Today, April 28, marks the anniversary of the day NIOSH first opened its doors in 1971, following the passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. Congress created NIOSH — the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health — to "assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working conditions."

Types of Respirators

For more than half a century, NIOSH has stood as a cornerstone of worker protection.  Its research has helped shape critical safety standards for asbestos, silica, lead, heat stress, mental health, and countless other hazards across industries.  From construction sites to healthcare settings, from manufacturing floors to environmental consulting offices, NIOSH’s work has been integral to safeguarding the health and lives of American workers.

But this year’s celebration is bittersweet — and frankly, alarming.

In a stunning and deeply concerning move, mass layoffs have gutted key NIOSH research and education programs.  Overnight, the agency’s capacity to investigate workplace hazards, develop scientific guidelines, and educate the next generation of safety professionals has been drastically reduced.

The consequences of this cannot be overstated.  Without NIOSH’s leadership:

• Standards for silica, a deadly airborne hazard linked to silicosis and lung cancer, are now at risk of stagnating.

• Protections against lead exposure, which affects the brain and nervous system, could weaken.

• Efforts to address heat-related illness, a growing crisis as climate change intensifies, are left vulnerable.

• Momentum around mental health in the workplace, a long-ignored pillar of occupational safety, may lose critical support just when it's finally gaining ground.

Occupational safety and health cannot afford to stand still — and it certainly cannot afford to move backward.  Every advance we’ve made — every reduced injury rate, every improved standard, every saved life — was built on a foundation of science, research, and proactive leadership.  Without a strong, fully functioning NIOSH, that foundation starts to crack.

Thankfully, the fight to #SaveNIOSH is growing stronger by the day.

American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) are actively advocating through letters, partnerships, and a public #SaveNIOSH campaign.  Workers, safety professionals, and the general public are encouraged to use the Voter Voice system to contact legislators, share their support on social media, and help safeguard worker protections that are critical to U.S. health, safety, and economic well-being.

A coalition of 460 organizations is urging Congress to stop the planned layoffs at NIOSH, warning that cutting more than 870 employees would cripple efforts to protect the health and safety of 164 million U.S. workers.  These cuts — part of a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) restructuring set to take effect by June 30 — would devastate critical programs like the National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory,  providing info on Firefighter research, services, and health and safety information, and Coal Workers' Health Surveillance Program and other such initiatives.

NYC FireFighter

The coalition emphasizes that NIOSH provides the nation’s only dedicated federal research on preventing workplace injuries and illnesses — losses that cost the U.S. economy more than $250 billion annually.

Lawmakers, including Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA), are demanding hearings and greater transparency, arguing that gutting NIOSH would not only endanger workers but also undermine decades of public health progress and weaken evidence-based solutions that have saved countless lives.

Protecting NIOSH is not just about preserving an institution — it's about maintaining a safer, healthier workforce and a stronger economy. It’s about continuing the work that has made American workplaces among the safest in the world.

As we mark this important milestone, let’s honor NIOSH’s legacy — not just with words, but with action.  Speak up.  Get involved.  Fight for the future of occupational health and safety.

Because workers deserve better.

The Professional Abatement Contractors of New York's (PACNY's) 28th Annual Environmental Conference started with an action-packed first day (February 28th, 2025) at Turning Stone Casino in Verona, New York, setting the stage for a dynamic exchange of ideas, regulatory updates, and thought leadership. Attendees were treated to a robust lineup of expert speakers covering various critical topics, from asbestos and lead regulations to safety leadership and mental health in the workplace.

Frank Ehrenfeld (at the podium) and Tom Laubenthal speaking on the EPA Lead Rule

The morning session began with side-by-side presentations with Frank Ehrenfield, from Eurofins, and Tom Laubenthal, from TGL Consulting, Inc., delivering an essential update on "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Lead Rule Update from November 2024" in the Mohawk room.  Their presentation discussed the EPA's November 2024, published new Lead-Based Paint rules regarding various definitions, dust levels for risk determination, and “clearance” values (which are now called “action levels”).  Once again, these values will be lowered to further lower risks to children in pre-1978 target housing and child-occupied facilities.  The new dust values are very low to “at reporting limits” (similar to a detection limit for simplicity), and the presentation also described in terms of the difficulties that may exist for some National Lead Laboratory Accreditation Program (NLLAP)-accredited labs, in meeting reporting limits. All stakeholders must read these regulations to understand the details and various applicability dates (see Lead and Environmental Hazards Association (LEHA) fact sheet).  While in the Cayuga room, Mary Parish, Principal Worker's Compensation Examiner in the office of the Advocate for Business, presented “Protecting Yourself and Your Team,” shifting the focus to workers' compensation and the legal framework protecting both employers and workers.  A key point from her talk was a reminder to make sure you are a certificate holder on your subcontractor's workmen's compensation insurance.

