacts);and ! Arethereenvironmentalandpublichealth impactsassociatedwithputtingaschoolonthe sitethatshouldbemitigatedorthatareso significantthatthesitecannotsafelybeusedfor schoolpurposes(i.e.,impactsoftheprojecton theenvironment)?
5.2.1. The Importance of Meaningful Public Involvement Anessentialprerequisitetoaneffectivesite reviewandselectionprocessistodevelopand formalizesubstantivepublicinvolvementinsite selectiondecisions(seeSection3).LEAsshould developacommunicationplanatthebeginningof theprocess.Whendraftandfinalreportsare availableforpubliccomment,writtennoticeofthe
66
| EnvironmentalReviewProcess
resultsofthereportsshouldbepostedonthe website,senttothoseidentifiedinthe communicationsplanandshouldinclude: ! Astatementthatareporthasbeencompleted; ! Abriefstatementinplainlanguagedescribing itsspecificcomponentsandresults; ! Thelocationwherepeoplecanreviewacopyof thereportoranexecutivesummarywrittenin theappropriateforeignlanguage(ifapplicable); ! Announcementofapubliccommentperiodthat providesareasonableopportunityfor meaningfulpublicinvolvement(typically30 90days,asdeterminedbythecircumstances, LEApracticeorrecommendationsofthestate ortribalenvironmentalagency); ! Instructionsandaddressesforsubmitting publiccomments;and ! Thedate,timeandlocationofanyscheduled publicmeetings. Moreinformationontheprocessforestablishing andmaintainingmeaningfulpublicinvolvement canbefoundintheMeaningfulPublic Involvement(seeSection3). contaminationissues(onsiteorfromnearby sources)thatmustberesolvedpriortousefora school. Ideally,theLEAshouldnotacquireorleaseany locationforschooluseuntiltheappropriate environmentalreviewhasbeencompleted(e.g., Stage2,Section5.6,forsiteswithnoorfew environmentalissuesandStage5,Section5.9,for siteswithsignificantcontaminationissues).The mostresourceintensiveenvironmentalreviewsof candidateschoollocationsoccurinStages35. Thefollowingsitereviewandselectionprocess recommendsstateandtribalenvironmental regulatoryapprovalandoversightforevaluation ofonsitecontaminationofcandidatesites.States andtribes(seeSection7)canalsoprovide technicalassistanceforanevaluationofoffsite environmentalhazardsandthepotential environmentalimpactsassociatedwithplacinga schoolonacandidatesite.However,theactual tribalorstateandlocaloversightrelationshipsfor variousstepsintheenvironmentalreviewprocess mayvary,withstateortribalpoliciesmandating greaterorlesseroversight. Allstateandmosttribalenvironmentalregulatory agencies(http://www.astswmo.org/Pages/ Resources/State_Agency_Links.htm)have programsinplacetoevaluateandapprove cleanupplansofonsitecontaminationforspecific typesofsitesorprojects.Fewstatescurrently requiresponsorsofnewschoolconstruction projectstoassesstheenvironmentalimpactofthe projectaspartofastateenvironmentalreview process.EPAencouragesLEAstoseektechnical assistanceonassessmentfromenvironmental regulatorsintheabsenceofotherlegislativeor regulatoryrequirements. Stateandtribaleducationagenciesandtheirlocal educationcounterpartswillbenefitfrom involvementandtechnicalassistancefromthe stateortribalvoluntarycleanupprogramor brownfieldsresponseprograminidentifying,as sessingandensuringsafeschoolsiteselectionin accordancewithstateandfederalrequirements. Potentialhealthandenvironmentalrisksposedby
5.3. Recommended Environmental Review Process

Theexampleenvironmentalreviewprocess presentedinthissectionandillustratedinthe flowchartsdescribesatransparent,thorough, prospectiveprocessforevaluationofpotential schoolsitesandstructures.Thepurposeofthe processistoensurethatallpotentialhazardsare addressedpriortothedecisiontoacquirelandor useaparticularlocationorstructureforaschool orotherpurposewherechildrenwillspenda significantamountoftime(seeSection1.1). Ifnosignificantenvironmentalandpublichealth issuesarefoundduringtheinitialscreeningstages (Stage1,Section5.5andStage2,Section5.6),no furtherassessmentisneeded.Laterstagesshould beusedforthosesitesthatmayhave
67
locationsnearSuperfundsitesorfacilitiesregu latedundertheResourceConservationand RecoveryAct(RCRA)canbestbeaddressed through consultationwithappropriatetribal,stateand federalhazardoussitecleanupstaff. Special Considerations for Existing Structures/Leased Space EPA recommends that existing structures/leased space be subject to a thorough environmental review consistent with these guidelines prior to use as a school. Existing structures at the site may have additional considerations for environmental review, including, but not limited to, the concern that a structure may not have been built and/or remediated to an adequate standard for occupation by students e.g., with respect to the presence of toxic substances, potential vapor intrusion, or seismic activity and that existing structures may not be accessible for intrusive sampling of onsite contamination. preliminaryassessment,nofurtherassessments areneeded.Ifpotentialenvironmentalhazardsare identifiedinthepreliminaryassessment,the environmentalreviewshouldcontinuetoStage3, whichbeginsthemoredetailedorcomprehensive environmentalreview,oranothersiteshouldbe selected.Theprocessofenvironmentalreview culminatesinafinalevaluationthatrespondsto commentsreceivedfromthepublicandthe agenciesprovidingoversightoftheprocess. ! Stage1ProjectScoping/InitialScreenof CandidateSites(seeSection5.5) ! Stage2PreliminaryEnvironmental Assessment(seeSection5.6) ! Stage3ComprehensiveEnvironmental Review(seeSection5.7) ! Stage4DevelopSitespecificRemediation/ MitigationMeasures(seeSection5.8) ! Stage5ImplementMitigation/Remediation (seeSection5.9) ! Stage6LongtermStewardshipPlan (seeSection5.10) Itisimportanttonotethatthefullprocessfor environmentalreviewcanbequitelengthyifsite remediationandmitigationarenecessary.The LEAmaywanttoconsideralternativelocations earlyonratherthantakeasitethroughtheentire environmentalreviewprocess.
5.4. Stages of Site Review

Therecommendedprocessforevaluating candidateschoolsitesshouldbeperformedbyen vironmentalprofessionals(seeSection10)andwill benefitfrompublicinvolvement(seeSection3)at multiplestepsintheprocess.Theenvironmental reviewbeginswithprojectscopingofthecandidate sitefollowedbyapreliminaryenvironmental review.Ifnosignificantissuesarefoundinthe
68
Exhibit 7: Stages of Site Review

START
STAGE 1: Project Scoping/Initial Environmental Screen of Candidate Sites Section 5.5
STAGE 2: Preliminary Environmental Assessment Section 5.6
Eliminate site from further consideration

NO
NO
Is the site acceptable from an environmental perspective?

YES
YES
Should the site continue to be evaluated?
Environmental review process for site is complete
NO
STAGE 3: Comprehensive Environmental Review Section 5.7 YES
NO
YES
NO
Does the LEA decide to mitigate/remediate environmental hazards so site can be safely used for a school location?
YES
STAGE 4: Develop SiteSpecific Mitigation/Remediation Measures Section 5.8
STAGE 5: Implement Remedial/Mitigation Measures Section 5.9
Do remedial actions and mitigation measures fully address environmental hazards so that no longterm stewardship is needed to prevent school occupants exposure?
YES
NO
STAGE 6: Longterm Stewardship Section 5.10
Maintain longterm stewardship to ensure that contaminant levels are safe for use of the school
69
5.5. Stage 1: Project Scoping/Initial Screen of Candidate Site

Exhibit 8: Stage 1: Project Scoping/Initial Screen of Candidate Site
START
STAGE 1: Project Scoping/Initial Environmental Screen of Candidate Sites
1. Develop a public involvement plan to implement throughout the environmental review process
2. Identify preliminary candidate sites using the environmental siting criteria see Environmental Siting Criteria Considerations, Section 4
3. Screen out sites that do not meet the environmental siting criteria considerations
4. Designate the site(s) to carry forward to preliminary environmental assessment
Go to STAGE 2:
Preliminary Environmental Assessment

70 | EnvironmentalReviewProcess
Thisstageoftheenvironmentalreviewprocess beginswhentheLEAdecidestoproceedwitha schoolfacilityproject.Atthispointtheschool sitingcommittee(SSC)(seeSection3.3)shouldbe taskedwithidentifyingcandidatelocationsforthe schoolprojectandplantogivethepublican opportunitytocomment(seeSection3.7)onthe preferredlocationthatisselected. TheSSCwouldtypicallybeginwithareviewof possiblelocationsfortheprojectandscreensites usingavarietyofsitingcriteriaconsiderations (seeSection4)thatwouldinclude,butnotbe limitedto,community,environmental,planning andtransportationfactors,andpublichealth considerations.Thescopeofcriteriaconsidered bytheSSCcouldalsoincludecost,availability, educationalprograms,servicestobeprovided, zoningandotherconsiderationsappropriateto thelocality.Thescreeningshouldalsoassessthe likelihoodofobtainingthevariousenvironmental, historical,culturalandotherlanduseapprovals andpermitsrelevanttotheproposedschoolsite. Forexample,suchanevaluationisrequiredin NewJerseyundertheSchoolDevelopment AuthorityEnvironmentalScreeningReport (www.njsda.gov/Business/Doc_Form/PDFsForms /RE_Manual.pdf),beginningonpage15of AppendixA.Manyofthefactorsthatwillbe consideredbytheSSCarebeyondthescopeof theseguidelines.Whileallofthesefactorsplayan importantroleinschoolsitingdecisions,the remainderofthissectionwillfocuson environmentalfactorsthatshouldbeconsidered bytheSSCinrecommendingappropriatelocations forschools. TheSSCandLEAmaywishtoconsultexisting stateortribalsiteinventoriestostreamlinethe acceptanceorrejectionofsites.Thescreening activitymayneedtobefacilitatedorsupportedby advisersfromvariousdisciplines,including environmentalprofessionalsandconsultants. Supportfromfederal,state,tribalorlocal governmentmaybeneededatthisstageaswell.
71
5.6. Stage 2: Preliminary Environmental Assessment

Exhibit 9: Stage 2: Preliminary Environmental Assessment
STAGE 2: Preliminary Environmental Assessment
1. Identify environmental professional to evaluate the site(s) and conduct preliminary environmental assessments
! Potential onsite contamination Section 5.6.1 ! Potential offsite contamination Section 5.6.2 ! Potential impacts of the project on the environment Section 5.6.3 ! Positive environmental attributes of candidate locations Section 5.6.4
2. Task environmental professional to develop a preliminary environmental assessment report Section 5.6.5
3. Submit the report to state or tribal environmental regulatory agency for preliminary review Section 5.6.5
4. Post the draft report for public comment Section 5.6.5

! Modify the report to address substantive issues raised during the public review phase
5. Submit the report and public comments to state or tribal environmental regulatory agency for final review Section 5.6.5
If all preferred sites are eliminated, Go to Stage 1, Step 2
6. Consider findings of the final preliminary environmental review report Section 5.6.6
NO
YES
NO
Should the site continue to be evaluated?
YES
Go to STAGE 3:
Comprehensive Environmental Review
72
OncetheLEAdesignatescandidatesitesforthe project,theLEAshouldengageanenvironmental professional(seeSection10)toconductthe necessaryenvironmentalreviewsforthe project. 52BecauseLEAsmayhavelimited experienceandlimitedresourcesforconducting oroverseeingtheworkdescribedinthe guidelines,theLEAmayneedassistancefrom federal,state,tribalorlocalgovernmentagencies toguideorevenundertakethiswork.Ifthelocal governmenthasanenvironmentaldepartment, theLEAshouldconsultwiththemastheymaybe inthebestpositiontooverseecontractorsor otherwisehelpwiththeenvironmentalreview process. Thepreliminaryenvironmentalassessmentofthe siteisintendedto: ! Identifyissuesrelatedtotheenvironmental suitabilityofthepreferredsite;and ! Identifyissuestobeaddressedindetailduring thenextstageofenvironmentalreview(Stage3, ComprehensiveEnvironmentalReview,Section 5.7)ifenvironmentalissuesareidentifiedand thesitecontinuestobeconsidered. Thefirststepofthepreliminaryenvironmental assessmentinvolvesfourenvironmentalreviews, whichcanbeconductedconcurrently. ! EnvironmentalSiteAssessment(ESA)ofonsite contamination; ! Preliminaryenvironmentalassessmentof offsiteenvironmentalimpacts; ! Preliminaryenvironmentalassessmentof impactsoftheprojectontheenvironment;and ! Preliminaryenvironmentalassessmentof desirableenvironmentalattributesofcandidate locations. Thefollowingfourenvironmentalreviewsshould becombinedintoapreliminaryenvironmental assessmentreportwhentheyhavebeen completed. 5.6.1. Environmental Site Assessment ESA of Onsite Contamination AnEnvironmentalSiteAssessment(ESA)initially examinesthesitehistoryandformeruseofthe property,andmayincludeinterviewswithnearby propertyownersandresidents,toassesspotential foronsitecontaminationofsurfacesoils, subsurfacesoils,soilgases,groundwaterand surfacewaterthatmaybecontaminated. ThepurposeoftheESAistoidentifythepresence orthelikelypresenceofanyenvironmental hazardsonapropertybasedonhistoricaland currentlandusesthatmightposehealthrisks.An ESA,asapreliminaryenvironmentalassessment process,willhelpidentifyissuesfordecision makingaswellasscreenforissuesthatmayneed tobeaddressedingreaterdetail.Theindustry standardforESAsistheASTMInternational StandardE152705. 53(www.astm.org/Standards/ E1527)TheESAwillbebasedonareviewof publicandprivaterecordsofcurrentandpast landuses,historicalaerialphotographs, environmentaldatabasesandthefilesoffederal, tribal,stateandlocalregulatoryagencies.In addition,theassessmentincludesconductinga sitevisit,inspectingadjacentpropertiesand interviewingpeoplefamiliarwiththesites history,includingpastandpresentowners. ManylendersandinsurersrequireanESApriorto propertyacquisitiontoobtainComprehensive EnvironmentalResponse,Compensation,and
53
52
The qualifications of an environmental professional needed to
conduct ESA's are defined in ASTM International Standard E152705 www.astm.org/standards/e1527.htm; also see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, All Appropriate Inquiries Rule: Definition Of Environmental Professional, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA 560F05241, October 2005. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: http://epa.gov/brownfields/aai/ep_deffactsheet.pdf. ASTM E152705 Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process sets forth the activities to be conducted and information to be gathered. The standard is used during real property transfers. www.astm.org/standards/e1527.htm
73
LiabilityAct (CERCLA;alsoknownas Superfund)(www.epa.gov/superfund/ policy/cercla)liabilityprotectionssuchas: ! Thebonafideprospectivepurchaserprotection (www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/revitalizati on/bfpp); ! Contiguouspropertyownerprotection (www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/revitalizati on/cpo);and ! Theinnocentlandownerdefense (www.epa.gov/oecaerth/cleanup/ revitalization/ilo). 55 TheEnvironmentalReviewProcesssectionofthe Resourcespage(www.epa.gov/schools/siting/ resources.html#LINKS_environmental_review_pro cess)listslinkstoASTMstandardsrelatedtosite assessmentforcommercialtransactions. Additionally,aneligibleLEAmayapplyforanEPA BrownfieldsAssessmentGranttoconductanESA ononeormultiplesitesandwillberequiredto havecompletedoneiftheLEAintendstoapplyfor anEPABrownfieldsCleanupGrant.TheLEAmay alsoberequiredunderstateortriballawsor regulationstoensurethatallpotentialhazardsare identified,includingthosethatarebeyondthe scopeofCERCLA.Tribalandstatevoluntary cleanupprogramsoftenprovideguidanceand oversightduringrealpropertytransfer transactions.ESAsconductedforproposedschool sitesshouldalsoaddressnonCERCLArelated potentialhazardsfrombothonsiteandoffsite sources(seeExhibit6:ScreeningPotential EnvironmentalandSafetyHazards). Ultimately,anESAorsubsequentenvironmental siteassessmentisusedtodetermineiffurther
54
54
actionornofurtheractionisrequiredforthesite. Forexample,ifareviewofrecordsshowsonsite environmentalcontaminationexceedsstate,tribal orlocalstandards,acomprehensive environmentalreviewwouldneedtobe conductedbeforethesitecouldbedevelopedasa school.Manystateshaveestablishedavarietyof environmentalstandardstosupportcleanups.In somecases,statesortribeshavedeveloped guidanceorrulesspecificallytoguidetheschool sitingprocesswhenconsideringenvironmental contamination.Inothercases,statesortribes haveotherstandardsthathavebeendeveloped formoregenericpurposesthatmaybe appropriateforassessingthesuitabilityof candidateschoolsites.Whenstateortribal standardsexist,theyshouldbeused.Inthe absenceofsuchstandards,statesandtribesmay wishtoemployEPAriskassessmentmethodsfor theestablishmentofcleanuplevels.(www.epa .gov/oswer/riskassessment/risk_superfund) Theenvironmentalstandardsusedtoevaluatesite contaminationshouldbebasedoneither1) standardsdevelopedforschoolsorresidentialuse or2)riskbasedlevelssetforresidentialuse.If furtheractionisrequired,theESAreportshould specifyrecognizedenvironmentalconditionsfor furtherstudy. 5.6.2. Preliminary Environmental Assessment of Offsite Environmental Impacts Inthepreliminaryenvironmentalassessmentof offsiteenvironmentalimpacts,theenvironmental professionalshouldidentifypotential environmentalhazardssurroundingthecandidate sitesuchasfromoldwastesites(including Superfundsites),localizedairpollution(e.g.,rail lines,industrialfacilities),hazardousmaterial pipelinesandothers.Hazardsofpotentialconcern andthescreeningdistancefromthesiteforwhich potentialhazardsshouldbeidentifiedfor evaluationaredescribedinExhibit6:Screening PotentialEnvironmentalandSafetyHazards. Somelevelofairqualityanalysisshouldbe consideredforeverynewschoolsitepriorto projectapprovalbytheLEA.Thisanalysisshould
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and In the CERCLA liability context, an ESA, usually called All
Liability Act, U.S. Code 42 (1980) 9601 et seq.

55
Appropriate Inquiries, see: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/aai is usually a prerequisite to obtaining any of these liability protections. If the LEA intends to obtain and maintain any of these CERCLA liability protections, it must conduct an ESA within one year prior to acquisition, with certain elements updated within 180 days prior to acquisition.
74
ataminimumincludecriteriaairpollutants(i.e., groundlevelozone,sulfurdioxide,lead,carbon monoxide,nitrogenoxidesandparticulatematter) andhazardousairpollutants(e.g.,airtoxicssuch asbenzene,formaldehydeanddieselexhaust). Dependingonthelocationofthesite,theanalysis mayrequiredatabasereviews,contaminant transportanddispersionmodeling,monitoring, healthriskassessments,sitereconnaissance and/orothermethods.Formorespecificguidance seeEvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAir Pollution(seeSection6). TheEmergencyPlanningandCommunityRight 56 ToKnowAct (www.epa.gov/oecaagct/ lcra#Hazardous%20Chemical%20Notification%2 0and%20Inventory%20Reporting)gives communitiesaccesstoinformationontoxicand hazardouschemicalsinventoriesintheir communities.Additionally,Section112(r)ofthe CleanAirAct 57requiresfacilitiesthatproduce, handle,process,distributeorstorecertain chemicalstodevelopandsubmitaRisk ManagementPlantoEPA,whichisalsoavailable 58 tocommunities. 5.6.3 Preliminary Environmental Assessment of Impacts of the Project on the Environment Inassessingapotentialsitefornewschool construction(ratherthanrenovatingorexpanding anexistingschooloradaptinganotherstructure), LEAsshouldconsidertheenvironmentalimpacts ofbuildingaschoolonthenewlocation,in additiontopotentialhealthandsafetyriskstothe surroundingcommunity.Anenvironmental impactreviewconductedduringthepreliminary environmentalassessmentidentifiespotential significantimpactsoftheprojectonthe surroundingenvironmentandhumanhealth,as wellasconstructionandregulatoryobstaclesthat cannotbeovercome.Anenvironmentalimpact
56
reviewmayberequiredbyastateortribal environmentalregulatoryagencyorplanning board(e.g.,forlargeschoolconstructionprojects). Theoutcomeoftheenvironmentalimpactreview couldresultinrejectingasitefromfurther considerationeitherbythestateortribeorbythe LEA.Thepotentialcategoriesforconsideration thatshouldbeassessedmayinclude: ! Communityamenities; ! Existinginfrastructure;and ! Potentialimpactsorhazards. Potentialimpactsthatshouldbeassessedmay include: ! Localutilitiessuchaswatersupply,sewage serviceandelectricity; ! Increasesinlocaltrafficandcongestionaswell asimpactsonpedestriansafety; ! Hydrology/waterqualitysuchascoastal wetlands,floodplainsandstreamencroachment constraints; ! Publiclandsuchasdisplacementofparks; ! Accesstopublicresourcessuchasparksand libraries; ! Historicorarcheologicalresources; ! Threatenedorendangeredplantoranimal species; ! Habitatloss; ! Aestheticssuchaslightingornoisefrom stadiums; ! Hazardsandhazardousmaterialsrelatedto transportanddisposalofonsitecontamination removedfromthesiteduringcleanup; ! Agriculturalresourcessuchasdisplacementof farmland;
Emergency Planning and Community RightToKnow Act, U.S. Code Clean Air Act, U.S. Code 42 (1970) 7401 et seq. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Management Plan
42 (1986) 11001 et seq.

57 58
Rule. Last modified September 19, 2011. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/osweroe1/content/rmp/.
75
! Airqualitysuchasemissionsfromconstruction, includingengineexhaustanddustfrom clearing,gradingandburning; ! Geology/soilssuchascreatingslopeinstability duringconstruction; ! Mineralresourcessuchasdisplacingdrilling rights; ! Publicservicessuchaspoliceandfire; ! Abilitytoserveasanemergencyshelter; ! Excessivecommunityrelocationand displacementimpacts; ! Timespenttravelingtoandfromschool; ! Walk/bikerouteaudits;and ! Percentageofstudentswhocouldwalk/biketo school. 5.6.4. Preliminary Environmental Assessment of Desirable Environmental Attributes of Candidate Sites Desirableenvironmentalattributesofagivensite shouldalsobeassessed,suchasthesites proximitytoresidenceswherefuturestudentslive (sostudentswouldbeabletowalkorbiketo school);whethersidewalks,crosswalksand streetsinproximitytothesiteprovidesaferoutes toschool;theavailabilityofpublictransportation toandfromthesite;andaccesstocommunity resources,suchaslibraries,communitycenters, parksandotherfeatures.SeeExhibit4:Desirable EnvironmentalAttributesofCandidateSites. 5.6.5 Review of the Preliminary Environmental Assessment Report Oncetheenvironmentalprofessionalhas completedthefourreviewsdescribedearlier,a reportshouldbedevelopedandsubmittedforthe reviewstepsthatfollow. Preliminary agency review of the preliminary environmental assessment report TheLEAwillneedtocomplywiththestates requirementsforenvironmentalreviewand wouldtypicallysubmitthedraftpreliminary environmentalassessmentoradditional assessmentstothestateortribalenvironmental regulatoryagency(www.astswmo.org/Pages/ Resources/State_Agency_Links.htm)foranysiteit isconsideringpursuing.Whenstateortribal requirementsarenotpresent,theLEAshould secureanagreementwiththestateortribal environmentalregulatoryagencyforreviewofthe draftESAresults.Itisdesirabletohavethestate ortribereviewtheoffsitecontamination assessment,environmentalimpactassessment andassessmentofdesirableenvironmental attributesaswell. Public comment on the preliminary environmental assessment report Allfourreviewsthatcomprisethepreliminary assessmentreportshouldbemadeavailabletothe publicandrelevantlocalagencies(e.g.,thelocal departmentoftransportationandthelocalpolice) forcomment.Toaidwiththeunderstandingof theseworkproducts,theenvironmental professionalortheLEAshouldprepareaplain languagesummaryofthepreliminary environmentalassessmentreportsforthe community,includingtranslationfornonEnglish speakingstakeholders,ifapplicable. Ifthepreliminaryenvironmentalassessment reportrecommendsnofurtheraction,theLEA shouldreleasetheworkconducted(e.g.,reports submittedtothestate,anyresponsesandother supportingassessments)forpubliccommentand, ifappropriate,holdapublichearing,before formallyadoptingtherecommendationsofthe preliminaryreview.Ifthepreliminary environmentalassessmentreportrecommends furtheraction,publicreviewofthepreliminary environmentalassessmentreportmayoccur duringStage3(seeSection5.7). Regardlessofthefindings,thecomponentsofthe preliminaryreviewreportshouldbesubjectto
76
publiccomment.TheLEAshouldfollowthesteps describedearlier(seeTheImportanceof MeaningfulPublicInvolvement,Section5.2.1)to solicitpubliccommentonthepreliminary environmentalassessmentreportandproposed nextstepsbasedonreviewfindings.Apublic commentperiodmayberequiredbythestateor tribalregulatoryagency,particularlyifthe preliminaryreviewindicatesthatnofurther environmentalreviewisnecessaryandnoother methodofsecuringpubliccommentarelikely.The informationlistedearliershouldbeincludedina publicnotice.Moreinformationoneffectivepublic involvementcanbefoundintheMeaningfulPublic Involvementsection(seeSection3). Final agency review of preliminary environmental site assessment
Priortofinalstateortriballevelreview,theLEAs reportshouldbemodifiedtoaddresssubstantive issuesraisedduringthepublicreviewphase.The stateortribalenvironmentalregulatoryagency (www.astswmo.org/Pages/Resources/State_Agen cy_Links.htm)shouldalsoreviewallcomments receivedonthepreliminaryenvironmental assessmentreportanddeterminewhetherno furtheractionisrequiredonthesiteorwhether furtheraction(e.g.,acomprehensive environmentalreview)isrequired.
1.
Proceedwithplansforconstructionifno furtherremediationorstudyisrequired; Continueevaluatingthepotential environmentalhazardsatthesitewitha comprehensiveenvironmentalreview;or Eliminatethesitefromfurtherconsideration andpursuealternativelocations.
2.
3.
Iftherecommendationistoproceedwith constructionorwithacomprehensive environmentalreview,decisionsshouldbe explicitlydescribedandstepsshouldbetakento involvethepublictothegreatestextentpossible. Iftherecommendationistoproceedwith constructionofanewschoolbecausenofurther remediationorstudyisrequired(nofurther actionisneeded),thegoverningbodyoftheLEA shouldformallyacceptanddocumentthefindings ofthereviewandthenproceedwiththeproject.
5.6.6. SSC and LEA Review and Recommendation Afterthestateortribalenvironmentalregulatory agencyrespondstothefindingsofthefinal preliminaryenvironmentalassessmentreportand determineswhetherfurtheractionisneeded,the SSCandtheLEAshouldreviewthefindingsofthe preliminaryenvironmentalassessmentreportand makearecommendationontheproject.The recommendationshouldbebasedonthe PreliminaryAssessmentReportandpublic commentsreceived.Thepurposeofthisreviewis fortheLEAtoeither:
77
5.7. Stage 3: Comprehensive Environmental Review

Exhibit 10: Stage 3: Comprehensive Environmental Review
STAGE 3: Comprehensive Environmental Review

1. Identify environmental professional to conduct the comprehensive environmental assessment Section 5.7 NOTE: Comprehensive environmental reviews are only needed for potential environmental hazards identified in the preliminary environmental assessment and may include review of onsite contamination, offsite environmental hazards and/or impacts on the environment.
2. Task environmental professional to develop a workplan that defines the goals and rationale of the sampling strategy and the sampling methods and procedures Section 5.7.1
! Post the workplan for public comment ! Submit the workplan to state and tribal environmental regulatory agency for review
3. Task environmental professional to conduct comprehensive environmental review Sections 5.7.15.7.3
4. Task environmental professional to draft a final report of all comprehensive environmental reviews that were conducted Section 5.7.4
! Develop preliminary plans and cost estimates for any mitigation/remediation measures that may be needed for the site
5. Submit the draft report to state or tribal environmental regulatory agency for preliminary review Section 5.7.4
6. Post the draft report for public comment Section 5.7.4

