Up, up and not away!

California homes in 1974 weren't being generally built with ceramic tile floors. It was mostly vinyl tiles or sheet vinyl. The previous owner(s) probably had the tile put in at a later date. By 1978 little to no asbestos was being used in much of anything. Grout or tile having asbestos? No the contractor is being shifty. I think the "contractor " is taking advantage of your inexperience with remodeling and trying to pocket a extra cash on the side. I would let Lowes know about it. They don't need the eventual bad rep guys like this will bring on them. Asbestos fears are overstated anyway. The fear mongering is insane. Removal companies capitalize on that fear. Ship builders and people who have worked around it all their lives get ill. Not a homeowner changing out a floor. Taking up even an old asbestos vinyl floor isn't going to create much dust and you have to breath in the dust for it to to be harmful. If it's a concern wetting the area down will take care of the little bit found in the average home built back in the asbestos days.

Having worked in the area of asbestos removal and regulation, I think your concern is understandable. While I do not agree with "functionthenlook" that only occupational, repeated exposures are a concern, I also think that you should not totally panic. It's hard to tell from your description just what the material was, how extensive it was, and how much of it was removed by these techniques. It is reassuring that the air tests came back as below detectable. (Hopefully, this was done by an accredited testing firm and the air samples were collected for a long enough period to be valid.) The single, positive swab result was not surprising, but it's good there weren't more of them. At this point the exposure, if any, has occurred and there is nothing to be done about that. However, if the facility has been cleaned, as the results seem to indicate, then you shouldn't have concerns about continuing exposure. If you want my opinion based on the very limited info you've provided, I'd say that it was a very unfortunate situation, but the fact that the children were not in the classroom while the work occurred, and there may not be any remaining contamination, suggests that long term health concerns are probably minimal. What the contractor did was bone-headed, incompetent, and in likely violation of asbestos removal regulations. In addition, while it was commendable that parents cleaned up after, that was something that should have been left to accredited asbestos removal workers so that there was not more potential exposure. If I were asking questions about this, they would be: -Were there any requirements in the work contract for compliance with environmental regulations, particularly in regard to asbestos? If not, why not? (This is a common situation and one would routinely anticipate a need for testing in advance for work on floors in a public building.) -How much asbestos-containing material was disturbed and what was the nature of the material? -Who collected the samples and conducted the testing? Was the lab accredited and did they follow standard testing protocol? In what location were samples taken (both air and swab)? -Was the debris disposed of in a landfill permitted to receive asbestos waste? -What personal respiratory protection measures, if any, were employed by people doing the cleanup work? -Has the contractor been reported to the local environmental regulatory agency for appropriate action? Answers to these questions might help better inform people of the extent of the problem (and hopefully reassure them), possibly prevent a recurrence with future projects, and provide consequences for possibly unlawful actions of the contractor. You may wish to contact your local environmental office to discuss this with them and see if they could provide someone from their staff to attend the meeting who would have regulatory, technical, and risk assessment knowledge that you don't have. I also assume, when you say that "they" will have a meeting, that it will include someone from the school board, which I think would be advisable. In summary, I think this is not something you should spend a lot more time fretting about because it has probably been pretty well-corrected, but asking the right questions at a meeting will help your school and possibly others in the area going forward.

This is a response to a post on the Trees Forum. Here is a smattering of my maples. I haven't watered them in two weeks. It should be noted that I live in the mid-Atlantic and we have been inundated with rain and it looks like Barry will continue that trend. These maples grow pot-to-pot and only get direct sun in the AM. This thread on the Professionals forum has a commercial recipe for potting mix for woodies. Plants are grown in this mix for few months and then shifted up or sold. It is next to impossible to make relevant rules about watering containers because there are so many variables. How much foliage does the plant have, how long ago was it potted, how much rainfall does your area have, what are your temps & humidity like, is it in full sun, are you using a lightweight mix, etc.etc.etc. Something else worth considering is watering practices. In my case, newly potted trees are thoroughly watered, (go over them two or three times) and then observe for a day or two. Another variable, was your plant formerly containerized or bareroot. If bareroot go easy on the water until it leafs out. If you are watering by hand you really need a breaker something like this. Might seem obvious to most however some beginners don't know this. The breaker reuces the velocity of the water and imitates rainfall.