Mary Parish speaking about NYS Workmen's Compensation

The next speakers in the Mohawk Room, David Duford, from CanAm Environmental Safety, Inc., and Ryan Carney, from Wegmans Food Markets, took the stage to present "Managing Exposure Decisions and Improving Exposure Judgements," diving into practical strategies for assessing and managing workplace hazards. Their discussion highlighted the importance of accurate exposure judgments in protecting workers from hazardous environments utilizing Bayesian Statistics. Meanwhile, in the Cayuga Room, Anthony DiTucci, of Livingston Associates, continued the theme of leadership with "Safety Leadership in Project Management." He delivered a compelling case for strong safety leadership as a cornerstone of effective project management, underscoring the need for safety-first cultures in construction and abatement projects.

Anthony DiTucci in the Cayuga room, Ryan Carney (at the Podium), and Dr. David Duford in the Mohawk room

After a small break in the Vendor Exhibition Hall, Dr. Joe Spurgeon, CIH, followed in the Mohawk room with a targeted presentation, “Write a Mold Assessment Report, Not a Data Report,” emphasizing the need for clear, actionable mold assessment reports. Spurgeon challenged attendees to move beyond merely collecting data and focus on producing comprehensive reports that drive decision-making.  Zooming into the Cayuga Room, Dr. Barry Castleman delivered a hard-hitting presentation on the "Saranac Laboratory Coverups for the Asbestos Industry," revealing the historical injustices faced by asbestos victims and how industry efforts were made to downplay the dangers of asbestos exposure.

Joe Spurgeon in the Mohawk room and Barry Castleman zooming in the Cayuga room,

Closing out the morning session in Mohawk room was Steven Smigielski and Sean Fitzgerald, of Encorus Group, who addressed another timely issue in their talk, "Impact of New York State's Building and Energy Code Revisions on Hazardous Material Abatement." They examined how these revisions are shaping hazardous materials management and abatement strategies, giving attendees practical insights into compliance and operational adjustments.  Closing the morning session in the Cayuga Room, Megan Beaushemin, of New York State Department of Labor, provided a vital introduction to "NYS Code Rule 59 & 60," offering a comprehensive overview of these key regulations and how they impact worker safety practices and workers' compensation insurance.

Steven Smigielski and Sean Fitzgerald in the Mohawk room, and Megan Beauchemin in the Cayuga room

After a networking lunch, the highlight of the day was undoubtedly the Asbestos Inspections Panel moderated by Angelo Garcia, III, of Future Environment Designs, Inc. This distinguished panel, titled "Asbestos Inspections: EPA, OSHA, NYSDOL, NYCDEP & ASTM. Different Requirements and Goals," brought together leading experts to explore the varying requirements and objectives in asbestos inspections. Tom Laubenthal, of TGL Consulting, Inc., led the discussion with a focus on the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) E2356 standard, offering a technical perspective. Chris Alonge, of the Dormitory Authority of New York (DASNY), presented the building owner's perspective, diving into the importance of thorough inspections to protect occupants and workers. Mr. Alonge shared some of the resources DASNY (click here for the DASNY resource page) provides to environmental consultants and contractors working for DASNY. Marc Rutstein, of Environmental Consulting and Management Services, Inc., shared his insights as a consultant, highlighting the regulatory challenges in NYCDEP and NYSDOL compliance. Finally, Matthew Brooks, of International Asbestos Removal, Inc., wrapped up with a contractor’s view, emphasizing the real-world application and costs of when inspectors don't follow these standards on job sites. The panel then had a discussion regarding the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) Varga Letter regarding materials containing one percent or less of asbestos and how those materials should be handled.

Front Row - Tom Laubenthal & Matthew Brooks Back Row - Chris Alonge, Marc Rutstein, & Angelo Garcia, III

The afternoon continued with Peter DeLucia, of Riedman Companies, and Mark Wiktorski, of Wonder Windows Showers and Baths, tackling an important but often overlooked topic—mental health. Their presentation, “Breaking the Stigma: Mental Health as a Critical Component of Workplace Safety,” emphasized how breaking the stigma attached to mental health issues is important to maintaining a safe, productive work environment.  An important website that promotes mental wellbeing in the workplace from the Construction Industry Alliance for Suicide Prevention.