! Modify the report to address substantive issues raised during the public review phase
7. Submit the final report and public comments to state or tribal environmental regulatory agency for final review Section 5.7.5
8. Make final comprehensive environmental review report available to the public Section 5.7.5
Go to Stage 1, Step 2
9. Consider findings of the final comprehensive environmental review report Section 5.7.7
NO
YES
NO
Does the LEA decide to mitigate/remediate environmental hazards so site can be safely used for a school location?
YES
Go to STAGE 4:
Develop Site Specific Mitigation/Remediation Measures
78
IftheLEAdecidestoconductacomprehensive environmentalreview,theenvironmental professional(seeSection10)employedorhiredto performtheassessmentwillconductamore thoroughexaminationofthepotentialissues identifiedinthepreliminaryenvironmental review. 59TheLEAisencouragedtoworkwithits stateortribalenvironmentalprogramtoassist withthiseffort.Thefollowingdescriptionofthe comprehensiveenvironmentalreviewincludes assessmentofonsitecontamination,offsite environmentalhazardsandpotentiallysignificant environmentalimpactsoftheproposedschoolon thesurroundingenvironment.Itisimportantto notethatitmaynotbenecessarytoperformall threecomprehensivereviews.Thefindingsfrom thepreliminaryenvironmentalreviewcanbeused todeterminewhichassessment(s)is/areneeded tofullycharacterizethesite. Thepurposeofthecomprehensiveenvironmental reviewistogatherandanalyzedataon environmentalhazardsandimpactsidentifiedin thePreliminaryEnvironmentalReview,and evaluatetherisksposedtochildrenshealth, publichealthandtheenvironmentbasedonthe contaminationorimpactsfound.The comprehensiveenvironmentalreviewalso includesdevelopingpreliminaryplansandcost estimatesformitigatingorreducingrisks.The costofthecomprehensiveenvironmentalreview willdependonthecomplexityofthesite.LEAsare stronglyencouragedtoworkwiththeirstateor tribalenvironmentalregulatoryprogramto identifycriticalenvironmentalfactorsthatneedto beconsideredintheenvironmentalassessment process. Inmanystates,theonlyportionofthe comprehensiveenvironmentalreviewthatis subjecttoreviewandapprovalbythestate
59
environmentalregulatoryagencyistheonsite contaminationcomponent.Anoversightreviewof theoffsiteandenvironmentalimpactreports shouldalsobecompleted,buttheagencythat conductsthereviewwillvaryfromstatetostate. Theenvironmentalprofessionalshouldprepare draftreportsforeachreviewbeingperformed, andtheLEAshouldpublishthosedraftsforpublic comment.Allfinaldraftsshouldconsiderpublic comments.Thefinaldraftsshouldbesubjectto reviewandapprovalbytheSSCandLEA.To capturearangeofconsiderationsthethree reviewsthatfollow(orwhicheverofthethree reviewsthatareneeded,basedonthepreliminary environmentalreview)canbeconducted concurrently. Thecomprehensiveenvironmentalreviewshould alsoincludeanevaluationofthepotentialrisks posedtochildrenshealth,publichealthorthe environmentbasedonthecontaminantsidentified atthesite.Thisevaluationshouldinclude: ! Aconceptualsitemodelthatincludesa writtendescriptionandgraphicdepictionofall possiblepathwaysofexposurethatcouldresult inchildren,schoolstaffandthecommunity beingexposedtopotentiallyharmful contaminantsattheschoolsite(e.g.,inhalation, soilingestion,dermal); 60and ! Adescriptionofpotentialhealth consequencesoflongtermandshortterm exposuretoanypotentiallyharmful contaminants,totheextentfeasible. 5.7.1 Comprehensive Environmental Review of Onsite Contamination Ifthestateortribalregulatoryagencyconcurs withthefindingsfromthepreliminary environmentalassessmentandnofurtheraction
60
The qualifications of an environmental professional needed to Many conceptual site models have been developed. For example,
conduct ESA's are defined in ASTM International Standard E152705 www.astm.org/standards/e1527.htm; also see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, All Appropriate Inquiries Rule: Definition Of Environmental Professional, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA 560F05241, October 2005. Accessed on September 16, 2011 Available at: http://epa.gov/brownfields/aai/ep_deffactsheet.pdf.
there is a model in Section 3.1 of the Regional Screening Level Guidance available at: www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb concentration_table/usersguide.htm and California has a model available at: www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/upload/Appdx_A1_083108.pdf.
79
isrequired,thereviewforonsitecontaminationis complete. Ifthepreliminaryenvironmentalassessment(see Section5.6)showsthatfurtherassessmentof onsitecontaminationisnecessary,the environmentalprofessionalshouldconducta comprehensiveenvironmentalreviewto determineifhazardousmaterialsarepresent,orif thereispotentialforareleaseofahazardous materialorsubstancethatcouldposeahealth threattochildren,stafforcommunitymembers. Thecomprehensiveenvironmentalreviewshould alsoassesstheneedforcleanupbasedonlevelsof contaminationfoundandidentifythecleanup standardsthatwillbeused. Beforeanyworkisdoneonthecomprehensive environmentalreview,theLEAshoulddevelopa publicinvolvementplan(seeSection3)that ensuresmeaningfulpublicandcommunity involvementinthecomprehensiveenvironmental reviewprocess.Theplanshouldindicatewhat mechanismstheLEAwillusetoinvolvethepublic. TheLEAshouldsubmitthepublicinvolvement plantothestateortribalregulatoryagencyfor commentbeforecomprehensiveenvironmental reviewactivitiesbegin;insomecases,thismaybe astateortribalrequirement. Beforeconductinganysamplingforthedetailed comprehensiveenvironmentalreview,the environmentalprofessionalshouldpreparea workplanthatdefinesthefollowing: water,groundwaterandair(www.epa.gov/ schools/siting/resources)toaccuratelydefinethe typeandextentofcontaminationpresentatthe candidatesite.Stateortribalenvironmental regulatoryagency(www.astswmo.org/ Pages/Resources/State_Agency_Links.htm) reviewoftheworkplanshouldbeobtainedprior totheinitiationofsampling.Priortosampling,the LEAshouldobtainsignedaccessagreementsfrom propertyowners. Criteriaforestablishingthedegreeofcleanup neededshouldbebasedonstateortribalcleanup Engineering and Institutional Controls and Community Involvement Engineering controls and institutional controls are tools to ensure that sites remain safe by preventing potential exposures to contaminants and preventing land uses likely to create exposures see Section 8.15. Communities have an important role to play in ensuring engineering and institutional controls remain in place and are effective in preventing potential exposures. Through the community involvement and planning process, the community can become familiar with the nature of residual contamination, engineering controls and institutional controls that place restrictions on how the land can be used. They can help LEAs meet their obligations by reporting actions in conflict with those land use restrictions to LEA management and tribal or state environmental regulatory authorities. The LEA and the SSC also can continue to play a role in updating the community about their inspection, monitoring and maintenance efforts, with the assistance of tribal or state technical oversight, as appropriate. See the Quick Guide for Environmental Issues see Section 8.15 for information about engineering and institutional controls.
! Thegoalsofthesampling; ! Therationaleforthesamplingstrategy, includingthenumberandlocationofsampling sitesandwhatsubstancestoanalyzeinthe samples;and ! Thesamplingmethodsandproceduresthatwill beused,andtheanalyticalmethodsand procedures,inaccordancewithquality assuranceplanrequirements. Thecomprehensiveenvironmentalreviewmay includefullscalegridsamplingandanalysisof soil,soilgases(ifany),andpotentiallysurface 80 | EnvironmentalReviewProcess
rulesorguidance,wheretheyexist.The environmentalstandardsusedtoevaluatesite contaminationshoulduseeither1)standards developedforschoolsorresidentialuseor2)risk basedlevelsdesignedtobeprotectivefor residentialuse.Ifcleanupsaregoingtoleave residualcontaminationthatexceedsresidential uselevels,engineeringandinstitutionalcontrols (seeSection8.15)andlongtermstewardship(see Section8.16)shouldbeincludedtoprovideasafe environment. Theprocessofidentifyingthecapabilityofthe state,tribalorlocalagenciestomaintain institutionaland/orengineeringcontrolsand implementlongtermstewardshipwillvarywith thejurisdiction.Forexample,communitieswith wellestablishedenvironmentaldepartmentsare morelikelytobefamiliarwithinstitutionaland engineeringcontrolsandlongtermstewardship, especiallyiftherearesiteswithintheir communitywhereinstitutionalandengineering controlsandlongtermstewardshiphavebeen employed.Insituationswherethelocal governmentlackstheresources,expertiseor authoritytoimplementandenforce institutional/engineeringcontrolsaspartof overseeinglongtermstewardshipplans,stateor tribalstaffmayneedtoassumethisresponsibility. Ifstafforresourcesarenotavailabletosupport institutionalandengineeringcontrolsandlong termstewardshipthatwouldbeneeded,asite thatrequiresthesetoolsshouldnotbeselected becauseexposureswithoutinstitutionaland engineeringcontrolsandlongtermstewardship couldposeunacceptableriskstostudentsand workers. Whenenvironmentaltestingiscompleted,and remedialactionsareundertakentoprevent potentialenvironmentalexposures,itmaybe importanttopreservetheabilitytopursuecost recoveryinthefuture,incaseswherelegalcost recoverymechanismsexist.Theenvironmental professionalshouldkeepdetailedrecordsduring allphasesoftheenvironmentalassessmentand remediationandisrequiredtosign documentationoftheirfindingsand recommendations.Photodocumentation, completefieldnotes,writtennotificationto propertyownersofenvironmentalconditionsand provisionstoallowpropertyownerstoobtain splitsamplesforanalysisareallrecognized methodstopreservecostrecoveryrights. 5.7.2. Comprehensive Environmental Review of Offsite Environmental Hazards Usingthelistofoffsitehazardsidentifiedinthe preliminaryenvironmentalassessmentreport (Stage2,seeSection5.6),theenvironmental professionalshouldevaluateandestimatethe risksthosehazardsmayposetofutureusersof theschoolsite.(Ifnonearbyhazardswere identifiedinthepreliminaryenvironmental review,nofurtherreviewofoffsiteenvironmental hazardsisneeded.)Theenvironmental professionalshouldidentifyboththerisksthat canbemitigatedandthosethatcannotbe mitigatedandidentifymeasurestoreducethese riskstotheextentfeasible.Oldwastesites, includingSuperfundsites,industrialairpollution sources,raillines,railyardsandhighwaysare examplesofthekindofhazardsthatwouldbe evaluatedatthisstage(SeeExhibit6:Screening PotentialEnvironmentalandSafetyHazards).The reportaboutoffsitehazardsshoulddiscuss whetherfeasiblemitigationmeasuresare availablethatwouldeliminateallsignificantrisks. FormorespecificguidanceseeEvaluatingImpacts ofNearbySourcesofAirPollution(seeSection6). 5.7.3. Comprehensive Environmental Review of Impacts of the Project on the Environment Usingthelistofpotentialsignificant environmentalimpacts(e.g.,habitatandwater quality)identifiedinthepreliminary environmentalassessment(seeSection5.6),the environmentalprofessionalshouldevaluateand reportpotentialimpactstheprojectmayhaveon thesurroundingenvironmentandpropose alternativestomitigateoreliminatethose impacts.Thereportshoulddiscusswhat environmentalimpactswillremainevenafter mitigationmeasuresaretaken.(Ifnopotential
81
significantenvironmentalimpactswereidentified inthepreliminaryenvironmentalreview,no furtherreviewofimpactsoftheprojectonthe environmentisneeded.) 5.7.4. Development and Review of Comprehensive Environmental Assessment Reports Theenvironmentalprofessionalshouldpreparea draftreportthatcombinesthefindingsofthe environmentalassessment(s)performedinthe comprehensiveenvironmentalreview.Thisdraft comprehensiveenvironmentalreviewreportwill alsodescribeproposedandalternativemitigation measurestoreducepotentialrisksandimpacts. Throughfindingsandconclusionswithsupporting data,thereportshoulddocumentpotential impactsthat: ! Arenotconsideredtobeofconcern; ! Couldbeeffectivelymanagedthough mitigation;and ! Mayposesignificantorunacceptableriskseven afterallfeasiblemitigationstepshavebeen implemented. TheLEAshouldsubmitthedraftcomprehensive environmentalreviewreporttothe environmentalagenciesinvolvedintheregulatory oversightoftheschoolsitingdecision,whichmay includetribal,state,otherlocalagenciesorfederal agencies(suchasBureauofIndianEducationor DepartmentofDefense),andthepublicuponits completionbytheenvironmentalprofessional.To solicitpubliccomment,theLEAshouldpostthe draftcomprehensiveenvironmentalreviewonthe projectwebsiteandshouldfollowthesteps describedearlierinthissection. TheLEAandstateortribalenvironmental regulatoryagencyshouldevaluatepublic responsetothenoticeandmodifythepublic involvementplan(e.g.,byextendingthecomment period),asnecessary,toensuremeaningfulpublic inputthroughouttheschoolsitingprocess.The LEAshouldaddressallsubstantivecomments receivedduringthecommentperiod. Thestate,tribal,localorfederalenvironmental regulatoryagencythatisoverseeingtheconduct ofthecomprehensiveenvironmentalreview shouldreviewallcommentsreceived.Theagency maythenacceptorrejecttheconclusionsofthe revieworrequestrevisions.Insomecases(e.g., duetotimingoraccessconstraints),the comprehensiveenvironmentalreviewmaynot characterizeallenvironmentalhazards.A separatesupplementalsiteinvestigationmaybe necessarypriortodeterminingthepotentialneed forremediation/mitigation.Theprocessfor conductingasupplementalsiteinvestigation shouldfollowthestepsidentifiedearlierforthe comprehensiveenvironmentalreview.Ifaccepted, thestate,tribal,localorfederalenvironmental regulatoryagencymayconcurwiththefinding thatnofurtheractionisrequiredorthata remedialactionworkplanisrequirediftheLEA decidestopursuedevelopmentofthesite.The agencywillexplainindetailthereasonsfor acceptingorrejectingthecomprehensive environmentalreviewreportandthebasisforits determination. 5.7.5. Final Comprehensive Environmental Review Report Followingthepubliccommentperiodthe environmentalprofessional,inconsultationwith theLEAandtheSSC,shouldevaluateandrespond toallpubliccommentsandincorporatethose commentsintoafinalcomprehensive environmentalreviewreport. Thefinalreportshouldthenbeforwardedtothe SSCandtorelevantpublicagencies.Tosolicit publiccomment,theLEAshouldpostthefinal comprehensiveenvironmentalreviewonthe projectwebsiteandshouldfollowthesteps describedearlierinthissection. 5.7.6. Cost Estimates and Schedules of Remediation and/or Mitigation Measures Ifthefinalreportofpotentialenvironmentalrisks andimpactsincludesproposalsformitigation measures(e.g.,institutionalcontrols(seeSection 8.15),engineeringcontrols(seeSection8.15),
82
encapsulationofleadbasedpaint(seeSection 8.16),enclosureofasbestos(seeSection8.8),and longtermstewardship(seeSection10),potential costestimatesandschedulesofimplementation shouldbedevelopedincoordinationwithfacility planners(e.g.,architectsandlocalagencies).In addition,preliminarycostestimatesand schedulesforimplementationofanyremediation ofonsitecontaminationshouldbeprepared, including,whereappropriate,thecostof maintainingandmonitoringcontrolsoverthelife oftheschool.Thesepreliminarycostandschedule estimatesformitigationandremediationshould thenbeforwardedtotheSSCandLEA. 5.7.7. SSC Review and Recommendation TheLEAshouldthenreviewthecommittee recommendations,includinganyanalysisof potentialalternatives,impactstopublichealth, projectcosts/scheduleimpacts,publicconcerns, etc.,anddecidetocertifytheenvironmental reportsorrequestfurtherrevisionstothereports. Followingthisdetermination,theLEAmay approveproceedingwiththeprojectatthesitefor whichthecomprehensiveenvironmentalreview wascompletedordecidetoeliminatethesitefrom furtherconsideration.IftheLEAdecidesto eliminatethesitefromfurtherconsideration,the LEAshouldworkwiththeSSCtoidentifyanother preferredlocationforenvironmentalreviewthat beginsatStage2(seeSection5.6)orStage3(see Section5.7),dependingonwhatassessmenthas alreadybeenperformedforthenewpreferred location.Inthoseinstances,recordsof environmentalinvestigation,findingsand decisionsshouldberetained.
TheSSCshouldreview: ! Finalcomprehensiveenvironmentalreview report; ! Preliminarycostestimatesandschedulesfor remediationandmitigation;and ! Publiccommentsreceivedonthesedocuments. TheSSCshouldrecommendtotheLEAwhether theenvironmentalreportsadequately characterizepotentialenvironmentalconcernsat thecandidatesite.Followingthisdetermination, theSSCcanrecommendtotheLEAwhetherto proceedoreliminatethesitefromfurther considerationbasedonpublichealthrisks,costs andscheduleimpacts,publicconcernsandother factors.
83
5.8. Stage 4: Develop Sitespecific Mitigation/Remediation Measures

Exhibit 11: Stage 4: Develop Sitespecific Mitigation/Remediation Measures
STAGE 4: Develop SiteSpecific Mitigation/Remediation Measures
1. Task environmental professional to develop a remedial action workplan, including a preliminary longterm stewardship plan if the remedial action includes the use of institutional controls, engineering controls and/or longterm mitigation measures. Sections 5.8.15.8.4 2. Submit draft workplan to the state or tribal environmental regulatory agency Section 5.7.5
3. Post the workplan for public comment Section 5.7.5
NO
Will remedial actions and measures fully address environmental hazards so that no longterm stewardship is needed to prevent school occupants exposure?
YES
NO
NO
Are there alternate remediation/ mitigation measures that can be selected that will not require longterm stewardship?
Does the LEA have the capacity to manage institutional and engineering controls to prevent potentially harmful exposures?
YES
YES
4. Submit the final workplan to the state or tribal environmental agency for review and approval Section 5.7.5
Revise workplan and resubmit for review
NO
Is the workplan approved by the state or tribal agency?
YES
Go to STAGE 5:
Implement Remedial/Mitigation Measures
84
5.8.1. Offsite Mitigation Measures subjecttopublicreviewbeforethedecisionis madetorelyonsuchcontrols.Wherestateor tribalregulatorshaveapprovedcleanupto restrictedreusestandards,LEAsneedtosecure fundsorpostabondtoensurethecontinued monitoringandmaintenanceofinstitutionaland engineeringcontrols. Theremedialactionworkplanshould: ! Identifymethodsforcleaningupthesiteto contaminantlevelsthatmeettheapplicable environmentalandpublichealthstandards; ! Containafinancialanalysisthatcompares estimatedcostsoverthelifeoftheschoolfor theidentifiedcleanupmethodsthatwillbring thesiteintocompliancewithapplicablesafety standards; ! Recommendacleanupplanfromthe alternativesidentified,includingadescription oflongtermmaintenance,monitoringandthe costofanyinstitutionalorengineeringcontrols andlongtermstewardshipimplementedas partofthecleanup(preliminarysite maintenanceplan); ! Explainhowtherecommendedcleanup optionwillpreventchildrenfrombeing exposedtotheenvironmentalhazardsfound atthesiteoronanyadjoiningcontaminated parcels;and ! Clearlydescribetheresponsibilitiesand longtermenvironmentalstewardship obligationsoftheLEA(orotherresponsible party)forinspection,maintenanceand reportingassociatedwithanyengineering controlimplementedaspartofthecleanup. Ifcleanupsaregoingtoleaveresidual contaminationonthesitethatrequire implementationandmaintenanceof engineering/institutionalcontrols(seeSection 8.15),LEAsshouldensurethatthesitecleanup planisapprovedbythestateortribeforstateor tribalvoluntarycleanupsites.
Inadditiontoremediationofonsite contamination,theLEAshouldcoordinatewith theappropriatestate,tribalandlocalgovernment agenciestoimplementanynecessaryoffsite mitigationmeasures,suchasinstallingtraffic signals,signage,utilities,etc.,aswellasidentify potentialmeasuresthatcanbeimplementedat theproposedschoolsitetomitigatehazardsfrom offsitepollutionsourcesbyeliminatingexposures topollutanthazards.Formorespecificguidance seeEvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAir Pollution(seeSection6). 5.8.2. Onsite Remediation Measures
IftheLEAdecidestoproceedwithasitewhere contaminationwillbecleanedup,aremedial actionworkplanshouldbedevelopedand submittedtothestateregulatoryagencyfor approval.Typically,anenvironmental professionalwillassistwiththeworkplan.When designingcleanupactivities,theLEAshould recognizethatyoungchildrenwillbepresenton thesiteandevaluateassumptionsusedin establishingcleanupstandardsandremedial response.Whenavailable,thestateandLEA shouldusecleanuplevelsthatareexplicitly protectiveofearlylifesensitivitytotoxicantsand earlylifeexposures. NOTE:Typically,cleanuplevelsforsitesintended forresidentialuseareappropriateforuseatsites consideredforafutureschooluse.Stateandtribal programsmayrecommendcleanuplevelsbased ontheirreviewofthespecificsitecharacteristics, contaminantspresentonthesiteandother factors.Wherecleanupisneeded,allcleanupwork shouldbecompletedandapprovedbythestateor tribalregulatoryagencypriortooccupancyofthe school.Incaseswhereresidualwasteor contaminationwillremainonsitefollowing cleanup,acarefulandobjectiveevaluationofthe capacityoftheschooldistrictandlocalandstate authoritiesshouldbecompletedtoensuresafe operationsandthatinstitutionalandengineering controls(seeSection8.15)willbemaintained(i.e., longtermstewardship)overthelongtermandbe
85
5.8.3. Remediation Techniques remedialactionssuchastheinstallationofan undergroundsoilvaporrecoverysystemmaybe requiredtoeliminateapotentialvaporintrusion concern.Waterqualitytestingmayalsobe required.Ifgroundwaterisfoundtobe contaminated,monitoringwellsmayneedtobe drilledatthesite,andlongtermwatermonitoring mayberequired. Example 2 Thepresenceofpetroleuminsoilandground water(seeSection8.5)asaresultofleaking undergroundstoragetanksmayrequiresoiland groundwaterremediation.Ifthesoilisexcavated, andifseparatedphasepetroleumisfloatingon thewatertable,itusuallyrequiresrecoveryand offsitetreatmentanddisposal.Contamination fromundergroundstoragetankscanalsoresultin vaporintrusionconcerns,whicharediscussedin theearlierexample. Example 3 Insomecases,structuralfillisbroughtontoasite toprovideareliablestructuralsurfacefor construction,andinothercases,thesoilsonthe sitearecomposedofhistoricfill(seeSection 8.14).Iffilliscontaminated,itcanpresenta potentialrisktostudentsorstaff.Iffeasible,the LEAshouldcleanupthesitetoresidentialuse levels,whichmayinvolveremovaloffillmaterial. Whereremovaloflargequantitiesoffillmaterial isinfeasible,institutional/engineeringcontrols andanenforceablelongtermstewardshipplan, approvedbyanenvironmentalregulatoryagency, maybeutilizedtoeliminateexposureto contaminatedsoil.Landscapingplansneedtobe compatiblewiththeengineeringcontrol.For example,plantswithonlyashallowrootzonemay beallowedbuttreesmaybeprohibited. Example 4 Thepresenceofbannedpesticides(seeSection 8.12)maybeencounteredinsoilandground wateratexistingandproposedschoolsitesasa resultofformeragriculturalandpest managementpractices.Someofthesepesticides donotreadilydegrade,andasaresultmay
Althoughthespecificremedialresponsemeasures prescribedinaremedialactionworkplanwill needtobetailoredtotheparticular characteristicsofagivensite,anumberof environmentalconditionsinneedofremediation areroutinelyencounteredatexistingand proposedschoollocations.Theenvironmental professionalandthestateortribalenvironmental regulatoryagencyshouldhavetheexpertise neededtodevelopeachoftheremediationoptions thatfollow. Thefollowingtextprovidesexamplesofsituations thatmightbeencountered.Theseexamplesare beingprovidedbecausetheyhighlightscenarios thathavebeenrepeatedindifferentlocations throughoutthecountry.Theyhighlighttypesof contaminationandremediesthathavebeen employed.SeetheQuickGuidetoEnvironmental Issues,Section8,foradditionalinformationabout theexamplesbelow,andseetheResources (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources)pageof theguidelineswebsiteforlinksrelatedto environmentalissuesthatmaybeencounteredfor somesites. Example 1 Thepresenceofvolatileorganiccompounds (VOCs)insoilandgroundwater(seeSection8.3) mayrequiremitigationmeasurestoprotect againstpotentialvaporintrusionintooverlying schoolbuildings.Commoncontaminantsinsoil andgroundwaterthatcancauseavaporintrusion concernincludebenzene(e.g.,fromgasoline)and drycleaninganddegreasingsolvents(e.g., trichloroethyleneandperchloroethylene).Ifthese orothervolatilecontaminantsarepresentandthe LEAdecidestoproceedwiththesite,thereare waysthefacilitycanbelocatedontheproperty, designedandengineeredtominimizethe potentialforvaporintrusionandinclude mitigationequipmentforfutureuse,ifneeded,at alowercostthanifretrofittedafterconstruction. Whenconstructed,periodicindoorairtestingis oftenwarranted,anddependingonthe concentrationandpotentialdurationofexposure,
86
presentapotentialexposurewhensoilis excavated.Dependingonpriorusesofthesite, samplingforpesticidesmaybeappropriateto considerinthedevelopmentofthe comprehensiveenvironmentalreviewplan describedearlierinStage3(seeSection5.7). 5.8.4. Plan Preliminary Longterm Stewardship authorizedpersonscangainaccesstothe unremediatedportionofthecontaminatedsite; ! Plansformonitoringinstitutionaland engineeringcontrolsshouldinclude timeframesformonitoring(annual monitoringreviewsshouldbeadoptedat leastforthefirstfewyearswheninstitutional controls/engineeringcontrolsareemployed), recordkeepingandreporting; ! Conditionsandproceduresformodification andterminationofinstitutionalcontrols; and ! Recommendationsforthefinalsitesampling tobedoneafterthecleanuphasbeen completedtoensurethatallresidual contaminationislessthanthecleanupgoals definedforthesite.Suchsampling recommendationsshouldbedesignedto discoverthehighestpossibleconcentrationsof contaminationatthecandidatesite. Thereareanumberofresourcesthatdocument typesofremediation,costsandeffectivenessfora rangeofcontaminants,engineeringcontrolsand institutionalcontrolsthatcanbeeffectivein managingcontaminants,includingEPAsOfficeof SolidWasteandEmergencyResponseonsite cleanup(www.epa.gov/oswer/cleanup/index) andEPAsCluIn(www.cluin.org/)websites, whicharelistedontheResources(www.epa.gov/ schools/siting/resources)pageoftheguidelines website.Whilethesewebsitesprovideextensive materials,thecost,effectivenessandvarietyof methodswillvarywiththesiteandneedtobe properlymonitoredandmaintainedtoremain protective. 5.8.5. SSC and State or Tribal Agency Review and Public Comment TheLEAshouldsecurestateortribalregulatory agencyreviewandapprovaloftheremedialaction workplanpreparedbytheenvironmental professional.Uponsubmittingthisplantothe stateortribalenvironmentalregulatoryagency, thedraftremedialactionworkplanshouldbe
Iftheremedialactionworkplanincludespartial cleanupinconjunctionwiththeuseof institutionalandengineeringcontrolstoprevent potentiallyharmfulexposurestocontaminants, theLEAshoulddevelopapreliminarylongterm stewardshipplanaspartoftheremedialaction plantoensurefullconsiderationoflongterm feasibilityandcost.Apreliminarylongterm stewardshipplanshouldinclude: ! Identificationofcontaminantsofconcern and,ifpossible,mapsshowingthelocationof contamination,propertyboundaries,and institutionalandengineeringcontrols; ! Proposedplanstocontaincontaminants, includinganyengineeringandinstitutional controlstobeused; ! Longtermmaintenanceandmonitoring measuresnecessarytoensurethelongterm integrityofengineeringandinstitutional controls; ! Adetailedevaluationoftheresourcesand expertisenecessarytoimplementtheplanand adiscussionofalternativemeasuresconsidered andthebasisfortheirrejection; ! Ademonstratedcommitmentoffunding sufficienttoensuretheimplementationand maintenanceofallplancomponentsoverthe longterm(i.e.,thelifeoftheschool); ! Aremedialactionworkplanthataddresses cleanupoftheentirecontaminatedsitewhena schoolisproposedforonlyaportionofaknown contaminatedsite.Inthiscase,thelongterm stewardshipplanshouldoutlinetheongoing securitymeasureswhichwillensurethatonly
87
madeavailabletotheSSCforreviewand comment.Oncetheworkplanissubmittedtothe stateortribalagencyforapproval,theLEAshould postthedraftcomprehensiveenvironmental reviewontheprojectwebsiteandfollowthesteps describedearliertosolicitpubliccomment. Apublichearingontheremediationplanshould beconductedintheneighborhoodorjurisdiction ofthecandidatesite.TheLEAshouldpublisha noticeofthehearinginnewspapersofgeneral circulation,includingforeignlanguage newspapersiftheschooldistricthasasizable numberofnonEnglishspeakingparents,andpost anoticeontheLEAandprojectwebsitesstating thedate,timeandlocationofthehearing. Afterthepublichearingandreviewofany commentsreceivedduringthepubliccomment period,thestateortribeshouldapprovethe remedialactionworkplan,approvetheworkplan withrevisionsordisapprovetheworkplan.Ifthe stateortriberequiresadditionalinformation,a copyofthestatesortribe'scommentsandthe responsespreparedbytheenvironmental professionalincoordinationwiththeLEAshould bemadeavailabletotheSSCandbepostedonthe projectwebsite.Anyadditionalinformation submittedbytheLEAtothestateortribeshould alsobemadeavailabletotheSSC. Thestateortribeshouldexplainindetailthe reasonsforacceptingorrejectingtheworkplan. Beforeapprovingaworkplan,thestateortribe shouldmakeanexplicitfindingthattheLEAhas therequisitecapacitytooverseeandmanagethe remediation/mitigationmeasuresand institutionalandengineeringcontrolsproposedin theremedialactionworkplan. Afterthestateortribeapprovestheworkplan,the SSCmayalsoreviewtheplanandrecommendto theLEAwhethertoproceedwithacquiringthe siteandimplementingtheremediationplan.The LEAshouldnotbeginconstructingtheschooluntil siteclearancehasbeenprovidedbythestateor tribalenvironmentalregulatoryagency,following itsapprovaloftheremediationactivities(post Stage5).

