EPA and OSHA Have Interesting Timing for Asbestos Regulations

As usual, summer is the busy season for the asbestos abatement industry.  With most schools closed for the summer, this is the perfect time to do asbestos abatement work for the renovation, remodeling, or demolition work necessary.  Interestingly, both the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) thought this would be the best time to ask for comments from the public and the industry about asbestos regulations.

Also interesting is that OSHA is looking to reduce regulatory requirements while EPA is looking to create regulations.  OSHA's public comment period ends August 21, 2026, and EPA's docket for public comments closes on August 24, 2026.

OSHA Still Pushing Its Unpopular Asbestos Respirator Proposal

OSHA's proposed changes actually came out July 1, 2025, and that comment period closed on November 1, 2025, after an extension from the original closing date.  As we discussed in our classes, the proposed changes are to reduce compliance burdens, allow for the use of more up-to-date technology, and improve the comprehensibility of the requirements for respiratory protection programs under the standards.  Part of the intent of this proposal was also to better align these standards with OSHA's respiratory protection standard.  However, this proposal would significantly increase a worker's exposure to asbestos.  Just the elimination of the HEPA filter requirement would increase a worker's exposure by 24,000 asbestos fibers in an 8-hour workday.  For more information about these changes, see our blog post OSHA’s Proposed Asbestos Respirator Changes Raise Important Safety Concerns.

On April 1 and May 19, 2026, OSHA consulted with the Advisory Committee and Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) on the proposed changes to asbestos and the other changes they proposed for the chemicals (there are 16 chemicals) that have specific respiratory protection requirements like asbestos.  If you review the meeting minutes of the ACCSH, OSHA's proposal for removing the HEPA filter requirement was rejected, and the same for the proposal to change assigned protection factors.  So we hope, based on all this, that should be the end of this dangerous proposal.

EPA Opens Public Docket for Asbestos Part 2 Rulemaking: A Critical Opportunity to Shape the Future of Legacy Asbestos Regulation

For decades, those of us in the asbestos industry have understood one simple truth: legacy asbestos is the problem that isn't going away.  While the EPA's 2024 rule addressing chrysotile asbestos represented a step forward, it left many unanswered questions regarding the millions of asbestos-containing materials that remain in schools, commercial buildings, industrial facilities, and homes throughout the United States.  Those "legacy uses" continue to expose workers, contractors, maintenance personnel, building occupants, and even homeowners to asbestos every day.

Now, the EPA has officially opened a public docket seeking additional information to assist in developing "Asbestos Part 2: Legacy Uses and Associated Disposals of Asbestos" under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  This is more than another request for comments.  It is an opportunity for the environmental consulting, remediation, industrial hygiene, laboratory, and construction industries to provide the real-world information EPA needs to develop regulations that are scientifically sound, practical, and enforceable.  As someone who has spent decades training asbestos inspectors, project designers, contractors, and consultants, we believe many of these questions deserve thoughtful responses from professionals who perform this work every day.

Why EPA Is Asking for More Information

EPA has determined that additional information is necessary before it can propose a final risk management rule addressing legacy asbestos.  Unlike the Part 1 rule, which focused primarily on ongoing commercial uses of chrysotile asbestos, Part 2 addresses the asbestos that already exists throughout our built environment.  EPA specifically states that the additional information will help develop:

• Practical regulatory requirements
• Economic analyses required under TSCA
• Science-based worker protections
• Feasible implementation strategies

That last point is important.  Protecting workers is essential, but regulations must also recognize how asbestos work is actually performed in the field.

Demolition and Renovation Projects

One area EPA is examining involves demolition and renovation projects that fall below the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) thresholds.  Anyone working in our industry knows this is where many exposures occur.  EPA's asbestos NESHAP requires inspections, notifications, work practices, and trained personnel when projects exceed:

• 260 linear feet (LF)
• 160 square feet (SF)
• 35 cubic feet (CF)

But thousands of smaller renovation projects occur every year that never trigger these requirements.  EPA wants to know:

• Are building owners hiring accredited asbestos professionals?
• What work practices are being used?
• Are wet methods, containment, and proper disposal still being followed?
• What happens in single-family homes?

These are important questions because many exposures occur during "small jobs" that are incorrectly assumed to present little risk.  As we've discussed in our asbestos training classes for years, the amount of material removed does not determine whether asbestos fibers are released.  The work practices do.  See our blog post on how floor tile removal can cause asbestos exposures: "Asbestos Floor Tile Debate Results"

Self-Employed Contractors

Perhaps one of the most significant sections of EPA's request concerns self-employed contractors.  OSHA's asbestos construction standard applies to employees.  It does not apply to many self-employed individuals (i.e., handymen).

EPA wants information about:

• Flooring installers
• Drywall contractors
• Roofing contractors
• Renovation contractors
• Siding contractors
• Handymen
• Sole proprietors

Questions include:

• How often do they disturb asbestos?
• How do they identify asbestos-containing materials?
• Do they receive asbestos awareness training?
• What engineering controls do they use?
• What barriers prevent them from having suspect materials analyzed before beginning work?

This is a conversation our industry has needed for years.  Many self-employed contractors work in older buildings where asbestos-containing materials remain common. Unfortunately, many rely solely on experience or visual assessment rather than laboratory analysis.  That approach is risky—not only for the contractor but also for their clients and anyone occupying the building.

Legacy Asbestos Products Still in Service

EPA is also looking beyond insulation and floor tile.  The agency is requesting information about asbestos still present in:

• Industrial equipment
• Pumps
• Valves
• Gaskets
• Packing materials
• Brakes
• Clutches
• Electrical equipment
• Textiles
• Heat-resistant fabrics
• Commercial appliances
• Boilers
• Furnaces
• Kilns
• Elevators
• Military equipment

Many younger environmental professionals may never encounter some of these products.  Those of us who have been in the industry for several decades know they are still out there.  Understanding where they remain, who works with them, and how often they are disturbed will be critical in developing effective regulations.

