The Reality of Asbestos Clearance Air Sampling! Are You Sampling Enough?

We attended the Environmental Information Association (EIA) 2022 National Conference and Exhibition in Phoenix, Arizona from March 20, through March 23, 2022.  We attended several sessions regarding asbestos where we discussed with some attendees asbestos clearance air sampling and what are the Federal requirements.  Based on those discussions we figured it was time to write an article on this topic.  To make sure we wrote this article based on general industry practice, versus what we are used to in New York State and New York City, we consulted with Mr. Tom Laubenthal, of TGL Consulting, Inc., and Mr. Dana Brown, of Time's Dark Captains.  Since everything else seems to start with the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools Rule (40 CFR Part 763, Subpart E, known in the industry as the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA)) why don't we start there?  The AHERA regulation remember applies to schools from Kindergarten to 12th grade (K-12), both public and private schools.  The requirements are found in two sections of the rule:

• Response Actions; §763.90 (i)
• Appendix A (to Subpart E) - Interim Transmission Electron Microscopy Analytical Methods - Mandatory and NonMandatory - and Mandatory Section to Determine Completion of Response Actions

For all intents and purposes, these methods serve as the industry standard when final clearance is performed for most asbestos abatement projects, especially when areas are to be re-occupied. We’ll discuss applicability issues as we go. 

TEM Analysis

First, let's discuss the requirement for aggressive clearance sampling.  In the AHERA regulation, aggressive sampling means floors, ceilings, and walls shall be swept with the exhaust of a minimum one (1) horsepower leaf blower.  Some states and specifications may also require the use of fans as described in the non-mandatory section of Appendix A.  The non-mandatory section states, that stationary fans shall be placed in locations that will not interfere with the air monitoring equipment.  Fan air is directed toward the ceiling.  One fan shall be used for every 10,000 cubic feet (CF) of a worksite.  This is required in the New York State Department of Labor's Asbestos Regulation Industrial Code Rule 56 (NYSDOL ICR56) and the New York City Department of Environmental Protection Asbestos Regulation Title 15 (NYCDEP Title 15).  However, NYSDOL ICR56 also requires one fan per room in addition to the one fan per 10,000 CF.

This is not in the spirit of the AHERA/NYSDOL ICR56/NYCDEP Title 15 requirements for aggressive clearance sampling. Thank you Greg Mance for the photo.

As defined by the AHERA rules, final clearance air sampling can be done by phase contrast microscopy (PCM) methodology for projects less than or equal to 160 square feet (SF) or 260 linear feet (LF) by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 7400 methodology (Issue 3: 14 June 2019 is the current issue).  For projects greater than 160 SF or 260 LF clearance shall be done by the AHERA transmission electron microscopy (TEM) method (requirements at 763.90 (i) (4) and Appendix A).

Graphic courtesy Tom Laubenthal

There are some similarities between the AHERA TEM and NIOSH 7400 methods.  For example, the AHERA TEM method (Appendix A) allows for the use of either a 25-millimeter (mm) filter cassette or a 37-mm filter cassette.  We haven't used a 37-mm cassette since the industry switched from the old asbestos sampling method NIOSH P&CAM 239 to the NIOSH 7400 method that was formally adopted into AHERA.  For sampling, whether it is the AHERA TEM method or the NIOSH 7400 method, we use a 25-mm 3-piece cassette with 50-mm electrically conductive extension cowl cassettes.  The two methods require the filter cassette to face 45 degrees downward from the horizontal.  The filter material used is mixed cellulose ester (MCE).  AHERA TEM method does allow for the use of polycarbonate (PC) filters as well.  The PC filters fell out of favor because post-sampling handling was more problematic than the MCE filters.  With PC filters, if samples sent to the lab are not handled carefully, the sampled fibers can move significantly from the filter surface.  This was widely discussed in the industry in the 1980s.  Since then, only MCE filters are used outside of specialty applications. 

The filter cassette is to face 45 degrees downward from the horizontal.

Both methods require blanks, however, that is where the similarities end.  The AHERA TEM method requires three blanks two field blanks and one laboratory (sealed) blank.  While the NIOSH 7400 method requires a minimum of two blanks or 10% of samples collected with a maximum of 10 blanks.  How the blanks are handled is different as well. The AHERA TEM method laboratory (sealed) blank is not opened and kept sealed, while the field blanks are opened for 30 seconds at the entrance to each abatement area and one at an ambient area.  While the NIOSH 7400 method requires the blanks to be opened at the same time as the other cassettes just prior to sampling and stored with the top covers of the cassettes that are running and remain open for the duration of sampling (here is an interesting difference, in some places the cassettes are stored in the box with the lid closed or, the way we were taught, they are placed in a Ziploc bag that is used to deliver the samples to the laboratory).  

A typical box of air sampling cassettes

Another difference is that with the AHERA TEM method we use a 0.45-micron (µm) MCE filter and the NIOSH 7400 method uses a 0.8 µm MCE filter.  This refers to the size of the air passages in the filter material. Filter manufacturers will color code or mark the label so that the type of filter within the cassette assembly is known to the user and the laboratory.