5.9. Stage 5: Implement Remedial/Mitigation Measures

Exhibit 12: Stage 5: Implement Remedial/Mitigation Measures
STAGE 5: Implement Remedial/Mitigation Measures
1. Commence with the remediation of onsite contaminants and mitigation of offsite sources of pollutants
2. Conduct sampling to verify cleanup goals have been met and mitigation measures of offsite sources of pollutants have been successful
3. Document successful implementation of the plan and final sampling results, and compile into a report
4. Post the report for public comment
5. Submit the report to the state or tribe for review
Do remedial actions and mitigation measures fully address environmental hazards so that no longterm stewardship is needed to prevent school occupants exposure?
YES
NO
6. Revise the preliminary longterm stewardship plan developed in Stage 4, Step 1
7. Post the final longterm stewardship plan for public comment
8. Send longterm stewardship plan to state and tribal authorities for approval
Revise the long term stewardship plan
NO
Do state or tribal authorities approve the final longterm stewardship plans?
YES
Go to STAGE 6:
Longterm Stewardship
89
Priortotheonsetofanyschoolconstructionatthe candidatesite,EPArecommendstheremediation ofthesiteasdefinedintheremedialaction workplanbecompleted.Ifengineeringcontrols arerequiredaspartofremediation,construction ofthosecontrolsmaybeginfollowingapprovalby thestateortribalenvironmentalregulatory agency. Remediationmeasurestakentoreducerisksfrom offsitehazardscanbeconductedpriortoor duringschoolconstructionactivities,depending onthemitigationmeasuresbeingimplemented. Appropriatestate,tribalandlocalenvironmental agenciesshouldbeconsultedbeforeandafterthe remediationmeasuresareinstalledtoensurethat themitigationcontrolstakenwillreduce exposurestotheenvironmentalhazardsof concern.Formorespecificguidancesee EvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAir Pollution(seeSection6). Finalsampling,inaccordancewithsampling proceduresinthecomprehensiveenvironmental reviewortheremedialactionworkplan,shouldbe conductedtoverifythatcleanupgoalshavebeen met.Documentationregardingthe implementationoftheplanandallfinalsampling resultsshouldbecompiledintoareportand submittedtotheLEAandSSCforpostingonthe projectwebsiteandalsosubmittedtothestateor tribeforreview,whichmayrequireadditional samplingand/orremediationeffortsasthestate ortribedeemsappropriate.Anymodificationsto theremedialactionworkplanshouldalsogo throughtheappropriatepublicreviewprocesses describedearlier. Towardthecompletionofremedialactivities,the environmentalprofessionalshouldrevisethe preliminarylongtermstewardshipplan(LTSP) developedinStage4,Section5.8,whichwillset forth,indetail,thespecificmannerinwhich institutionalandengineeringcontrolswillbe employed.ThepreliminaryLTSPshouldaddress allcontaminationleftonsitefollowing remediationthatwouldpreventresidentialuse. ThepreliminaryLTSPshouldbesubmittedfor publicreviewandcommentinthesamemanner undertakenforalloftheprecedingplansand reportsandshouldbesubmittedtothestateor tribeforapprovalpriortothecommencementof construction.Acriticalcomponentofsuchaplan isaclearcommitmentforthefundingandother supportneededtoeffectivelymonitorandensure theintegrityandeffectivenessofanyinstitutional andengineeringcontrols. Adescriptionoftherecommendedcontentsofthe preliminaryorfinalLTSPfollows: ! Asitedescriptionthatincludes: Historicalusesofthesiteandrelevant adjacenthistoricaluses; Asummaryoftheenvironmental evaluationofthesiteincludingdetailson thelocationandextentofsoil/water contaminationinexcessofregulatory standards;and Asummaryoftheremedialworkdoneat thesitealongwiththetestresults. ! Acleardepictionoftheinstitutionaland engineeringcontrolsthatincludes: Accuratemapsshowingtheinstitutional andengineeringcontrols; Adescriptionofthelongterm environmentalstewardshipobligations alongwithastatementofwhowillbe responsiblefortheirimplementation;and Apublicdocumentthatoutlinesthe responsibilitiesformaintainingboth engineeringandinstitutionalcontrols, providedcontaminationlevelswarrantthe controls. ! Specificcontingencyplansthatdescribe engineeringcontrolrestorationactivities shouldtheengineeringcontrolbedisturbed; ! Adescriptionofprohibitedactivities(e.g., digging)inareasconstructedwithan engineeringcontroltomaintaintheintegrityof theengineeringcontrol;
90
! Adefinitionoftheminimumprofessional requirements(i.e.,licensedprofessional engineer)formaintainingtheengineering control,includingwhereappropriateany necessarytrainingofschoolstaffresponsible formanagingschoolgroundsincluding: Identification/creationofapositionwithin theschoolsfacilitydepartmentfora technicallyknowledgeablepersontrained andresponsibleforoversightoftheschool andgrounds; Trainingontechniquesformonitoring cracksintheschoolfoundationand breachesintheengineeringcontrol; Howtohandleand/orreportproblems withequipmentandremedialsystems;and Howtohandlecomplaintsandcomments aboutenvironmentalconditionsatthe school. ! Acompliancemonitoringprogramtobe carriedoutbyqualifiedenvironmental professionals,asnecessary,thatwillinclude: Routineinspections,testsand maintenanceofengineeringand institutionalcontrolstoensuretheir continuedeffectiveness; Testsforthepresenceofcontaminantsin thesoil,soilgas,groundwaterandindoor andambientairontheschoolgroundsif anengineeringcontrolisdisturbed; Proceduresforrecordkeepingand reporting; Allocationofresponsibilitiesforthese activitiesamongLEAs,stateortribal agencies,schoolofficialsandstaff;and Anindependentreviewbyalicensed professionalengineernotaffiliatedwith theschool. ! Apublicaccountability/oversightplanthat includes: Theprominentplacementofsignage withintheschoolthatclearlydefinesthe extentofthecontaminatedareasalong withappropriateinstitutionaland engineeringcontrolsontheproperty,and directsreaderstoappropriatepersonnel anddocumentsforfurtherinquiry; Developmentofa"duecareplan,"tobe keptonsiteandmadeavailabletothe publicelectronically,thatsummarizeskey elementsandresponsibilitiesfor implementingtheplaninalayaccessible manner; Measurestopromotethelongterm, institutionalandpublicmemoryofthe planthroughactivitiesdesignedto promoteawarenessbystudents,staffand thecommunity,suchasguestspeakersand dedicationofasectionoftheschoolor locallibrarytothehistoryofthesite, remediationstrategiesandoversightand stewardshipmeasures;and Theestablishmentofregularreporting mechanismsthatpubliclydisseminate informationonthelocationofcontrols, compliancestatusandmonitoringreports inamannerconsistentwiththenotice provisionsdiscussedearlierandincluding relevantlocalandtribalorstate environmentalagencies.Includedinthis shouldbetestingreportsthatclearly describethepurposeofthetesting,sample locationsandcollectionprocedures,and analyticalmethodsused.Thereleaseof thesereportsshould: Beaccompaniedbyameaningful opportunityforthepublictoprovide commentandmeetwithschool officialsresponsibleformaintaining theengineeringcontrols;and Targetoutreachandcommunications aboutreleaseofreportstoparentsand schoolworkers(shouldbenotified yearlyaboutwhereandhowtoobtain informationaboutcontamination, remediationactivitiesandongoing monitoring).
Schoolbuildingconstructionshouldbeginonly afterthestateortribalauthorityapprovesthe finallongtermstewardshipplananddetermines thatthesiteisreadyforconstruction.Engineering controlsmaybeimplementedbefore,duringor afterconstruction,dependingonthetypeof controlstobeused.
91
5.10. Stage 6: Longterm Stewardship

Exhibit 13: Stage 6: Longterm Stewardship
STAGE 6: Longterm Stewardship
1. Implement longterm stewardship plan
2. Incorporate key components of longterm stewardship plan into other facilities and operational plans
3. LEAs and state or tribal environmental regulatory agency should conduct periodic reviews of the effectiveness of remedial measures and engineering and institutional controls used at the site
Implement Remedial/Mitigation Measures Are remediation and mitigation measures being effectively implemented to prevent school occupants' exposures to environmental hazards?
NO
YES
Maintain longterm stewardship to ensure that contaminant levels are safe for use of the school
92
LEAsshouldincorporatekeycomponentsofthe longtermstewardshipplanintootherfacilityand operationalplansandtrainingmaterialsfor principals,facilitystaff,groundskeepersand contractors.Thelongtermstewardship componentoftheschoolmanagementplan memorializestheremedialactionsthatwere performed,monitoringofwelllocations,the standardstowhichtheremediationwas performed,thelocationofmaterialremovedand replaced,andtestsandconfirmatorysamplingof materialsbroughtasreplacementfillandany wastesormaterialleftcappedinplace.Thisplan describesindetailthespecificmannerinwhich institutionalandengineeringcontrolswillbe employedinthefutureandbywhom.Thefinal planshouldclearlyshowfiguresanddrawingsof thoselocationswheresoilorwaterquality remainsaboveresidentialusestandards, includingasbuiltdrawingsdepictingthe engineeringcontrol.Theplanshouldclearly definetherolesandresponsibilitiesfor maintainingtheengineeringcontrols,andthese responsibilitiesshouldbememorializedinan institutionalcontrolsuchasadeedrestrictionthat stayswiththepropertyevenwhenbought,soldor donated.Whereoffsitesourcesofcontamination exist,areawidepartnershipsmaybeaneffective tooltoaddresscontamination. Aftertheschoolprojectiscompleteandtheschool isopened,thestateortribalenvironmental regulatoryagencyshouldconductaperiodic reviewoftheeffectivenessofremedialmeasures andengineeringandinstitutionalcontrolsusedat thesite.Annualassessmentsofschoolsitesmay alsoberequiredaspartofaschoolfacility operationplanorlongtermfacilityplanoraspart oflocalgovernmentmasterplanningor comprehensiveplanupdatesandreporting.One potentialmodelforsuchreviewsisthefiveyear reviewEPAcurrentlyconductsforSuperfund sites.Fiveyearreviews 61(www.epa.gov/ superfund/cleanup/postconstruction/5yr)
61
provideanopportunitytoevaluatethe implementationandperformanceofaremedyto determinewhetheritremainsprotectiveof humanhealthandtheenvironment.These reviewswillalsobeusefulinidentifyingnew sourcesofenvironmentalhazardsarisingafter schoolconstructionandoccupancy. Whenemployinginstitutional/engineering controls,plansshouldbedevelopedtoaddress issuesthatmightarise.Forexample,thefailureof aninstitutionalorengineeringcontrolshould triggerimmediatenotificationbytheLEAofthe staff,parentsandcommunity,aswellasstateor tribalauthorities.Actionsmaybeneededto ensurethatstudentsorstaffarenotexposedto contamination.Schoolemergencypreparedness plansshouldprovideforensuringthatstudents andstaffwillnotbeatriskintheeventofthe failureofengineeringcontrols.Plansshouldalso outlinerequirementsforpersonneltomonitor engineeringcontrols,whichmightbea combinationofmaintenancestaffand environmentalengineers.Complaintsorconcerns relatedtotheperformanceofengineeringand institutionalcontrolsshouldbetrackedand responsestothosecomplaints/concerns documented. Tohelpensurethatthemanagementof institutionalandengineeringcontrolswillreceive theattentiontheyrequire,theproceduresfor managementofinstitutionalandengineering controlsshouldbepartoftheschoolfacility operationsprocedures.Theproceduresshould includemonitoringrequirements,effectiveness andintegrityreviewrequirements,any performancereviewrequirements(suchas calibrationprocedures)anddocumentation requirements.Becausethesedocumentscanbe challengingforalayaudience,asummarywritten inplainlanguage(andtranslatedfornonEnglish speakingstakeholders)shouldbeavailableto communitymembers.Routinemonitoring, reviewsfortheeffectivenessandintegrityofthe remedy,andreportingallneedtocontinueforas longascontaminationlevelsdonotmeetsafe levelsforuseoftheschool.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Superfund FiveYear
Reviews. Last modified August 9, 2011. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/postconstruction/5yr.htm.
93

6. Evaluating Impacts of Nearby Sources of Air Pollution

6.1. Overview
Thissectionprovidesguidanceonassessmentof offsiteenvironmentalhazardsduringthe environmentalreviewprocess(seeSection5.1).It canbecomplextomeasureandunderstandthe potentialriskstoschooloccupantsthatmaybe associatedwithairemissionssourcessituatedin thevicinityoftheproposedschoollocation.The localeducationagency(LEA)(seeSection10)and schoolsitingcommittee(SSC)(seeSection3.3) shouldconsideranypotentialimpactsfrom nearbysourcesofairpollutionearlyinthe selectionprocess.Airbornepollutantsfrom nearbyemissionsourcescandirectlycontaminate theambientairatthelocationorbedepositedon thesiteovertime.Sourcesoftheseairpollutants arevaried,butmostarehumanmade,including: ! Mobilesources(e.g.,cars,trucksandbuseson roadways;trainsandrailyards;shipsandport facilities;planesandairportequipment); ! Stationarymajorsources(e.g.,factories, refineries,powerplants);and ! Localareasources(i.e.,collectionsofsmall pointsources,suchasautobodysprayshopsor drycleaners).
TheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA) identifiespollutantsofinterestinevaluatingair qualityataparticularlocationeitherascriteria pollutantsortoxicairpollutants,alsoknownas hazardousairpollutants(HAPs). ! Criteriapollutantsrefertosixcommonair pollutantsthatareregulatedthroughthe developmentofhumanhealthbasedand environmentallybasedcriteria(i.e.,science basedguidelines)thatareusedtosetthe NationalAmbientAirQualityStandards (NAAQS). 62Theyareparticles(oftenreferredto asparticulatematter),groundlevelozone, carbonmonoxide,sulfurdioxide(SO2),nitrogen dioxide(NO2)andlead.Stateswithareaswhere ambientconcentrationsareabovetheNAAQS (nonattainmentareas)arerequiredtodevelop planstobringthemintoattainment. ! Airtoxicsarepollutantsthatareknownor suspectedtocausecancerorotherserious healtheffects,suchasreproductiveeffectsor birthdefects,oradverseenvironmentaleffects. ThecurrentlistofHAPsisavailableonEPAs TechnologyTransferNetworkAirToxics website.(www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/188polls)In additiontothislist,dieselemissionsare consideredamobilesourceairtoxic.Brief summariesofthepertinenttoxicityinformation ontheseHAPsandinformationonwheremore comprehensiveandprimarydatacanbe obtainedarelocatedatwww.epa.gov/ttn/ atw/hlthef/hapindex.
62
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Ambient Air
Quality Standards NAAQS. Last modified August 4, 2011. Available at: www.epa.gov/air/criteria.
EvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAirPollution |
95
AsdiscussedintheEnvironmentalSitingCriteria Considerations(seeSection4)andEnvironmental ReviewProcess(seeSection5)sections,theinitial screenofpotentiallocationsforschoolsshould considerpotentialonsiteandnearby environmentalandsafetyhazards.Ingeneral,the LEAandSSCshouldseektoavoidlocationsthat areincloseproximitytolandusesthatmaybe incompatiblewithschools,suchasthoseincluded inExhibit6:ScreeningPotentialEnvironmental andSafetyHazards,particularlyincaseswhere acceptablealternativelocationsexistthatmay posefewerenvironmentalchallengesandstill meetotherimportantschoolsitingcriteria. IfanLEAisconsideringlocationsthatarein proximitytoairpollutionsourcesthatmaypose potentialrisks,anunderstandingofthose potentialexposuresandrisksisessential.Dueto themanyvariablesinvolved(suchasthose includedinExhibit5:FactorsInfluencing ExposuresandPotentialRisksfromNearby Hazards),assessingrisksfromairpollutionis inherentlycomplexandshouldbeperformedbya trainedenvironmentalprofessionalwith monitoring,modelingandriskassessment expertise.Theoverallprocessinvolvesthe followingcomponents: ! Thoroughfamiliaritywiththepotentialschool locationslayout(seeSection6.2),including localmeteorology,topographyandthelanduse ofthesurroundingneighborhood; qualitybasedonmodelingand/ormonitoring assessments;and ! Developmentofanenvironmentalassessment report(seeSection6.6)containingdescriptions ofactivities,conclusionsandrecommendations. Publicinvolvement(seeSection3)isanimportant partofevaluatingtheimpactsofnearbysourcesof airpollution.TheLEAandSSCshouldinformthe publicabouttheevaluationandgiveopportunities forpubliccommentonassessmentreportsand,in caseswheremitigationisneeded,onpotential mitigationmeasures. Examples of Local Air Toxics Monitoring www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources EPAs Initiative on Assessing Outdoor Air Near Schools: In 2009, EPA embarked on an initiative to understand whether outdoor toxic air pollution poses health concerns to school children. This initiative, Assessing Outdoor Air Near Schools, www.epa.gov/schoolair is instructive about some of the types of school air monitoring efforts that have been performed and provides useful examples of assessing outdoor air near schools. CommunityScale Air Toxics Ambient Monitoring Projects www.epa.gov/ ttn/amtic/local: Since 2003/2004, EPA has conducted periodic CommunityScale Air Toxics Ambient Monitoring grant competitions to support state, local and tribal communities in identifying and profiling air toxics sources, characterizing the degree and extent of local air toxics problems, and tracking progress of air toxics reduction activities. The Community Scale Air Toxics Ambient Monitoring website has grant information, final project reports and a training module, How to Create a Successful Air Toxics Monitoring Project. www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/airtox daw2011.html#how
! Initialassessmentofexistingairquality monitoringandmodelinginformation(see Section6.3)togaugeairqualityinthe neighborhoodaroundapotentialschool location; ! Developmentofaninventoryofpollution sources(seeSection6.4)andassociated emissionsthatmayimpacttheairqualityata location; ! Screeningevaluationofpotentialairquality (seeSection6.5)and,iffeasible,healthimpacts potentiallyassociatedwithalocationsair
96
| EvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAirPollution
6.2. Location Layout and Study Area

Thestudyareaaroundapotentiallocationwill varywiththelanduse(i.e.,urbanvs.rural),the natureofnearbyemissionsources(i.e.,major stationarysources,mobilesources,areasources), andthetypesofpollutants(i.e.,gaseousor particulate).Therecommendedscreening perimetersincludedinExhibit6shouldbe consideredasaruleofthumbforthe environmentalprofessional.Dependingonthe winddirectionsandtheexistenceoflargemajor emissionsourcesupwindofthecandidateschool location(i.e.,thedirectionoftheprevailingwind carriestheairfromaroundthesourcetowardthe school),theenvironmentalprofessionalmayneed toadjustthestudyarea.
country.Comparedtocriteriapollutant monitoring,airtoxicsmonitoringdataare generallymorelimitedintheircoverageandin theamountoftimethemonitorshavebeen operating.State,tribalandlocalairagenciesmay alsohavelocalairqualitymonitoringdatathatcan beusedinthisinitialassessment. Existingairmonitorswillvaryintheextentto whichtheyrepresentairqualityataparticular location.Monitorsaremorerepresentativeofa potentialschoollocationwhentheyshare similaritiesinthetypesofnearbysources,land uses,topographyandmeteorologicalconditions present.Theenvironmentalprofessionalshould documenttheextenttowhichexistingmonitors arelikelytorepresentairqualityconditionsata candidateschoollocation. EPAsNationalScaleAirToxicsAssessment (NATA)(www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/natamain)isa screeningtoolthatprovidesmodeledestimatesof averageambientairpollutantconcentrations,and associatedcancerrisk,acrossbroadgeographic areassuchascountiesandstates.NATAcanbe usedtoidentifyandprioritizeemissionsources, locationsandpollutantsofinterestforfurther study.However,NATAisnotadefinitivemeans forpinpointingspecificriskvaluesatasiteor characterizingorcomparingrisksatlocallevels, suchasbetweenneighborhoodsorbetween candidateschoollocations.Consequently,other informationsourcesarenecessarytoassistin developingtheinitialassessment.
6.3. Initial Assessment of Area Air Quality

Aninitialassessmentofairqualityarounda potentialschoollocationshouldmakeuseof existingdatathatisrepresentativeofconditions intheneighborhoodaroundthelocation. Airqualitymonitoringcanplaymultiplerolesin theinitialassessment.Earlyintheassessment,the environmentalprofessionalshouldevaluatelocal airqualitymonitoringdataasameansofinitially gaugingairqualityatalocation.Tofacilitate accesstodataoncriteriapollutants,EPAs AirExplorerwebsite(www.epa.gov/airexplorer) isanonlinecollectionofuserfriendlytoolsfor visualizingandmappingairmonitoringdata. AirExplorerallowsuserstodownloadmonitoring dataformonitoringsitesinaspecificarea, producegraphsofmonitoredairqualityand visualizelocationsusingGoogleEarth.Asaninitial screenofsiteconditions,monitoredairquality dataatnearbystationsmaybecomparedtothe leveloftheNAAQS.Nearbymonitoringdatamay alsobeavailableforassessingairtoxicsata potentiallocation.EPAsAirDatawebsite (www.epa.gov/air/data)allowsuserstoquery andmapairqualitydatafromlocationsacrossthe
Withavailabledatainhand,theenvironmental professionalshouldconductaninitialassessment ofairqualityconditionsatthecandidatelocation. Theenvironmentalprofessionalshouldnote whetherlocalmonitoringdataareavailablefor bothcriteriapollutantsandairtoxicsandwhen availabledataarelimitedtoNATA.Aninitial screeningassessmentofairqualityatthelocation mayincludecomparisonofcriteriapollutant levelstotheNAAQSandcharacterizingrisks associatedwithairtoxicsinandaroundthe potentiallocation.
!"#
Iftheenvironmentalprofessionaldeterminesthat thereisabasisforairqualityconcernduetohigh ambientconcentrations,orthereisinsufficient informationtodeterminewhetheraconcernis present,additionalsitespecificanalyses (descriptiontofollow)shouldbeconsidered.For environmentalprofessionalsneedingmoresite specificairqualityinformation,onsitemonitoring orlocalairqualitymodelingshouldbeconsidered. Airmonitoringandmodelingarecomplexand expensivetoconduct.Forthemonitoringand modelingtoprovideaccurateandrelevant information,theactivitiesmustbeappropriately performed.Theassessmentplanandtheresults shouldbeclearlycommunicatedtostakeholders before,duringandaftercompletionofthe monitoringand/ormodeling. Thefollowingstepspertaintorefinedsitespecific analysesthatmaybeperformed. ! Thenameofeachpointandindustrialarea source; ! Adescriptionofthesource(e.g.,pointsource, mobilesource,fugitiveemission,majororarea source);and ! Thedistancefromthesourcetothestudyarea. Forpointandindustrialareasources,alsoinclude: ! Theirlocations(i.e.,streetaddress, latitude/longitude); ! Theongoingactivityatthesource; ! Thepollutantsemittedorreleased(i.e.,criteria pollutant,orchemicalnameandChemical AbstractsServicenumberfortoxics);and ! Theemissionrateofeachpollutant(e.g., pounds/yearortons/year). Highwaysandothertransportationfacilitiesmay benearbyemissionsources.However,detailed emissionsinformationisoftennotreadily availableforthesesources,andmobilesource inventoriesareusuallydevelopedbyallocating emissionfactorsfrombroadgeographicareas usingestimatedvalues.Assuch,whenassessing nearbytransportationsources,localdataon activitysuchasuse(e.g.,vehiclesperday,trains perday)andtimeofoperations(e.g., morning/eveningrushhoursforhighways,ship andtruckactivityinports)shouldbecollected andappliedtoemissionrateestimatestodevelop localinventories.TheNATA(www.epa.gov/ttn/ atw/natamain/)andNEI(www.epa.gov/ oar/data/neidb)databasesmayalsocontain informationonsometransportationfacilitiesinan area.Theenvironmentalprofessionalshould consultwithtransportationandurbanplanning agenciestoidentifythelocationandactivityofall transportationfacilitiesinthearea,suchasstate departmentsoftransportationandmetropolitan planningorganizationsformetropolitanareas withatleast50,000residents.These organizationscanalsoprovideinformationon futureplannedinfrastructureintheareathatmay impactairqualityaroundtheschoollocation.
6.4. Inventory of Air Pollutant Sources and Emissions