Mark Wiktorski & Peter Delucia (at the Podium)

Kevin Hutton, of EAST Centers of NY, rounded out the day with a much-anticipated session on "2024 TOP DOL Violations." His presentation gave attendees a close look at the year’s top safety violations, offering key takeaways for improving compliance and reducing risks in the workplace.

Kevin Hutton

The day concluded with a lively happy hour in the exhibition hall, where a record 31 exhibitors were on hand, showcasing the latest products and services in the industry. It was a fitting end to a day full of rich learning and networking opportunities, giving attendees a chance to connect and unwind after a full day of presentations.

As the conference continues (Day 2 was Friday, February 28, 2025; look out for Part Two), the knowledge and insights shared on day one have already set a high bar for the discussions to come. Whether you're looking to stay ahead of regulatory changes or enhance your leadership in safety practices, PACNY's Environmental Conference is the place to be.

Always thankful for Sheryl Esposito's (and Matt Desch) presence managing the booth!

In the construction world, one of the most pressing concerns for worker safety is the potential asbestos exposure.  This hazardous material, once commonly used in various building materials for its fire-resistant and other properties, has been linked to serious health risks, including lung cancer, asbestosis, and mesothelioma.  Asbestos exposure remains a significant threat, especially in older buildings undergoing renovation or demolition.  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have set strict guidelines to minimize this danger, but compliance hinges on one key factor: thorough and accurate asbestos inspections.

To explore the intricacies of asbestos inspections, Angelo Garcia, III of Future Environment Designs, Inc., will be moderating a distinguished panel at PACNY's 2025 Environmental Conference on Thursday, February 27, 2025. The panel will dive deep into the importance and differences in asbestos inspections from various perspectives. This includes Tom Laubenthal of TGL Consulting and ASTM E2356 Chairman, who will discuss the ASTM asbestos inspection standard, Chris Alonge now with Dormitory Authority of the State of New York (DASNY) who will provide insights from an owner's perspective, Marc Rutstein from Environmental Consulting & Management Services, who will offer a consultant's viewpoint and highlight the differences between NYCDEP and NYSDOL inspections, and Matt Brooks from International Asbestos Removal (IAR), who will speak on the contractor’s perspective.

Asbestos pipe insulation with fitting insulation

Asbestos inspections play a vital role in identifying materials that may contain asbestos before they are disturbed. This proactive approach not only prevents worker exposure but also ensures that proper abatement procedures are followed. A well-executed asbestos inspection is the first line of defense against the release of airborne asbestos fibers, which can be deadly when inhaled.

Understanding the Importance of Homogeneous Areas

At the heart of every asbestos inspection is the process of determining whether a material is classified as a surfacing material, thermal system insulation, or miscellaneous material.  Once the material type is identified, the inspector must establish whether the materials are homogeneous.  According to the EPA’s Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA), a homogeneous area is defined as one where the material is uniform in color and texture.  

Floor tiles and numerous homogeneous areas

Sampling Procedures: The Foundation of a Successful Inspection

For surfacing materials, the size of the homogeneous area directly influences the number of samples needed. Under the EPA’s guidelines, inspectors follow the “3-5-7 rule.” This means that three samples are required for areas smaller than 1,000 square feet, five samples for areas between 1,000 and 5,000 square feet, and seven samples for areas larger than 5,000 square feet. Additionally, the EPA’s “Pink Book,” formally known as Asbestos in Buildings: Simplified Sampling Scheme for Friable Surfacing Materials, recommends taking nine samples per homogeneous area, regardless of the square footage, for increased accuracy.

Asbestos Fireproofing

For thermal system insulation, the process differs slightly. Inspectors must determine if the material is homogeneous, patch material, or material used on fittings like elbows and valves. Homogeneous areas of thermal system insulation require three samples, while patch materials smaller than six linear or square feet only need one sample (the only time one sample is allowed). Cement or plaster used on fittings must be sampled based on the specific mechanical system in question, and a minimum of two samples is required for each system. However, the EPA in A Guide to Performing Reinspections Under AHERA strongly advises taking at least three samples in larger homogeneous areas, even if regulations don't mandate it.