TEM filter is 0.45-micron.  PCM filter is 0.8-micron.

Let's get to some of the interesting items such as how the samples are taken and how many are required.  The AHERA TEM method is straightforward, it requires 5 samples inside the work area and 5 samples outside the work area that represent air entering the abatement site plus the blanks (as mentioned above) for a total of 13 samples.  These samples should run from 1 to less than 10 liters per minute (LPM) for a total volume of air greater than 1199 liters or greater (see Table 1 below for the recommended sampling volume range for this method, typically the volume range is between 1200 liters and 1800 liters).  It is interesting that the maximum flow rate is less than 10 LPM.  It would be interesting to find out how many in the industry actually sample at less than 10 LPM (i.e., 9.9 LPM versus 10 LPM).  Likely most of the industry merely samples at 10 LPM.  The statistical difference between 10 and 9.9 LPM, some regulators insist upon, is statistically insignificant and will affect method performance in no discernable manner.  Either way, this means your clearance samples will take a little over 2 hours to collect.  

In speaking with Mr. Tom Laubenthal, we learned at the time this method was developed it became known through the research involved that flow rates higher than 10 LPM could cause fibers to impact the MCE filters vertically and not horizontally to the filter surface.  This makes the sample analysis, counting, and identification, difficult and likely biased.  This is also the reason the method specifies a second MCE filter under the 0.45 µm sampling filter and the 5 µm diffuser. This additional filter is placed in this manner to attempt to create an even flow across the filter surface so that fibers impact the filter uniformly.  Since the fibers are lying flat on the filter this is the reason for turning the sample upright before interrupting the pump flow to ensure the fibers remain on the filter.

Sampling Cassette Configuration

In the AHERA TEM method, the clearance samples pass when the average concentration of the five samples inside the work area does not exceed 70 structures per square millimeter (s/mm²).  See AHERA at 763.90 (i) (3) for an optional clearance test based on the z-test which compares the outside and inside air samples.  This is rarely necessary.  But cases have occurred when contamination can exist in the air outside the work area that could cause a failure in the work area.

This TEM asbestos image is from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) "Asbestos Fibers and Other Elongate Mineral Particles: State of the Science and Roadmap for Research"

The NIOSH 7400 method for final clearance is also interesting when it comes to how the sample is taken and how many are based on the project.  For schools, when PCM is allowed, it's 5 samples inside the work area.  What's interesting is that the clearance is based on each sample and each sample must be less than or equal to a limit of quantitation (LOQ) for PCM of 0.01 fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc).  Well according to the NIOSH 7400 method how do you achieve clearance at that LOQ?  This concept of LOQ is not a concept understood by many that use the NIOSH 7400 method for all its purposes.  In the NIOSH 7400 method, this issue is addressed as follows in the section "Sampling", number 4 on page 4.  It utilizes the formula below to determine the amount of time needed to achieve the fiber density, E, for optimum filter loading.  So, the minimum density the method allows is 100 fibers per square millimeter (mm²).  The Ac is the collection area for a 25-mm cassette which is 385 mm².  The Q is the sampling flow rate in LPM, so let's say that is 16 (the maximum flow rate allowed by the method).  The L is the concentration of fibers in the air, we are looking to achieve clearance at 0.01 fibers/cubic centimeters (f/cc).  So if you plug these numbers into the formula you get a time of 240.6 minutes, which means the sample would have to run for a little over 4 hours at 16 liters per minute (total volume of air of 3,850 liters).

Realize that is running the sample at 16 LPM.  If your pump/flowmeter can only go to 15 LPM then you would have to run the sample for 256.7 minutes which is just short of 4 hours and 15 minutes.  The lower the flow rate, the longer time it will take to meet sample volume requirements. 

Airbox High-Performance Air Sampler

Many believe or have been misled to believe that PCM sampling is the same as TEM sampling in terms of sampling volume.  This is not the case.  A PCM sample volume meeting AHERA clearance requirements are not at 1200 liters.  To do so is outside of the NIOSH 7400 method requirements for this purpose.  In the NIOSH 7400 method, the issue regarding "relatively clean" environments" is addressed on page 4, number 4, note number 1 which states  "In relatively clean atmospheres, where targeted fiber concentrations are much less than 0.1 f/cc, use larger sample volumes (3000 to 10,000 liters) to achieve quantifiable loadings."  Even though the formula calculates that 3,850 liters of air should be collected, many people use note 1 to collect 3,000 liters of air for clearance.  Either way clearance samples should be collected using no less than 3,000 liters of air as the minimum allowed for the NIOSH 7400 method requirements and AHERA compliance. 

PCM image of fibers

The true problem is the NIOSH 7400 was never designed as a clearance tool, it was designed as a personal air sampling method.  NIOSH and the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) still view the method in that manner officially.  The other problem with PCM is that all fibers meeting method criteria are counted, not just asbestos fibers.  The AHERA TEM method is the only procedure that was designed as a final clearance air sampling method. Only asbestos fibers/structures are counted in the analysis meeting method criteria for size, and those much smaller than can be determined by the PCM.