Theenvironmentalprofessionalshoulddevelopor obtainaninventoryofallthepotentialpollution sources,bothlargeandsmall,withinthestudy area.Developingtheinventoryshouldinclude consultingwiththestate,tribalorlocalairagency (e.g.,permits,monitoring)andEPARegional Offices(www.epa.gov/aboutepa/index.html #regional)todeterminewhatdataresourcesmay beavailablethatcanprovideadditional informationforinventorydevelopment.Thestate agencies(www.epa.gov/air/where)are particularlyusefulinthattheymayhave emissionsdataorotherstudiesthatarenot reportedatthenationallevel.Whenlocal informationisunavailablefromstate,tribalor localairagencies,otherinformationsourcescan beused,suchasEPAsAirDatawebsite, (www.epa.gov/air/data)whichquerieslarge nationaldatabasessuchastheNationalEmission Inventory(NEI)(www.epa.gov/oar/data/neidb) andallowsuserstodownloademissiondataon localsourcespermittedtoemitcriteriapollutants andairtoxics.Ataminimum,thispollutant inventoryshouldinclude:
98
Moreinformationonconsideringnearby highwaysandothertransportationfacilities, includinggoodsmovement(seeSection8.2),is includedintheQuickGuidetoEnvironmental Issues(seeSection8). Theenvironmentalprofessionalshouldrecognize thatalldatabaseshavelimitations.Theymaynot beuptodate;theymaynothavethemost accuratelocationinformationforsomeofthe sourcesinthestudyarea;ortheymaynotidentify allthepotentialsourcesinthestudyarea.Also, thedatacontainedinthesedatabasesmaybe aggregatedatsomelargerlevel(e.g.,countyor statelevel)andlackthenecessarydetailforthe studyarea.Thereforetheenvironmental professionalshouldbepreparedtoutilize additionalmethods,suchasanontheground visualsurvey,oftencalledawindshieldsurvey, tocompletethepollutantinventory. Awindshieldsurveyisextremelyvaluablefor identifyingthosesourcesnotavailablethrough nationalandregionaldatabasesandagencies, identifyingnewsourcesthathaverecentlyopened nearthelocation,andverifyingwhethersources identifiedintheinitialdatabasereviewsarestill operating.Thesurveycanbeinformedbymaps, aerialphotographs,onlineresourcesandlocal governmentrecords(e.g.,utilityrecords,tax records).Also,documents,suchastheSouthCoast AirQualityManagementDistrictsAirQuality IssuesinSchoolSiteSelectionGuidance Document,(www.aqmd.gov/prdas/aqguide/ doc/School_Guidance.pdf)canprovidethe environmentalprofessionalwithusefulguidance foridentifyinggeneralcategoriesofemission sourcesforinclusioninthesurvey. Ifnewsourcesarediscoveredduringthe windshieldsurvey,orifmodificationsare observedinknownsources,theenvironmental professionalshouldcontactthestateortribalair agencyandtheEPARegionalOfficetofillindata gaps.Ifsourcespecificemissiondetailsarenot available,theseagenciesmayrecommend surrogateparameters(e.g.,emissionsprofilesand emissionrates)tohelpcompletetheinventory.To quantifytheextentofemissionsfromnearby roadsandothersources,emissionmodelsmaybe employed.Forexample,theenvironmental professionalcanuseEPAsMotorVehicle EmissionSimulator(MOVES)(www.epa.gov /otaq/models/moves/index.htm)tocalculate emissionratesforindividualroadlinks,andEPAs AP42(www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/)canbe usedforstationaryandareasources. Ininterpretingtheimpactofnearbysourcesona schoollocation,itishelpfultoevaluate meteorologicalconditionspresentatthe prospectivelocation.Forinstance,potential schoollocationsthataresituatedpredominantly downwindofanairpollutionsourcemayrealize greaterimpactsthanthosethatarelocated upwindofthesource.However,evenifapotential locationissituatedupwindofasourcebasedon historicalwinddata,therewillstillbeoccasions whenthelocationwillbedownwindofthesource. Inaddition,forhighwaysandothertrafficsources, pollutantscantravelupwindoftheroadbecause ofairflowscreatedbythevehiclesoperatingon theroadway.Thus,forroadwaysources,there maynotbeasignificantdifferencebetween upwindanddownwindlocationswithregardto airpollutionimpacts. Basedontheinventoryandonprofessional judgmentpertainingtothemanyfactors influencingexposuresandpotentialrisks(see Exhibit5),theenvironmentalprofessionalshould determinewhetherthereisreasonforinitial concernrelatedtoairpollutantexposuresatthe locationanddetermineifonsiteambientair monitoringiswarrantedpriortochoosingthe location.
!!
6.5. Screening Evaluation of Potential Air Quality

6.5.1. Local Air Quality Modeling Iftheenvironmentalprofessionaldeterminesthat additionalinformationpertainingtolocalair qualitybeyondthatdevelopedintheinitial assessmentisneeded,airqualitymodelingmaybe consideredasameanstoprovidethisinformation. Inparticular,dispersionmodelsaretoolsthat calculatetheairqualityimpactsofnearbysources atdownwindlocations.Theymaybeusedto modelambientconcentrationsofbothcriteria pollutantsandairtoxicsandtoestimatethe magnitudeofnearbysourcesimpactsonair qualityatagivenlocation. Dispersionmodelsrequireinformationon emissionratesofnearbysources(froman emissioninventory(seeSection6.4)aspreviously discussed),meteorologicalconditionsata location,andinformationonterrainandlanduse inthevicinityofthecandidatelocation.Thereare twomajorcategoriesofdispersionmodels: screeningmodelsandrefinedmodels. ! Screeningmodelsestimatethemaximum likelyimpactsofagivensource,generallyatthe receptorwiththehighestconcentrations.These modelsareintendedtoeliminatetheneedfor moredetailedmodelingincasesthatwillclearly notcreateambientconcentrationsofconcern. Formanysourcesinsimpleterrain,the SCREEN3(www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ dispersion_screening.htm)modelmaybeused toestimatemaximumgroundlevel concentrationsresultingfromasinglesource. Forroadwaysandintersections,theCAL3QHC model(www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_ prefrec.htm#cal3qhc)maybeusedtoestimate likelymaximumconcentrationsatlocations nearby.
! Refinedmodelsusedetailedlocalinformation andsimulatedetailedatmosphericprocessesto providemorespecializedandaccurate estimatesofhownearbysourcesaffectair qualityatdownwindlocations.Relativeto screeningmodels,refinedmodelscanrequirea significantinvestmentoftimeandresourcesto conductaproperanalysis.AERMOD (www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_prefrec.ht m#aermod)isEPAsgeneralusemodel recommendedforawiderangeofsourcesinall typesofterrain.Formostsituations,AERMODis anappropriatemodelforestimatingtheimpact ofnearbysourcesonairqualitynearapotential location. 6.5.2. Onsite Air Quality Monitoring and Risk Analysis Iftheenvironmentalprofessionaldeterminesthat onsitemonitoringiswarranted,andupon authorizationbytheLEA,theenvironmental professionalshoulddevelopandimplementan onsiteairqualitymonitoringandanalysisstudy. Theobjectiveofthestudyistodeterminewhether thetargetedairpollutantsidentifiedinthe inventoryarepresentatthelocationin concentrationsthatmayposeeithershorttermor longtermhealthriskstochildrenoradultsthat mayutilizetheschoolfacility.Monitoringcanalso captureimpactsfromsourcesthatwerenot explicitlyincludedinanylocalscalemodeling, includingunreportedorunidentifiedsources. Ambientairmonitoring,however,iscostlyin termsofthetime,resourcesandtechnical expertiserequiredtogeneratemeaningfuldata. Tominimizethesecostsasmuchaspossible,a shorttermmonitoringapproachcanbeusedasan initialscreentodetermineifalocationissuitable forfuturedevelopment.Inaddition,passiveand otherportablesamplingtechniquescanalsobe usedinscreeningmonitoringtocompareand evaluatemultiplepotentialschoollocations. Throughoutthemonitoringactivity,the environmentalprofessionalshouldreviewthe monitoringandanalysisprocedurestoconfirm compliancewiththeappropriatequality assuranceandqualitycontrol(QA/QC)protocols
100
andassesslocalmeteorologicalconditionsduring monitoringactivitiestoidentifyanypossible impactsonthesamplecollection.Therearea numberofstudiesandprogramsdescribedon EPAswebsitethatprovideexamplesoflocal monitoringactivities.EPAsAssessingOutdoor AirNearSchools(www.epa.gov/schoolair) Initiativeprovidesusefulguidanceforthis approachrelativetoairmonitoringandthe determinationofpotentialadversehealthimpacts. EPAsCommunityScaleAirToxicsAmbient MonitoringProjects(www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/ local)websiteshouldalsobeconsultedfor recommendationsonconductingairtoxics monitoringanalyses.Bothwebsitesinclude informationonQAprojectplansforoutdoorair monitoring.TheNO2nearroadmonitoring website(www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/nearroad) providessomeinformationonpilotstudies conductedatseveralcitiesintheUnitedStates usingpassivesamplingdevices. 6.5.3. Development of Pollutant Specific Screening Criteria Animportantstepindeterminingalocations acceptabilityistheidentificationofasetof screeningcriteriaforeachofthetargetedair pollutants.Thesecriteriashouldbeprotectiveof childrenshealth.AsdiscussedinPrinciple1(see Section1.4.1)intheAbouttheGuidelines(see Section1)section,childrenaremorevulnerableto environmentalexposuresthanadults. Forcriteriapollutants,thesecriteriamaybebased oncomparisonwiththerelevantNAAQS.Forair toxics,thecriteriashouldscreenforthepotential ofadversehealtheffectsresultingfromboth shortterm(i.e.,acute)andlongterm(i.e., chronic)exposuresatthelocation.Ifusinga dispersionmodeltoassesspotentialexposures, theoutputshouldbeformattedtoreflectthe averagingtimesrelevanttothescreeningcriteria. Inashorttermmonitoringstudy,established referenceconcentrations,doseresponse assessmentsorothersimilarbenchmarksmaynot beavailableforallofthepollutants detected.Consequently,theenvironmental professionalmayneedtoemployother approachestoidentifyappropriatescreening criteria,includingthedevelopmentofsurrogates foruseinlieuofestablishedacutevalues.The environmentalprofessionalwillalsoneedto evaluatetheairsamplingdataforpotential adversehealthimpactsresultingfromchronic exposurestopollutantsatthelocation.Therefore, theenvironmentalprofessionalshoulddevelop healthbasedscreeningcriteriathatcanbeusedas longtermcomparisonlevels.Thedevelopmentof suitablescreeningcriteriaforchronicexposures dependsontheavailabilityoftwodifferenttypes oflongtermcomparisonlevels: ! Acancerbasedcomparisonlevelthatisan estimatedcontinuous(i.e.,24hoursperday, 365daysperyear)exposureconcentrationset atanacceptablelifetimecancerrisk.EPA typicallyconsiderslifetimecancerrisksinthe rangeof1inonemillionto100inonemillionto beacceptable.Insomesituations,other acceptablerisklevelscouldbeappropriate. ! Anoncancerbasedcomparisonlevel,suchas thereferenceconcentrationoracomparable value,whichistheestimatedcontinuous(i.e., 24hoursperday,365daysperyear)exposure concentrationconsideredlikelytobewithout adverseeffectsoveralifetime. Inderivingthechronicscreeningcriteria,priority shouldbegiventotheuseofrelevantand appropriateairstandards(e.g.,theNAAQS)as wellasEPAsriskassessmentguidanceand precedents.DatafromEPAsIntegratedRisk InformationSystem(www.epa.gov/iris/)canalso beusedtoderivetheappropriatescreening criteria.IntegratedRiskInformationSystem containsbothInhalationUnitRiskvaluesfor chemicalswithcarcinogeniceffectsandreference concentrationsforchemicalswithchronic, noncancerhealtheffects.Otherdatasourcescan befoundonthefollowingwebsites: ! EPAOfficeofAirsTechnologyTransfer NetworkAirToxics(www.epa.gov/ ttn/atw/toxsource/summary);
EvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAirPollution | $%$#
! CaliforniaEnvironmentalProtectionAgency OfficeofEnvironmentalHealthHazardand Assessment(www.oehha.ca.gov/air); ! TexasCommissiononEnvironmentalQuality (www.tceq.texas.gov/toxicology); ! NewJerseyDepartmentofEnvironmental Protection(www.state.nj.us/dep/daq/);and ! AgencyforToxicSubstancesandDisease Registry(www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls). Anexampleofhowbothacuteandchronic screeningcriteriahavebeenestablishedfor previousairtoxicsmonitoringstudiescanbe foundatwww.epa.gov/schoolair/pdfs/ UsesOfHealthEffectsInfoinEvalSampleResults.pdf. 6.5.4. Evaluation of Potential for Adverse Acute and Chronic Health Impacts Withanalyticalresultsinhandandscreening criteriainplace,theenvironmentalprofessional canbeginanevaluationofthelocationspotential airqualityimpactsonacuteandchronichealth effects.Thosesampleresultsshowingpollutant concentrationslessthanthescreeningcriteria indicateacceptableairqualityanddonotrequire furtheraction.Thosepollutantsdeterminedtobe presentatconcentrationsabovethescreening criteriashouldbeflaggedforfurther considerationinthefinalreport. Whenevaluatingonsitemonitoringdata,the environmentalprofessionalwillalsoneedto considerthepotentialimpactsofthelocations meteorologyonanysamplescollected.Thiswill requirecomparingthemeteorologicaldatataken onactualsamplingdaysagainstthosedatataken onsiteoverallthedayswithinthemonitoring period,aswellasavailabledatafromanearby weatherstation.Thiswillenablethe environmentalprofessionaltodeterminethe representativenessofthesamplescollectedwith respecttowhatmightbeexpectedoverthelonger term. Foranexampleofhowtocomparemonitored valuestoacuteandchronicscreeningcriteria,go totheschoolairtoxicsmonitoringprojectat www.epa.gov/schoolair/pdfs/UsesOfHealthEffect sInfoinEvalSampleResults.pdf. Whenseverallocationsarebeingconsidered,a comparisonofpotentialhealthimpactsat alternativelocationsmayhelpinidentifyingthe locationwiththelowestrisk.
6.6. Development of an Environmental Assessment Report

Aftercompletingthecomparison,the environmentalprofessionalshouldprepareand submitanenvironmentalassessmentreport. Whendevelopingrecommendationsforthe report,theenvironmentalprofessionalwillneed toconsiderandweighavarietyoffactors.Among theseisthefactthatthescreeninglevelswere developedspecificallytobeconservative indicatorsoftheriskofanadversehealtheffect. Exposuresatoraboveaspecificscreeningleveldo notnecessarilyindicatethatariskexists;ratherit indicatesthatasexposuresincreaseabovean indicator,thereisanincreasingpotentialforrisk ofadversehealtheffects. Takingintoaccountthesefactorsandtheresults fromtheenvironmentalassessment,thefinal reportmayincludeoneofseveral recommendations.Ifnopollutantsofconcern havebeenidentifiedatconcentrationsgreater thantheacuteorchronicscreeningcriteria,the reportmayconcludethatthelocationis acceptablefromanairqualityperspective.In thoseinstancesinwhicheitherorbothofthe acuteorchronicscreeningcriteriaareexceeded byapollutant,thereportmayconcludethatthe locationisunacceptablefromanairquality perspectiveorthatadditionalmeasures(e.g., additionalmonitoring,sitespecificrisk assessment)arerequired.Ifnocandidate locationsareavailablethatarewithoutairquality concerns,thereportshoulddescribewhat mitigationoptionsmaybeavailableforthe candidateschoollocation.
102
Ataminimum,thefinalreporttotheLEAandSSC shoulddescribeanddiscussthefollowing: ! Studyarea,includingthesources,activitiesand emissionslocatedwithinareaboundaries; ! Pollutantinventoryprocess,includingthe identificationofthepollutantstargetedfor monitoring; ! Modelingapproachandmodeled concentrationsforlocationsinandaroundthe site; ! Monitoringapproachandresults,including actualmeasuredpollutantconcentrations, projectionsofpotentiallongerterm concentrationsandacomparisonofthese concentrationsagainstnationalandregional averages; ! Acuteandchronicscreeningcriteria, includingtheprocessforselectingand/or derivingthecriteria; ! Comparisonofpollutantsagainstthe screeningcriteria,includingpotentialhealth effectsandtoxicityinformationforthoseair toxicsdeterminedtobeatthelocation; ! Potentialformultipollutantimpactsinthose caseswheremultiplepollutantshavebeen detectedatlevelsaboveorjustbelowtheir respectivecomparisonlevels; ! Identificationandevaluationofpotential contributingsources; ! Conclusionsandrecommendationsfornext steps;and ! Impactsoftheuncertaintyandlimitations associatedwiththerecommendationsarising fromlimitedsampling,locationmeteorology, availabletoxicityinformation,etc. Thedraftreportshouldbemadeavailablefor publiccomment,asdescribedintheMeaningful PublicInvolvement,Section3.Theenvironmental professionalshouldconsiderpubliccommentsin draftingthefinalreport. TheLEAandSSCshouldreviewtheenvironmental professionalsreportandthepubliccomments receivedonthereportand,inlightofother assessmentsbeingperformedatthelocation, determinenextsteps.Tofurtherclarifyits options,theLEAmayelecttohavethereport reviewedbyathirdparty,suchasastate,tribalor federalagency,withexpertiseinthesubjectarea. Inaddition,theLEAmaychoosetoidentifyand evaluateactions(regulatoryorotherwise)being takenorplannednationally,regionallyorlocally thatmayachieveemissionand/orexposure reductionsinanacceptabletimeframe.The decisionaboutnextstepsshouldbebasedonthe weightofevidencesupportedbythe environmentalprofessionalsreport,otherdata developedduringtheenvironmentalreview process(seeSection5.1),andthepotentialfor futurereductionsinexposure
EvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAirPollution | $%&

104 | EvaluatingImpactsofNearbySourcesofAirPollution
7. Recommendations for States and Tribes

7.1. Overview
Stateandtribalinvolvementandoversightoffers manyopportunitiestoenhancetheworkoflocal educationagencies(LEAs)(seeSection10)and schoolsitingcommittees(SSCs)(seeSection3.3) inidentifyingpotentialsitesorstructuresfor schools.Thissectionidentifiesimportantsteps thatstatesandtribescantaketoenhancethe capacityoflocalcommunitiestoidentifylocations forschoolsthatenhancetheeducationalprocess byprovidingasafeandhealthyenvironmentfor children,teachersandstaff.
Ataminimum,stateagenciesareimportant resourcesforcommunitiesonsitingissues.For example,statesoftenserveasacentralrepository forexpertiseinthemanycomplexitiesassociated withchoosingthebestpossiblesite.Thisisoften theresultofpromulgatedlegislation,state regulationsorstatespecificrecommendations relatedtoissuesthatarerelevanttoschoolsiting decisions.WhileindividualLEAsmayhavelimited resourcesforinvestingintheirownspecialists, statesmaybeabletohelpdeferthecostsofsuch expertisethroughcentrallylocatedresourcesthat canbemadeavailabletoallstateLEAs.For example,astatewidelistingofenvironmental professionalslicensedorregisteredwithacentral stateagencycanserveasanimportantresource forLEAsneedinghighlyqualifiedandwell respectedonsiteevaluationofpotentialsitesor buildings. Policies that Impact the Siting of Potential Sources Near Schools States, tribes and localities should evaluate siting and permit processes that influence where potential sources of environmental pollution see Source categories identified in Exhibit 6: Screening Potential Environmental and Safety Hazards may be allowed to locate with respect to schools. While these land use decisions are highly complex and beyond the scope of these guidelines, states, tribes and communities should seek to avoid situations in which new nearby sources of potentially harmful pollutants are sited in such close proximity to schools that they may pose a potential hazard to the school occupants.
7.2. Recommendations for States

