That Time of Year! Conferences, Posting Requirements, and OSHA Violations Increased!

It's that time of year again. We're between conferences.  February 15-16, 2024 was the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) Environmental Conference and the Environmental Information Association (EIA) National Conference & Exhibition is March 18 - 21, 2024.  This year we have the honor of speaking at both conferences.  We are speaking on the "Fallacy of PCM Clearance" in other words 5 reasons PCM should not be used for clearance.  We are speaking on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, at 1:00 PST if you happen to be in San Diego, California come down and say hello!  We're looking forward to arriving early and seeing the San Diego Wildlife Park and the Zoo, two different areas.  Our speech was very well received at the PACNY Environmental Conference.  If you would like to see the posts from the PACNY Conference visit PACNY's Linkedin page.

FEDTC's Booth at PACNY Conference

There are other things also happening at the beginning of the year.  For example, remember to post your Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 300A if you have 10 or more employees, see last month's post for more information.  The 300A, which is the summation of injuries and illnesses your company had in 2023, should be posted from February 1st, 2024 to April 30, 2024.  Also, remember certain employers must electronically submit the OSHA 300A information directly to OSHA by March 2, 2024.

300a Must Be Posted & For Some Must be Submitted

On January 16, 2024, the OSHA maximum penalties for serious and other-than-serious violations increased from $15,625 per violation to $16,131 per violation.  The maximum penalty for willful or repeated violations also increased from $156,259 per violation to $161,323 per violation.  These increases happen every January 15th.  This year's increase was delayed because January 15th was a Federal holiday (Martin Luther King Day).

Looking Forward to EIA's Conference in San Diego & Visiting the Wildlife Park

Winter Storm Impacts PACNY Conference, Part One.

Turning Stone Lodge before the Storm

This year was the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) 22nd Annual Environmental Conference.  This year's conference was overshadowed by Winter Storm Riley which turned into a Nor'easter and hit Turning Stone Casino between Thursday night & Friday Morning, March 1-2, 2018 with about 7 inches of snow.  Which put a dampener on attendance with only a few Long Islanders making the conference this year.  However, the Vendor Display/Exhibit Hall seemed to have the usual amount of vendors, maybe we even had more than the usual.  This year's schedule was a little different from past years in that presenters were given a little more time for their presentations and more time was given between presentations to spend in the Vendor Display/Exhibit Hall.  As usual the PACNY Board did an excellent job of putting everything together, which special accolades to Ms. Deborah Sanscrainte of Aramsco, the conference chairperson and Ms. Lisa Brown of Summit Environmental, Administrator.

Mr. Meacham discussing the Enforcement Process

The first day, known as Proficiency Workshop day consisted of two presentations the first was Mr. James Meacham, PE, program manager for New York State Department of Labor' (NYSDOL)'s Asbestos Control Bureau (ACB), discussing "Solving the Mysteries of the Asbestos Control Bureau".  Mr. Meacham's presentation went through the process of an inspection, the issuance of a Notice of Violation (NOV), and then continued with the process of resolving the NOV.  His presentation did an excellent job of bringing transparency to the enforcement process.  A key point of Mr. Meacham's presentation, was the response from the contractor (violator) issued the NOV.  Contractors have two opportunities to address a violation, onsite during the inspection and the second time, is when responding to the written violation.  Onsite, if their is no dispute contractors should stop work, fix the discrepancy(ies) and document the actions in the logbook.  If there is a discrepancy, contractors should work towards complying with what can be done, document your position on the deficiency, and document your corrective actions in the logbook.  When a violator receives a violation,  the contractor should review the project with their staff, gather the compliance documentation, and submit a response to the NOV.  This is important part of the process and could go a long way in mitigating violations.

Mr. Meacham discussing the Violation Review Process

The second presenter was Mr. Kevin Hutton, of Cornerstone Training Institute, discussing "Complexities of NYSDOL, OSHA, and EPA".  Mr. Hutton provided a handout called a "Guide to NYS CR56-11.1 In-Plant Operations", this guide provided basic information regarding how Industrial Code Rule 56 handles the requirements for in-plant operations and what Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 1926.1101 work practices would apply under in-plant operations.  In addition, Mr. Hutton's presentation, discussed NYSDOL Engineering Service Unit's addition of full-time project monitoring to many variance applications.  The additions have included wording of what the responsibilities of the project monitor are for these variances (since Industrial Code Rule 56, itself, does not provide much information regarding that).  Which brings up the question whether project monitors realize the scope of their responsibilities on such projects.  We suspect not, since we've already seen some project monitors being issued violations for not following the variance requirements.

Mr. Hutton discussing full-time Project Monitoring added to Variances

That ended the first day of presentations, with later that evening the PACNY President's (Joseph Cantone, of Colden Corporation) reception was held, where many of us gathered and discussed concerns regarding the pending storm.  Stay tuned for Part Two the Technical Sessions and the Vendor Reception!