The Air Sampling Debate Continues

One section of EPA's request immediately caught our attention.  EPA is requesting information regarding the use of:

• Phase Contrast Microscopy (PCM)
• Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM)

Specifically, EPA asks whether laboratories have sufficient TEM capacity if lower exposure limits ultimately require TEM analysis instead of PCM.  Anyone who has followed our writing knows we have discussed the limitations of PCM for years.  PCM counts fibers.  TEM identifies asbestos.  Those are two very different things.  See our blog post: "The Fallacy of Phase Contrast Microscopy (PCM) Clearance Air Sampling, or 5 Reasons Why We Should Stop Using PCM for Clearance."

EPA is asking practical questions that deserve careful consideration:

• Can laboratories handle increased TEM demand?
• What would increased costs mean?
• How much longer would turnaround times become?
• Would compliance monitoring become impractical?

These aren't academic questions.  They directly affect contractors, consultants, industrial hygienists, laboratories, regulators, and building owners.  Finding the balance between scientific accuracy and practical implementation will be one of the biggest challenges facing EPA.

Practical Experience Matters

One aspect we appreciate about this request is that EPA is not simply asking for opinions.  The agency is requesting:

• Exposure data
• Industry practices
• Economic impacts
• Laboratory capabilities
• Engineering controls
• Worker training information
• Real-world implementation challenges

This is exactly the type of information regulators need.  Those of us working in the field every day understand that regulations look very different on paper than they do during an emergency water loss, a school renovation, a hospital shutdown, or an industrial outage.  Field experience matters.

This Is Your Opportunity to Be Heard

EPA cannot develop effective regulations without meaningful participation from those who perform this work every day.  If you are an

• Asbestos consultant
• Industrial hygienist
• Laboratory director
• Project designer
• Contractor
• Building owner
• Safety professional
• Environmental attorney
• Training provider
• Equipment manufacturer

This is your opportunity to contribute.  Your experience can help ensure future regulations improve worker protection while remaining practical and achievable.

Final Thoughts

The asbestos industry has evolved tremendously over the past four decades.  Technology has improved.  Analytical methods have advanced.  Training has become more comprehensive.  Yet legacy asbestos remains one of the most significant occupational and environmental health challenges facing our country.

EPA's Part 2 rule has the potential to shape asbestos management for decades to come.  Whether that rule becomes practical and effective depends, in part, on the quality of information EPA receives during this public comment process.  As we've said many times throughout our careers, "good regulations are built on good science—but they must also be informed by real-world experience."

This is one of those opportunities where the professionals who work with asbestos every day can help shape the future of our industry.  Let's make sure our voices are heard.

**Call to Action**

If you work in the environmental, construction, remediation, industrial hygiene, or laboratory industries, we encourage you to review EPA's questions carefully and consider submitting comments based on your professional experience.  Your input could influence how legacy asbestos is regulated for years to come—affecting worker protection, building owners, contractors, laboratories, and consultants nationwide.

At Future Environment Designs, we will continue monitoring this rulemaking process and providing updates as additional information becomes available.  We will also continue to incorporate these regulatory developments into our asbestos training programs so that inspectors, designers, contractors, and environmental professionals remain informed and prepared for the future.

The best regulations are developed when regulators listen to those who do the work every day. This is one of those opportunities. Don't let it pass.

Recognition, Innovation, and Continuing Our Mission to Educate

As we move further into 2026, we are proud to share several exciting developments at Future Environment Designs Training Center (FEDTC) that reflect our continued commitment to training, innovation, and supporting environmental and safety professionals.

This year has already brought significant recognition for our efforts, the launch of a new educational resource for asbestos inspectors, and opportunities to contribute to important industry discussions regarding indoor air quality and workforce development.

Two Awards That Reflect Our Commitment to Excellence

One of the most rewarding aspects of operating a business for nearly four decades is seeing your hard work recognized by others in the industry.  We are pleased to announce that FEDTC has received two prestigious awards for 2026.

Environmental Business Review's Top Indoor Air Quality Services 2026

FEDTC was selected as one of Environmental Business Review's Top Indoor Air Quality Services Providers for 2026.  The recognition specifically highlights our innovative "At Your Convenience Service", which was developed to address the real-world operational challenges faced by employers and workers in regulated industries.

For years, we've recognized that training alone is not enough. Employers need workers who are ready to work, medically cleared, fit-tested, properly documented, and compliant with regulatory requirements.  Our At Your Convenience Service was designed to bring these elements together into a single coordinated process.

The service combines:

• Training and certification
• Respirator fit testing
• Medical evaluation coordination
• Documentation management
• Regulatory guidance
• Ongoing compliance support

Rather than forcing employers to coordinate multiple vendors and schedules, the service provides a streamlined solution that helps workers stay compliant and job-ready.  See what our client, Mr. Tom Watral of Watral Brothers, has to say about our service.

Receiving this recognition validates what we've believed all along: the most effective training solutions address the entire compliance process, not just the classroom portion.

CourseCheck 2026 Brilliance Award

We were also honored to receive the "CourseCheck 2026 Brilliance Award" for maintaining an exceptional trainer evaluation score of "4.9 out of 5" throughout all of 2025.

This award is particularly meaningful because it comes directly from the people we serve—our students.

Every evaluation represents feedback from environmental consultants, contractors, facility managers, engineers, maintenance personnel, and safety professionals who attend our courses.  Maintaining a 4.9 rating throughout the year reflects our team's dedication to providing practical, relevant, and engaging training that attendees can immediately apply in the field.