Statesoftenplayanimportantroleincommunity schoolsiteselectiondecisions,dependingonstate legislation,regulationsandguidance.Anumberof states(seeSection5.2.1)havedeveloped comprehensiveschoolsitingpolicies,including: ! California:www.dtsc.ca.gov/schools/ index.cfm; ! NewJersey:www.nj.gov/dep/ dccrequest/;and ! Washington:www.ecy.wa.gov/ programs/sea/sepa/ereview.html.
RecommendationsforStatesandTribes | 105
Becauselandfordevelopmentisbecomingless availableinmanystates,officialsatthestatelevel inthesestatesoftendevelopcomprehensivestate wideorregionallanduseanddevelopmentplans. Workingtogether,LEAsandstateofficialscan effectivelycoordinatetoidentifyappropriate landsforlocatingschools.Establishmentofstate wideschoolsitingpoliciesandguidelines,where theyarenotcurrentlyinplace,canhelpstates promoteeducational,environmental,healthand safetyobjectivesassociatedwithschoolfacility constructionandrenovation.Insomecases,states haveprogramsinplacethatallowthemto partiallyfundprojectsthatmeetstateschool sitingguidelines. 63 7.2.1. State Resource Review sitesaretoprovideinformationfromexistingsite inventoriestoLEAsandtodeveloppoliciesto supportlocalcommunitiesmakingschoollocation decisions.Inaddition,statesareencouragedto partnerwithLEAstobuildcapacitytoeffectively managewasteorcontaminationthatremains throughtheimplementationofengineeringand institutionalcontrols(seeSection8.15)andlong termstewardship(seeSection8.16). Thereareseveralimportantstepsthatstatescan taketosupportdevelopmentoflocalcapacityfor identifyingappropriatelocationsforschools: ! Improvedcoordinationacrossstateprograms (seeSection7.2.2); ! Staffingandfinancialresources (seeSection7.2.3); ! Participationinpublicmeetings (seeSection7.2.4);and ! Accesstostateinformationonschoolsiting (seeSection7.2.5). 7.2.2. Improved Coordination across State Programs Manyexistingstateprogramshavethecapacityto supportlocallandusedecisionsrelatedtothe sitingofschools.Statesareencouragedtoenhance coordinationacrossstateprogramstoassistlocal communitieswithschoolsitingdecisions.Some keyfactorsforstatestoconsiderinclude: ! Whethertheexistingstateprogram managementstructureisabletoperformthe necessarycoordinationandsupervision betweenagenciesneededtosupportLEAsin makingschoolsitingdecisions; ! Whichstateand/orlocalagenciescan contributetoschoolsitingandthe responsibilitiesofeachagency;and ! Whethertherearelegalandinstitutional impedimentsthatneedtobeaddressed.
Manystateagencieshaveexpertisethatcan contributetosoundschoolsitingdecisionsand implementation,includingdepartmentsof education,publichealth,transportation,planning, parks,communitydevelopment,historic preservationandenvironment.Differentagencies willlikelyhavestaffwithcomplementary knowledge,expertiseandskillsthatcanbehelpful invariouspartsoftheschoolsitingprocess. However,itmaybechallengingforLEAsandlocal communityresidentstoknowwhichagenciesto contactforspecificconcernsandquestions.States areencouragedtosharetheexpertise,available assistance,statelevelcontactsand responsibilitiestheyhaveacrossagencies,andto assignanofficeoragencytoserveastheliaison forschoolsitingquestionsandassistance.Indoing so,statescanreviewwhetherthereareadequate staffresourceswithappropriateexpertiseinplace toassistlocalcommunitieswithschoolsiting decisionsandplanningprocessesanddevelopa plantosupportlocalschoolsitingefforts, includingaddressinggapsinstaffingand resourcesasnecessary. Twoofthewaysstatescansupportlocal communitiesintheselectionofpotentialschool
63
For more information on existing state policies, see 50 State
Survey, conducted by Rhode Island Legal Services. Available at: www.childproofing.org/school_siting_50_state.htm.
106
| RecommendationsforStatesandTribes
Effectivecoordinationacrossstateprogramscan helptoensurethattheprogramswith responsibility,knowledgeandexpertiseinhealthy schoolsissuesareengagedintheschoolsiting process.Astateshouldconsideridentifyinga pointofcontactwithresponsibilityfor coordinatingacrossstateagencieswith authorities,responsibilities,programs,policies, guidelinesorstandardsaffectingdecisions concerningwhetherandwheretobuildnew schoolsorcarryoutmajorexpansionofexisting facilities,aswellascoordinatingotherschool facilityissues.Statesarealsoencouragedto coordinatewithlocalandregionalplanning agenciestoensurelocationsselectedforschools meetmultiplecommunitygoals. Manystateshaveprocessestodetermine appropriatelandandresourceusesforsitesthat haveresidualcontaminationaftercleanup;these processesmayalreadyapplytoschoolsitingor maybeexpandedtoapplytoschoolsiting decisions.Stateinventoriesofassessedor remediatedlocationsorstructuresaswellas thoseundergoingorplannedforassessmentand cleanupmaybeusefultosharewithLEAsand otherstate,publicorprivateentitiestoensure safereuses.Itisessentialthattheagencyand departmentresponsibleforreviewingpotential schoolsitesforpotentialenvironmental contaminationbeidentifiedearlyinthesiting processsothattheywillbeappropriately involved. Localgovernmentswithrobustenvironmental, planningandhealthdepartmentsoftenbear primaryresponsibilityformanaging environmentalhealthorcontaminatedsite cleanupprograms.However,inmanypartsofthe country,localgovernmentresourcestosupport schoolsitingdecisionsareverylimitedorperhaps maynotevenexist.Inthesecases,thestate governmentfrequentlyprovidesassistancetothe localagencyoridentifiesasuitablethirdpartyto manageeffortstodetermineappropriatelandand resourceusesforpropertieswithresidual contamination.Theseactivitiesareparticularly importantinsituationswhereschoolsmaybe constructedonsiteswithresidualcontamination toensurepropermaintenanceandoversightfor anynecessaryengineeringorinstitutional controlsorlongtermmonitoring. Statesmaywanttoconsiderdevelopingaformal memorandumofunderstandingbetweenagencies toensurethatstaffresourcesandexpertiseare availabletoassistwithschoolsiting.Forexample, theIowaDepartmentofHistoricResourceshasa memorandumofunderstandingwiththeIowa DepartmentofEducationtoprovideinformation aboutolderandhistoricschools. 64 7.2.3. Staffing and Financial Resources
Anassessmentofthehumanandfinancial resourcesavailableinstateagenciestosupport localschoolsitingdecisionsshouldaddressthe followingquestions: ! Howcanstaffwiththeappropriateexpertise assistlocalcommunitieswithschoolsiting decisionsandplanningprocesses;and ! Howcanbudgetaryorotherresourcegapsbe overcometosafelyrenovateorsiteschools? 7.2.4. Participation in Public Meetings
Stategovernmentrepresentationatmeetingswith thecommunityisimportantwhenthestatehas oversightresponsibilitiesforenvironmental cleanuporreuseplanning.Evenwhenoversight responsibilitieshavebeendelegatedtolocal agencies,stategovernmentparticipationcanbe helpfultoensurethatthereviewprocessissound andthatcommunicationswiththecommunityare effectiveandtoreinforcethatthespecial sensitivitiesofchildrenwereconsideredaspartof theschoollocationselectionprocess.
64
State Historical Society of Iowa, Historic Preservation. Accessed on
September 16, 2011. Available at: www.iowahistory.org/historic preservation/.
7.2.5. Access to State Information on School Siting Statesshouldconsiderdevelopingapublicly available,easilyaccessiblewebsite/databaseto provideacentralizedsourceofinformation pertinenttoschoolevaluationandselection, including: ! Policiesandproceduresforsitelocation evaluationandreview,includingstatespecific guidanceforevaluationofcandidatesites,if available; ! Publicinvolvementguidelines; ! Mappingandotherresourcestoassistin evaluationofpotentialschoollocations; ! Recordsoflocationreviews(e.g.,findings, descriptionofsiteremediationactivities, institutionalandengineeringcontrols,decision documentsforcleanupanddocumentationof sitesthatmeetstandardsforresidentialuse); and ! Surveysofhistoricproperties,including schools,casestudiesandawardsgivenfor historicrenovation,reportsaboutcostsof renovationvs.costsofnewconstruction. 7.2.6. State Oversight Roles schooluseorexpansionofexistingschoolshave receivedappropriateenvironmentalapproval fromthestateagencypriortoconstruction.Sites shouldbeassessedpriortoacquisitionor donationtodetermineifthereispotential environmentalcontaminationonsiteorat neighboringsitesthatcouldposehealthor environmentalriskstochildren,facultyorstaff, andfortheirimpactsontransportation,airquality andaccessibility. Whereproposedsitesadjoinorabutalocation thathasenvironmentalorpublichealthconcerns, LEAsshouldseekouttheappropriateplanning, environmentalandhealthreviewtoensurethata potentialsitewouldbeanappropriateandsafe locationforaschool. Cleanup procedures Althoughmoststatesdonothaveschoolsiting proceduresthatspecificallyapplytosite investigation,sampling,cleanup,determinationof appropriatelandandresourceusesandlongterm stewardship,manydohavethesepoliciesand practicesinplacethatapplymoregenerallyto sitesbeingconsideredforreuse.Ingeneral, cleanupsaretailoredtomeettheintendedreuse. Locationswhicharetobeusedforschoolsshould becleaneduptolevelsthatsupportresidential use.Intheeventthatresidualcontamination remainsonthesite,engineeringandinstitutional controlstopreventexposureandaclear, documentedlongtermstewardshipplanshould beinplaceatthelocation.Formoreinformation seetheEnvironmentalReviewProcess,Section5. Meaningful public involvement Meaningfulpublicinvolvement(seeSection3) throughouttheschoolsitingprocessisofcritical importance.Plansforpublicinvolvementshould beformalizedpriortoinitiatingtheidentification ofpotentialschoolsites.Detailsofsiteassessment processes,findings,cleanupdecisions(e.g.,scope, procedures,findings),landuserestrictions (engineeringandinstitutionalcontrols,see Section8.15)andsubsequentschoolconstruction plansshouldbeprovidedtothepublicandsubject tocommunityinvolvementandpublicnotification.
Stateenvironmentalregulatoryagenciesmay overseeassessmentandcleanupactivitiesfor propertiesenrolledintheirvoluntarycleanup programs.Manystateshaveadoptedriskbased cleanupactionsanddeterminelevelofcleanup neededbasedonproposedreuse.Institutional controltrackingprogramsmaybeapartoftheir programoversightaswell.However,thisstate regulatoryoversightdoesnotrelievetheLEAsor privatepropertyownersoftheirresponsibilityto managetheirproperty,monitorandmaintainland usecontrolsandensuresafesitereuse. Environmental evaluation LEAsshouldworkwithstategovernmentsto ensureallsitesproposedforconstructionofnew schools,renovationofanexistingbuildingfor
108
ItisimportantforLEAstodevelopa communicationsplantoensureeffectivepublic involvement(seeSection3.4). Local capacity to manage institutional and engineering controls Statesshouldestablishstandardstoassessthe capacityofanypartyformanagementof institutionalorengineeringcontrolsatpotential schoollocations.Thestandardsshouldbe designedtoensurethelongtermintegrityofany institutionalorengineeringcontrolsputinplace atpotentialschoolsiteswhereresidual contaminationoroffsitehazardstobemitigated exist.Thecapacitytomanageengineeringand institutionalcontrolsshouldconsiderthe following: ! Availabilityofaccurateinformationonthe locationorextentofinstitutionaland engineeringcontrols,perhapsprovidedona map; ! Establishmentof,andparticipationin,aonecall system(seeSection10)toprotectagainst humanexposuretocontaminatedsoil; ! Establishmentofamandatorymonitoring programtoroutinelyreviewinstitutionaland engineeringcontrolstoensuretheircontinued effectiveness; ! Establishmentofenforceableinstitutional controls,whichrequirecompliance; ! Establishmentofinformationalinstitutional controlsthateffectivelydisseminate informationonthelocationofcontrols, compliancestatusandmonitoringreportsto interestedstakeholders,especiallyparents, stateandlocalenvironmentalofficials; ! Longtermbudgetcommitmenttoprovide fundsfortheoperationandmaintenanceof institutionalandengineeringcontrols,including requiredtrainingofstaffresponsiblefor maintainingcontrols; ! Trackingofexpendituresassociatedwith institutionalandengineeringcontrolsbythe LEAsothathistoricalexpenditurescanbeused torefineplanningestimatesforthecostof maintaininginstitutionalandengineering controls; ! Usingmorethanoneinstitutionalcontrol(i.e., layering)toimproveoverallreliabilityand effectivenessformanagingtheamount, concentrations,toxicityandother characteristicsoftheresidualwasteor contamination;and ! Availabilityofaprocesstoreportmalfunctions ofcontrols. 7.2.7. State Policy Review
Statesareencouragedtoreviewexistinglaws, policiesandregulationsaddressingschoolsiting todeterminewhetherchangesareneededto encourageimprovedschoolsitingdecisions.Such areviewofexistingpoliciesacrossstateagencies wouldhelpidentifygapsandoutdatedpolicies thatnolongerservestategoalsandobjectives. Education,health,environmental,planning,and transportationagencies,aswellasothers,suchas theStateHistoricPreservationOfficer,should worktogethertoconsiderhowexisting regulations,policiesandguidelinesinfluenceor affectdecisionsaboutschoolrenovation, remodelingorthesitingofnewschools.Reviewof existingguidelinesorpoliciesmayfocusonthose relatedtothefollowinggeneraltopics:
! Communityinvolvementandpublic participationinschoolsitingandrenovation decisions; ! Longrangeschoolfacilitiesplan; ! Schoolfundingofnewconstructionorto supportexistingschoolrenovation; ! Prohibitionsonstatereimbursementofland coststhatforcecommunitiestowardthelowest costsites,regardlessofpotentialenvironmental challenges;
! Schoolsizeformulasorrequirementsforlot sizeandaccesstorecreationalareas; ! Minimumschoolenrollmentrequirements; ! Environmentalevaluationandassociatedcosts; ! Environmentalcleanup(includingcleanup standardsandlongtermstewardshipsite controls)andassociatedcosts; ! Communityuseofschools(andjointuseof communityresourcessuchaslibraries, theaters,parksandballfields); ! Energyefficiency; ! Sustainabledevelopment;and ! Emergencypreparednessandshelteringplans. Statesmayalsoconsiderdevelopingpolicies, guidelinesorregulationswithlocalhealth jurisdictionstoinvolvetheminapprovalofschool sites,andstatesshouldprovidelocalcommunities withinformationrelatedtostatepoliciesthat pertaintositingdecisions. 65 Publichealthpoliciesshouldpromoteschoolsites thatdonotleadtoharmfulenvironmental exposuresandthatdofacilitatephysicalactivity, healthybehaviorsandhealthycommunities. Schoolslocatedintheneighborhoodsofthe studentstheyservewillhaveanincreased numberofchildrenwhowalk,bikeortakepublic transittoandfromschoolandwillprovide familieswithaccesstoplaygroundsandfacilities thatencouragesphysicalactivityoutsideofschool time.Policiesrelatedtoenvironmentalreview shouldfacilitateassessmentoflocationsbeforean LEApurchasesorleasesaproperty.Statepolicies, lawsandregulationscanpromotethesegoalsina numberofways,including: ! Encouragethecreationoflongrangeschool facilitiesplans(seeSection4.2.1)byLEAs, includingLEAguidanceonhowtheseplanscan
65
involvestakeholdersandcommunitymembers andcomplementcomprehensiveplansand otherplanningeffortsatthemunicipal(and state)levels.OneresourceisCaliforniasGuide toLongRangeFacilitiesPlan(www.cde.ca.gov/ ls/fa/sf/longrangeplan.asp); ! Donotrequireminimumnumberofacres forschoolsites.Acreagerequirementscan preventLEAsfromusingsmallersiteswithin neighborhoodsandforcethemtobuildschools onlargetractsoflandsontheoutskirtsof communities.TheCouncilofEducational FacilityPlannersInternational (www.cefpi.org/)hasabolisheditsminimum acreagestandardspolicybutmanystatesstill havenowoutdatedlawsbasedonthispolicyin effect; ! EncouragecommunitiesandLEAstoplan anddevelopjointuseagreementsfor libraries,parksandballfieldsforefficientuseof availableland; ! Donotfavorlargerenrollmentschools, whicharechallengingtobuildwithin neighborhoods,informulasforeducation fundingallocations; ! Donotfavornewconstructionover renovationofexistingschoolsinschool constructionfundingformulas(oftencalledthe twothirdsruleor60percentrule). Renovationandmodernizationcouldhelp achieveeducationalobjectivesbycreating schoolenvironmentsthatsupportimproved academicachievementbyhelpingtoalleviate thebacklogofrepairandmaintenanceprojects. InastudyconductedintheLosAngelesUnified SchoolDistrict(www.edfacilities.org/pubs/ LAUSD%20Report.pdf),researchersfoundthat
110
improvementsinthequalityofschoolfacilities ledtoanincreaseinstudentperformance; 66 ! Considertruelongtermcostsofasite assessment/investigation,includingland acquisition,initialconstruction,longterm busingcostsandothertransportationcosts, improvementstotheutilitiesandstreet networkaroundtheschool,longtermsite locationmonitoringandmaintenancecostsin policiesonestimatingcostsforrenovation versusconstruction; ! Encourageefficientlocationofschoolsand judicioususeofbusingthroughschoolbusing reimbursementformulasandbusingradius policies; ! Considerwalkabilityinfrastructure(e.g., adequatesidewalks,absenceoftraffichazards, saferoutestoschools); ! Schoolfundingmechanismsatthestatelevel shouldallowtimeforproperanalysisand considerationofsuitablesitesforconstruction, particularlyatsiteswhereenvironmental concernsareinvolved; ! ProvidetechnicalsupporttoLEAsduringthe environmentalreview.Policiesofstatehealth andenvironmentalagenciesshouldallowfor andencourageLEAstopartnerwithstate agenciesinconductingathorough environmentalreview;and ! Encouragepublicinvolvementthroughout thesitingprocess. Inadditiontopoliciesrelatedtoenvironmental reviewandcleanup,relevantpoliciesinclude thosethatpromotepublichealthandtakeinto accounttheimpactofproposedorexistingoffsite sourcesonexistingschools.
66
7.3. Recommendations for Tribes

Tribesaresovereignentitiesandplayacentral roleincommunityschoolsitedecisionswhenan existingorpotentialschoolsiteissituatedin Indiancountryoronothertriballands.Thisrole mayalsodependonwhattypeofschoolisbeing built,andwhetheracommunity,tribalorBureau ofIndianEducationschoolisontrustortribal lands.Schoolsitingdecisionsontriballandsmay alsodependonfederalandtriballegislation, regulationsandguidanceormemorandaof understandingwithstateandlocalgovernments. Tribalgovernmentcoordinationwithfederal, stateandlocalgovernments,asappropriate,is alsodesirable.Tribalagenciescanbecritical resourcesforcommunitiesonsitingissues. Incaseswheretribalmembersattendschools outsideofIndiancountry,tribeswillwantto coordinatewithstateandlocalgovernments aboutsitingnearbyschools.Thebalanceofthis sectionwillfocusonsituationswhereschoolsare beingsitedinsideIndiancountry. Inadditiontothecriticalroleofthelocalschool sitingcommittees(SSCs)(seeSection3.3)in identifyingpotentialsitesfornewschool construction,tribalinvolvementandoversight offersmanyadvantages.Forexample,tribescan beacentralrepositoryforexpertiseinthemany nuancesassociatedwithchoosingthebest possiblesite,therebyensuringthatthesitewill notonlybesuitablefromtheperspectiveof environmentalhealthandsafety,butwillalso respectthelocaltraditionsandcustomsofthe community. Workingtogether,LEAsandtriballevelofficials, possiblyinconjunctionwithstates,canmore effectivelycoordinatetodetermineappropriate landsforlocatingschools.Establishmentoftribal schoolsitingpoliciesandguidelines,wherethey arenotcurrentlyinplace,canhelptribespromote educational,environmental,healthandsafety objectivesassociatedwithschoolfacility constructionand/orrenovation.
Jack Buckley, Mark Schneider and Yi Shang, LAUSD School
Facilities and Academic Performance, Los Angeles Unified School District, Unpublished report prepared as part of Building Educational Services Together initiative, 21st Century School Fund, Washington, DC. Accessed on September 16, 2011. Available at: www.ncef.org/pubs/LAUSD%20Report.pdf.
7.3.1. Review Tribal Expertise ! Whichtribalorotheragenciesneedtobe involvedinschoolsiting;and ! Aretherelegalorinstitutionalimpediments thatneedtobeaddressed? Sometribalgovernmentshaveestablished processestodetermineappropriateprocedures foraddressingsitesthathaveresidual contaminationaftercleanup.Inothercases,tribes workwithfederalpartnerstoaddressthese issues.Itisessentialthattheagencyand departmentresponsibleforreviewingpotential schoolsitesforpotentialenvironmental contaminationisidentifiedearly,sothattheywill beappropriatelyinvolvedthroughoutthesiting process.Tribesarealsoencouragedtocoordinate withlocalandregionalplanningagenciesto ensurelocationsmeetmultiplecommunitygoals. Tribesareencouragedtoidentifyapointof contactwithresponsibilityforcoordinatingacross agencieswithauthorities,responsibilities, programs,policies,guidelinesorstandards affectingdecisionsconcerningwhetherandwhere tobuildnewschoolsorcarryoutmajorexpansion ofexistingfacilities,aswellascoordinatingother schoolfacilityissues. Tribesmaywanttoconsiderdevelopingaformal memorandumofunderstandingwithdifferent governmentagencies(federal,state,local)to ensurethatstaffresourcesandexpertiseare availabletoassistwithschoolsiting. 7.3.3. Staffing and Financial Resources
Tribalcouncilsand/orseveraltribalagencies, includingdepartmentsofeducation,publichealth, transportation,historicpreservationand environment,canplayanimportantroleinschool sitingdecisionsandimplementationalongwith localgovernments.Differentagencieswilllikely havestaffwithcomplementaryknowledge, expertiseandskillsthatcanbehelpfulthroughout theschoolsitingprocess.Tribesareencouragedto shareexistinginventoriesofcontaminatedsites withlocalcommunitiestoassistwithassessment ofpotentialschoollocations (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources)andto helptoidentifylocationsthatmayrequiretheuse ofengineeringandinstitutionalcontrols(see Section8.15)anddevelopmentofaclearly documentedlongtermstewardshipplantomeet standardsforresidentialuse.Localresidentsmay notknowwhichagencytocontactforspecific concernsandquestions,sotribesarealso encouragedtocoordinateacrossprogramsandto assignanofficeoragencytoserveastheliaison forcommunitymembers. Thereareseveralimportantstepsthattribescan taketosupportdevelopmentoflocalcapacityfor identifyingappropriatelocationsforschools: ! Coordinationacrosstribalprograms (seeSection7.3.2); ! Staffingandfinancialresources (seeSection7.3.3); ! Participationinpublicmeetings (seeSection7.3.4);and ! Accesstoinformationonschoolsiting (seeSection7.3.5). 7.3.2. Coordination across Tribal Programs
Anassessmentofthehumanandfinancial resourcesavailableintribalagenciesshould addressthefollowingquestions: ! Howcanstaffwiththeappropriateexpertise assistlocalcommunitieswithschoolsiting decisionsandplanningprocesses;and ! Howcanbudgetaryorotherresourcegapsbe overcometosafelyrenovateorsiteschools?
Enhancedcoordinationacrosstribalprograms withresponsibilityforhealthyschoolscanplayan importantroleininforminglocalschoolsiting decisions.Amongtheinstitutionalquestionsthat tribesshouldconsiderwithrespecttoschool sitingare:
112
7.3.4. Participation in Public Meetings controlsandthelongtermstewardshipplanare sufficienttopreventexposurestoenvironmental hazards.Alternatively,thisrolemaybeshared withordelegatedtoalocalagencyorother partner,providedthepartnercandemonstrate thecapacitytomanagetheseimportantissues. Environmental evaluation LEAsshouldworkwithtribalgovernmentsto ensurethatallsitesundertribaljurisdictionthat areproposedforrenovationofanexisting buildingforschooluse,constructionofnew schoolsorexpansionofexistingschoolshave receivedappropriateenvironmentalapproval fromthetribalagencypriortoconstruction.Sites orbuildingsshouldbeassessedpriorto acquisitionordonationtodetermineifthereis environmentalcontaminationonsiteorat neighboringsitesthatcouldposehealthor environmentalriskstochildren,facultyorstaff. Federalreviewmayalsobeneeded. Cleanup procedures Althoughmosttribesdonothaveproceduresthat specificallyapplytoinvestigation,sampling, cleanup,determinationofappropriatelandand resourceuses,andlongtermstewardshipof potentialschoollocations,theyoftendohave policiesandpracticesinplacethatapplymore generallytolocationsbeingconsideredforreuse. Locationsselectedforuseasschoolsshouldbe cleaneduptostandardsforresidentialuse. Cleanupsshouldalsofollowcleanupplansthat haveclearlydelineatedcontaminationandverify thatcleanupeffortshavebeeneffective.Inthe eventthatasitedoesnotsupportresidentialuse becauseofresidualcontamination,institutional controls(andpossiblyengineeringcontrols)may beanecessarycomponentofthecleanup.Because thepurposeofinstitutionalandengineering controls(seeSection8.15)istopreventexposure tocontaminantsandprotecttheintegrityofthe cleanup,effectivemanagementofinstitutionaland engineeringcontrolsiscriticaltoensuringthata sitecanbeusedsafely.
Tribalgovernmentmeetingswiththecommunity areespeciallyimportantwhenenvironmental reviewactivitiesneeddiscussionwiththe community.Evenwhenoversightresponsibilities havebeendelegatedtolocalagencies,tribal governmentparticipationcanbehelpfultoensure thatthereviewprocessissoundandthat communicationswiththecommunityare effective,andtoreinforcethatthespecial sensitivitiesofchildrenwereconsideredaspartof theschoollocationselectionprocess. 7.3.5. Access to Information on School Siting Tribesshouldconsiderdevelopingapublicly available,easilyaccessiblewebsite/databaseto provideacentralizedsourceofinformation pertinenttoschoolevaluationandselection, including: ! Policiesandproceduresforsiteevaluationand review; ! Publicinvolvementguidelines; ! Mappingandotherresourcestoassistin evaluationofpotentialschoollocations; ! Recordsoflocationreviews(e.g.,findings, descriptionofsiteremediationactivities, institutionalandengineeringcontrols,decision documentsforcleanupanddocumentationof sitesthatmeetstandardsforresidentialuse); and ! Surveysofhistoricproperties,including schools. 7.3.6. Tribal Oversight Roles
Tribesareencouragedtoidentifyanddocument tribalrolesandresponsibilitiesforlongterm oversightearlyintheschoolsitingprocess.Ifa sitethathasnotbeencleaneduptostandardsfor residentialuseisselectedforaschool,tribal agenciesmayoverseetheenvironmentalreview toensurethatinstitutionalandengineering
Meaningful public involvement Meaningfulpublicinvolvement(seeSection3) throughouttheschoolsitingprocessisofcritical importance.Tribesshouldensurethattheirpublic involvementrequirementswilleffectivelyinvolve thecommunity,andplansforpublicinvolvement shouldbeformalizedpriortoinitiatingthe identificationofpotentialschoolsites.Detailsof siteassessmentprocesses,cleanupdecisions(e.g., scope,procedures,findings),landuserestrictions (engineeringandinstitutionalcontrols,see Section8.15)andsubsequentschoolconstruction plansshouldbeprovidedtothecommunityand subjecttopublicnotificationandcomment.Itis importantforLEAstodevelopacommunications plantoensureeffectivepublicinvolvement(see Section3.4). Local capacity to manage institutional and engineering controls Tribesshouldestablishstandardstoassessthe capacityofanypartyformanagementof institutionalorengineeringcontrolsatpotential schoollocations.Thestandardsshouldbe designedtoensurethelongtermintegrityofany institutionalorengineeringcontrolsputinplace atpotentialschoolsiteswhereresidual contaminationoroffsitehazardstobemitigated exist.Thecapacitytomanageengineeringand institutionalcontrolsshouldconsiderthe following: ! Availabilityofaccurateinformationonthe locationorextentofinstitutionaland engineeringcontrols,perhapsprovidedona map; ! Establishmentof,andparticipationin,aonecall system(seeSection10)toprotectagainst humanexposuretocontaminatedsoil; ! Establishmentofamandatorymonitoring programtoroutinelyreviewinstitutionaland engineeringcontrolstoensuretheircontinued effectiveness; ! Establishmentofenforceableinstitutional controls,whichrequirecompliance; ! Establishmentofinformationoninstitutional controlsthateffectivelydisseminate informationonthelocationofcontrols, compliancestatus,andmonitoringreportsto interestedstakeholders,especiallyparents, tribalandlocalenvironmentalofficials; ! Longtermbudgetcommitmenttoprovide fundsfortheoperationandmaintenanceof institutionalandengineeringcontrols,including requiredtrainingofstaffresponsiblefor maintainingcontrols; ! Trackingofexpendituresassociatedwith institutionalandengineeringcontrolsbythe LEAsothathistoricalexpenditurescanbeused torefineplanningestimatesforthecostof maintaininginstitutionalandengineering controls; ! Usingmorethanoneinstitutionalcontrol(i.e., layering)toimproveoverallreliabilityand effectivenessformanagingtheamount, concentrations,toxicityandother characteristicsoftheresidualwasteor contamination;and ! Availabilityofaprocesstoreportmalfunctions ofcontrols. 7.3.7. Tribal Policy Review
Tribesareencouragedtoreviewexistinglaws, policiesandregulationsaddressingschoolsiting todeterminewhetherchangesareneededto encourageimprovedschoolsitingdecisions.Such areviewofexistingpoliciesacrosstribalagencies wouldhelpidentifygapsandoutdatedpolicies thatnolongerservestategoalsandobjectives. Education,health,environmental,planningand transportationagencies,aswellasothers,suchas HistoricPreservationOffices,shouldwork togethertoconsiderhowexistingregulations, policiesandguidelinesinfluenceoraffect decisionsaboutschoolrenovation,remodelingor thesitingofnewschools.Reviewofexisting guidelinesorpoliciesmayfocusonthoserelated tothefollowinggeneraltopics:
114
! Communityinvolvementandpublic participationinschoolsitingandrenovation decisions; ! Longrangeschoolfacilitiesplan; ! Schoolfundingofnewconstructionorto supportexistingschoolrenovation; ! Prohibitionsontribalreimbursementofland coststhatforcecommunitiestowardthelowest costsites,regardlessofpotentialenvironmental challenges; ! Schoolsizeformulasorrequirementsforlot sizeandaccesstorecreationalareas; ! Minimumschoolenrollmentrequirements; ! Environmentalevaluationandassociatedcosts; ! Environmentalcleanup(includingcleanup standardsandlongtermstewardshipsite controls)andassociatedcosts; ! Communityuseofschools(andjointuseof communityresourcessuchaslibraries, theaters,parksandballfields); ! Energyefficiency; ! Sustainabledevelopment;and ! Emergencypreparednessandshelteringplans. Tribesmayalsoconsiderdevelopingpolicies, guidelinesorregulationswithlocalhealth jurisdictionstoinvolvetheminapprovalofschool sites,andtribesshouldprovidelocalcommunities withinformationrelatedtotribalpoliciesthat pertaintositingdecisions. 67 Publichealthpoliciesshouldpromoteschoolsites thatdonotleadtoharmfulenvironmental exposuresandthatdofacilitatephysicalactivity, healthybehaviorsandhealthycommunities. Schoolslocatedintheneighborhoodsofthe
67
studentstheyservewillhaveanincreased numberofchildrenwhowalk,bikeortakepublic transittoandfromschoolandwillprovide familieswithaccesstoplaygroundsandfacilities thatencouragesphysicalactivityoutsideofschool time.Policiesrelatedtoenvironmentalreview shouldfacilitateassessmentoflocationsbeforean LEApurchasesorleasesaproperty.Tribal policies,lawsandregulationscanpromotethese goalsinanumberofways,including: ! Encouragethecreationoflongrangeschool facilitiesplans(seeSection4.2.1)byLEAs, includingLEAguidanceonhowtheseplanscan involvestakeholdersandcommunitymembers andcomplementcomprehensiveplansand otherplanningeffortsatthemunicipal(and tribal)levels.OneresourceisCaliforniasGuide toDevelopmentofLongRangeFacilitiesPlan (www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/sf/longrangeplan.asp); ! Donotrequireminimumnumberofacres forschoolsites.Acreagerequirementscan preventLEAsfromusingsmallersiteswithin neighborhoodsandforcethemtobuildschools onlargetractsoflandsontheoutskirtsof communities.TheCouncilofEducational FacilityPlannersInternational (www.cefpi.org/)hasabolisheditsminimum acreagestandardspolicybutsometribesmay stillhavenowoutdatedlawsbasedonthis policyineffect; ! EncouragecommunitiesandLEAstoplan anddevelopjointuseagreementsfor libraries,parksandballfieldsforefficientuseof availableland; ! Donotfavorlargerenrollmentschools, whicharechallengingtobuildwithin neighborhoods,informulasforeducation fundingallocations; ! Donotfavornewconstructionover renovationofexistingschoolsinschool constructionfundingformulas(oftencalledthe twothirdsruleor60percentrule). Renovationandmodernizationcouldhelp achieveeducationalobjectivesbycreating
schoolenvironmentsthatsupportimproved academicachievementbyhelpingtoalleviate thebacklogofrepairandmaintenanceprojects. InastudyconductedintheLosAngelesUnified SchoolDistrict(www.edfacilities.org/pubs/ LAUSD%20Report.pdf),researchersfoundthat improvementsinthequalityofschoolfacilities ledtoanincreaseinstudentperformance; 68 ! Considertruelongtermcostsofasite assessment/investigation,includingland acquisition,initialconstruction,longterm busingcostsandothertransportationcosts, improvementstotheutilitiesandstreet networkaroundtheschool,longtermsite locationmonitoringandmaintenancecostsin policiesonestimatingcostsforrenovation versusconstruction; ! Encourageefficientlocationofschoolsand judicioususeofbusingthroughschoolbusing reimbursementformulasandbusingradius policies; ! Considerwalkabilityinfrastructure(e.g., adequatesidewalks,absenceoftraffichazards, saferoutestoschools)intribalschoolfunding policies; ! Schoolfundingmechanismsatthetribal levelshouldallowtimeforproperanalysis andconsiderationofsuitablesitesfor construction,particularlyatsiteswhere environmentalconcernsareinvolved; ! Encouragepublicinvolvementthroughout thesitingprocess. Inadditiontopoliciesrelatedtoenvironmental reviewandcleanup,relevantpoliciesinclude thosethatpromotepublichealthandtakeinto accounttheimpactofproposedorexistingoffsite sourcesonexistingschools.
! ProvidetechnicalsupporttoLEAsduringthe environmentalreview.Policiesoftribalhealth andenvironmentalagenciesshouldallowfor andencourageLEAstopartnerwithtribal agenciesinconductingathorough environmentalreview;and
68
Jack Buckley, Mark Schneider and Yi Shang, LAUSD School
Facilities and Academic Performance, Los Angeles Unified School District, Unpublished report prepared as part of Building Educational Services Together initiative, 21st Century School Fund, Washington, DC. Accessed on September 16, 2011. Available at: www.ncef.org/pubs/LAUSD%20Report.pdf.
116
8. Quick Guide to Environmental Issues

Contents
AirPollution(seeSection8.1) NearbyHighwaysandOtherTransportation Facilities(IncludingGoodsMovement)(see Section8.2) VolatileOrganicCompounds(VOCs)inSoiland GroundWater(seeSection8.3) Radon(seeSection8.4) PetroleumHydrocarbonsinSoilandGround Water(seeSection8.5) LeadbasedPaintHazardsandLeadinSoiland DrinkingWater(seeSection8.6) Polychlorinatedbiphenyls(PCBs)inFluorescent LightBallasts,WindowCaulkingandinSoil AssociatedwithOlderBuildings(seeSection8.7) AsbestosContainingMaterialSurveys (seeSection8.8) Mold(seeSection8.9) ChemicalsinSchools(seeSection8.10) HeavyMetalsinSoilandGroundWater (seeSection8.11) Pesticides(seeSection8.12) SecuringSafeSoilandFill(seeSection8.13) HistoricFill(seeSection8.14)
InstitutionalandEngineeringControls (seeSection8.15) CapacityforLongtermMaintenanceof EngineeringandInstitutionalControls (seeSection8.16) Thissectionprovidesgeneralinformationon someofthecommonenvironmentalissuesthat thelocaleducationagency(LEA),theschoolsiting committee(SSC)andthecommunitymay encounterduringanenvironmentalreview.
8.1. Air Pollution