 

EPA's Silver Book

Realize this is not something out of the ordinary the EPA's publication "Measuring Airborne Asbestos Following An Abatement Action" (otherwise known as the Silver Book) written in November 1985 on page 2-6 recommends the sample volume for the PCM analysis should be a minimum of 3,000 liters of air (though at the time of this publication it was describing the NIOSH P&CAM 239 PCM methodology).  In addition, in March 2015 the EIA published a revision to the EPA's 1985 document "Guidance for Controlling Asbestos-Containing Materials in Buildings"(EPA 560/5-85-024, known as the Purple Book).  This nationally peer-reviewed document was re-titled "Managing Asbestos in Buildings: A Guide for Owners and Managers."  Chapter 5 (on page 88) says the minimum sampling volume of 3,000 liters of air for samples taken to meet the NIOSH 7400 method requirements for LOQ sampling.  Mr. Dana Brown did a video regarding the LOQ issue and why NIOSH 7400 method is not the best choice for clearance, you can see it below. 

This doesn't count that we have called for the AHERA TEM method to be utilized for asbestos-containing floor tiles and mastic removals based on our previous blog post "Asbestos Floor Tile Debate", published in the August 2017 issue of Healthy Indoors Magazine, which found that the NIOSH 7400 method is not able to analyze the type of fibers (Grade 7-Shorts and Floats that are known to be less than 5 microns) found in these materials because of the known small fiber sizes generated by floor tile work.  Whether AHERA-based work or asbestos abatement where re-occupancy will occur, the surest way to make sure an area is ready to be given back to the public to be free of asbestos as practicable by current methods, and the fastest method for clearance would be the AHERA TEM method.  

NYSDOL ICR56 Definition of an Asbestos Project

Of course, those of you who work in New York State or New York City realize these requirements only apply to public and private K-12 schools.  So they don't apply to other buildings, or do they?  First, let's take the NYSDOL ICR56 Subpart 56-4, page 35 is the air sampling requirements.  56-4.6 "Test Methods" on page 36 says "the same NIOSH approved methodology for project air sampling and for analysis of the air samples shall be used at all phases of an asbestos project that require area air sampling and analysis, with the possible exception of clearance air sampling."  This means that the NIOSH 7400 method must be followed for all phases except clearance (Phase IIC of the asbestos project) this allows you to use either the NIOSH 7400 method or the AHERA TEM method instead for clearance.  So this means you have to follow the NIOSH 7400 method's LOQ requirements for all phases (Phase I B and Phase II A, B, & C) of the asbestos project.  In addition, the NYSDOL ICR56 regulation for clearance is less than 0.01 f/cc so that changes the formula again.  Let's use 0.009 f/cc for the L instead and still use 16 liters per minute, well that means the sample has to run for 267 minutes, almost 4 hours, and 30 minutes (a total volume of air of 4,278 liters).

The consummate leader cultivates the moral law, and strictly adheres to method and discipline; thus it is in his power to control success. ~ Sun Tzu

So why does everyone sample 1,200 liters of air for all samples?  On April 8, 2011, the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) Wadsworth Center issued frequently asked questions (FAQs) regarding asbestos/fibers analysis that were developed through the collaboration of the NYSDOH Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (ELAP) and the Bureau of Occupational Health and the NYSDOL.  In this FAQ is FAQ#13: What is the minimum sampling volume to be collected for air sampling associated with (a) post-abatement (clearance) air monitoring and (b) post-abatement area monitoring for PCM analysis?  The answer that was given was:  Within the upcoming revision to NYS Industrial Code Rule 56, minimum air sample volume requirements 

are being added for both background and clearance PCM air samples. The minimum volume will be 1,200 liters for all background and clearance PCM air samples collected.  Hopefully, you all see the problem here...the code rule has not been revised to include this requirement, and even if it did change this is a minimum volume of air and does not comply with the NIOSH 7400 method requirement.

Buy our Asbestos Air Sampling Chart here.
Read about our Asbestos Air Sampling Charts here.

Next up is the NYCDEP Title 15.  NYCDEP Title 15 was just updated on May 28th, 2022.  See our blog post "New York City's Asbestos Regulation Revised, Again!" for more information on the changes.  However, these changes did not make any significant changes to what we are discussing.  Under Subpart D, 1-37 (b) "Area air sampling equipment for PCM shall be utilized in accordance with the sampling procedures specified within the NIOSH 7400 Method modified for area sampling."  Again, it means you must follow the LOQ requirements in the NIOSH 7400 method, even though NYCDEP Title 15 does give you minimum sample volumes.  For clearance by NIOSH 7400 method, it's 1800 liters and for the AHERA TEM method, it's 1250 liters.  Remember these are minimums.  In addition, NYCDEP Title 15 limits the flow rate to a maximum of 15 liters per minute.  This means to achieve the LOQ requirement it would take 256.7 minutes which is just short of 4 hours and 15 minutes (total volume of air of 3,850 liters).  The NYCDEP Title 15 minimum volume would not meet the LOQ requirements in the NIOSH 7400 method.  We hope this post has helped to resolve those pesky questions regarding clearance and convince you that probably the best air sampling method for clearance is the AHERA TEM method! 