Our waitress serving "The Gotham" at the TS Steakhouse

Related articles

• Nor'easter hits East Coast, grounds flights and halts trains(bostonherald.com)

  ---

• Bombogenesis turns winter storm Riley into a monster as it batters US coast(telegraph.co.uk)

  ---

• PACNY's Environmental Conference - The NYSDOL Round Table - Day Three and So It Ends!(futureenv.blogspot.com)

  ---

• PACNY's Environmental Conference - Day 1 - And So It Begins!(futureenv.blogspot.com)

  ---

OSHA Violations Indicate Enforcement of Asbestos Standard

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently cited two hospital construction sites for violations related to the asbestos construction standard. The closest site in Rochester, New York involved Gordon-Smith Contracting that was cited for 3 alleged willful and 7 serious violations of the asbestos and respiratory standards and faces a total of $99,925 in proposed fines.

Gordon-Smith employees were required to remove ceiling tiles and other materials that were embedded in or adjacent to asbestos containing fireproofing without proper safeguards. The willful citations, accounting for $87,000, were for not using wet methods or wetting agents to control asbestos exposures, employees not supplied with approved respirators,and the workers had not been trained in asbestos removal. The seven serious citations were issued to Gordon-Smith for not ensuring each employee wore the appropriate respiratory, hand, and head protection; not immediately mending or replacing ripped or torn protective work suits; no written respirator program, and not informing employees of the results of asbestos monitoring.

The second hospital site was in Mescalero, New Mexico involving Maloy Construction, a general construction company, and Deerfield Corp., a plumbing and construction company. OSHA cited Maloy Construction with one alleged willful and 4 alleged serious violations totalling $75,600 in proposed fines. The willful violation was for failing to assure that Deerfield, the subcontractor, was in compliance with OSHA's asbestos standard. The serious violations include failing to inform other employees in the area of the asbestos work, assessing the exposure, and designating and containing the asbestos materials.

OSHA cited Deerfield with 3 alleged willful and nine alleged serious violations accounting for $81,900 in proposed fines. The willful violations were failing to regulate the asbestos area, assess the initial exposure, and provide protective equipment. The serious violations included failing to launder contaminated clothing, train employees on asbestos removal, label containers for waste, and provide a competent person to properly supervise the work area.

These citations show what OSHA focuses on when coming to an asbestos abatement project. Asbestos contractors and consultants should make sure they have a written respiratory protection program with an appropriately trained administrator; an initial exposure assessment; and a means for ensuring employees are informed of the asbestos monitoring results. While general contractors or construction managers must ensure that their subcontractors are in compliance with the OSHA asbestos standard.

Parkway Village, Queens, NY is hit with $117,000 OSHA fine.

Parkway Village Equities Corp., a residential complex, located at 81-26 150th Street, Queens, NYwas cited by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for nine violations of health and safety standards following an inspection begun November 1, 2006 in response to a complaint.

OSHA found that Parkway employees entered into crawlspaces known to contain asbestos or presumed ACM. OSHA found that Parkway did not perform personal air monitoring to determine the employee's exposure leve when entering the crawl space. Parkway also did not inform the workers of the presence, location, and quantities of asbestos; did not institute a training program; and did not label the materials as asbestos containing materials. Fo the above violations, OSHA issued Parkway four willful citations carrying a proposed fine of $112,000.

In addition, OSHA also found five serious violations and fined Parkway an additional $5,000 for failing to provide appropriate hand, eye, and face protection; respirator safety deficiencies; a lack of quick-drenching eyewashes; the absence of a hazard communication program; and failing to properly label and dispose of asbestos-contaminated material.

Could this happen to you?

Aapex Environmental Services of Liverpool, New York was hit with a $57,000 fine from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Aapex was hit with this fine based on an inspection begun on November 13, 2006 which found that Aapex was exposing employees to asbestos during an asbestos removal project at the Agway Building in Dewitt, New York. The OSHA inspection found the following:

• required monitoring of employees' exposure to asbestos was not conducted on several occasions even though monitoring records alleged that it had been done (OSHA issued a willful citation with a proposed fine of $42,000).
• short term (excursion limit) sampling was not done.
• the contractor did not keep accurate exposure monitoring records.
• employees were not notified of sampling results.
• employees were not trained to properly establish an asbestos containment system.
• contractor did not prevent asbestos contaminated water from leaking from an enclosed work area.

For the last five violations, OSHA issued serious citations totaling $15,000. The willful citation is issued when OSHA determines that the employer commits a violation with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for employee safety and health. A serious violation is issued when OSHA determines death or serious physical harm is likely to result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

Preventing these types of violations requires the development and adherence to a personal air sampling plan. The air sampling plan should properly document all segments of personal air sampling. The plan should include the number of people you will sample, calibration of equipment, documentation of who is sampled and the work tasks performed, documentation of the laboraotry accreditations, procedures for collecting samples and ensuring the samples are individually numbered, ensuring the chain of custody is completed correctly, and maintaining these records for 30 years from date of creation. The information from this plan then assists with documenting the proper respiratory protection used by the workers and assists with the respiratory protection plan and the exposure assessment for the project and future projects.