Thepotentialexposureofchildrentoairpollution isbothageneralcommunityconcern,depending ontheoverallairqualityinanygivenregion,anda verylocalconcern,dependingonwhatsourcesof airpollutionmaybelocatedinproximitytoa prospectiveschoollocation.Therearemany potentialsourcesofairpollutionrangingfrom largescaleindustriestosmallbusinesseslocated withinneighborhoods;avarietyoftransportation relatedactivitiessuchasroadsandtransportation hubs;andareasourcesincludingagricultural activitiesandamyriadofotherlanduses.Major pollutantsinclude: ! Criteriapollutants(ozone,particulate matter,carbonmonoxide,nitrogenoxides, sulfurdioxideandlead)Exposuretothese pollutantsisassociatedwithnumerouseffects onhumanhealth,includingincreased respiratorysymptoms,heartorlungdiseases andevenprematuredeath(www.epa.gov/air/ urbanair/);and
QuickGuidetoEnvironmentalIssues | 117
! Airtoxicsinclude187specificpollutantsthat areknownorsuspectedtocauseserious healtheffectsandareregulatedashazardous airpollutants,orHAPs.Examplesoftoxicair pollutantsincludebenzene,whichisfoundin gasoline;perchloroethlyene,whichisemitted fromsomedrycleaningfacilities;and methylenechloride,whichisusedasasolvent andpaintstripperbyanumberofindustries. Examplesofotherlistedairtoxicsinclude dioxin,asbestos,tolueneandmetalssuchas cadmium,mercury,chromiumandlead compounds.(www.epa.gov/air/toxicair) typeandsizeofroadsofconcern,thevehiclefleet mixandactivitiesleadingtohighestexposures, andthedistancefromtheroadatwhichnearroad healthimpactssubside.Moststudiesontrafficand healthfocusonroadswithhighlevelsoftraffic (forexample,100,000annualaveragedailytraffic orhigher).Afewstudieshavereportedhealth effectsassociatedwithsmallertrafficvolumes, withonestudyshowingeffectsatvolumesaslow as10,000annualaveragedailytrafficinanarea. Further,whilethehealthstudiesreviewedbyHEI focusedonexposurestotrafficemissions,other transportationsourcessuchasrailyards,rail lines,airportsandmarineportshavesimilar concernsduetosimilaritiesinthetypeand characteristicsofairpollutionemissions. Formosttransportationsources,airpollutant concentrationsaregenerallyhighestclosesttothe source,withconcentrationsdecreasingwith distancefromthefacility.AccordingtotheHEI report,studiesthathaveexaminedgradientsinair pollutantconcentrationsasafunctionofdistance fromroadwayshaveindicatedexposurezones fortrafficrelatedairpollutionintherangeof 50to1500mfromthehighwaysandmajorroads evaluated.However,themagnitudeandextentof theseincreasedairpollutantconcentrationscan varybasedonanumberoffactorsrelatedto emissionsfromthesource,meteorologicaland topographicconditionsaffectingpollutant transportanddispersion,andtheinfluenceof roadwaydesignandroadsidefeatureson pollutanttransportanddispersion. Trafficemissionsmayvarydependingonthetotal numberofvehiclesusingaroad,thelevelof congestionontheroadandthenumberofheavy dutytruckspresent.Forrailoperations,the numberoftrains,maintenanceactivitiesand line/yardconfigurationwillinfluenceemissions andexposures.Portsandairportswillgenerate emissionsfromtheships/planespresentatthe facility,aswellassupportequipmentand operationsatthefacility.Formarineports,large numbersofheavydutytrucksmayalsobepresent onlocalroadwaystomovegoodsfromtheport. Airpollutantconcentrationsneartransportation
In2009/2010,EPA,stateandlocalairpollution controlagenciesconductedairmonitoringat 63schoolsinanefforttobetterunderstandtheair aroundselectedschoolsthroughoutthecountry. Datafromthisairmonitoringinitiativecanbe foundatwww.epa.gov/schoolair. Linktoairpollutionresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_air_pollution.
8.2. Nearby Highways and Other Transportation Facilities Including Goods Movement
Recentresearchhasdemonstratedalinkbetween exposurestoairpollutantsfromtrafficemissions nearlargeroadwaysandadversehumanhealth effects.TheHealthEffectsInstitute(HEI)recently completedareviewofalargenumberofhealth studies,concludingthatnearroadexposuresare apublichealthconcern. 69Althoughthelink betweenadversehealtheffectsandnearroad exposureshasbeenmade,thesciencehasnotyet progressedtoanunderstandingofhowsomekey elementsaffecttheseassociations,suchasthe
69
Health Effects Institute Panel on the Health Effects of Traffic
Related Air Pollution, TrafficRelated Air Pollution: A Critical Review of the Literature on Emissions, Exposure, and Health Effects, Health Effects Institute Special Report 17 January 2010. Available at http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=334.
118
| QuickGuidetoEnvironmentalIssues
facilitieswillalsobeaffectedbywinddirection, windspeedandatmosphericstability.Changesin localtopographyfromnaturalorroadwaydesign featureswillalsoaffectairpollutanttransportand dispersion,whichcanleadtovaryingexposures forschooloccupants.Thus,airqualitymayvary basedonsurroundingterrainandfeatures,such ascutsections,noisewalls,vegetationor combinationsofthesefeatures. Thecomplexityandmultitudeoffactorsaffecting airpollutantconcentrationsneartransportation sources(seeExhibit5:FactorsInfluencing ExposuresandPotentialRisksfromNearby Hazards)makeitdifficulttorecommendastrict setofguidanceforsafedistancesfromthese sourcetypes,particularlygiventhepotentialfor unintendedconsequences.Locationsinclose proximitytomajortransportationfacilitiesshould considerarangeofapproachestomitigateor avoidpotentialexposures.Whenevaluating potentiallocationsthatmaybelocatedneara highwayorothermajortransportationfacility, severalfactorsshouldbeconsidered: ! Arethereotherlocationsinthecommunityat fartherdistancesfromthesourcethatarealso beingconsidered?Urbanareasmaybelimited intheirabilitytofindappropriatelocations awayfrommajorroadsandother transportationsources;thus,careful considerationshouldbegiventonearroad andothertransportationsourcelocations beforeeliminatingthemiftheonly alternativesaretolocateschoolsmuchfarther fromthecommunitiesbeingserved. Unintendednegativeconsequencestomoving schoolsawayfromthesecommunitiesmay includeincreasedpollutantexposuresduring longerbusorpersonalcarcommutes, increasedtrafficonlocalroadstoaccess schoolsfurtherfromtheircommunities,and lackofwalking,biking,orotheralternative commuteoptionstoschool;and Whatoptionsmightbefeasibleformitigating pollutantconcentrationsatthesitefromthese offsitesources? Studiessuggestthatroadsincutsections (i.e.,roadsurfacebelowexistingterrain)or thathavecombinationsofnoisebarriers, vegetationand/orbuildingsnearthe roadsidemayreducedownwindair pollutionconcentrations; Schooldesigntechniquesmaybe employedtoreduceexposuresatnear sourceschools,suchaslocatingathletic fields,playgroundsandclassroomsasfar fromthesourceaspossible,andlocating airintakesinareasontheschool building(s)thatareleastaffectedbyoffsite oronsitetransportationairpollutant sources; Installingorpreservingbarrierssuchas trees,buildingsandnoisebarriersmay reduceairpollutantexposures; FiltrationdevicesaspartofHVACdesign canbeusedtoimproveindoorairquality asdescribedinothersectionsofthis guidance;and Addingcontrolsorredesigningoffsite sourcestoreduceschoolareapollutant concentrations(e.g.,replacingor retrofittingportandrail engines/equipmentwithcleaner technologies,reducingidlingatterminal facilities,reroutingexistingorprojected trafficawayfromschoolorother populatedareas(e.g.,truckonlylanes), andadoptionofhighdensitydevelopment andtransitalternatives). ThesectionEvaluatingImpactsofNearbySources ofAirPollutionprovidesinformationthatcan assistLEAsandenvironmentalprofessionalsin evaluatingpotentialsourcesofairpollutionearly inthesiteevaluationprocess(seeSection6). Linkstoairpollutionresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_air_pollutionand www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_highways_and_traffic.
8.3. Volatile Organic Compounds VOCs in Soil and Ground Water

Thepotentialforvaporintrusionintooverlying buildingshasreceivedmuchattentioninthepast decade.Thereisaheightenedawareness nationallyandinternationallybythegeneral publicofthepotentialhealthconcernsrelatedto vaporintrusion. Vaporintrusionisgenerallydefinedasthe upwardmigrationofvolatileorganiccompounds (VOCs)intooverlyingbuildingsfromunderground soilsandgroundwater.Commoncontaminants thatmaycreateavaporintrusionhealthconcern include,butarenotlimitedto,gasoline components(e.g.,benzene)anddrycleaningand degreasingsolvents.Commondrycleaningand degreasingsolventsincludeperchloroethylene andtrichloroethylene. Thepresenceofthesecontaminantsinthesoilor thegroundwaterbeneathabuildingdoesnot alwayspresentavaporintrusionconcern. Physicalfactors,suchassoilchemistry,ground waterconditions,subsurfacefeaturesandweather conditions,alsoaffectwhethervaporintrusion occurs.Extremesinweatherconditionscan increaseextentofthevaporintrusion(e.g.,in timesofdrought).Likewise,excessprecipitation maycauseplumestomigrate(e.g.,basedonwater cascadingoffedgesorapronsofgasstations) and/ortravelfarther(e.g.,undernearbyschools). Theseweatherandgeophysicalconditionscan resultinunanticipatedexposures. Eventhoughwelldesigned,wellconstructedand welloperatednewbuildingsaregenerallynot susceptibletovaporintrusion,theuseof integratedfoundationsubslabventingsystems equippedwithpolyethyleneorothervapor barriersisbecomingincreasinglycommoninnew constructionindenselypopulatedregionsofthe country,includingCalifornia,NewYorkandNew Jersey.Therearemanydifferenttypesofdesigns forsubslabventingsystems.Mostsystems,
originallydevelopedforprotectionagainst naturallyoccurringradongasaccumulation, consistofarelativelyinexpensivenetworkof horizontalperforatedPolyvinylchloridepiping installedwithinanaggregatelayerunderapoured concreteslabbeneaththegroundfloorofa building.Thepolyvinylchloridepipesare connectedtoamanifoldcollectionsystem,andthe collectedvaporisventedbyverticalpipingup throughtheroofofthebuilding.Insomecases,a syntheticvaporbarrierisrecommended,orroof topfansareincludedtooperatethesystemina moreactivemode. Inmuchthesamewaythatventingsystemsare usedtointerceptradongasbeforeitentersa home,suchventingsystemsareeffectivein preventingtheaccumulationofVOCs.Addressing vaporintrusionintoolderbuildingsismoreofa challenge. Thedesignandinstallationofsubslabventing systemsandvaporbarriersbuiltintothebuilding foundationarebestcompletedbyexperienced architecturalandengineeringfirms.Theproper installationofavaporbarrierthatmayoverliea subslabventingsystemisveryimportant.Once installed,thevaporbarriershouldbeinspected, testedandcertifiedbytheengineerorarchitectof recordthatthebarrierwasinstalledcorrectlyand worksasdesigned.Smoketestingisarecognized methodtoassessproperinstallationofvapor barriersandothersyntheticliners. Theengineerand/orarchitectofrecordshould furnishareporttotheLEAalongwiththeresults ofthetesting,andacopyoftheinspectionandtest resultsshouldbeincludedinareporttoan oversightregulatoryagency. Performancemonitoringofaventingsystemis equallyimportant.Ifresidualundergroundsoil andgroundwatercontaminationexists,theLEA shouldretainanexperiencedenvironmental professionaltodevelopalongtermmonitoring planandperiodicallycompletetestingaroundthe schooltodocumentthatthesystemisoperating properly.Soilgassamplingportsarebest integratedintothebuildingdesign,withinavent
120
piping,orasclosetothebuildingasisfeasibleif thestructurealreadyexists. Linktovaporintrusion/VOCresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_vapor_intrusion_vocs. Additionalinformationregardingvolatileorganic compoundscanbefoundhere: www.epa.gov/iaq/voc.html#Additional%20Resou rces. Linktoradonresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_radon.
8.5. Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil and Ground Water

Onecommonenvironmentalissuelikelytobe encounteredatexistingandproposedschool locationsiscontaminationfrompetroleumor otherfuelorheatingoilsattributedtopetroleum productsthathavebeenspilledduringuseor leakedfromoldundergroundstoragetank systemsandpiping.Theseoilandfuelstorage tanksarecommonlyassociatedwithgasstations orfuelstorageareasgovernedbyfederalandstate environmentalregulations.Nonresidential undergroundstoragetanks(includingcommercial heatingoilandcommercialmotorfuel)canbe largerthan10,000gallonsinsize.Careshouldbe exercisedwheneverolderpetroleumtanksare encountered.Soilandwatersamplesshouldbe obtainedfromaroundtheundergroundtankprior toitsremovalorabandonment,andappropriate budgetcontingenciesshouldbeestablishedbythe LEAtoaddresssoilandgroundwaterremediation costsassociatedwithleakingpetroleumtanks.If theundergroundstoragetankhasleaked,itmay benecessarytodrillmonitoringwellsand regularlytestthewater,addingtothecostof remediation. Aboveorundergroundheatingoiltanksareoften regulatedbythelocalfiremarshalorhealth department,dependingonthesize.Inmanyparts ofthecountry,especiallyoldercities,home heatingoiliscommonlyusedasafuelinhomes. Mostburiedresidentialundergroundtanksare smallerthan1,000gallonsinsize,butduetotheir age,poorconditionandlocation(commonlyunder sidewalks),fuelleaksarecommonlyencountered. Insomeinstances,fueltanksarelocatedwithin basements.Thesesystemspresentlessofa concern,astheycanbevisuallyinspected.
8.4. Radon
Radonisanaturallyoccurring,radioactive,soil gas.Inhalingradoncanleadtolungcancer.Radon entersbuildingsthroughopeningsinground contactfloorsandwalls.Wellwatermayalso containradonandcontributetothelevelofradon inindoorair.Alwaystestforradoninindoorair beforetestingforradoninwater.Fortunately, simple,provenandinexpensivetechniqueshave beenusedinmanyschoolstokeepradonat acceptablelevels. Soiltestingasiteforradonisnotareliablewayto determineifaschoolbuildingwillhavehigh radonlevelsonceconstructed.Instead,EPA recommendsthatallschoolsinhighradon potentialareasbebuiltwithradonprevention techniques.Suchschoolsshouldbetestedupon completionandperiodicallyovertimetoensure theradonisatacceptablelevels.EPArecommends thefollowingradonpreventiontechniquesfor constructionofschools:installationofactivesoil depressurizationsystems,pressurizingthe buildingusingtheHVACsystem,andsealing majorradonentryroutes. Forexistingstructures,EPArecommendstesting allschoolsforradon.Aspartofaneffectiveindoor airqualitymanagementprogram,schoolscantake simplestepstotestforradonandreducerisksto occupantsifhighradonlevelsarefound.Theonly waytoknowifelevatedradonlevelsarepresentis totest.Somestatesregulateradonrelated activitiesinschools,forexample,byrequiring schoolstotakecertainactionsorlicensingradon measurementandmitigationservicesproviders.
TheLEAshouldretainanexperienced environmentalprofessionaltooverseethe removalofundergroundstoragetanksandany excavationthatmaybenecessarytoremoveand properlydisposeofpetroleumimpactedsoil. Issuesconcerningundergroundoraboveground storagetanksshouldbeidentifiedinthe preliminaryenvironmentalassessment.As discussedintheEnvironmentalReviewProcess section,thepurposeofthepreliminary environmentalassessmentistoidentifythe presenceorthelikelypresenceofany environmentalhazardsonapropertybasedon historicalandcurrentsiteuses. Linktoundergroundstoragetankresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_Storage_Tanks. Moreinformationrelatedtoabovegroundstorage tanks:www.epa.gov/oilspill/spcc. exteriorsandinsurfacesoilsisabestpractice.If leadisdetectedataconcentrationinsoilthat posesarisktochildren,thebestpracticeisto haveanexperiencedandlicensedhazardous wasteprofessionalproperlyremoveanddispose ofimpactedsoils.Ifleadbasedpainthazardsexist ontheexteriorsofpost1978schoolbuildings,the bestpracticeistohaveanEPAorstatecertified renovatorperformrenovation,repairandpainting workinaccordancewithEPAsleadsafework practicerequirementsforchildoccupiedfacilities foundat40CFRPart745orcapthesoilstoreduce exposures. DrinkingWater:TheLEAshouldengagean experiencedenvironmentalprofessionalto investigatethedrinkingwaterqualitywithin existingbuildings/structuresiftheschoolis servedbyamunicipality.Forschoolsthatareto berenovatedorexpanded,thesamplingand analysisofwaterfromtapsandfountainswhere peoplemaybedrinkingandcookingwithinthe building(s)isabestpracticetodeterminethe presenceandconcentrationoflead.Thisworkis bestdonebyanenvironmentalprofessional experiencedinwaterqualitytesting.Ifleadis detectedabovetheEPAactionlevel,the environmentalprofessionalshouldfurnisha reporttotheLEAthatidentifiesthelocationsof concernandprovidesoptionsonhowbestto addressthesituation.Theschoolshouldstop usingthattaporwaterfountainuntilthe recommendationsfromtheenvironmental professionalcanbeenacted. Ifaschoolisapublicwatersystemandsupplies itsownwaterwithawell,itissubjecttostateand federalSafeDrinkingWaterActregulationsand shouldbeawareofanyleadlevelsthatexceedthe EPAactionlevel.LEAscancontacttheirlocal drinkingwaterprogramforassistance. Linktoleadresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_lead. Additionalinformationregardingsampling drinkingwaterinschoolscanbefoundhere:
8.6. Leadbased Paint Hazards and Lead in Soil and Drinking Water
Leadhasbeenusedinawiderangeofindustrial, commercialandresidentialproductsfrom gasoline,piping,flashingorsolderaswellas pesticidesandpaint. PaintandSoil:Leadwascommonlyusedinpaint beforethe1978banbytheConsumerProducts SafetyCommissiononleadbasedpaintfor applicationswhereconsumersmaybeexposed. Buildingexteriorsmaycontainleadbasedpaint andsoilssurroundingolderbuildingsmaycontain leadatlevelsthatpresentanunacceptable exposurerisk.EPAhaspromulgatedregulations governingboththeabatement,aswellasthe renovation,repairandpaintingof,amongother things,pre1978childoccupiedfacilities,which generallyincludepreschoolsorbuildingareas wherechildrenundersixspendasignificant amountoftime.(See40CFRPart745,SubpartsE andL.)Forpost1978buildingsandschoolsin general,representativetestingforleadonbuilding
122
http://water.epa.gov/drink/info/lead/ testing.cfmand http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwat er/schools/guidance.cfm. ofPCBs,exceptintotallyenclosedequipment. However,alargenumberoffluorescentlight ballaststhatwereinstalledpriortothesebans maycontainPCBsandmaystillbeinusein schools. Intact,operationalballastswherePCBsremainin theballastsandpottingmaterialmaynotposea healthriskoranenvironmentalhazard.However, astheyage,theballastsdegrade.Dependingon thenumberofoperatinghours,thetypicallife expectancyofamagneticfluorescentlightballast isbetween10and15years.Thefailurerateprior totheendoftheusefullifeofballastsisabout10 percent.Afterthistypicallifeexpectancy,ballast failureratesincreasesignificantly.Allofthepre 1979ballastsinlightingfixturesthatarestillin usearenowfarbeyondthislifeexpectancy, increasingtheriskofleaksorevenfires,which wouldposeahealthandenvironmentalhazard.A PCBcontainingballastmayalsobelackingin thermaloverloadprotection,increasingthe possibilityoffiresorleaks.Thehazardcanbe worsenedbymishandlingbypersonnelwhoare unawareofthepresenceofPCBsinthelighting ballasts.Aballastthathasbeendamagedor mishandledcanincreaseexposureofstudentsand schoolpersonneltoPCBs. CaulkandSoil:RecentstudiesconductedbyEPA haveidentifiedapotentialexposurerisktoPCBs becausetheywereusedinthepastforcertain windowcaulkandrubberizedpaintformulations tomakethemmoreflexibleanddurable.Asa result,PCBsmaybefoundinsoilthatsurrounds olderbuildings.Representativetestingofsurface soilsanddeterioratedwindowcaulkforPCBsin buildingsthatwerebuiltorrenovatedbetween 1950and1978isabestpractice.IfPCBsarefound indeterioratedwindowcaulking,thebestpractice istohaveanexperiencedandlicensedcontractor properlyremoveanddisposeofthecaulking. Similarly,ifPCBsaredetectedinsoils,thebest practiceistohaveanexperiencedandlicensed contractorproperlyremoveanddisposeof impactedsoils.
8.7. Polychlorinated biphenyls PCBs in Fluorescent Light Ballasts, Window Caulking and Soil Associated with Older Buildings
Polychlorinatedbiphenyls(PCBs)werewidely usedinelectricalandmanufacturingprocesses beforetheywerebanned30yearsago.Ifanolder buildingisbeingconsideredasapossiblelocation orexistsonasiteproposedforaschool,theLEA shouldengageanexperiencedenvironmental professionaltoinvestigateexisting buildings/structurestodeterminethepresenceof PCBcontainingequipment/fixturesandbuilding materials.PCBscanbefoundinlightfixtures, electricalequipment(transformers),olderpaint formulationsandolderwindowcaulkproducts.If elevatedconcentrationsofPCBsarefound,an environmentalprofessionalshouldfurnisha reporttotheLEAthatdocumentstheiroccurrence andremediationoptionsandcosts.The environmentalprofessionalshouldalsoidentify andfollowthefederalandstateregulatory requirementsforhandling,storageandmarkingof PCBcontainingitems. Ballasts:ManyschoolsintheUnitedStatesbuilt before1979havelightballastscontainingPCBs. ThePCBsarecontainedwithinthelightballast capacitorsandintheballastpottingmaterial.Until thelate1970s,PCBswerecommonlyusedas insulatorsinelectricalequipmentbecausethey havehightolerancetoheat,donotburneasilyand arenonexplosive. CongressbannedthemanufactureofPCBsinthe UnitedStatesin1977becauseoftheirtoxic effects.In1979,EPAbannedtheprocessingoruse
LinkstoPCBsresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_pcbsand www.epa.gov/pcbsincaulk/guide/guidesect4. AlistofEPAregionalasbestoscontactsis availableat: www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/regioncontact. Additionalguidanceonasbestosprogramsfor schoolscanbefoundatEPAsasbestoswebsite: www.epa.gov/asbestos.
8.8. AsbestosContaining Material Surveys

Asbestosisanaturallyoccurringmineralfiber thathasbeenusedinawidevarietyofproductsas aninsulatorandfireretardant.TheAsbestos HazardEmergencyResponseAct(AHERA),a provisionoftheToxicSubstancesControlAct, becamelawin1986.AHERArequireslocal educationagencies(LEAs)toinspecttheirschools forasbestoscontainingbuildingmaterialand preparemanagementplanstopreventorreduce asbestoshazards. Ifanolderbuildingisbeingconsideredfora possibleschoollocation,theLEAshouldengagean experiencedenvironmentalprofessionalto determinethepresenceofasbestoscontaining materialsanditsconditionusingrecognized testingmethods.Asbestoscontainingmaterials maybefoundoninteriorandexteriorpipe/duct insulations,equipmentandboilerinsulations,fire brick,HVACunits,plastermaterials,floorand ceilingtiles,mastics/glues,roofingmaterials, windowglazingcaulks,wirewrap,betweenold woodenflooring(fornoisereduction)and fireproofingmaterials.Asbestosmayalsobefound invermiculiteinsulation.Theenvironmental professionalshouldfurnishareporttotheLEA thatincludesthetestresults,anitemized inventoryofallsuspectedasbestoscontaining materials,andacorrespondingcostestimateto abatesuchconditions(includingmanagementin place,whereappropriate)andconductthe appropriatetestinginaccordancewithall applicableregulatoryagencyandcode requirements. Linkstoasbestosresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_asbestos.
8.9. Mold
Leaks,condensationandhighhumiditycanresult insignificantmoldcontaminationofstructures. Buildingsthatareintendedforreuseshouldbe evaluatedforevidenceofpriormoistureproblems andpotentialforfuturemoistureandmoldissues. Inbuildingswheremoldissuesareidentified, properassessmentandremediationofboththe underlyingmoistureproblemsandcleanupof existingmoldshouldbecompletedpriorto occupancy.Potentialhealtheffectsandsymptoms associatedwithmoldexposuresincludeallergic reactions,asthmaandotherrespiratory complaints. Linktomoldresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_mold. Additionalguidanceregardingmoldremediation inschoolscanbefoundhere: www.epa.gov/mold/mold_remediation.
8.10. Chemicals in Schools

Existingbuildingsmaycontainimproperlystored, hazardousandoutdatedchemicals,whichcan posearisktostudents,staffandotherschool occupants.Fromelementaryschoolmaintenance closetstohighschoolchemistrylabs,schoolsusea varietyofchemicals.Whentheyaremismanaged, thesechemicalscanputstudentsandschool personnelatriskfromspills,firesandother accidentalexposures.TheSchoolsChemical CleanoutCampaignwebsitegivesK12schools informationandtoolstoresponsiblymanage chemicals.ToviewtheSchoolsChemical CleanoutCampaignwebsite,visit
124
www.epa.gov/schools/programsandclickon SchoolsChemicalCleanoutCampaign. Linktochemicalsinschoolsresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_chemicals_in_schools. GroundWater:www.epa.gov/lawsregs/topics/ water.html#ground, http://water.epa.gov/type/ground water/index.cfmand www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_drinking_water. Soil:www.epa.gov/gateway/science/landand www.epa.gov/superfund/index.
8.11. Heavy Metals in Soil and Ground Water