To everyone who attended a class, completed an evaluation, and trusted us with their professional education, thank you.

Introducing Our New Asbestos Bulk Sampling Package

Education has always been a cornerstone of what we do, and recent events reinforced the need for additional training resources regarding asbestos bulk sampling requirements.

Following the release of a New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) fact sheet, "Expectations for Contents of Asbestos Surveys and Assessments" published after the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York's (PACNY's) Environmental Conference in March, we observed several areas that created confusion within the industry and raised questions among inspectors and consultants.

The Reference Book

As a result, we developed a comprehensive "Asbestos Bulk Sampling Package" designed to provide practical, field-ready guidance.  Click here to purchase the package.

The package includes:

• An eLearning/On-Demand training course,
• A comprehensive reference book,
• A durable laminated bulk sampling table designed for field use

The goal is simple: provide asbestos inspectors with a clear understanding of sampling requirements, sampling strategies, homogeneous area determinations, suspect materials, and regulatory expectations.  Too often, inspectors rely on incomplete information, outdated guidance, or interpretations that may not withstand regulatory scrutiny.  We wanted to create a resource that inspectors can use both during training and while conducting actual field inspections.

The laminated sampling table is particularly useful because it provides quick reference information that can be carried directly onto inspection projects.  As regulations, interpretations, and industry practices continue to evolve, providing accurate and practical educational resources remains essential.

Preserving Experience for the Next Generation

Another accomplishment we are particularly proud of is the publication of our article:

"Preserving Experience: How Continuous Training Supports the Next Generation of Environmental and Safety Professionals"

The article has been prominently featured in the "Insights" section of Environmental Business Review's website.  The topic has become increasingly important across our industry.

Many of the professionals who built the environmental consulting, asbestos, industrial hygiene, and safety industries are approaching retirement. As this transition occurs, organizations face a significant challenge: how do we preserve decades of practical knowledge and transfer that experience to the next generation?

The reality is that many of today's new environmental and safety professionals may never have the opportunity to spend years learning side-by-side with veteran supervisors the way previous generations did.  As experienced workers retire, the informal transfer of knowledge that once occurred naturally on job sites is becoming more difficult.  This makes structured training, mentoring, and continuous professional development more important than ever.

At FEDTC, our training philosophy has always been built around continuous learning and ongoing support because competency is not developed in a single class.  It is built through repetition, reinforcement, field application, and access to experienced guidance over time.

Far too often, training is viewed as an event—a worker attends a course, receives a certificate, and the process is considered complete.  In reality, that is where the learning process begins. Environmental health and safety professionals face changing regulations, evolving technologies, new workplace hazards, and increasingly complex projects throughout their careers.  Remaining competent requires continual education and reinforcement.

This philosophy is one of the reasons we have invested heavily in developing resources that extend learning beyond the classroom. Our training library, Negative Air App, asbestos air sampling charts, reference materials, and educational content (such as the above-mentioned asbestos bulk sampling package) were all created to provide workers and employers with continued access to practical information long after a training certificate has been issued.

The goal is to help bridge the gap between classroom instruction and field experience.  Our philosophy that "training never ends" reflects the reality of the industries we serve. Whether someone is an asbestos inspector, project designer, air sampling technician, project monitor, mold assessor, safety professional, or facility manager, they must continually adapt to changing regulations, evolving hazards, and new workplace challenges.

The future success of our profession depends not only on attracting new talent but also on ensuring that valuable lessons learned over decades are not lost. Continuous learning, knowledge sharing, and ongoing support are essential if we want the next generation of environmental and safety professionals to be as prepared and effective as those who came before them.

That is the message behind our article and a principle that continues to guide everything we do at FEDTC.

Looking Ahead

As we reflect on these accomplishments, we are reminded that none of them happened in isolation.  They are the result of dedicated employees, loyal clients, industry partners, instructors, students, and colleagues who continue to support FEDTC and share our commitment to education and worker protection.

Whether it's receiving industry recognition, developing new training tools, contributing to important industry discussions, or helping prepare the next generation of professionals, our mission remains the same as it was when we started nearly 38 years ago:

To provide practical, high-quality education and services that help protect workers, building occupants, and the environment.

We look forward to continuing that mission in 2026 and beyond.

Regulatory Updates, Industry Concerns, and Straight Talk from OSHA and NYSDOL at the PACNY 29th Annual Environmental Conference – Day 3

The third and final day of the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) 29th Annual Environmental Conference at the beautiful Turning Stone Resort Casino wrapped up another outstanding year of education, discussion, and industry networking. February 27, 2026, focused heavily on regulatory updates, owner expectations, compliance trends, and direct engagement with regulators — exactly the kind of practical information environmental professionals need to bring back to the field.

The Mohawk Room

Throughout the day, attendees gathered in the Mohawk Room for presentations.  At the same time, the Oneida Room Vendor Exhibit Hall continued to serve as the hub for coffee breaks, networking, and conversations with exhibitors.  PACNY once again demonstrated why this conference remains one of the most valuable environmental industry events in New York State.

PACNY Leadership Opens the Day

The morning began with remarks from PACNY President Kevin Hutton and PACNY Vice President Russell Vent, who discussed the current state of PACNY, ongoing industry initiatives, and the organization’s continued role in supporting environmental professionals throughout New York State. Their comments reflected both the growth of the organization and the evolving challenges facing the asbestos, remediation, and environmental consulting industries.