For materials such as joint compound and add-on materials, however, the EPA’s “Asbestos Sampling Bulletin dated September 30, 1994” specifies that three samples are required for each material. These distinctions are critical for asbestos inspectors to ensure compliance and accuracy in their assessments (see our original blog post on asbestos surveys).

In May 2007, the EPA provided important clarification on sampling requirements.  Mr. Chris Alonge, at the time, was working for New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) and he requested clarification regarding the number of samples that should be taken for each suspect asbestos-containing homogeneous miscellaneous material.  The clarification was distributed by the Professional Abatement Contractors of New York (PACNY) in November 2007. According to this clarification, the minimum number of samples that should be taken of miscellaneous materials (i.e., floor tiles, roofing, caulk, ceiling tiles) is two (see our original blog post on this issue).

Respirator and protective clothing should be worn by the inspector during sampling

Following proper sampling protocols is crucial because asbestos is considered present if any one of the samples from a homogeneous area contains more than 1% asbestos. Conversely, if all samples return asbestos concentrations at or below 1%, the area is deemed asbestos-free—though it’s important to remember that materials containing 1% or less of asbestos are still regulated under OSHA’s asbestos standard (see the Varga letter).

The Legal and Health Implications of Incomplete Inspections

Inadequate or incorrect asbestos inspections can have severe consequences.  From a legal standpoint, failing to adhere to EPA and OSHA regulations can result in hefty fines and penalties.  Remember neither regulation has a specific end date for buildings not containing asbestos (see our post Is There an Appropriate End Date for Asbestos Use?).  More importantly, from a health perspective, improperly identifying or failing to identify asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) can expose construction workers to dangerous fibers, leading to long-term health problems.  Given that asbestos-related diseases may take decades to develop, the human cost of negligent inspections can be devastating.

The closet door with asbestos core was cut without any precautions costing over $30,000 to clean up the contamination.

Mr. Tom Laubenthal wrote EPA in November 2014 regarding The Standard Practice for Comprehensive Asbestos Surveys (ASTM E2356-18) Pre-Construction Survey (section 8 of the standard) meeting the requirement under National Emissions Standards of Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) of a thorough inspection.  EPA responded that they would expect an owner/operator to follow the steps in Sections 1 through 5 and Section 8 to comply with the NESHAPS regulation. This standard provides a framework for conducting thorough asbestos inspections, particularly in pre-construction scenarios, ensuring that no asbestos-containing material goes unnoticed.

Conclusion: The Essential Role of Inspections

Asbestos inspections are the cornerstone of any effort to protect workers from exposure to this hazardous material. By adhering to the EPA’s and OSHA’s strict sampling and inspection guidelines, inspectors can identify asbestos-containing materials before they are disturbed, reducing the risk of airborne fibers and subsequent health issues. Given the serious implications of asbestos exposure, thorough inspections are not just a regulatory requirement—they are a moral imperative in safeguarding the health and well-being of workers.

Asbestos Floor Tiles disturbed before identification led to a clean-up costing over $250,000

In the end, the responsibility lies with all stakeholders—building owners, contractors, and asbestos inspectors alike—to ensure that every construction or renovation project is free from asbestos hazards. As inspectors, staying current on regulations, maintaining rigorous sampling standards, and educating clients on the risks and regulations associated with asbestos are critical components in this ongoing battle against a deadly substance.

The asbestos inspection panel promises to be an invaluable session for professionals across the construction, consulting, and regulatory industries. With these diverse viewpoints, we aim to shed light on the critical role inspections play in protecting workers and ensuring compliance with ever-evolving asbestos regulations.  Asbestos inspections are not just about checking boxes—they are about saving lives.

As we enter 2025, it’s time to once again 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 form from February 1 to April 30, 2025.  This annual posting ensures transparency in workplace injury and illness data for the previous year.  In addition, many employers must electronically submit the OSHA 300A data by March 2, 2025.

OSHA 300A Form

The OSHA 300A form is a summary of the injury and illness information that was recorded in the OSHA 300 log throughout the past year (2024). It plays a key role in workplace safety, helping employers analyze and reduce hazards in their operations. It’s important to remember that COVID-19 is considered a recordable and reportable illness if it is confirmed, work-related, and results in days away from work. In these cases, it would be logged as a respiratory illness. However, if an employee requests that their name not appear on the log for privacy reasons, employers must comply as per 29 CFR 1904.29(b)(7)(vi) and treat it as a privacy case.