Inadditiontolead,metalssuchasarsenic, cadmium,mercuryandchromiumcanbefoundin paintpigmentsandolderpesticideformulations. Metalsmayalsohavebeenreleasedtothe environmentfromcommercialorindustrial operations.Metalsdonotdegradeinthe environment,andasaresult,canbefoundinsoil andgroundwaterinmanyareas.Althoughlow backgroundlevelsofmetalsmaynotrepresenta healthconcern,elevatedlevelsofmetalsinsoilare frequentlyencounteredacrossthecountry. Metalsarealsofoundinoldermasonryproducts.A standardofcareneedstobeundertakenifmasonry materialsfromolderbuildingsaretobecrushedand recycledasfillmaterial.Thisissuehasonlyrecently surfacedinenvironmentalassessmentsofolder buildingslatedfordemolition.Oldermasonry materialsmaycontainelevatedlevelsofmetals,such asberylliumandcadmiumthatmaynotbesuitable foronsiterecycling.Thisisespeciallytrueifmasonry materialsarepainted.Representativesamplesofthe masonryshouldbeobtainedbyanexperienced environmentalprofessionaltodeterminewhether themasonryissuitableforonsiterecycling. Linkstoresourcesonspecificmetals: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_lead, www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_arsenicand www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_mercury. Thefollowinglinksprovideinformationregarding lawsandregulationsandtechnicalapproaches relatedtogroundwaterandsoil.
8.12. Pesticides
Pesticidesmaybeencounteredonexistingand proposedschoolsites.Ifaproposedschoolwas historicallyusedforresidentialoragricultural purposes,surfaceandsubsurfacesoilsshouldbe testedforpesticidessuchaschlordane,dieldrin, leadarsenateanddichlorodiphenyltrichloro ethaneaswellasotherpesticidesassociatedwith thecropsoragriculturalactivitiesatthatsite.If thereisawellontheproperty,thewatershould alsobetestedifitislikelytobeusedforconsump tion.Pesticidesusedfortermiteprotectionat schoolswereroutinelysprayedadjacentto buildingfoundations.Ifaschoolbuildingis proposedfordemolitionorexpansion,soils shouldbetestedforpesticidesinareasproposed fordisturbance.Properhealthandsafety precautionsshouldbeemployedbyworkersthat maycomeincontactwithpesticides.Excavation andoffsitedisposalofsoilfoundtocontain pesticidesmayberequiredpriortoorduring schoolconstruction.
Pesticidesingroundwatergenerallyoccurasa resultofleachingfromsoilintogroundwateras wellasinjectionofsoilfumigantpesticidesinto theground.Thepotentialpresenceofpesticidesin groundwatershouldalsobeconsideredifan onsitesourceofdrinkingwaterisrequired. Aerialaswellasgroundbasedapplicationsof pesticidescanresultinunintendedspreadof pesticidesfromtheintendedtargetlocationto otherlocationsduetoequipment,application techniques,applicatorerrororweatherorother applicationconditions.Thedriftofsprayanddust
frompesticideapplicationscanexposepeople, wildlifeandtheenvironmenttopesticideresidues thatcancausehealthandenvironmentaleffects andpropertydamage. Whilelargescaleaerialsprayingofagricultural operationshasresultedinpoisoningoffarm workers,childrenandothers,spraydriftcanoccur duringanypesticideapplication,includingin suburbanorurbanenvironments.Driftcaneven occurduringindooruseofpesticides. Potentialpesticideusagenearprospectiveschool sitesinrural,suburbanaswellasurbanlocations shouldbeconsideredandevaluatedforpotential toexposechildrenorstafftopesticides.Where suchpotentialexists,stepstomitigatepotential exposuresshouldbeconsideredand implemented.Potentialmitigationapproaches include: ! Oversightandstrictenforcementofproduct labelusedirectionsanddriftrestrictions; Useofdriftreducingapplicationtechnologies andbestmanagementpractices;and Bufferzonesbasedoncaseandsitespecific considerations. isdeliveredtothesite.Contractdocumentsshould clearlystatethatimportedfillmaterialsneedto meetestablishedenvironmentalquality specifications. Contractdocumentsshouldclearlystatethatfill andtopsoilimportedtoaproposedschoolsitebe suitablefortheintendedfutureuseofthe propertyasaschool,frombothanengineering andenvironmentalqualityperspective,andthat thequalityoftheimportedfillandtopsoilshall notchangetheenvironmentalclassificationofthe propertyfromanunrestrictedtoarestricteduse. Similarly,theexportationofexcessfillandtopsoil thatoriginatesfromaproposedschoolsiteshould notbeassumedtobefreeofcontaminants.Low levelsofcontaminantsarecommonlyfound, especiallyinurbanandformeragriculturalareas. TheLEAanditsenvironmentalprofessionalare responsibleforensuringthattheexportationof fillmaterialissuitableforpropertytowhichitis delivered. Whentestingisnecessarytodocumentfillandsoil quality,representativesamplesofthefillandsoil shouldbetestedforsuchcontaminantsas pesticides,PCBs,metalsandpolycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons. Additionalinformationregardinglegacylanduse orcontaminationcanbefoundhere: www.epa.gov/superfund/health/index.
Linkstopesticideresources: http://www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.ht ml#LINKS_pesticides.
8.13. Securing Safe Soil and Fill

Soilandfillmaterialsshouldnotalwaysbe assumedtobefreeofcontaminants.Dependingon thesourceofsoilandfillmaterialstobeimported toaschoolsite,thesoilandfillmaycontain contaminantsaswellasconstructionand demolitiondebris.Notonlydoesfillmaterial importedtoaschoolsiteneedtobesuitablefrom anengineeringperspective,thesoilmayneedto meetenvironmentalqualitystandards.Itis recommendedthatmaterialbetestedandthe architectorengineerofrecordapprovesthe placementoffillmaterialonschoolsitesbeforeit
8.14. Historic Fill

Historicfillisgenerallydefinedasnonindigenous materialthatwasimportedtoasitetoraisethe topographicelevation.Examplesofhistoricfill mayinclude:constructiondebris,dredgespoils, incineratorresidue,demolitiondebris,flyashor nonhazardoussolidwaste. Priortotheturnofthepastcentury,itwasa commonpracticeincertainareasoftheUnited Statestofilllowlyingareastoreducemosquito breedinggroundsandexpandurbanlandon whichtobuild.Inmanyinstances,thishistoricfill materialoriginatedfromanoffsitelocation,and itsenvironmentalqualitywasneverdetermined.
126
Mosthistoricfillcontainslowlevelsofpollutants, butsomehistoricfillcanhavepoorerquality. Insomeinstancestherecanbeeconomicand impracticabilityissuesassociatedwithremovalof suchlargequantitiesofhistoricfillmaterials, whichinsomeareasofthenortheasternUnited Statescanbe20feetthick.Intheseinstances, constructionofvariousimperviousand engineeringcontrolsiscurrentlyanaccepted practice. Additionalinformationregardinglegacylanduse orcontaminationcanbefoundhere: www.epa.gov/superfund/health/index. fencingmaterial).Twofeetofcleanfillandsoilis placedoverthegeotextileandvisualbarrier.The visualbarrierservesasamarkerlayertowarn anyonewhomightdigintothesoilthatsoilbelow thismarkercontainspollutantsinsoilthatshould notbedisturbed.However,sitesthatcontainan areaofcontaminatedsoil/fillmayrequire additionalengineeringcontrolstoencapsulatethe contaminatedlayerofsoil/fill.Forexample,a layerofcrushedstoneunderneaththecleanfill layerwillprovideacapillarybreakthatlimits theupwardanddownwardmovementofwateror leachate.Thislayerwillalsopreventburrowing animalsandwormsfromtransporting contaminatedsoilintothecleanfilland potentiallytothesurface.LEAsshouldreview EPAsrequirementsforencapsulating contaminatedsoils. Undergroundutilitiesarebestinstalledwithin cleansoilzonestomitigateexposureshould futurerepairs,alterations,improvementsor disturbancesbenecessary.Suchcleanutility corridorsarerecommendedwhenanengineering controlisnecessaryforaparticularpropertyto eliminateapotentialdirectcontactexposureto preexistingsoilsthatmaycontainresidual contamination.Acleanutilitycorridorisdefined asalineartrenchthatisexcavatedtosupportthe installationofundergroundutilities;thetrenchis restoredtograde,aftertheinstallationofutilities, usingcleansoilorfillmaterials.Cleanutility corridorsreducethepotentialfordamagetoan existingengineeringcontrolwhenfutureutility repairs,alterationsorimprovementsare necessary. Plantingtreeswithextensiverootsystemsshould beavoidedifasiteisconstructedwitha multilayeredengineeringcontrolbarrier.Whenan engineeringcontrol,intheformofaclean landscapedsoilcoverofsufficientthickness,is employed,treesandshrubsshouldbeplantedin cleansoilzonesspecificallyexcavatedto accommodatetheirrootsystems.Treesand shrubsshouldbekeptawayfromwaterwellsand septicfields.Thisoftenrequiresexcavationtoa
8.15. Institutional and Engineering Controls

Institutionalcontrolsarelegaland administrativecontrolsusedtopreventhuman exposuretoresidualcontaminationandprotect theintegrityoftheremedy.Examplesof institutionalcontrolsincludezoning,noticesand warnings,easements,restrictivecovenants,other landorresourceuserestrictions, permits/governmentalcontrolsand administrativeorders. Engineeringcontrols:Examplesofengineering controlsincludetheplacementoftwofeet(or more)ofcleansoil/fillmaterial(suitablefor residentialuses)andturfgrassonplaygrounds andathleticfields,imperviousengineeredsurface parkinglotsandbuildingslabs,landfillsoilcaps, impermeableliners,othercontainmentcovers, undergroundslurrywalls,fences,airfiltration devicesandphysicalandplantedvegetation barriers. Bestconstructionandperformancemanagement practicesshouldbeusedwhenanengineering controlintheformofacleansoilcoveris necessarytoeliminatedirectcontactexposureto soilfoundtocontainpollutants.Themost commonpracticeistoisolatetheunderlyingsoil usinggeotextileandvisualbarriermaterials(such aspolyethyleneorangeconstruction/snow
depthoffourtosixfeettoaccommodatetheroot ballofthetreeorshrub. Linktocleanupregulationsandprocesses: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_cleanup_regulations_and_processes. Additionalinformationregardingcleanup programsandstandardscanbefoundhere: www.epa.gov/oswer/cleanup/indexand www.epa.gov/oswer/cleanup/programs. Additionalinformationregardingriskassessment processescanbefoundhere: www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment. ! ! Informstheowner(andfutureowners)ofthe propertytomaintaintheengineeringcontrols andtonotifytheregulatoryagencypriorto anyalterations,improvementsor disturbancesinthearea(i.e.,therestricted area); Setsforththescheduletoconductperiodic inspectionsofthearea;and Specifiesanyparticularcertification requirementsthattheengineeringcontrol remainsintact.
8.16. Capacity for Long term Maintenance of Engineering and Institutional Controls
Theuseofinstitutionalandengineeringcontrols canbeaneffectivemethodforeliminatingdirect contactexposure.Wherethereisconcernabout anLEAscapacityandabilitytomanagesiteswith institutionalandengineeringcontrols(see Sections7.2.6and7.3.6,underLocalcapacityto manageinstitutionalandengineeringcontrols), LEAsareencouragedtoenrollprospectivesitesin theirstateortribalvoluntarycleanup/ brownfieldsresponseprogramtoensure oversightofassessmentandcleanupeffortsandto identifyaprocessforanLEA,workingwiththeir regulatorypartners,tooverseecontinuedsafesite management.Ifaninstitutionaloranengineering controlisnecessarytoeliminatedirectcontact exposure,theLEAshouldadequatelybudgetfor periodicinspections,maintenanceand repair/replacementofthecontrols. Aninstitutionalcontrol,intheformofanoticeto thepropertydeed,canspecifycertainactionsto becompletedbythepropertyownerandwill identifythevariousreportingrequirementsto documentthattheengineeringcontrolremains intact.Thisdeednoticetypically:
Longtermstewardshipresources: www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LIN KS_longterm_stewardship. Additionalinformationregardingcleanup programsandstandardscanbefoundhere: www.epa.gov/oswer/cleanup/indexand www.epa.gov/oswer/cleanup/programs. Additionalinformationregardingriskassessment processescanbefoundhere: www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment.
128
9. Frequent Questions
Contents
! PublicInvolvement Howdotheguidelinesaddresscommunity involvementintheschoolsitingprocess? (seeSection9.1) ! ExistingSchools Dotheguidelinesapplyretroactivelyto previoussitingdecisions?(seeSection9.2) Dotheguidelinesaddresstheretention andrenovationofexistingschools? (seeSection9.3) WillEPASchoolSitingGuidelinesprevent pollutiongeneratingfacilitiesfrombeing builtnearexistingschools? (seeSection9.4) WhatcanIdotoprotectmychildright nowfromenvironmentalhazardsattheir currentschool?(seeSection9.5) ! EnvironmentalHazards Shouldntschoolsbebuiltasfarawayfrom majorpollutiongeneratingsourcesas possible?(seeSection9.6) Isn'tanuncontaminatedsitealwaysthe bestlocationforanewschool? (seeSection9.7) Canschoolsbesafelybuiltonsiteswith residualsoilorgroundwater contamination?(seeSection9.8) Incaseswherethebestavailablelocation foraschoolreliesonengineeringand/or institutionalcontrolstopreventpotential exposures,howcanthecommunitywork withtheLEAandotherresponsible entitiestoensurethatthosecontrolsare
effectiveforthelifeoftheschool? (seeSection9.9) Whatcleanuporremediationof contaminationataschoolsiteshouldbe completedbeforetheschoolisoccupied? (seeSection9.10) Towhatcleanupstandardshouldschool sitesberemediated?(seeSection9.11) ! DistancesforEvaluatingEnvironmental Hazards DoesEPArecommendbufferorexclusion zones(alsosometimescalleddistance criteriaorseparationdistances)tomake sureschoolsaren'tbuiltclosetomajor sourcesofpollution?(seeSection9.12) Whatisthedifferencebetweenscreening perimeters,whichareincludedinthe guidelines,andbufferorexclusionzones? (seeSection9.13) ! StatesandTribes TheSchoolSitingGuidelinesplacealotof emphasisonstateandtribalinvolvement inevaluatingandapprovingsiting decisionswhereenvironmental contaminationispresent.Atatimeof shrinkingstateandtribalbudgets,howare statesandtribestomeettheanticipated demandformoreinvolvement? (seeSection9.14) ! OtherChildOccupiedFacilities Dotheguidelinesapplytochildcare centersorotherfacilitieswherechildren spendtime?(seeSection9.15)
9.1. How do the guidelines address community involvement in the school siting process?
Theguidelinesemphasizetheimportanceof meaningfulpublicinvolvement(seeSection3)
FrequentQuestions | 129
throughouttheschoolsitingprocess.The guidelinesrecommendthatatthebeginningofthe schoolsitingprocess,thelocaleducationagency (LEA)(seeSection10)shouldcreateapublic involvementplanandformalizetheroleofthe public,includingreviewingpotentiallocations, environmentalreports,cleanupplansandlong termstewardshipplans.EPArecommends formingaschoolsitingcommittee(SSC)(see Section3.3)thatincludesrepresentativesfromthe communitytomakerecommendationstotheLEA throughoutthesitingprocess. retrofittedwithnewtechnologiestoexpandtheir usefullife,possiblyatalowercostandwithfewer environmentalimpacts(e.g.,energysavings,less impactonopenspace)thannewconstruction. Renovatingexistingneighborhoodschoolfacilities canprovideanimpetusforcommunity revitalization,haveanimpactonneighboring propertyvalues,encourageinvestmentinschools bycommunitymembersandpreserve irreplaceablecommunityassets. EPArecommendsthatdistrictsperiodically inspectexistingschoolsforpotential environmentalhealthandsafetyrisks.These inspectionsshouldusetoolsdesignedforthat purpose,suchasEPA'sHealthySchool EnvironmentsAssessmentTool(HealthySEAT; www.epa.gov/schools/healthyseat/)orthe NIOSHSafetyChecklistProgramforSchools (www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2004101/).Where deficienciesarefound,EPArecommendsstepsto reducestudentandstaffexposuretopotential hazardsbeidentifiedandimplemented,tothe maximumextentpractical(seeSection9.5).
9.2. Do the guidelines apply retroactively to previous siting decisions?

No.TheSchoolSitingGuidelinesarenotdesigned forretroactiveapplicationtoexistingschool locationsorpreviousschoolsitingdecisions,but rathertoinformandimprovefutureschoolsiting decisionmakingprocesses.However,irrespective oftheseguidelines,EPArecommendsthatdistricts periodicallyinspectexistingschoolsforpotential environmentalhealthandsafetyrisks.These inspectionsshouldusetoolsdesignedforthat purpose,suchasEPA'sHealthySchool EnvironmentsAssessmentTool(HealthySEAT; www.epa.gov/schools/healthyseat/)ortheNIOSH SafetyChecklistProgramforSchools. (www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2004101/)Where deficienciesarefound,EPArecommendsstepsto reducestudentandstaffexposuretopotential hazardsbeidentifiedandimplemented,tothe maximumextentpractical(seeSection9.5).
9.4. Will EPAs School Siting Guidelines prevent pollution generating facilities from being built near existing schools?
Landusedecisionsaregenerallymadeatthelocal level,subjecttothelocaljurisdictionszoningand otherlandusepolicies.Whilemanytypesof industries,commercialoperationsand transportationinfrastructureprojectsaresubject tostate,tribaland/orfederalenvironmentalor otherregulations,therequirementsvary. However,therecommendationsinthese guidelinescanbeusedbyplanningand environmentalagenciesinlanduseand permittingissuestotheextentapplicable. EPArecommendsthatstates,tribesand communitiesevaluatesitingandpermitting processesthatinfluencewherepotentialsources ofenvironmentalpollution(seesourcecategories identifiedinExhibit6)maybeallowedtolocate
9.3. Do the guidelines address the retention and renovation of existing schools?
Yes.Thesitingdecisionoftenstartswith evaluatingexistingschoolsandtheirsuitabilityto beupdatedtomeetthefutureneedsoftheLEA. Theguidelinesrecommendthatcommunities considerrenovation,repairand/orexpansion options(seeSection4.2.2)beforedecidingto buildanewschool.Manyexistingschoolscanbe
130
| FrequentQuestions
withrespecttoschools.Whiletheselanduse decisionsarehighlycomplexandbeyondthe scopeoftheseguidelines,states,tribesand communitiesshouldseektoavoidsituationsin whichnewnearbysourcesofpotentiallyharmful pollutantsaresitedinsuchcloseproximityto schoolsthattheymayposeapotentialhazardto theschooloccupants. Campaignaretoreducechildren'sexposureto dieselexhaustandtheamountofairpollution createdbydieselschoolbuses.Schoolscanalso encouragethereductionofpersonalvehicleidling andoveralluseoncampus. Fortipsonhowtoreduceengineidlinganddiesel emissionsaroundschoolsandinthecommunity, visit:www.epa.gov/cleanschoolbus/ whatyoucando. ProtectindoorairqualityatschoolsImproving andprotectingindoorairqualityatschoolsis importanttochildrenshealth.Indoorlevelsofair pollutantscanbetwotofivetimeshigherthan outdoorlevels.Sourcesofpoorindoorairquality inschoolsrangefrominadequateventilation systemstofumesfrompesticidesandcleaning agents.Manyofthenationsschoolsare implementingindoorairqualitymanagement programs,mostofwhicharebasedonEPAs voluntaryIndoorAirQualityToolsforSchools Program,whichhelpsschoolsidentify,resolveand preventindoorairqualityproblemsusingmostly lowandnocostmeasures. ForEPA'sguidanceonpreventingandresolving indoorairqualityproblemsinschools,visit www.epa.gov/iaq/schools. Useintegratedpestmanagement(IPM)IPM providessafeandusuallylesscostlyoptionsfor effectivepestmanagement.Visit:www.epa.gov/ pesticides/ipm/. EnsuredrinkingwaterqualityConsuming enoughfluidsonadailybasisisimportantfor childrenshealthandwaterisahealthychoice. Ensuringthatchildrenreceivesafedrinkingwater attheirschoolsandchildcarecentersisimportant becausethatswherechildrenspendpartoftheir day,andtheyarelikelytodrinkwaterwhilethey arethere.Schoolsandchildcarecenterscanfind onEPAswebsiteinformationaboutleadin drinkingwater,sourcewaterprotection,water conservation,crosscontamination,andotherbest managementpracticestoassistschoolsandchild carecentersinprovidingsafedrinkingwaterto
9.5. What can I do to protect my child right now from environmental hazards at their current school?
Therearemanystepsthatparentscantaketohelp promotehealthyschoolenvironments.EPAhas resources(seebelow)forparentsinanumberof programsthataredesignedtohelpschoolsand communitiestakeactiontoprotectchildrens healthinoneofthemostimportantplaces wherechildrenlearn.EPAalsoencourages parentstopartnerwithschoolsandlocal communityplannerstomakeschoolwalkingand bikingroutessaferforchildren.Thisencourages moreactivetransportationchoiceswhichresults infewervehiclesontheroad. EPASchoolsWebPortalTheWebportal provideslinkstoEPAandotherprograms addressingenvironmentalhealthissuesin schools,fromairpollutionandasbestosto chemicalmanagement,pesticides,water conservationandmore.Visit: www.epa.gov/schools. HealthySchoolEnvironmentsAssessmentTool (HealthySEAT)HealthySEATisafreesoftware tooltohelpschooldistrictsassessandmanageall oftheirenvironmentalhealthandsafetyrisks. Visit:www.epa.gov/schools/healthyseat. Reduceengineidlingaroundschools,cleanup oldschoolbusesandreduceotherdiesel emissionsourcesinthecommunitySchool busesareasafewayforchildrentogettoschool. However,pollutionfromolderdieselvehicleshas healthimplicationsforeveryone,especially children.ThegoalsoftheCleanSchoolBusUSA
studentsandstaff.Visit:www.epa.gov/safewater/ schools/. ManagechemicalssafelyFromelementary schoolmaintenanceclosetstohighschool chemistrylabs,schoolsuseavarietyofchemicals. Whentheyaremismanaged,thesechemicalscan putstudentsandschoolpersonnelatriskfrom spills,firesandotheraccidentalexposures.EPAs schoolchemicalcleanoutcampaignwebsitegives K12schoolsinformationandtoolstoresponsibly managechemicals.Visitwww.epa.gov/schools/ programs(clickonSchoolsChemicalCleanout Campaign). ProtectstudentsandstafffromthesunToo muchsuncanleadtoheatstressandunhealthy exposuretoUVradiation.EPAsSunWiseprogram providesinformationandmaterialstoschools, educatorsandparentstohelpthemprevent cancerandblindnesscausedbyUVexposure. Visit:www.epa.gov/sunwise/. ChecktheAirQualityIndexChildrenareoneof thesensitivegroupsatriskforhealtheffectsfrom airpollution,inpartbecausetheirlungsarestill developing.TheAirQualityIndex(AQI) (www.airnow.gov)letsyouknowwhenairquality inyourareaisunhealthyandhowyou,your familyandyourcommunitycanprotectyour health.TheAQIusesacolorcodedscaleandmaps toprovidedailyairqualityinformation.TheAQIis availableatwww.airnow.govanditisreportedin manylocalnewspapersandontelevisionand radiostations. Fortipsonhowyoucanreduceairpollutionin andaroundyourcommunity,visit: www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=jump.jump_yo ucando. Toteachstudentsaboutairquality,useEPAs toolkit:www.airnow.gov/index.cfm? action=learning.workshop_for_teachers. CreateSafeRoutestoSchoolsTheU.S. DepartmentofTransportationsSafeRoutesto Schoolprogramencouragesschoolsand communitiestoimproveinfrastructuresand educationalprogramstoencouragemorechildren tosafelybikeorwalktoandfromschool.Visit: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferoutes/.
Examples of EPA-funded projects in communities:
CommunityActionforaRenewedEnvironment (CARE)grantprogramEPAsCAREisa competitivegrantprogramthatoffersan innovativewayforacommunitytoorganizeand takeactiontoreducetoxicpollutioninitslocal environment.ThroughCARE,acommunitycreates apartnershipthatimplementssolutionstoreduce releasesoftoxicpollutantsandminimizepeople's exposuretothem.Tolearnmoreabout communityeffortsthatarebeingsupportedby EPAsCAREprogram,visit:www.epa.gov/care/ communitybyregion. CommunityBasedAirToxicsProjectsEPA supportsairtoxicsprojectsinabout30 communitiesacrossthenationtohelpinformand empowercitizenstomakelocaldecisions concerningthehealthoftheircommunities. (http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/CommunityAssess ment.nsf/Welcome?OpenForm) MakesimplechoicesontheroadDoingyour parttoimproveairqualityandreducetraffic congestionaroundschoolsandinyourcommunity iseasy.Incorporatingevenafewofthesimple stepsofferedherecanhelpcleantheairand reducetrafficcongestion.Foreasytips,visit:www .italladdsup.gov/resources/what_can_i_do.asp.
9.6. Shouldnt schools be built as far away from major pollution generating sources as possible?
Whenacceptablealternativesitesexistwithinthe neighborhood(s)beingservedbythenewschool, theguidelinesrecommendthattheLEAandSSC seektoavoidsitesthatareeitheronorinclose proximitytolandusesthatmaynotbecompatible withschoolsduringtheinitialscreenofcandidate sites.Theseincludelocationsthathaveonsite contaminationthathasnotbeenaddressed,major
132
| FrequentQuestions
pollutionsources,clustersofindustrialfacilitiesor otherpotentialhazards(seeSitingCriteria, Exhibit6:ScreeningPotentialEnvironmental, PublicHealthandSafetyHazards).Ifno acceptablealternativesitesexist,itiscritically importantfortheLEAandSSCtofullyexplainthe absenceofalternativesinatransparentmanner andfullyengagethepublicinidentifyingand implementingbothsitespecificandcommunity wideexposureandriskreductionstrategies. Hightrafficroadscanbeamajorpollutionsource thatrequirecarefulconsiderationandevaluation bytheLEAandSSCbecausethesesourcesare commonandthereistypicallyadirect relationshipbetweenthetransportationsystem andtheaccessibilityoftheschoolforstaffand students.Theguidelinesrecommendthatwhen practicable,achosenschoolsiteshouldbeasfar fromhightrafficroadsasfeasible.Hightraffic roadsmayincludehighways,localroads experiencingheavycongestion,localroadswith significantstopandgoactivities,androadswith largenumbersoftrucks.Sincehightrafficroads areverycommon,especiallyinurbanareas,itmay bedifficulttofindlocationsawayfromtheseroads yetstillbelocatedwithinthecommunitybeing servedbythenewschool.Underthese circumstances,theLEAandtheSSCshould consideranumberoffactorsinmakingthebest choiceforstudenthealth,safetyandaccessibility. Thesefactorscaninclude:1)iftheschoolsiteand designprovideanopportunitytoplace classrooms,playgrounds,athleticfieldsandair intakesasfarfromtheroadaspossible;2) whetherbarriers(e.g.,noisebarriers,nonsensitive buildings)ornaturalfeatures(e.g.,vegetation, berms)areorcanbelocatedbetweentheschool androadtoreduceairqualityimpacts;and3) whethercertainsitesallowstudentstowalk/bike toschoolcomparedwithalternativesthatrequire busandpersonalvehicletravel.Becauseofallof thesefactorsandthedifficultyincomprehensively assessingtheadvantagesanddisadvantagesof particularsitesundertheseconditions,an environmentalprofessionalshouldbeconsulted toprovideassistance.Moreinformationis providedintheQuickGuideforEnvironmental Issues(seeSection8).
9.7. Isn't an uncontaminated site always the best location for a new school?
Thebestschoollocationwillbeonethatprovides ahealthyandsafelearningenvironmentfor children,whilealsomeetingadiversearrayof othercommunitygoals.Forexample,integrating communitycenteredschoolsintoexisting residentialneighborhoodsoftenallowsforbetter environmental,community,economic,educational andpublichealthoutcomes.ThevoluntarySchool SitingGuidelinesareintendedtohelp communitiesappropriatelyconsider environmentalhealthandsafetyinthecontextof thiscomplexdecisionmakingprocess. Ofcourse,ifuncontaminatedstructuresorsites arereadilyavailableinthecommunitytheschool isintendedtoserve,andmeetthecommunitys otherimportanteducational,economicand communitycriteria,selectinganuncontaminated locationwouldbetheidealchoice.However,such locationsarerareinmanyurbancommunities, andoftentheLEAisfacedwithchoosingamong locationsthathavesomelevelofcontamination frompriorusesorareclosetopotentialsourcesof contamination.Buildingschoolsonthe undevelopedouteredgesofcommunitiesoften calledgreenfieldscreatesotherproblemssuch asincreasedtransportationrisks,longer transportationtimesandincreasedtrafficrelated airpollution,whilereducingopportunitiesfor students,parentsandstafftowalkorbiketo schoolintheircommunity.
9.8. Can schools be safely built on sites with residual soil or ground water contamination?
Schoolscanbesafelylocatedonsiteswhereall wasteandcontaminatedmediahavebeen removed,aswellasthosewithresidual contamination,providedthatthelocationis carefullymanagedovertimetoensurethatno exposuretothecontaminationcanoccur.Incases wherecompleteremovalofcontaminationisnot feasible,exposurescanbepreventedthroughthe useofengineeringcontrolsand/orinstitutional controls(seeSection8.15).Forexample,vapor intrusionfromsoilorgroundwatercontaminated withcertainchemicalscanposearisktothe peoplewhousebuildingsthatarelocatedabove thecontamination.Engineeringcontrolscanbe usedtoaltertheflowofcontaminatedairor restrictlanduseinaspecificareasothat contaminatedairdoesnotenterthebuildings indoorair.Theuseofengineeringand institutionalcontrolscanpreventexposures,but onlyifeffectivesystemsareinplacetomaintain andenforcethem,suchasperiodicmonitoringto ensuretheircontinuedprotectivenessandsafe operation.Nationwide,brownfieldsandother formerlycontaminatedlands,includingthosewith residualcontamination,nowsafelysupport housing,schools,clinics,hospitalsandother reusesthatmeetcommunityneeds. Criteriaforestablishingthedegreeofcleanup neededshouldbebasedonstateortribalcleanup rulesorguidance,wheretheyexist.The environmentalstandardsusedfordeterminingthe appropriatelevelofcleanupshouldbebasedon either1)standardsdevelopedforschoolsor residentialuse,or2)riskbasedlevelssetfor residentialuse.Ifthesitewillhaveresidual contaminationatconcentrationsabovethese levelsafterthecleanuphasbeencompleted, engineeringand/orinstitutionalcontrolswillbe neededtoensurenoexposureoccurs(seeSection 8.15).Aspartoftheirreviewofthecleanupplan, state,tribalandlocalregulatoryagenciesshould considertheabilityoftheLEAandother
governmentalbodiestoeffectivelymaintainthose controls.Intheeventthatthereisconcernthat thesecontrolscannotbeeffectivelyandreliably managed,thentheLEAmayneedtocleanthesite toresidentiallevels,orselectanotherlocation.
9.9. In cases where the best available location for a school relies on engineering and/or institutional controls to prevent potential exposures, how can the community work with the LEA and other responsible entities to ensure that those controls are effective for the life of the school?
Communitieshaveanimportantroletoplayin ensuringthatengineeringandinstitutionalcontrols remaininplaceandareeffectiveinpreventing potentialexposures(seeSection8.15).Throughthe communityinvolvementandplanningprocess,the communitycanbecomefamiliarwiththenatureof residualcontamination,engineeringand institutionalcontrolsandanyrestrictionsonhow thelandcanbeused.TheycanassistLEAsandhelp themmeettheirobligationsbyreportingactionsin conflictwiththoselanduserestrictionstoLEA managementandstateenvironmentalregulatory authorities.TheLEAandtheSSCcanalsocontinue toplayaroleinupdatingthecommunityabout inspection,monitoringandmaintenanceovertime, withtheassistanceofstatetechnicaloversight,as appropriate.
9.10. What cleanup or remediation of contamination at a school site should be completed before the school is occupied?
Beforeaschoolorportionofaschoolisoccupied, allcontaminationthatcouldposeariskofharmful exposuretostudentsandstaffshouldberemoved
134
| FrequentQuestions
orcontrolled.Incaseswherethereisresidual contamination,anynecessaryengineeringand institutionalcontrolsshouldbeinplaceandthe sitecertifiedbythestateortribalregulatory agencyassuitableforoccupancy(seeSection 8.15).Forexample,occupationofaschoolabovea groundwaterplumethatisundergoing remediationtocleanthegroundwatershouldnot poseathreattostudents,faculty,stafforothers unlessthereisathreatofvaporintrusionfromthe groundwater.Ifthecontaminatedgroundwater posesathreatofvaporintrusion,anyinstitutional orengineeringcontrolsshouldbeinplaceatleast foranyportionoftheschoolwherethereisa potentialforexposure.
9.12. Does EPA recommend buffer or exclusion zones also sometimes called distance criteria or separation distances to make sure schools aren't built close to major sources of pollution?
No,theguidelinesdonotincludedistancebased bufferorexclusionzonesforpotentialschool locations.EPAsapproachtotheSchoolSiting Guidelinesistoencourageandpromotean integratedandholisticevaluationofawiderange ofcommunityandlocationspecificcriteriain selectingthebestlocationforanewschool.The distancebetweenaschoollocationandamajor sourceofpollutionisonlyoneofmanycomplex factorsthatinfluencewhetherthatsourceposes risksofconcerntostudentsandstaff(seeExhibit 5).Thesefactorscanonlybeeffectivelyevaluated onacaseandlocationspecificbasisandrequire considerationoftheextenttowhichaspecific sourceraisesaconcernforapotentialschool location,aswellasthedegreetowhichanyrisk canbereducedoreliminated.Somestatesand localgovernmentshavedevelopeddistancebased requirementsorguidanceforschoolsandother locationsthatmayhavesensitivereceptors,and whileEPAdoesnotbelievethatestablishmentof bufferorexclusionzonesatanationallevelis appropriate,thisshouldnotbeconstruedasa criticismofthosejurisdictionsthathaveadopted orareapplyingbufferorexclusionzonesasa usefultool. 70
70
9.11. To what cleanup standard should school sites be remediated?