AHERA Bulk Sampling Rules and Other Requirements that Apply to Asbestos Surveys.

In 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) responded to a question by the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) regarding the minimum number of bulk samples required for suspect asbestos-containing miscellaneous materials (see our blog post dated 6/24/08 and rebooted 07/09/22). This clarification determined that the minimum number of samples is two (2) samples for each suspect homogeneous miscellaneous materials.  This clarification was determined based on a review of the EPA's Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) section 763.86 -Sampling. This section of the AHERA regulation is used by asbestos inspectors to determine the number of samples to take for each homogeneous area.  However, it is important to remember when sampling joint compound and add-on material (which are miscellaneous materials) that EPA's "Sampling Bulletin 093094", requires 3 samples per homogeneous area for joint compound and 3 samples per homogeneous area of add-on material.

The core of all asbestos inspections is the determination of the type of material (surfacing material, thermal system insulation, or miscellaneous material) and whether the materials are homogeneous. A homogeneous area is defined as a type of material that is uniform in color and texture (as per 763.83). Once the type of material is determined and the material is classified as a homogeneous area, then the number of samples for each area is determined.

If the suspect asbestos material is a surfacing material, the square feet of the homogeneous area is determined which provides the inspector with the minimum number of samples that shall be taken. If the homogeneous area is less than 1,000 square feet, the inspector shall take 3 samples. If the area is between 1,000 and 5,000 square feet, the inspector shall take 5 samples. When the area is over 5,000 square feet, the inspector shall take 7 samples. This is sometimes known in the industry as the 3-5-7 rule.  In addition, EPA also published "Asbestos in Buildings: Simplified Sampling Scheme for Friable Surfacing Materials," otherwise known as the "Pink Book."  This document not only describes the process for random sampling but also recommends that for surfacing materials the number of samples should be 9 per homogeneous area no matter the number of square feet.

Should the suspect asbestos material be classified as thermal system insulation then the inspector must determine if the material is a homogeneous area, a patch material, or a cement or plaster used on fittings (tees, elbows, or valves). Homogeneous areas of thermal system insulations shall require 3 samples, while each homogeneous area of patch material less than 6 linear feet or 6 square feet shall require only 1 sample. Cement or plaster used on fittings shall be sampled based on each insulated mechanical system (hot water, cold water, steam, chilled water, etc.) and shall require a minimum of 2 samples to  be taken.  In addition, EPA strongly recommends that at least three samples be taken in large homogeneous areas, even when the regulations do not require it.  This recommendation was published in EPA's 700/B-92/001 A Guide To Performing Reinspections Under AHERA.

Some general rules to remember when taking bulk samples is sampling should be taken in a randomly distributed manner, samples cannot be composited, and shall be submitted to laboratories accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) and, in New York State, approved New York State Department of Health Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (NYSDOH ELAP).  Asbestos Inspectors determine a homogeneous area contains asbestos when one of the required numbers of samples contains asbestos in the amount greater than 1%. Should all the required samples taken in a homogeneous area result in asbestos amounts less than or equal to 1%, then the area does not contain asbestos as per EPA. However, you must make sure your client is aware that under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulation 1926.1101 these materials are still regulated as asbestos and there are specific requirements under the OSHA regulation on handling these materials, see OSHA's standard interpretation letter dated November 24, 2003.  

As Asbestos Inspectors we should also remember that the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) has a Standard Practice for Comprehensive Asbestos Survey ASTM E2356-18.  This standard practice has also been approved by EPA as the method for performing asbestos surveys for the purposes of complying with the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) regulation.  That regulation requires a "thorough inspection" of the facility for asbestos and EPA expects an owner/operator to follow the steps described in Sections 1 through 5 and section 8 (the pre-construction survey) in the ASTM standard.  Being an Asbestos Inspector and performing an asbestos survey is not an easy task.  There are a lot of different documents that you have to have knowledge about to be able to perform your task and then on top of that you must have knowledge regarding where asbestos was used in building materials.

EPA Clarifies Miscellaneous Materials Sampling - RePublished

Over the past several months in the asbestos refresher classes, we have been talking about the clarification letter that the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) sent to all asbestos contractors and consultants back in November 2007. This letter detailed clarification from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) regulation to a question from Mr. Christopher Alonge of the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) regarding the minimum number of samples that should be taken for miscellaneous materials. According to this clarification (follow the link above for the PACNY letter and clarification), the minimum number of samples that should be taken of miscellaneous materials (i.e., floor tiles, roofing, caulk, ceiling tiles) is two. The original AHERA section covering sampling of miscellaneous materials indicates that the word used in this part of the regulation is "samples" indicating more than one.