"A Crystal Ball” Panel Brings Owner Perspectives Front and Center

One of the most engaging discussions of the day was the panel presentation titled:

“A Crystal Ball – What Owners and General Managers Want You To Know”

The session was moderated by Bridget Ruane of C&S Companies and featured panelists representing multiple perspectives within the construction and environmental industry:

• James Riscica of C&S Technical Services, representing general contractors
• Sean Dollaway of C&S Companies, representing construction managers
• Conor Osterman of SUNY Upstate Medical University, representing owners and clients

This panel generated substantial discussion because it addressed a growing frustration that many owners, construction managers, and contractors are experiencing regarding asbestos surveys and project design documents.

Bridget Ruane moderating "Crystal Ball" panel

Several recurring themes emerged:

• Lack of sufficient detail in asbestos surveys
• Overreliance on asbestos presumptions in specifications and designs
• Disconnects between field conditions and design assumptions
• Challenges owners face when incomplete information results in costly change orders or project delays
• Difficulties contractors encounter when survey limitations are not clearly communicated upfront

The panelists emphasized that owners and construction managers are increasingly expecting consultants and designers to provide clearer documentation, more defensible assumptions, and practical project planning. It was an honest conversation that many attendees clearly related to based on the audience participation and follow-up discussions afterward.

OSHA Provides Regulatory and Enforcement Updates

Following a coffee break in the exhibit hall, Jeff Presbin from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) presented updates regarding OSHA standards and enforcement trends

The presentation focused heavily on:

• OSHA’s Top Ten Violations from 2025
• Enforcement trends involving asbestos work
• Common compliance failures seen during inspections
• Regulatory expectations for documentation and worker protection

For environmental contractors and consultants, these discussions are always valuable because they provide insight into where OSHA is placing emphasis during inspections and enforcement actions.

Jeff Presbin from OSHA

Asbestos compliance continues to remain a significant area of concern, particularly involving respiratory protection, regulated areas, exposure assessments, competent person oversight, and proper work practices under the asbestos construction standard.

NYSDOL Roundtable Closes Out the Conference

The final presentation of the conference featured representatives from the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) Asbestos Control Bureau:

• Vincent Rapacciuolo, Deputy Director of Safety & Health
• Chek Beng Ng, Professional Engineer 2
• Jason Pensabene, Program Manager 2

As always, the NYSDOL session drew substantial attendance and participation because attendees had the opportunity to directly engage with regulators and ask real-world compliance questions.

Chek Beng Ng, Jason Pensabene, & Vincent Rapacciuolo, NYSDOL

Expansion of the MPWR System

Vincent Rapacciuolo discussed the proposed expansion of the MPWR website platform, including increased electronic functionality involving:

• Notifications
• Payment of fines
• Opt-in electronic communications
• Asbestos license renewals

The overall direction is clear — NYSDOL continues moving toward expanded electronic communications and digital administration processes.  For contractors, consultants, and building owners, staying current with these electronic systems will become increasingly important.

Variance Statistics and Processing Times

Chek Beng Ng provided updates regarding variance activity processed by the NYSDOL Engineering Services Unit (ESU) over the past year. The numbers were eye-opening:

• 1,759 total variances processed
• 120 statewide variances
• 121 school variances
• 380 emergency variances
• 1,130 site-specific variances

Average processing time was reported at approximately two weeks. These statistics highlight both the volume of asbestos-related work occurring throughout NYS and the continued importance of understanding the variance process under Industrial Code Rule 56.

New NYSDOL Fact Sheets

Jason Pensabene discussed several newly released NYSDOL fact sheets concerning asbestos survey requirements in NYS, with another guidance document currently in development.  The fact sheets are all asbestos survey-related:

• Asbestos Survey Always Required - (Published based on a PACNY initiative)
• NYS Asbestos Survey Requirements - Municipalities
• NYS Asbestos Survey Requirements - Building Permit Applicants
• Expectations for Contents of Asbestos Surveys and Assessments (published after the conference in March)

These fact sheets are expected to provide additional clarification regarding survey expectations and compliance obligations — areas that continue to generate questions throughout the industry.

One of the Most Active Q&A Sessions in Recent Memory

The conference concluded with an extensive roundtable question-and-answer session that utilized a newer structured format designed to encourage broader audience participation.  The result was one of the most active Q&A sessions many attendees could remember.

To their credit, the NYSDOL representatives remained engaged and attempted to address the large number of questions raised by attendees.

Some of the issues discussed included:

• Partial asbestos removal with encapsulated edges and flood cuts
• Interpretation of survey requirements
• Variance considerations
• Enforcement consistency
• Field compliance challenges

One particularly notable discussion involved bead blasting methods. NYSDOL representatives explained that refusals involving bead blasting are based on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) documentation and agency experience indicating the equipment cannot be successfully used with water under those conditions.

These types of direct exchanges between regulators and industry professionals are one of the major reasons PACNY continues to provide such value to attendees year after year.

Final Thoughts

The 29th Annual PACNY Environmental Conference successfully returned to a three-day format and delivered another strong educational program covering technology, compliance, project design, exposure assessment, regulatory interpretation, and public health advocacy.  From discussions on AI and robotics to owner expectations, OSHA enforcement, and NYSDOL compliance updates, the conference reflected an industry continuing to evolve while facing increasingly complex regulatory and operational challenges.

NYSDOL representatives at the Conference

Perhaps most importantly, the conference once again reinforced the importance of communication between contractors, consultants, regulators, building owners, laboratories, and public health advocates. These conversations — even when difficult — are critical to improving worker protection, project quality, and regulatory compliance.

PACNY, its leadership, presenters, vendors, and attendees should be commended for putting together another outstanding conference.  If this year’s event is any indication, the environmental industry in NYS continues to move forward through collaboration, education, and honest discussion about the challenges we all face in the field every day.