OSHA 300 must be filled out as the year progresses

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.  Remember, covered employers are required to maintain accurate records of serious occupational injuries and illnesses and tally the totals at the end of each year for the OSHA 300A form. The data should be used by employers to evaluate workplace safety and make improvements to reduce risks.  Keep in mind that the OSHA 300A form must be posted until April 30, 2024, and retained for five years.  During this time, employers are also required to update the log as new information becomes available.

Electronic Submissions – March 2, 2025, Deadline

OSHA’s final rule, which took effect on January 1, 2017, requires certain employers to submit injury and illness data electronically.  OSHA has provided a secure website for submitting this data. If you are required to submit your OSHA 300A information, be aware that there’s a login procedure that took effect in October 2022.  Hopefully, you've handled this process previously.  The OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA) helps to determine if your establishment is required to electronically submit 300A and 300/301 data through the ITA.  You can watch a tutorial video on how to use the ITA to submit your data.  Submissions must be completed by March 2, 2025, and OSHA began collecting data starting January 2, 2025.

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

1. 250 or more employees and is not in an industry listed in the exempt industries list in Appendix A to Subpart B of OSHA’s recordkeeping regulation of 29 CFR Part 1904, or 
2. 20-249 employees and is in an industry listed in Appendix A to Subpart E of 29 CFR Part 1904.

YOU MUST also submit 300/301 data if your establishment(s) has 100 or more employees and is in an industry listed in Appendix B to Subpart E of 29 CFR Part 1904.  What does this mean for our industry?  If you are in the industry of Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services you are exempt.  However, for Construction, Remediation, or Waste Management Services that meet the size requirements (20 to 249 employees), you are required to submit your OSHA 300A information electronically.

Ensure you’re compliant with OSHA’s posting and reporting requirements; if you need any assistance or clarification, don’t hesitate to reach out. We’re here to help!

Construction Site

2025 OSHA Penalty Updates What You Need to Know

In 2025, OSHA updated the penalty structure as required by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015. Each year, OSHA adjusts civil penalty amounts to account for inflation, ensuring penalties maintain their deterrent effect and reflect current economic conditions. This year is no different, with the penalty adjustments now updated for 2025 based on the latest inflation data.

Purpose of the Update

The information contained in this update supplements OSHA’s existing penalties and debt collection guidelines, which can be found in Chapter 6 of the Field Operations Manual (FOM). The updated tables provided in this memorandum reflect the penalty amounts for the calendar year 2025, corresponding to adjusted figures in OSHA Information Systems (OIS). These annual adjustments allow employers and safety professionals to access the most current penalty information and ensure compliance with OSHA regulations.

Background

This annual update follows the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, which was enacted on November 2, 2015. This act builds upon the original Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 and the 1996 Debt Collection Improvement Act to strengthen the impact of civil monetary penalties. The Inflation Adjustment Act requires two key actions by regulatory agencies:

1. Perform a "catch-up" adjustment of civil penalties (completed through an interim final rule in 2016), and
2. Implement subsequent annual adjustments for inflation by January 15 of each year.

For 2025, the cost-of-living adjustment multiplier is 1.02598, based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers from October 2024. This multiplier is applied to the previous year's penalty amounts and rounded to the nearest dollar. The adjustment ensures that both minimum and maximum penalties set forth under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) and the Field Operations Manual (FOM) remain consistent with inflation.

Minimum and Maximum Penalty Amounts for 2025

To give you a clearer picture, Table 1 outlines the updated penalty amounts for various types of violations:

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 beyond the abatement date (up to 30 days max)

Note: For repeated other-than-serious violations, the penalty starts at $472 for the first repeat offense, increasing to $1,182 for the second and $2,364 for a third repetition.

Gravity-Based Penalty (GBP) System

The Gravity-Based Penalty (GBP) is used to determine the severity of violations and assess penalties accordingly. The gravity of a violation is categorized into high, moderate, or low based on the risk it presents:

• High Gravity: $16,550 penalty
• Moderate Gravity: Penalties range from $9,457 to $14,187
• Low Gravity: $7,093 penalty

For serious violations, the GBP is determined by a combination of severity and probability, as shown in Table 2:

Severity	Probability	GBP	Gravity	OIS/GRAVITY Code
High	Greater	$16,550	High	10
Medium	Greater	$14,187	Moderate	5
Low	Greater	$11,823	Moderate	5
High	Lesser	$11,823	Moderate	5
Medium	Lesser	$9,457	Moderate	5
Low	Lesser	$7,093	Low	1

For other-than-serious violations, only minimal severity is assigned. However, if the Area Director determines a higher penalty is necessary for deterrence, the maximum penalty of $16,550 may be applied.