Criteriaforestablishingthedegreeofcleanup neededshouldbebasedonstateortribalcleanup rulesorguidance,wheretheyexist.The environmentalstandardsusedfordeterminingthe appropriatelevelofcleanupshouldbebasedon either1)standardsdevelopedforschoolsor residentialuse,or2)riskbasedlevelssetfor residentialuse.Ifthesitewillhaveresidual contaminationatconcentrationsabovethese levelsafterthecleanuphasbeencompleted, engineeringand/orinstitutionalcontrolswillbe neededtoensurenoexposureoccurs(seeSection 8.15).Aspartoftheirreviewofthecleanupplan, state,tribalandlocalregulatoryagenciesshould considertheabilityoftheLEAandother governmentalbodiestoeffectivelymaintainthose controls.Intheeventthatthereisconcernthat thesecontrolscannotbeeffectivelyandreliably managed,thentheLEAmayneedtocleanthesite toresidentiallevels,orselectanotherlocation.
Examples include:
Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, California Environmental Protection Agency, California Air Resources Board April 2005. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf; Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education School Construction Regulations. May 24, 2007. Available at: www.ride.ri.gov/regents/Docs/RegentsRegulations/Regents%20Schoo l%20Constructions%20Regulations.pdf. California Department of Education, School Site Selection and Approval Guide, Prepared by School Facilities Planning Division. Last modified March 10, 2011. Available at: www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/sf/schoolsiteguide.asp; Links to additional state and local regulations and guidance are available in the Resource section of the guidelines website. www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources
EPAbelievesthatestablishingnationaldistance criteriaislikelytoresultinavarietyofnegative unintendedconsequences.Forexample,useof nationaldistancecriteriaasthebasisforselecting locationsthatarefartherawayfromthechildren theyserve,withoutcarefulconsiderationof locationspecificfactors,couldcreatelesshealthy environmentsforstudentsandstaffthrough increasedtransportationrisks,reduced opportunitiesforwalkingandbikingand increasedtrafficrelatedairpollution. EPArecommendsthatsoundtechnical assessmentsofbothonsiteandnearbypotential hazardsbeundertakentodeterminewhether suchpotentialhazardsmightposeathreatto studentsorschoolstaff(seeExhibit6).Locations shouldbeexcludedfromfurtherconsiderationif nearbyoronsitehazardsposeunacceptablerisks thatcannotbeeliminatedorreducedtoan acceptablelevel. perimetersmayalsobeappropriateforfurther evaluation. Screeningdistances,alone,maynotbepredictive oftheactualpotentialforelevatedexposuresand risksfromthatsource.Exposuretocontaminants fromasourcecouldbenonexistent,orcouldbe significant.Todeterminethepotentialfor exposure,anassessmentshouldbeperformedas partoftheschoolsitingscreeningandevaluation process.Incontrast,bufferorexclusionzones arebasedonapresumptionthatthereisahigh potentialforsignificantexposuresfromasource locatedwithinthatzone.LEAsshouldworkwith theappropriatestateresponseortribal regulatoryprograminassessingschoollocations withinthescreeningperimetertodetermineif facilitiesposearisksufficienttoinfluencesiting locationdecisionsorrequirealternativesite selection.Intheeventthatafacilityposesa potentialrisktostudents,staff,parentsorothers, theresolutionofanyunacceptablerisk associatedwiththatfacilityshouldbeaddressed beforethedecisiontositeaschool.
9.13. What is the difference between "screening perimeters," which are included in the guidelines, and "buffer" or "exclusion" zones?
EPAhasincludedsomedistancebasedscreening recommenda tionsintheEnvironmentalSiting CriteriaConsiderationssectionofthese guidelinesunderExhibit6:ScreeningPotential Environmental andSafetyHazards(seeSection 4).Thescreeningperimeterdistancesa re approximatedista ncesforuseintheinitial screeningprocess.Duringthisinitialscreening process,anenvironmentalprofessional(see Section10),theLEA(seeSection10)andtheSSC shouldidentifyallpotentialhaza rdstha tare withinthisdistanceofaprospectiveschool locationanddeterminethosetha tneedfurther evaluation.Thescreeningdistancesincludedin theguidelinesarebasedprimarilyonexisting stateorlocalrules,laws,ordinances,policiesor guidanceandareintendedasgeneralrulesof thumb.Potentiallyimportantsourcesthatmay beoutsidetherecommendedscreening
9.14. The School Siting Guidelines place a lot of emphasis on state and tribal involvement in evaluating and approving siting decisions where environmental contamination is present. At a time of shrinking state and tribal budgets, how are states and tribes to meet the anticipated demand for more involvement?
EPArecognizesthatelementsofthe recommendedenvironmentalreviewprocessmay bebeyondthecurrentcapacityofsomeLEAsand otherparticipantsintheprocesstofully implementwithexistingauthorities,expertiseand resources(seeSection5).Allstateandmosttribal environmentalregulatoryagencieshaveprograms
136
| FrequentQuestions
inplacetoevaluateandapprovecleanupplansfor specifictypesofsitesorprojects(seeSection7). EPAencouragesLEAs,states,tribes,communities andotherinterestedorganizationstowork collaborativelyandwithEPAtoidentify opportunitiestoleveragetheseandotherexisting resourcesaswellastoidentifyandworktoward fulfillingneedsforimprovinglocalandstate capacitytoconductasrigorousaprocessofsite evaluationaspossible.EPArecommendsthat LEAsworkdirectlywiththestateandtribal environmentalresponseprogramregardingthe neededevaluationandapprovalofcleanupplans. EPAalsorecommendsthatLEAsseekadvicefrom stateandtribalenvironmentalresponseprograms toensurethatlongtermstewardship responsibilitiesareeffectivelymet.TheResources pageoftheguidelineswebsitecontainspotentially helpfulfundingandcapacitybuildingresources. (www.epa.gov/schools/siting/resources.html#LI NKS_Technical_Assistance)
9.15. Do the guidelines apply to child care centers or other facilities where children spend time?
Whiletheguidelinesareprimarilyintendedtobe usedbyLEAsinevaluatingandselectinglocations forK12schools,EPAbelievesthatthe recommendationsintheguidelinesrepresenta setofbestpracticesthatmayinformandimprove theevaluationandselectionoflocationsforawide rangeofsettingswherechildrenspendtime. However,EPArecognizesthattherearemany differencesacrossthetypesofchildoccupied facilities.ForexamplemostK12schoolsgenerally haveaclearlyidentifiablecentralauthorityand significant(thoughnotnecessarilyplentiful) resources,whilemanychildcarecentersaresmall businesseswithextremelylimitedresourcesand subjectprimarilytostatelicensingauthorities. Nevertheless,thesitingcriteriaconsiderations (seeSection4),environmentalreviewprocess (seeSection5)andpublicinvolvement(see Section3)practicesrecommendedwithinthe SchoolSitingGuidelinesmaybeapplied,with appropriateadaptation,toawiderangeofschool relatedinstitutions.

138 | FrequentQuestions
10. Glossary
Termsnotdefinedhereinshouldhavetheir ordinarymeaningwithinthecontextoftheir use.Ordinarymeaningisasdefinedin,for example:Webster'sCollegiateDictionary,see theonlineversionatwww.mw.com/.
A|B|C|D|E|F|G|H|I|J|K|L|M| N|O| P|Q|R|S|T|U|V|W|X|Y|Z
ensurelongtermstewardshipofanyinstitutional orengineeringcontrolsdesignedtoprotectpeople fromresidualsitecontaminationfollowinga cleanup(seeSection8.15). CERCLA:TheComprehensiveEnvironmental Response,Compensation,andLiabilityAct otherwiseknownasCERCLAorSuperfund providesafederalSuperfundtocleanup uncontrolledorabandonedhazardouswastesites aswellasaccidents,spillsandotheremergency releasesofpollutantsandcontaminantsintothe environment.ThroughCERCLA,EPAwasgiven powertoseekoutthosepartiesresponsiblefor anyreleaseandensuretheircooperationinthe cleanup. Comprehensiveenvironmentalreview:Astage intheenvironmentalreviewprocess(seeSection 5)thatinvolvesgatheringandanalyzingdataon environmentalhazardsandimpactsidentifiedin theinitialorpreliminaryenvironmentalreview (seeSection5.6)andevaluatingtherisksposedto childrenshealth,publichealthandthe environmentbasedonthecontaminationor impactsfound.Thecomprehensiveenvironmental review(seeSection5.7)alsoincludesdeveloping preliminaryplansandcostestimatesfor mitigation/remediationmeasures. Concentratedanimalfeedingoperations (CAFOs)oranimalfeedingoperations(AFOs): Agriculturaloperationswhereanimalsarekept andraisedinconfinedsituations.AFOsgenerally congregateanimals,feed,manure,deadanimals andproductionoperationsonasmalllandarea. Feedisbroughttotheanimalsratherthanthe animalsgrazingorotherwiseseekingfeedin pastures.Animalwasteandwastewatercanenter waterbodiesfromspillsorbreaksofwaste storagestructures(duetoaccidentsorexcessive rain)andfromnonagriculturalapplicationof Glossary | 139
AllAppropriateInquiries:Theprocessof evaluatingapropertysenvironmentalconditions andassessingpotentialliabilityforany contamination.SeeAllAppropriateInquiries Standard40CFRPart312(http://ecfr.gpoaccess. gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=c712de4f bdbfd669e790daa37865a02e&rgn=div5&view=te xt&node=40:27.0.1.1.9&idno=40),EPAFactSheet: AllAppropriateInquiriesRule:DefinitionOf EnvironmentalProfessional(www.epa.gov/ brownfields/aai/ep_deffactsheet.pdf),andASTM E152705StandardPracticeforEnvironmental SiteAssessments:PhaseIEnvironmentalSite AssessmentProcess.(www.astm.org/Standards /E1527) Brownfield:Aproperty,theexpansion, redevelopmentorreuseofwhichmaybe complicatedbythepresenceorpotentialpresence ofahazardoussubstance,pollutantor contaminant. Capacity:Theinstitutional,organizational, technicalandfinancialabilitytoaddressissues. Usedinthecontextoftheseguidelinesasthe capacityofeducationagenciesorlocal governmentstohavetheorganization,staff, technicalandfinancialresourcestosafelyoperate schoolfacilityriskreductionmeasuressuchas leadencapsulationandtoinspect,maintainand
manuretocropland.AnAFOisalotorfacility (otherthananaquaticanimalproductionfacility) wherethefollowingconditionsaremet: ! Animalshavebeen,areorwillbestabledor confinedandfedormaintainedforatotalof 45daysormoreinany12monthperiod;and ! Crops,vegetation,foragegrowthorpost harvestresiduesarenotsustainedinthe normalgrowingseasonoveranyportionofthe lotorfacility.AFOsthatmeettheregulatory definitionofaCAFOmayberegulatedunderthe NationalPollutantDischargeElimination System(NPDES)permittingprogram.For RegulatoryDefinitionsofLargeCAFOs,Medium CAFOs,andSmallCAFOs,see: www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sector_table.pdf. Criteriapollutants:TheCleanAirActrequires EPAtosetNationalAmbientAirQualityStandards forsixcommonairpollutants.Thesecommonair pollutantsarefoundallovertheUnitedStates. Theyareparticlepollution(oftenreferredtoas particulatematter),groundlevelozone,carbon monoxide,sulfuroxides,nitrogenoxidesandlead. Thesepollutantscanharmhumanhealthandthe environment,andcausepropertydamage.Ofthe sixpollutants,particlepollutionandgroundlevel ozonearethemostwidespreadhealththreats. EPAcallsthesepollutantscriteriaairpollutants becauseitregulatesthembydevelopinghuman healthbasedand/orenvironmentallybased criteria(sciencebasedguidelines)forsetting permissiblelevels.Thesetoflimitsbasedon humanhealthiscalledprimarystandards. Anothersetoflimitsintendedtoprevent environmentalandpropertydamageiscalled secondarystandards. Engineeringcontrols:Forpurposesofthis guidance,theengineeredphysicalbarriersor structuresdesignedtocontrolorlimitexposureto residualonsitecontamination.Engineering controlsaredistinctfrominstitutionalcontrols. Certainengineeredcleanupsroutinelyinvolve ongoingoperationandmaintenance(O&M), monitoring,reportingandevaluation. Environmentaljustice:Forthepurposesofthis guidance,thefairtreatmentandmeaningful involvementofallpeople,regardlessofrace,color, nationaloriginorincomewithrespecttothe development,implementationandenforcementof environmentallaws,regulationsandpolicies. Environmentalprofessional:Thequalifications ofanenvironmentalprofessionalneededto conductEnvironmentalSiteAssessmentsare definedinASTMInternationalStandardE1527 05.(www.astm.org/Standards/E1527)Alsosee EPAFactSheet:AllAppropriateInquiriesRule: DefinitionOfEnvironmentalProfessional. (www.epa.gov/brownfields/aai/ ep_deffactsheet.pdf) Environmentalreviewprocess:Aseriesofsteps takentodeterminewhetheraprojectwillbe impactedbypotentialhazards.Inthecaseof schoolsiting,theenvironmentalreviewevaluates potentialenvironmentalhazardsandexposuresto children,staffandvisitorsbeforeadecisionis madetositeaschoolinaparticularlocation. Furtheraction:Denotesstep(s)duringthe environmentalreviewprocessthattrigger additionalreview,evaluation,remediation, referralorotherappropriateactivity. Greenfields:Locations,typicallyoutsideofcities, thathavenotpreviouslybeendeveloped. Greenschools:Seetermhealthyhigh performanceschoolsintheglossary. HAPs:Toxicairpollutants,alsoknownas hazardousairpollutants(HAPs),arethose pollutantsthatareknownorsuspectedtocause cancerorotherserioushealtheffects,suchas reproductiveeffectsorbirthdefects,oradverse environmentaleffects. Healthimpactassessment(HIA):Mostoften definedasacombinationofprocedures,methods andtoolsbywhichapolicy,programorproject maybejudgedastoitspotentialeffectsonthe healthofapopulation,andthedistributionof thoseeffectswithinthepopulation(WorldHealth Organization,1999).Thisbroaddefinitionfrom
140
| Glossary
theWorldHealthOrganizationEuropeanCenter forHealthPolicy,aspresentedintheGothenburg ConsensuspaperonHIA,(www.euro.who.int/ document/pae/gothenburgpaper.pdf)reflectsthe manyvariantsofHIA.Asomewhatmoreprecise definitionisthatHIAisamultidisciplinary processwithinwhicharangeofevidenceabout thehealtheffectsofaproposalisconsideredina structuredframework. Healthyhighperformanceschools:Facilities thatintegrateallaspectsofthedesignprocess startingwithselectionofthedesignteamandthe schoollocationtodesignschoolsthatmeet multipleeducational,environmentaland communitygoals.Theenvironmentalgoalsofsuch facilitiesincludeenergyandwaterefficiency, healthyindoorair,safermaterialsselection (includinglifecyclecostconsideration)and reducedenvironmentalimpactfromtheschool. Thetechnologiesandpracticesusedtoachieve thesegoalsareoftenintegratedintothe curriculumandotherstudentlearning opportunities. Hightrafficroads:Mayincludehighways,local roadsexperiencingheavycongestion,localroads withsignificantstopandgoactivitiesandroads withlargenumbersoftrucks. Institutionalcontrols:Nonengineered instruments,suchasadministrativeand/orlegal controls,thathelptominimizethepotentialfor humanexposuretocontaminationand/orprotect theintegrityofaremedy.See:EPACitizensGuide toUnderstandingInstitutionalControls(www. epa.gov/fedfac/pdf/ic_ctzns_guide.pdf)andAll AppropriateInquiriesStandard40CFRPart312. (http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text idx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr312_m ain_02.tpl) Jointuse:Theuseofschooldistrictcontrolled, ownedorutilizedfacilitiesbyanondistrictentity ortheuseofnonschoolownedproperty,suchasa libraryorparkorathleticfacility,byaschool. Therearefivetypesofentitiesthatconstitutejoint users: ! Individuals:Persons,generallyresidentsofa community,whohaveaccesstoexteriorspaces, suchasplayequipment,athleticfieldsorcourts, andopenspaceforpersonaluse. ! CivicGroups:Individuals,groupsor organizationswhoseekoccasionaluseofschool buildingsandgroundsforactivitiesorevents suchaspollingstations,communitymeetings andspecialevents. ! OtherPublicAgencies:Apublicagencythatis notpartoftheschooldistrictthatmayoffer programs,needtoleasespaceandofferno programconnectiontotheschooland/ormay seekjointdevelopmentwithongoingjoint programming. ! PrivateNonprofitOrganizations:Theuseof schoolbuildingsand/orgroundsbyanonprofit organizationsuchasafterschoolprograms, healthclinicsoradulteducationclasses. ! PrivateForProfitCorporations:Theuseof schoolbuildingand/orgroundsbyaprivatefor profitcorporation,eitherforeducationrelated worklikeaprivatetestingserviceorunrelated worklikeprivateoffices. Jointuseagreement(JUA):Aformalagreement betweentwoseparategovernmententities,often aschoolandacityorcounty,settingforththe termsandconditionsforshareduseofpublic propertyorfacilities.See:www.nplanonline. org/nplan/jointuse.
Localeducationagency(LEA):Anyentity, whetherpublicorprivate,includingitsstaffand itsgoverningorvotingbody(e.g.,aschoolboard oratribalboard)withresponsibilityfordecision makingwithrespecttoschoolbuildingsand operations. Localcommunity:Generaltermreferringtoall membersofalocalareawithaninterestinschool environmentalhealthandsafetyissues,including butnotlimitedtolocalgovernments,local educationagencies(seetermlocaleducation agencyintheglossary),nongovernmental organizationsandindividuals. Glossary | 141
Locationspecificremediation/mitigation: Appropriateresponsemeasures,asprescribedin aremedialactionworkplan,thataretailoredto theparticularcharacteristicsofthelocationin question. Longrangeschoolfacilitiesplan:Awayfor localeducationagencies(LEAs)toidentify importantprojectionsoflongtermschooland communityneedssuchasstudentenrollment, operationalcostsandinfrastructuretousein makingschoolsitingdecisions. Longtermstewardship:Longtermmanagement ofcontaminatedenvironmentalmediatoprotect humanhealthandtheenvironment,generally throughtheuseofengineeringorinstitutional controls(seeSection8.15). LTSP:Longtermstewardshipplan. Meaningfulpublicinvolvement:Fullyengaging stakeholdergroupsthroughoutthereviewand decisionmakingprocess,includingopportunities toshareopinionsandreviewrelevantdocuments. Nearbyhazard:Apotentialriskorhazardlocated outsideofthesitepropertyboundary. Determiningwhatisnearbydependsonmany factorsandwillvarywithtypeofpotentialhazard. SeeExhibit5:FactorsInfluencingRisksfrom NearbyHazardsandExhibit6:ScreeningPotential Environmental,PublicHealthandSafetyformore information. rangeoftoxicityandvaryinconsistencyfromthin, lightcoloredliquidstoyelloworblackwaxy solids.Duetotheirnonflammability,chemical stability,highboilingpointandelectrical insulatingproperties,PCBswereusedinhundreds ofindustrialandcommercialapplications includingelectrical,heattransferandhydraulic equipment;asplasticizersinpaints,plasticsand rubberproducts;inpigments,dyesandcarbonless copypaper;andmanyotherindustrial applications. Petroleumhydrocarbonsortotalpetroleum hydrocarbons(TPH):Alargefamilyofseveral hundredchemicalcompoundsthatarederived fromcrudeoil.Somechemicalsthatmaybefound inTPHarehexane,jetfuels,mineraloils,benzene, toluene,xylenes,naphthaleneandfluorene,as wellasotherpetroleumproductsandgasoline components. Phytoremediation:Describesthetreatmentof environmentalproblems(bioremediation) throughtheuseofplantsthatmitigatethe environmentalproblemwithouttheneedto excavatethecontaminantmaterialanddisposeof itelsewhere.SeeEPACitizensGuideto Phytoremediation.(www.epa.gov/tio/ download/citizens/citphyto.pdf) Preliminaryenvironmentalassessment:Initial screeningandreviewstageforcandidatesitesto identifypotentialenvironmentalissuesrelatedto thesuitabilityofacandidateschoolsite,ifany, thatshouldtobeassessedindetailiftheLEA decidestopursuethesiteforuseasaschool location. Publicinvolvement:Seetermmeaningfulpublic involvementintheglossary. Remedialactionworkplan:Detailedplanfor remediationofonsitecontamination,including cleanupmethods,longtermmaintenance requirementsandlongtermstewardship obligations. Schoolsitingcommittee(SSC):Committee establishedtomakerecommendationstothe
O&M:Operationandmaintenance. Onecallsystem:Centralizedandintegrated phonebasedsystemforobtaininginformation fromasinglephonecallonundergroundutilities orotherhazardspriortodiggingorexcavation (e.g.,MissUtility). PAH:Polycyclicaromatichydrocarbons. PCBs:Polychlorinatedbiphenyls(PCBs)belongto abroadfamilyofhumanmadeorganicchemicals knownaschlorinatedhydrocarbons.PCBswere domesticallymanufacturedfrom1929untiltheir manufacturewasbannedin1979.Theyhavea
142
| Glossary
LEAsgoverningbodyonsitesforbuildingnew schools,leasingspacefornewschoolsand/or renovatingorexpandingexistingschools.The committeeincludesrepresentativesoftheLEAs governingbody(suchaselectedschoolboard members,facility,healthandsafetystaff),local governmentortribalstaff(suchascityplanners, governmentenvironmentalhealthspecialist, countyauditor)andrepresentativesfrom stakeholdergroups(suchasparentsofchildren likelytoattendthenewschool,teachers,public healthorganizations,communitymembers, environmentaladvocacyandenvironmental justicegroups,ageappropriatestudents,local trade/buildingassociations). Screeningperimeter:Screeningdistances intendedtoidentifypotentiallandusesnear candidateschoollocationsthatwarrantfurther considerationratherthantoidentifylanduses thatmaybeincompatiblewiththelocationof schools.Screeningdistances,alone,maynotbe predictiveoftheactualpotentialforasource locatedwithinthatdistancetopresentan environmentalorhealthhazard.Potentialhazards associatedwithcandidateschoollocationsshould beevaluatedaspartofthesitescreeningand evaluationprocess. SVOC:Semivolatileorganiccompound. TPH:Totalpetroleumhydrocarbon. Transparent:Readilyaccessibleand understandablebyallcommunitymembers(e.g., decisionmakingcriteriaandproceduresshould betransparent). Vaporintrusion:Migrationofvolatilechemicals fromcontaminatedgroundwaterorsoilintoan overlyingbuilding.Formoreinformation,seethe discussiononthistopicintheQuickGuideto EnvironmentalIssues,seeSection8. VOCs:Volatileorganiccompounds(VOCs)are emittedasgasesfromcertainsolidsorliquids. VOCsincludeavarietyofchemicals,someof whichmayhaveshortandlongtermadverse healtheffects.ConcentrationsofmanyVOCsare consistentlyhigherindoors(upto10times higher)thanoutdoors.VOCsareemittedbyawide arrayofproductsnumberinginthethousands. Examplesinclude:paintsandlacquers,paint strippers,cleaningsupplies,pesticides,building materialsandfurnishings,officeequipmentsuch ascopiersandprinters,correctionfluidsand carbonlesscopypaper,graphicsandcraft materialsincludinggluesandadhesives, permanentmarkersandphotographicsolutions. Zoningandlanduses:Zoningcodesare developedtoregulatethelocationandtypeof developmentinagivenarea.Zoningcan determinethelanduseofaparticularlocation, suchasresidential,commercialorindustrial.
Glossary | 143
O ce of Childrens Health Protection

1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Washington, DC 20460
EPA-100-K-11-004 October 2011 www.epa.gov/schools/siting

School Siting Guidelines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

School Siting Guidelines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thispageleftintentionallyblank.