PACNY 29th Annual Environmental Conference Part Two – Day Two Recap

Day Two of the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) 29th Annual Environmental Conference on February 26, 2026, at the Turning Stone Resort & Casino delivered a full schedule of technical presentations, regulatory updates, and practical field discussions, all complemented by strong engagement in the Vendor Exhibit Hall.

Future Environment Design's Team in the Vendor Hall

With the morning sessions split between the Mohawk and Tuscarora Rooms, attendees could tailor their experience to their discipline and interests while still coming together throughout the day in the Oneida Room for networking, lunch, and the always-popular Happy Hour.

Vendor Exhibit Hall Sets New Record

Before diving into the sessions, it’s worth highlighting that this year’s Vendor Exhibit Hall, located in the Oneida Room, featured 32 vendors, setting a new conference record.

This continues to reflect the industry's growth and the importance of direct interaction among service providers, manufacturers, trainers, consultants, and contractors. The exhibit hall remained active throughout the day, especially during lunch and the closing Happy Hour, providing valuable opportunities to connect and discuss new products, services, and technologies.

Morning Sessions – Mohawk Room

"Lead-Based Paint Regulations: Recent Changes & Updated Standards" by Brad Arthur, PE – Arthur Engineering DPC. The day began with a regulatory-focused presentation on lead-based paint, where one of the more notable updates discussed was the shift away from using the term “clearance.”  Instead, the industry is moving toward defined terminology using two distinct clearance-related levels:

• Work Completed
• Pre-Occupancy

2026 Changes to the Lead Standard

Brad also addressed the growing challenges associated with analytical methods at increasingly lower detection limits. The cost differences between methodologies were particularly eye-opening:

• Flame AA: approximately $4 per sample
• ICP: approximately $45 per sample

This has significant implications for project budgeting and laboratory selection as regulatory thresholds continue to tighten.

"The Science You Should Know" by Kevin Hutton – EAST Centers of NY.  Kevin delivered a science-driven session reinforcing the importance of understanding the “why” behind what we do in the field. While many of us operate within regulatory frameworks daily, revisiting the underlying science helps strengthen decision-making, interpretation of results, and overall credibility in the field.

"Exposure Assessments Under OSHA’s Asbestos Construction Standard" by Peter DeLucia – Riedman Companies. This presentation focused on the practical application of exposure assessments under 29 CFR 1926.1101, highlighting:

• Real-world compliance challenges
• Proper interpretation of exposure data
• The importance of defensible assessment strategies

The discussion resonated with many in the room, particularly regarding the gap between regulatory language and field implementation.

Morning Sessions – Tuscarora Room

"Immigration Enforcement: Know Your Rights – Employer Edition" by Michael Paglialonga, Attorney at Law, at Littler Labor & Employment Law Solutions.  This session provided a timely and important briefing on the evolving landscape of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and I-9 compliance, particularly in construction and hospitality sectors.  The key takeaway was clear:

• We are seeing a shift from historically routine, paper-based audits to more aggressive, high-frequency site inspections and enforcement actions, with projections reaching up to 15,000 audits annually.
• The emphasis has moved toward proactive compliance, or what was described as “preventative maintenance” of documentation, to avoid significant civil and potential criminal liability.

Michael Paglialonga, ICE Presenter, photo by Nathan Boor of AAC

"Workers’ Compensation: Protecting Yourself and Your Team" by Anthony Tomeselli – NYS Workers’ Compensation Board.  Anthony provided a comprehensive overview of workers’ compensation, focusing on:

• The distinction between business advocates and injured worker advocates
• Proper classification of independent contractors
• The implications of the Construction Industry Fair Play Act

This was a valuable reminder that misclassification and misunderstanding coverage requirements can have serious financial and legal consequences.

Anthony Tomeselli's points regarding the Business Advocate

"From Mold to Measurement: A Practical Overview of Mycotoxins" by Aaron Wilson – Hayes Microbial Consulting.  Aaron’s presentation highlighted the complexity of mycotoxins and their impact on indoor environmental quality.  One of the most critical takeaways:

• Mycotoxins are toxic at extremely low concentrations—parts per billion (ppb) and even parts per trillion (ppt).

This reinforces the need for careful interpretation of sampling data and a strong understanding of the limitations and capabilities of current analytical methods.

Aaron Wilson discussing types of mycotoxins

Afternoon Sessions

"Asbestos in Settled Dust – Is it a Valid Method?" Panel Discussion Panelists:

• Angelo Garcia, III – Future Environment Designs, Inc.
• Martin S. Rutstein, Ph.D. – Environmental Consulting and Management Services, Inc.
• Marc Rutstein – Environmental Consulting and Management Services, Inc.

This panel sparked significant discussion around one of the more debated topics in the industry—the validity and application of settled dust sampling for asbestos.  The conversation focused on:

• Whether it should be used as a screening or decision-making tool
• Interpretation challenges
• Regulatory limitations
• Real-world implications, including cost impacts when misapplied

We really enjoyed working with the Rutsteins in putting this presentation together.  Though Dr. Rutstein's review of our presentation made us feel like we were back in college working with our professors.  See our presentation below, and our slides can be found in our training library.

"Diversity in Safety – Inclusive Safety Designs" by Courtney Connelly – The El Group, Inc.  Courtney delivered an important session on designing safety programs that are not just compliant, but inclusive.  The focus was on providing equity tools—ensuring that all workers, regardless of background or ability, have access to the same level of protection.  This is an area that continues to evolve and deserves ongoing attention in safety program development.

Courtney Connelly discussing OSHA PPE Update

"From the People’s House to Every House" by Linda Reinstein – Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization.  Linda Reinstein presented from Washington, D.C., on enforcement gaps, accountability, and the current status of the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now (ARBAN) Act.  The central question: Where do we stand today?  The presentation reinforced:

• Ongoing regulatory gaps
• The need for comprehensive legislative action
• The human impact of delayed policy decisions

As always, Linda’s presentation grounded the technical discussions in real-world consequences and public health impact.

