Question Whether Friedman & Schmitt Violated the Asbestos NESHAP’s Notice and Work Practice Standards

In circumstances in which the Asbestos NESHAP applies (i.e., where it is shown that a renovation activity disturbed the threshold amount of RACM), the Asbestos NESHAP sets forth notice requirements, work practice standards, and record-keeping requirements.

The Region alleged in its Complaint that Friedman & Schmitt violated these notice requirements, work practice standards, and waste shipment record requirements by:

Failing to provide 10 working day written notice of their intention to remove RACM from the facility in violation of 40 C.F.R. § 61.145(b);

Failing to maintain waste shipment records documenting the transportation of asbestos containing material from the facility to 2900 Heinz Street, in violation of 40 C.F.R. §§ 61.145(c)(6), 61.150(d); and,

Failing to keep RACM at the facility adequately wet, in violation of 40 C.F.R. §§ 61.145(c)(6), 61.150. Because the ALJ based his finding of no liability on his conclusion that Friedman & Schmitt were not given fair notice that applicability would be determined as set forth in the Asbestos NESHAP, the ALJ did not make specific findings regarding whether Friedman & Schmitt complied with the 10-day notice requirement of 40 C.F.R. § 61.145(b). The ALJ did, however, find that Friedman & Schmitt failed to maintain waste shipment records and failed to keep RACM in Building #2 adequately wet as required by 40 C.F.R. §§ 61.145(c)(6) and 61.150.

These violations are discussed below.