Serious Willful Penalty Reductions

When calculating penalties for serious willful violations, employers may be eligible for penalty reductions based on the size of their workforce. The reductions are shown in Table 3 below:

Number of Employees	Percent Reduction
10 or fewer	80%
11-20	60%
21-30	50%
31-40	40%
41-50	30%
51-100	20%
101-250	10%
251 or more	0%

These reductions are applied after considering other factors such as the company’s history of violations and overall safety performance.

Final Thoughts

As OSHA updates penalties each year to keep pace with inflation, employers must remain informed and compliant. These adjustments not only ensure that penalties maintain their deterrent effect but also encourage safer workplace practices. Staying on top of OSHA’s evolving regulations and penalty structures is essential for companies operating in high-risk industries.

If you have questions about these updates or need assistance navigating OSHA’s penalty framework, feel free to reach out for further guidance.

As we mark the 36th anniversary of Future Environment Designs, Inc., we find ourselves reflecting on the incredible journey that brought us here.  It’s been a ride filled with countless milestones, hard-earned lessons, and the unrelenting pursuit of excellence.  From our humble beginnings in 1988 to where we stand today, one thing has remained constant: our commitment to protecting your employee's health and safety while delivering top-notch occupational safety and health training and indoor air quality consulting services.

Keeping Employees Safe is part of our business and our motto!

Building a Legacy Through Expertise and Dedication

In the beginning, like most small businesses, we faced our share of challenges.  Navigating a highly regulated industry, gaining the trust of clients, and keeping up with rapidly changing indoor environmental and occupational safety and health standards were no easy tasks. But what set us apart from day one was our dedication to truly understanding the intricacies of the environmental and occupational health and safety field. Whether it was asbestos abatement, mold remediation, managing indoor air quality, or lead hazard control, we immersed ourselves in the details—so that our clients didn’t have to.

Speaking at PACNY!

Our expertise and relentless pursuit of staying ahead in the industry have been the foundation of our success.  Over the years, we have expanded our services, invested in new technologies, and continuously improved our training programs to better serve our clients and partners. This journey of continuous growth allowed us to build long-standing relationships with clients who trust us to handle their most complex indoor air quality and occupational safety and health challenges.

A Focus on Innovation and Adaptability

The occupational health and safety industry is not one that stands still. Regulations change, technology evolves, and the needs of clients shift. Over the last three and a half decades, we’ve prided ourselves on being ahead of the curve. From adapting to new asbestos and mold regulations to embracing the digital transformation in project management and compliance, innovation has been at the core of everything we do.

Speaking at EIA

We’ve taken our knowledge beyond the office and into the field, teaching and training the next generation of environmental health and occupational safety and health professionals. Our training programs have evolved over the years to meet the demands of an ever-changing regulatory landscape, helping hundreds of professionals stay compliant and safe.

The Value of Relationships and Trust

Being in business for 36 years also means we’ve had the privilege of forming deep, lasting relationships with our clients, partners, and team members.  Trust is a word we never take lightly, and earning that trust has been paramount to our success.  Whether it’s a new client who needs guidance through a complex abatement project or a returning partner who knows they can rely on us for expert advice, we’ve always approached each project with the same level of commitment and integrity.

PSEG a long time client

BNL a long time client

To our clients—some of whom have been with us since our early years—thank you for putting your trust in us time and time again.  It is your faith in our ability to deliver results that has allowed us to grow and thrive in this industry.

Looking Ahead to the Future

As we look to the future, we are more excited than ever about the possibilities that lie ahead. The challenges we face today, from climate change to emerging contaminants like PFAS, demand new levels of expertise, innovation, and collaboration.  We are ready to meet these challenges head-on, continuing to evolve (see our updated website) and adapt (changes to the virtual training process) just as we have for the past 36 years.

Updated Website

Our vision remains the same: to protect people, property, and the environment through high-quality consulting, training, and project management services. As we step into our next chapter, we will continue to push boundaries, embrace change, and lead with integrity ("Fallacy of Clearance Air Sampling")—just as we’ve done since 1988.

Thank you to everyone who has been part of this incredible journey. Here’s to the next 36 years of innovation, leadership, and success!