Linda Reinstein discussing asbestos disease 

"Common Compliance Issues in the Field" by Stacy Portnoy – New York State Department of Labor Asbestos Control Bureau.  Closing out the formal sessions, Stacy provided a practical look at common compliance issues observed in the field.  These types of presentations are always valuable, as they reflect what regulators are actually seeing on projects—often highlighting recurring issues that are entirely preventable with proper planning and oversight.

Stacy Portnoy discusses the most common violations in 2025

Closing the Day: Networking and Industry Engagement

The day concluded with the Happy Hour Networking Event in the Vendor Exhibit Hall.  With record vendor participation and strong attendee turnout, the room remained active and engaged. These interactions continue to be a key component of the conference—providing an opportunity to discuss challenges, share solutions, and strengthen professional relationships across the industry.  One of the interesting vendors was A2Z Environmental LLC because they have a battery-operated pump capable of sampling for asbestos (both NIOSH 7400 method and the AHERA TEM method) and mold (spore trap sampling).  See the video from the Happy Hour Networking Event below:

Final Thoughts

Day Two of the PACNY Conference successfully balanced technical depth, regulatory insight, and practical field application.  From evolving enforcement trends and analytical challenges to emerging discussions on equity and technology, the sessions reflected where the industry stands today—and where it’s heading.

Stay tuned for Part 3, where we’ll wrap up the final day of the conference and key takeaways

Related Articles:

• PACNY 29th Annual Environmental Conference Returns to Three-Day Format at Turning Stone

PACNY 29th Annual Environmental Conference Returns to Three-Day Format at Turning Stone

The Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) 29th Annual Environmental Conference, held at the Turning Stone Resort & Casino, marked a strong return to a full three-day format, taking place February 25th, 26th, and 27th, 2026. The expanded schedule provided additional opportunities for education, collaboration, and industry engagement, beginning with the President’s Reception on the evening of February 25th.

Early Afternoon Session: Technology, Design, and Industry Insight

The conference officially opened on Wednesday with a timely and forward-looking presentation by Mark and Mike Gonzales, of Cornerstone Training Institute, titled: “The Emergence of AI, Robotics, Virtual Reality, and Modern Technologies in the Environmental Remediation Industry.”  This was an excellent, highly relevant session that explored not only the availability of these technologies but also their active implementation across the environmental and remediation sectors.

Mark Gonzales of Cornerstone Training Institute

The discussion covered:

• Real-world applications of artificial intelligence and robotics
• The role of virtual reality in training and hazard simulation
• The benefits of increased efficiency, safety, and data collection
• The limitations and challenges that still exist with AI adoption

A key takeaway was the growing role of advanced sensors and exoskeletons, which are now being used to assess hazards in real time and, in many cases, eliminate or significantly reduce worker exposure.  The integration of these tools represents a meaningful step forward in both safety and productivity.

Mike Gonzales of Cornerstone Training Institute

Additionally, the use of drones equipped with 360-degree cameras continues to evolve, offering enhanced site assessments, documentation, and inspection capabilities—particularly in areas that are difficult or unsafe to access.

The session struck a balanced tone, emphasizing both the promise of these technologies and the practical limitations the industry must still navigate.

Late Afternoon Panel Discussion: The Criticality of Design

Following a short break, the focus shifted from emerging technology to one of the foundational elements of our industry—project design.  Benjamin Reddy of Ravi Engineering moderated a panel discussion with Gary Lasky of LCP Group Inc. on “The Criticality of Design.”  This was a highly engaging and comprehensive discussion that drew significant participation from attendees. What made this session particularly valuable was the open exchange of real-world experiences related to asbestos project design.

Ben Reddy of Ravi Engineering

Topics included:

• Common strengths and weaknesses in project specifications
• Challenges encountered in the field due to design deficiencies
• The importance of clear, enforceable, and practical design documents
• Lessons learned from both successful and problematic projects

The dialogue reinforced something many in the room already know—good design sets the tone for the entire project, while poor design can lead to confusion, delays, increased costs, and compliance issues.

President’s Reception: Kicking Off the Conference

The day concluded with the PACNY President’s Reception, which provided an excellent opportunity for attendees to reconnect with colleagues, meet new professionals, and begin the conference on a strong networking note.

As always, these informal settings continue to be just as valuable as the formal sessions, fostering conversations that often lead to collaboration and shared solutions across the industry.

Looking Ahead

With a strong opening day that balanced innovation with practical field experience, the PACNY Conference set the stage for two more days of education and discussion.  Stay tuned for Part 2 and Part 3, where we’ll cover the remainder of the conference sessions, speakers, and key takeaways.

Our new booth is set up and ready to go!

OSHA 300A Posting Requirements and 2026 Penalty Updates: What Employers Need to Know

It’s time once again to focus on an important requirement from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).  Employers with 10 or more employees are required to post the OSHA 300A Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses from February 1 through April 30, 2026. This annual posting reflects injury and illness data from calendar year 2025 and ensures transparency for employees regarding workplace safety performance.  If you need guidance in completing the OSHA 300A form, we’ve got resources to help you out. We partnered with Keevily Spero & Whitelaw to create a webinar that walks you through the steps for both the OSHA 300 and 300A forms. You can find the webinar on our YouTube Channel or watch the video below.

In addition to posting, many employers are required to electronically submit their OSHA 300A data by March 2, 2026.  Let’s break this down.