Realize this is only an issue if you took one sample of let's say floor tiles, and based on the result (remember floor tiles are analyzed utilizing the nonfriable organically bound material method of analysis, requiring final negative results to be analyzed by Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM)) you said the floor tiles did not contain asbestos. The EPA clarification says that you needed another negative sample result to say the floor tiles did not contain asbestos. This issue obviously does not impact those of you who have been following our recommended procedure of taking at least three samples per homogeneous miscellaneous material. If you followed our recommendation you would have three negative results before declaring a miscellaneous material not asbestos-containing and would be in compliance with the clarification and the original regulation.

Over 600 Attend the 23rd Annual PACNY Environmental Conference - A Most Successful Conference!

The third day of the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York's (PACNY's) 23rd Annual Environmental Conference at Turning Stone Resort & Casino in Verona, New York, is typically called Regulatory Day because of the New York State Department of Labor attending and discussing the status of the programs they run.  This year's conference was the most attended conference with over 600 attendees, attending the three-day conference.  Ms. Deb Sanscrainte, of Aramsco, and the chairman of the conference, and Ms. Lisa Brown, of Summit Environmental, administrator of PACNY did what has become their routine process of getting the conference together (the most successful ever!), keeping everyone on point, focused on the conference, and the presentations.  Peter DeLucia and Greg Mance of AAC Contracting worked the audiovisual equipment as pros, even though this was there the first conference working the audiovisuals.  They have also made sure that they have gotten most of the presentations up on the PACNY website, click here.  Usually, the day after the vendor reception, the next morning starts out very slowly.  With vendors and attendees enjoying coffee, tea, and danishes in the vendor area.

Vendor Reception

The conference opened with a discussion of the hazards of lead-based paint by Mr. Kevin Hutton of Rochester Colonial Manufacturing.  Followed by Mr. Stephen Gheen, P.E. of Gheen Engineering speaking on New York State Department of Education (NYSED) rules regarding hazards of lead-based paint and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has different certifications and licenses for working in schools on lead-based paint.  Then Mr. Peter DeLucia of AAC Contracting spoke on the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations regarding lead exposure.  All three then took questions and answers from the audience regarding lead-based paint.  All three presentations can be found on PACNY's website.

Lead Panel Discussion - Stephen Gheen, Kevin Hutton, & Pete DeLucia

After a short break, the conference proceeded with the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) panel consisting of Dr. Eileen Franko, the Director; Mr. James Meacham Program Manager, Asbestos Control Bureau; Mr. Kirk Fisher, Program Manager, Licensing & Certification; and Mr. Ed Smith, Program Manager, Engineering Services Unit.  Questions and answers session was moderated by Mr. Tim Thomas of Tetra Tech Engineering.

Questions for the Lead Panel

Mr. Meacham filled us in that NYSDOL received another 3-year grant (runs through to 2021) to audit school's compliance with the EPA's Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA).  To date, NYSDOL has audited 115 schools throughout the state.  Dr. Franko re-emphasized as she does every year that Article 32 the mold law is a consumer protection law and there are limitations in the law.  Mr. Fisher informed us that the online notification systems are not working they want and because of staffing issues licenses and certifications are taking 30 days to 6 weeks to process.  Mr. Smith informed us that they will start working on the fast track variances, again.  Fast Track Variances are a pilot program for certain site-specific variances (SSV).  These are common variances that are issued on a regular basis.  They are planning 9 variances to be available at the start of the program - negative air shutdown, exhausting to an interior space, elevator door removal, fire door removal, crawlspace with dirt floor, intact component removal, buried cementitious (e.g., Transite) pipe, HEPA drilling spot removal, & air sampling at elevated exhaust duct locations.   These would be the guidelines for getting a fast track variance:

• A completed SH-752 form must be submitted. The form must include all the necessary information for obtaining a variance, including the hardship. NO information about the work plan should be included with the application.
• The SH-752 form must be submitted by a certified Project Designer working on behalf of the Petitioner.
• The variance fee of $350 must be included.
• In Section 9 of the SH-752 form, the Petitioner's Agent must write in the number of the FTV that is requested.
• The FTV will be issued as it is written. If some part of the FTV doesn't meet the project's needs, then a standard SSV is required.
• Other relief cannot be added to the FTV.
• No re-openings or amendments are allowed.
• Termination date extension requests will be handled on a case-by-case basis,
• These FTVs have no bearing on notification times.

During the questions and answers, several questions were asked related to the expiration date of training by NYSDOL versus the expiration date of AHERA.  With NYSDOL's view that this is only an issue for the initial class and that student as long as they comply with the annual training requirement related to the birth month, this is not an issue.  We also learned that NYSDOL has suspended the disruptive enforcement/reconciliation of records process they developed back in 2013 in response to a Thomas DiNapoli audit saying NYSDOL had no process to find those breaking the law for notification, surveys, etc.  According to NYSDOL, they do not have the staffing to handle this at this time.

