|
All three employers were involved in a commercial real estate renovation project at a residential apartment construction worksite in San Antonio. After an OSHA inspection, two of the companies, FBZ Broadway LP and Roscoe Properties, Inc., were each cited for one willful violation for failing to determine the location and quantity of asbestos. FBZ Broadway had been cited for the same violation a month earlier. The third company, One Eighty Construction was cited for one willful violation for failing to ensure that workers followed asbestos removal practices.
We’ll examine each of the citations and lessons learned.
FBZ Broadway and Roscoe Properties
What went wrong? FBZ Broadway, which is an entity of Roscoe Properties, and Roscoe Properties owned the apartment building in question. They were each cited for a willful violation for failing to determine the presence, location, and quantity of asbestos-containing material (ACM) and presumed asbestos-containing material (PACM) at the worksite before the demolition and renovation work began. The apartments in the building contained previously installed vinyl flooring and floor mastic.
Under OSHA’s construction asbestos standard at 29 CFR 1926.1101(k), building owners are required to provide information concerning asbestos hazards before any construction/renovation activities begin.
What should have happened? As building owners, FBZ Broadway and Roscoe Properties should have made the determination about the presence of ACM and PACM in the building. Vinyl flooring installed in 1980 or before must be considered as ACM unless it has been determined through due diligence that it is not ACM. They should have hired a properly certified individual to determine whether the flooring was ACM or asbestos-free.
If it was determined that ACM was present, FBZ Broadway and Roscoe Properties were required to notify the following people either in writing or through personal communication:
- Prospective employers applying or bidding for work whose employees reasonably can be expected to work in or adjacent to areas containing ACM;
- Employees of the owner who will work in or adjacent to areas containing ACM;
- On multiemployer worksites, all employers of employees who will be performing work within or adjacent to areas containing ACM; and
- Tenants who will occupy areas containing ACM.
The fine. FBZ Broadway was fined $14,000. Roscoe Properties received the largest of the fines at $63,000.
One Eighty Construction
What went wrong? One Eighty Construction was cited for a willful violation for failing to ensure that its workers followed required asbestos removal practices. OSHA inspectors determined that One Eighty Construction failed to ensure that:
- The Class II asbestos work was performed under the supervision of a competent person. Class II asbestos work includes the removal of asbestos-containing flooring. A competent person for supervising Class II work is someone who, in part, is specially trained in a course that meets the criteria of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Model Accreditation Plan found at 40 CFR Part 763 for a supervisor.
- Monitoring was performed to determine accurately the airborne concentrations of asbestos to which the workers may be exposed.
- The demolition/renovation workers removing the asbestos flooring material and mastic were trained in asbestos work practices and engineering controls that include the use of wet methods.
What should have happened? As the general contractor, One Eighty Construction was considered supervisor of the entire project, and, as such, was required to ensure that the contractor hired to perform the asbestos work was in compliance with OSHA’s construction asbestos standard.
The fine. One Eight Construction was fined $35,000.
Training is a critical component for workers who deal with ACM. Tomorrow we will review required training for asbestos workers.