OSHA 300A Form – Posting Requirements

The OSHA 300A form summarizes the injury and illness data recorded throughout the year on the OSHA 300 Log. It provides totals for:

• Total cases
• Cases with days away from work
• Cases with job transfer or restriction
• Recordable injuries and illnesses by category
• Total number of days away or restricted
• Establishment information and annual average employment

Covered employers must ensure that the 300 Log is completed as the year progresses and that totals are accurately calculated at year-end for the 300A summary.

300A is the Summary of Work-Related Injuries & Illnesses

The OSHA 300A must:

• Be certified by a company executive
• Be posted in a conspicuous location where employee notices are normally placed
• Remain posted from February 1 through April 30
• Be retained for five years
• Be updated if new recordable information becomes available

Electronic Submission – March 2, 2026 Deadline

OSHA’s electronic reporting rule requires certain establishments to submit injury and illness data through the OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA).  OSHA began collecting 2025 data on January 2, 2026, and submissions must be completed by March 2, 2026.

You must submit OSHA 300A data electronically if your establishment meets one of the following:

• 250 or more employees and not in an exempt industry (Appendix A to Subpart B of 29 CFR Part 1904), or
• 20–249 employees and in an industry listed in Appendix A to Subpart E of 29 CFR Part 1904.

Additionally:

Establishments with 100 or more employees in industries listed in Appendix B to Subpart E must submit OSHA 300 and 301 data in addition to the 300A. 

300 Form is the Log of Work-Related Injuries & Illnesses 

 What This Means for Our Industry

• Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services are generally exempt.
• Construction, Remediation, and Waste Management Services that meet size thresholds (20–249 employees) must electronically submit 300A data.
• Larger employers (100+ employees in covered industries) must submit expanded datasets.

If you are unsure whether your establishment must submit, the OSHA ITA portal provides a coverage determination tool.  

2026 OSHA Penalty Updates (Applicable for 2026 Citations)

As of today, there have been no changes to the penalty structure issued on January 15, 2025.  Despite ongoing discussion in the regulatory space, OSHA has not released any additional inflation adjustments or revisions beyond the 2025 annual update required under federal law.

For employers, safety managers, and compliance professionals, this means the current penalty framework remains fully in effect.

Current OSHA Penalty Structure (Effective January 15, 2025)

Under the annual adjustment mandated by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, OSHA applied a cost-of-living multiplier of 1.02598 for 2025. Those figures remain unchanged.

2025 Maximum and Minimum Penalties

Type of Violation         Penalty Minimum             Penalty Maximum

Serious                         $1,221 per violation     $16,550 per violation

Other-Than-Serious $0 per violation             $16,550 per violation

Willful or Repeated $11,823 per violation     $165,514 per violation

Posting Requirements $0 per violation             $16,550 per violation

Failure to Abate         N/A                                     $16,550 per day (up to 30 days)

These amounts are reflected in OSHA’s Information Systems (OIS) and enforcement guidance under Chapter 6 of the Field Operations Manual (FOM).

What This Means for Employers

There is sometimes confusion mid-year about whether OSHA penalties change outside the annual January adjustment cycle. They do not.

OSHA is required to:

• Publish updated civil penalty amounts annually.
• Implement those changes no later than January 15 of each year.

Unless Congress amends the statute or OSHA issues a formal rulemaking update, penalties remain static until the next annual adjustment.

Why This Still Matters

Even without a new increase, the current maximum penalties remain significant:

• A single serious violation can reach $16,550.
• A willful or repeated violation can reach $165,514 per violation.
• Failure-to-abate penalties accrue daily.

For construction, remediation, environmental services, and other higher-risk industries, multi-item citations can escalate quickly.

The absence of a 2026 update (so far) does not reduce enforcement activity. OSHA continues to:

• Conduct programmed and unprogrammed inspections
• Increase emphasis on programs
• Focus on repeat and willful classifications
• Utilize the Gravity-Based Penalty (GBP) system for calculation

Final Thoughts

OSHA recordkeeping and reporting are not administrative formalities. They are compliance obligations that carry significant financial consequences when ignored.

Between:

• OSHA 300A posting requirements,
• Electronic submission deadlines, and
• Current penalty structures, employers in construction, remediation, environmental services, and related industries must remain vigilant.

Now is the time to:

• Verify your 300 Log accuracy,
• Confirm executive certification of the 300A,
• Ensure timely posting,
• Determine electronic submission requirements,
• Review your safety program to reduce exposure to costly violations.

If you need assistance navigating OSHA recordkeeping or understanding how these penalties affect your organization, reach out.  Staying proactive is always less expensive than reacting to a citation.

Related Articles:

• OSHA 2024 Reporting Requirements and 2025 Penalty Adjustments: Key Compliance Guidelines for Employers
• It’s That Time! Remember to Post Your 300A Form and Electronically Report Your 2023 OSHA 300A Data to OSHA Using a New Login Procedure.
• OSHA Recordkeeping Webinar To Discuss Posting Requirements For 300A Form & Filing It Electronically! (futureenv.blogspot.com)
• It's That Time Again! Did You Remember to POST Your OSHA 300A Form! (futureenv.blogspot.com)
• Have You Remembered To Post The OSHA 300A Form? (futureenv.blogspot.com)

Update of Dust and Debris Sampling in New York State: What Asbestos Inspectors Need to Know

On July 16, 2016, we blogged about "Asbestos Dust Sampling in New York State," since that post had over 1,550 views and will be ten years old this year.  We thought we should update the post.  In addition, we were honored to be asked by Dr. Martin Rutstein to join him and Mr. Marc Rutstein in presenting at the 2026 Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) 29th Annual Environmental Conference.  Our presentation is titled "Asbestos in Settled Dust - Is it a Valid Method in a Consultant's Toolbox?"  We look forward to seeing you at the conference and discussing this issue.  This issue is typically discussed in our asbestos inspector and designer classes, so many of you already know some of the issues.  These discussions are necessary because this is an area where misunderstandings, improper sampling, and incorrect laboratory analysis can lead to serious regulatory, financial, and legal consequences for building owners, contractors, and consultants alike (Dr. Martin Rutstein & Marc Rutstein will be discussing recent case histories).