Mr. Thomas introducing the NYSDOL panel Dr. Franko, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fisher, Mr. Meacham

The conference ended with lunch and Future Environment Designs was proud to be one of the sponsors of the conference.  Though it ended with NYSDOL indicating they are having staffing issues that are obviously impacting licensing, certification, and enforcement.  It was good to hear that NYSDOL is moving forward with the fast track variances.  As usual, we are already looking forward to next year's conference which will be February 26, 27, & 28, 2020.  See you there!

Proficiency Day Awards Architects & Engineers 3 Professional Development Hours - PACNY's 23rd Annual Environmental Conference - Day One

This year's Proficiency Day of the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York's (PACNY's) 23rd Annual Environmental Conference was approved to award three (3) professional development hours (PDH) for architects and engineers.  This was the first time the first day of the conference was recognized for this purpose.  The first day is typically short with two or three presenters allowing us to get the presentations to the Practicing Institute of Engineers for their review.  Attendees had to sign the attendance sheet and attend the presentations to receive the 3 PDHs.  Ms. Lisa Brown, Executive Secretary of PACNY sent out the certificates to those that attended the presentations.

Karen Cummings, MPH presenting on the Asbestos Safety Training Program

Starting the conference and the proficiency day was Ms. Karen Cummings, MPH presenting on the Asbestos Safety Training Program  "Overview and Updates".  Her presentation gave us insights into the asbestos training industry.  For a copy of her presentation visit our Dropbox folder on the Resources page of our website.  Ms. Cummings has been the Director of the New York State Department of Health's Asbestos Safety Training Program for just over a year and has been getting to know the program.  Her presentation gave asbestos training providers, an important opportunity to meet with her and her staff (Ms. Jessica Pierce, reviewer of training submittals, and Ms. Ida Berry, many of us have met her when she has audited our training courses, were both in attendance).  Her department in 2018 regulated 62 training providers that provided 26,251 training certificates.  Her presentation included several graphics providing us with a glimpse of the NYS asbestos training industry.  The high water mark for training was 2000 when approximately 3,838 training classes (refreshers and initials total) were held (in 2018, 3,401 training classes were held).  Ms. Cummings also informed us that the high water mark for training certificates was 2013 with 29,130 certificates issued.  We learned that the busy season for training providers runs from January to April with over a third of all classes being held in that time period.  Some other interesting points from Ms. Cumming's presentation: 15% of providers (training providers holding 100+ classes per year) taught over half the classes and issued two-thirds of the certificates; average exam scores by discipline were typically higher for refresher classes than initial classes (not surprising) except for the air sample technician discipline (surprising).

Angelo Garcia, III, CIEC, CEOP, presenting on Asbestos Inspections & NYCDEP Changes

The next presentation was a "Review of Asbestos Inspection Requirements" presented by Mr. Angelo Garcia, III, CIEC, CEOP, of Future Environment Designs with significant assistance from Mr. Peter Delucia and Mr. Greg Mance, both from AAC Contracting.  Mr. Delucia worked on the content and did the polling of the audience, while Mr. Mance assisted with the content and questions to the audience.   Our group effort paid off with a well-received presentation that provided the audience with interactivity and information on the various requirements for performing asbestos inspections.  This presentation can also be found in the Dropbox folder.

The final presentation was "New York City Title 15 Amendments" also presented by Mr. Angelo Garcia, III, CIEC, CEOP, and again this presentation can be found in the Dropbox folder.  This presentation was on the recent changes to the New York City Department of Environmental Protection's (NYC DEP's) Title 15 Asbestos Regulation (formerly known as Local Law 76).  These changes were made because of the arrest of 17 NYC asbestos investigators (see the above video on the press conference on the arrests) and the recommendations of the New York City Department of Investigations (NYC DOI).   These changes included additional requirements for NYC Asbestos Investigators and some changes to other parts of the asbestos regulations.  See our previous blog post on these new requirements.

TS Steakhouse Waitress making the "Gotham"

Overall it was a good start to the three-day conference.  Of course, what is a PACNY conference without snow?  It was snowing by the end of the presentations.  Though it did not seem to deter people from attending the President's Reception that evening or prevent us from getting the Gotham at the TS Steakhouse.  Stay tuned for Days Two & Three!

Related Articles:

• NYCDEP Asbestos Rule Amendment Goes Into Effect January 6, 2019
• Countdown to PACNY's 23rd Annual Environmental Conference Begins!

PACNY's Environmental Conference - Day 1 - And So It Begins!

This year's Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) 21st Annual Environmental Conference was definitely more technical then previous years.  The first day of the PACNY environmental conference started with the Proficiency Workshop for Trainers.  The Proficiency Workshop speakers consisted of Mr. Kevin Malone, Director of New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH); Mr. Don Pierce of New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL); and Mr. Kevin Hutton of Eastcoast Resources; and Mr. Ed Smith of NYSDOL Engineering Services Unit.