The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYC DEP) has introduced proposed amendments to Chapter 1 of Title 15 of the Rules of the City of New York, aimed at clarifying procedures, improving safety standards, and addressing issues raised by the regulated community. NYC DEP is holding a public hearing on the proposed rule.  The hearing will take place on September 25, 2024 at 11:00 AM.  The hearing will be conducted by video conference (click here for more information).  These changes focus primarily on asbestos control and are designed to streamline processes and address specific concerns about project management, record-keeping, and compliance (or in other words where the regulated community has beaten NYC DEP at the NYC Office of Administrative Tribunals and Hearings (OATH)). Below is a summary of the most significant proposed changes:

State-Certified Asbestos Inspector must be supervised by physically present CAIs

---

Key Definitions and Clarifications

• ARTS E-File: This web-based system is used by applicants to submit and manage asbestos project notifications, variances, permits, and related documents (including amending these documents). The definition has been clarified to reflect its role in the filing process.
• Asbestos Assessment Report: The "Form ACP-5" now has a clearer definition, ensuring that asbestos investigators accurately report the presence (or absence) of asbestos-containing materials (ACM) even if those materials will not be disturbed by construction activity.
• Physically Present: A new definition specifying that an individual, such as a certified asbestos investigator (CAI), must be physically on-site during asbestos surveys or project oversight. Virtual supervision is not permitted.

Variance Applications and Procedures

• The NYC DEP is proposing updates to how variance applications are handled, particularly for projects involving Section 1-22(b), which requires certification by the NYC Department of Buildings (DOB). New procedures ensure that work cannot start without the NYC DEP’s approval, preventing confusion and improving coordination between variance and non-variance work.  In addition, it creates a Form V2 and Form V5 both forms are required to be posted at the workplace.
• A new fee category has been created for variance applications related to notifications, permits, and recordkeeping, addressing a previous gap in the rules.

Transition to Digital Certificates

• The NYC DEP is preparing for a shift from plastic certificates to digital or electronic alternatives. These certificates will be issued to asbestos investigators, contractors, and workers, making the process more efficient and environmentally friendly.

On-Site Presence, Supervision, and Recordkeeping for CAIs

• Certified asbestos investigators (CAIs) must now be physically present while non-CAI assistants perform survey work.  Not only present but must be there for the duration of the survey. It has always been NYC DEP's intent that CAI be present onsite during the asbestos survey.  This just makes even more clear, that supervision cannot be from a distance or virtually.
• The rules clarify that both CAIs and State-certified asbestos inspectors can perform bulk sampling, provided that a CAI is physically present to supervise. 
• Recordkeeping clarifications that each requirement for recordkeeping must be satisfied independently.  In addition, the removal of "written description" from blueprint, diagram, or drawing section.  The addition, to this section exact location and type of material where bulk samples were collected or assumed to be ACM.  The survey report must now include the scope of work and information regarding non-certified individuals, along with a description of the activities they engaged in.  Chain of custodies must be prepared in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recording requirements (QA Handbook Volume II Section 8.00).

EPA Chain of Custody

Work Place Safety Plan (WPSP) Updates

• Proposed updates to the Work Place Safety Plan (WPSP) removing the requirement to list non-asbestos contractors and introduce a new requirement: an Occupant Protection Plan. This plan is required if the asbestos project is being performed in a building where both asbestos abatement workers and non-asbestos abatement workers are working at any time during the permitted project.

Record-Keeping and Inspection Procedures

• Clarifications have been made to improve how final inspection and other records are stored, with a specific focus on protecting records from water damage. Contractors, Design professionals, etc. must now report any damage to DEP, ensuring that vital documentation is preserved.

Air Monitoring and Abatement Requirements

• A new section has been added to prohibit abatement work from being performed without air monitoring, reinforcing safety measures to protect both workers and building occupants.  The air monitor must be physically present at the workplace and air monitoring is being conducted.
• New air monitoring requirement for areas where a negative air duct has become damaged.
• Visual inspection prior to clearance must be documented in the project air sampling log, along with the inspection required for the A-TR1 final inspection report.
• Abrasive removal methods, including the use of grinder and beadblasters, are prohibited.

Emergency Projects and Variances

• Emergency asbestos removal projects may now be exempt from certain requirements, streamlining the process to address hazardous situations more efficiently.
• Clarification of what must be filed with the emergency notification.