Stop by and Interact with our New Display

Under New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) Industrial Code Rule 56, dust and debris are specifically identified as suspect miscellaneous asbestos-containing materials (ACM).  This means that any debris or dust that is visually assessed by an asbestos inspector must be treated and handled as ACM and assumed to be asbestos-containing until bulk sampling and analysis demonstrate otherwise.  The inevitable question that follows is a practical one: How do you collect bulk samples of debris and dust?

Scrape Sampling and NYSDOH ELAP Method 198.1

The most straightforward method is to physically collect the debris or dust by scraping it into an asbestos sample bag using a knife, scraper, or business card.  This collected material can then be submitted for analysis using the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) Method 198.1.

Sampling Tools - Tweezers are one of my favorites

The ELAP Method 198.1 is the standard polarized light microscopy (PLM) method, which utilizes dispersion staining and point counting.  When performed correctly by an ELAP-accredited laboratory, this method provides results in percent by weight (%), which allows the inspector to compare findings directly to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) definition of ACM - greater than 1% asbestos by weight.  We also have to take into account that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulates materials that are 1% or less (see the Varga Letter in the FED Training Library).

Microvacuum Sampling and ASTM D5755

Another commonly used collection method is described in American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) D5755, Microvacuum Sampling and Indirect Analysis of Dust by Transmission Electron Microscopy for Asbestos Structure Number Concentrations. Note that the method has been withdrawn because of an administrative lapse and should be republished by the Fall of 2026.  This method involves vacuuming a known surface area—100 square centimeters is referenced in the standard, though the area may be larger or smaller depending on conditions.  The standard recommends that multiple independent samples are secured from the same area, and that a minimum of three samplesbe analyzed by the entire procedure.

The sample cassette and the nozzle must be submitted

Sampling is conducted using a standard 25- or 37-millimeter air sampling cassette equipped with either a mixed cellulose ester (MCE) or polycarbonate (PC) filter membrane with a pore size of 0.8 microns or smaller.  A plastic tube is attached to the inlet orifice to act as a nozzle and is cut at a 45-degree angle transverse to the sampling area of visible dust, avoiding particles > 1 millimeter.  Do not scrape the surface.  The air sampling pump is calibrated to operate at 2 liters per minute.  The sample cassette and the plastic tube (nozzle) must be submitted for analysis.

Nozzle example

While ASTM D5755 includes its own analytical method, this is where inspectors working in New York State must proceed with caution.  On April 8, 2011, NYSDOH published a document called "New York State Asbestos/Fibers - Frequently Asked Questions" (see the FAQ in the FED Training Library). According to NYSDOH ELAP Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) No. 8, all bulk samples collected must be analyzed using ELAP-approved methodologies at an ELAP-accredited laboratory.  ASTM D5755 is not an ELAP-approved method of analysis.  Therefore, when transmission electron microscopy (TEM) is desired, the required analytical method in NYS is ELAP Method 198.4.

Wipe Sampling and ASTM D6480

ASTM D6480, Standard Test Method for Wipe Sampling of Surfaces, Indirect Preparation, and Analysis for Asbestos Structure Number Concentration by Transmission Electron Microscopy, is another method used to collect dust and debris.  This approach involves wiping a known surface area - again, typically 100 square centimeters - with a particle-free, sealed-edge, continuous filament cloth, such as a cleanroom wipe with 50/50 alcohol/water (no ghost wipes or baby wipes).  Multiple passes, first horizontal, then vertical, then hit the corners. Record the area sampled.  Like D5755, this standard recommends that multiple independent samples be secured from the same area, and that a minimum of three samples be analyzed by the entire procedure.

Cleanroom wipes

As with D5755, ASTM D6480 also includes an analytical method that is not approved under NYSDOH ELAP.  For NYS compliance, samples collected via these methods must be analyzed using the ELAP Method 198.4.

The Analysis Matters More Than the Collection Method

This is where many inspectors encounter problems. NYS ELAP-approved laboratories should be advising inspectors that ASTM analytical methods cannot be used for regulatory determinations in New York State.  Unfortunately, we have seen numerous instances where this guidance was not provided or ignored.

Transmission Electron Microscope

The result is that inspectors receive data reported as asbestos structures per square centimeter.  While this may be useful for certain research or exposure characterization purposes, there is no federal or state regulatory standard that allows these results to be compared to a threshold for determining whether a material is asbestos-containing.

Despite this, some parties have used these results to declare areas contaminated or to classify dust and debris as ACM.  In several cases, this has led to building owners incurring cleanup costs in the thousands - or even millions - of dollars, based on analyses that cannot be tied to regulatory definitions.

It is also worth noting that ASTM itself acknowledges these limitations.  In the Significance and Use section of its standards, ASTM clearly states that these test methods do not establish building safety, habitability, or regulatory compliance, and that a direct relationship between surface asbestos measurements and human exposure does not currently exist.

Experience, Knowledge, and Regulatory Awareness Are Critical

When using ASTM collection methods for dust and debris, asbestos inspectors must be extremely careful - both in how samples are collected and, more importantly, in how results are interpreted and communicated.  Understanding NYS regulatory requirements, approved analytical methodologies, and the limitations of various testing approaches is essential.

Asbestos Inspector Initial Class

As with many aspects of asbestos inspections, experience and knowledge are key. Proper sampling, appropriate analysis, and accurate interpretation protect not only inspectors and their clients but also the credibility of our profession.