It was a modest Day One which started with networking during lunch. Mr. Malone started the presentations by providing us with an update on the statistics of the asbestos training program.  As we have come to expect the number of individuals attending asbestos courses shrinks every year.  The 2016 stats were 26,734 total certs issued broken done 21,642 refresher certs and 5,092 initial certs issued at 3,349 total classes held.  Those numbers are down from the 2015 stats that were 27,731 total certificates issued with 22,074 refresher certs and 5,657 initial certs issued at 3,436 training courses.

 

Mr. Kevin Malone of NYSDOH

The next presenter was Mr. Pierce discussing the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) auditing update.  For those of you who don't know, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been providing New York State (NYS) with a grant to perform audits of public and private school's AHERA required management plans.  The presentation included a discussion on the process of selecting schools to be audited (randomly selected and/or based upon cause {complaint}), how the data is collected and how the information is provided back to EPA.  In addition, Mr. Pierce discussed several issues the audits have found:

• EPA accepts electronic record-keeping, but hard copies of the original survey and asbestos management plan must be maintained at the Local Education Agency (LEA) office.
• The LEA must assign and train a designated person to oversee asbestos activities and ensure compliance with AHERA requirements.  The designated person must be trained but does not require them to be accredited and does not list a specific course or specific number of hours. It does list specific training topics which include - health effects; detection, identification, & assessment of asbestos; options for controlling asbestos; asbestos management plan topics; and relevant Federal, State, and local regulations for asbestos.  As a side note: Future Environment Designs (FEDTC) recommends designated persons take the asbestos inspector (3 day) and management planner (2 day) initial courses to meet the AHERA requirements.
• EPA allows two methods for new additions to existing buildings.  An architect or project engineer responsible for the construction of a new school building after October 12, 1988 or an accredited inspector to:
• to sign a statement that no asbestos containing building materials (ACBM) was specified as a building material in any construction document for the building, or
• to the best of his or her knowledge, no ACBM was used in any building material in the building.
• The LEA must submit a copy of this statement to the EPA Regional Office and shall include the statement in the management plan of the school.
• Deficiencies found by the audit included:
• Periodic surveillances were missing or weren't well documented
• Documentation of notifications not included or well documented
• ACBM removal not updated in the management plan
• Clearance air monitoring records not available per AHERA

Mr. Don Pierce of NYSDOL

After a short break, the Variance Writing Workshop with Mr. Hutton and Mr. Smith was up next.  This nearly two-hour presentation, got into the details of submitting and writing variances that Mr. Smith's Engineering Services Unit (ESU) reviews for approval, disapproval, or modification. Some of the points discussed:

Mr. Kevin Hutton of Eastcoast Resources

• According to the Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Re-authorization Act (ASHARA) an asbestos project designer is required on Public and Commercial Building asbestos projects (including residential buildings with 10 or more dwellings).
• When writing a variance consider your audience: DOL ESU; Abatement Contractor, Project Monitor; Asbestos Control Bureau (ACB) Inspector; Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Inspector (Compliance Safety Officer); and the Courts.
• Mr. Smith discussed that his department handles between 1400-1500 variances a year.  About 25% are then reopened, with another 5% reopened a second time and another 5% reopened a third time.  Mr. Smith also provided us with a list of Pet Peeves regarding variance applications which included:
• Failing to explicitly list what code sections you are requesting relief from
• Don't be lazy and simply submit someone else's variance and state you want to do what is in that variance.  Own your work, your client is paying you to apply for a variance on their behalf.
• "State-Wide" emergencies
• Try to limit your write-up to the hardship and proposed steps to be taken to work around the hardship.

Mr. Ed Smith of NYSDOL Engineering Services Unit

Variance workshop ended the first day of the Conference.  That evening we celebrated & networked at the President's Reception featuring Dan the Magic Man!

John of TS Steakhouse at Turning Stone Casino

Related articles

• Is It Really Here Again! The 21st Annual PACNY Environmental Conference Starts March 1, 2017.(futureenv.blogspot.com)

  ---

• NYSDOL Roundtable Highlight of PACNY Environmental Conference(futureenv.blogspot.com)

  ---

Another Great PACNY Conference - Part Two

As we discussed in our previous post, the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York's  (PACNY's) 20th Annual Environmental Conference was witty, intelligent, & had a magnetic personality.  Held at the Turning Stone Casino in Verona, New York for all three days was magnetic with excitement.  Wednesday night included the first annual PACNY Poker Tournament won by Mr. Chuck Kirch of Environmental Compliance Management Corp.  However, we digress, the Technical Session on Thursday continued after lunch with presentations from Dr. Bryan Bandli, PhD of RJ Lee Group on the "Quantification of Amphibole Asbestos in Loose Fill Vermiculite - A validation case study" written with an eye to New York State approving it for bulk vermiculite analysis.  Then Ed Cahill of EMSL presented on "Identifying and Dealing with Naturally Occurring Asbestos in Surveys".  Exhibit Hall break followed and the issuing of the wrist bands for the Vendor reception after the last presentation.