Project Closeout and Final Forms

• The ACP15 and A-TR1 forms must be submitted to DEP within 21 days of project completion. Failure to comply may result in suspension of a contractor or air monitor's ARTS E-File account. This aims to ensure timely submission and project closeout, reducing delays.

---

Conclusion

The some of the proposed changes to Title 15 are a step toward increasing safety, clarity, and efficiency in asbestos project management in New York City.  With these amendments, NYC DEP is addressing issues brought up by the regulated community, improving procedural transparency (in other words, closing loopholes), and paving the way for digital record-keeping and certification. 

Some of these updates highlight a commitment to worker and occupant safety, streamlined compliance processes, and clearer guidelines for asbestos professionals.  However, no changes to the air sampling requirements show that they are still in the dark ages for the need to switch to electron microscopic analysis of air samples for clearance.

On September 11, 2001, Future Environment Designs (FEDTC) was teaching an asbestos supervisor refresher and an asbestos inspector initial course at the Underhill Blvd. Syosset office.  We were some of the fortunate individuals who were not in New York City when terrorists hijacked airplanes and proceeded to fly them into the World Trade Centers (WTC), the Pentagon, and crashed another in Pennsylvania.  On that day hundreds of thousands of people were exposed to a massive cloud of toxic gases and particulates from the terrorist attack on the WTC.  Significant failings by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) led to tens of thousands of people who participated in the ensuing rescue, recovery, and clean-up efforts being exposed to the WTC toxic dust.  Nearly a half million people are estimated to be at increased risk of adverse health effects from exposures to physical, psychological, and emotional stressors in the days, weeks, and months following the terrorist attacks.  This year we honor their sacrifice on the 20th Anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center.  On January 2, 2011, the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2012 (the Zadroga Act) created the World Trade Center Health Program (WTCHP).  The WTCHP is administered by the director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).  So this year is also the 10th Anniversary of the WTCHP.  

We have no intention of changing our logo which depicts the NYC skyline with the WTC.

The WTCHP provides medical monitoring and treatment of covered health conditions for emergency responders, survivors, recovery and cleanup workers, and volunteers who helped at the WTC, the Pentagon, and the crash site near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, and maintains a research program aimed to improve the care and well-being of the affected population.  The WTCHP serves four groups of people affected by the 9/11 attacks:

• Fire Department of New York Responders,
• World Trade Center General Responders,
• World Trade Center Survivors (lived, worked, or went to school in NYC Disaster Area), and
• Pentagon/Shanksville Responders

From Express - 9/11 firefighters still Dying 20 years on - Devastating graph exposes the harrowing impact

As of December 31, 2020, 108,666 individuals have enrolled in WTCHP.  The ten most common certified conditions are:

• Chronic Rhinosinusitis
• Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)
• Cancers
• Asthma
• Sleep Apnea
• Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
• Chronic Respiratory Disorder - Fumes/Vapors
• WTC-Exacerbated Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)
• Anxiety Disorder (Not otherwise specified)
• Major Depressive Disorder

As the years go by, it will be interesting to see if this list changes.  In FEDTC's asbestos training courses, we discuss the latency period for asbestos-related diseases (asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma) are 10-50 years from the date of the first exposure.  In the next 5-10 years we will hit the beginning of the latency period for lung cancer and mesothelioma.  Currently, cancers only account for about 13% of WTCHP certified conditions with non-melanoma skin cancer (27%) and prostate cancer (21%) being the top two cancers.  Comparison studies indicate that prostate and thyroid cancer are elevated compared to other groups (without WTC toxic dust exposure). Other excess cancers at this time include bladder cancer, malignant melanoma, multiple myeloma, leukemia, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

The Guardian Miami condo collapse: death toll rises to nine as crews search pile for survivors | Miami condo collapse | The Guardian

 Future Environment Designs (FEDTC) wishes everyone a Happy Labor Day weekend!  We hope everyone takes the time to remember that today we are celebrating the contributions of the labor movement to the development and achievements of the United States of America (USA).  Many workers have sacrificed their lives in making these achievements.  On average, almost 100 workers are killed every week in the United States due to traumatic injuries suffered at work. Over 20 times as many die from occupational diseases, many due to exposure to hazardous substances many years before they died (for example, asbestos, silica, and coal dust) or from COVID-19 acquired at work.  It is important to remember those who made these sacrifices while working on the job.  These sacrifices also cost businesses profitability and increase workmen's compensation costs.  The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has created a tool to show the impact different types of injuries cost businesses.