Deb Sanscrainte of Aramsco, Lisa Brown of Summit Environmental the PACNY Adinistrator, & Lynn Burlingham of Cornerstone Training Institute

The final presentation of the Thursday Technical Session was Mr. Tom Laubenthal of The Environmental Institute (A division of ATC Group Services).  Mr. Laubenthal's presentation was on the "American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) E2356-14 Standard Practice for Comprehensive Building Asbestos Surveys" which included a letter from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding the ASTM standard and its relevance in performing asbestos surveys for compliance with the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants' (NESHAP's) "thorough inspection" requirement.  The letter and the standard are extremely helpful information for performing a proper inspection in order to comply with the NESHAP regulations, which we will add to our asbestos inspector courses (a copy of the letter can be found at our Resource Page on our website, Click on the link to the Dropbox Folder.  The letter is in the EPA folder).  The day ended with the vendor reception in the Vendor Hall.  One of the interesting vendors was qub9 Environmental which is creating portable decontamination units from shipping containers.  Unfortunately, they didn't have a container at the conference to see how it would work.  We thank everyone who stopped by our booth to say hello and enter there card for the drawing on Friday.

There were 27 vendors in the vendor hall and the reception was a perfect way to end the Technical Session first day.

It was an honor for me to present on Friday with Mr. Bob Krell of IAQ Tech on the New York State (NYS) Mold Law Article 32.  A big Thank You! to everyone who encouraged me with my first presentation at PACNY.  Our presentation was very well-balanced between technical and overview, in my humble opinion.  The usual highlight of the last day of the conference is the panel from NYS Department of Labor (NYSDOL) led by Dr. Eileen Franko, Director of the Division of Safety and Health; which included Mr. James Meachum, P.E., manager of the Asbestos Control Program; Mr. Ed Smith, P.E. of the Engineering Services Unit; and "Mean" Mr. Kirk Fisher, manager of the License and Certification Unit.  Some of the highlights of the presentations by the panel included changes to Industrial Code Rule 56; additional inspections of school districts regarding compliance with the AHERA (Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act) regulation (Long Island School Districts can expect to see NYSDOL this spring); there will be a public comment period for rules and regulations under the new mold law (Article 32) and an expectation that mold supervisors may need to be present at mold projects; code officials must provide condemnation letters for demolition projects; emergency projects are handled on a case-by-case basis and the information should be forthright and accurate; and what consists of a contamination assessment.  Some of the changes to Code Rule 56 are removing the 1974 cut off date and adding responsibilities and teeth to the project monitor.  The conference ended with lunch and a final networking among attendees.

FED Team (Kimberly Granmoe, Sheryl Esposito, Veronica & Angelo Garcia III) at the Vendor Reception

Overall the conference was an excellent source of information, the presentations have helped to improve our classes, and was an excellent networking event in meeting regulators, suppliers, trainers, consultants and contractors.  If you missed the conference and you want to get some additional highlights, you can head over to Twitter and search for our tweets during the conference under the hastag #FEDTCPACNY.  We look forward to attending next year's event (scheduled for March 1-3, 2017, so save the dates) and hope to see you there!

Related articles

• Another Great Conference! PACNY Does It Again! - Part One(futureenv.blogspot.com)

  ---

• NYSDOL Roundtable Highlight of PACNY Environmental Conference(futureenv.blogspot.com)

  ---

• After 15 years, cleanup plan approved for contaminated town(host.madison.com)

  ---

Syosset School Closure Creates Discussion

Last week, most people on Long Island heard about Syosset School District closing school because asbestos planks (?) were discovered in the dumpster.  This occurred after a routine mainteance operation in the boiler room.  We have had an excellant discussion at the New York State Asbestos Group at Linked In (join the discussion at http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=2432277&trk=anet_ug_hm).  We have discussed several issues with the articles discussing what happened.  First many of us are trying to figure out what is an asbestos plank?  We have some speculations but we still have not figured it out.  Why didn't anyone know that the asbestos (planks?) were in the boiler room.  Schools are required under the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) regulations to perform triennial inspections of their facilities for asbestos containing building materials (ACBM) and every 6 months a periodic surveillance of the ACBM is required to ensure it is not disturbed.  Obviously, something went wrong.  In addition, some of the articles talk about medical testing of the workers to determine if they were exposed.  Well in our discussion we know of no such test.  The tests can be used as a baseline.  However, asbestos diseases can take at least 10 years to develop.  It is possible that an intense exposure could cause pleural plaques sooner, possibly as soon as a year, but this does not mean a disease will develop.  We thank Mr. Jack Springston, Mr. Donald Weekes, and Mr. Jim Morey for their comments on Linked In for helping flesh out this posting.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Air Quality Tests Show Syosset High School is Safe (Newsday.com)
• Weitz & Luxenberg Cautions Boilermakers on Job-Related Asbestos Exposure (eon.businesswire.com)
• ADAO Praises Senate for Passage of Sixth Annual Resolution That Establishes "National Asbestos Awareness Week" (eon.businesswire.com)