I spent 13 years working in a large industrial facility that removed hundreds of tons of asbestos. I have seen it done and have even worked for weeks inside an encapsulated powerplant operating boilers while the asbestos was being removed.

This stuff can be dealt with and it is not that difficult. In Delaware where I live the course you need to take costs $400, the cost in North Dakota is $550.

I know everyone is going to worry about lawsuits but for the cost of training 2 people, materials, and landfill fees you can clean up a locomotive. There might be a hundred reasons why a plan like that would not work but it is worth looking into if the alternative is cutting up a pacific.

Tom Gears

Forgotten Delaware
tom@forgottendelaware.com

I once considered becoming an abatement contractor when it was becoming obvious that myself and a certain scab RR company from Texas were not getting along. While the cost of the training course was small and materials, tools, etc., were reasonable, it appeared the cost of insurance was quite high. Too high, in fact, to consider doing it part time if I found another RR job. In the end, I got a decent RR job and protected my pension, with no spare time for extra work.

Has anyone investigated further the full costs of a non-profit group becoming an abatement entity, especially the insurance/liability issue?

> I spent 13 years working in a large
> industrial facility that removed hundreds of
> tons of asbestos. I have seen it done and
> have even worked for weeks inside an
> encapsulated powerplant operating boilers
> while the asbestos was being removed.

> This stuff can be dealt with and it is not
> that difficult. In Delaware where I live the
> course you need to take costs $400, the cost
> in North Dakota is $550.

> I know everyone is going to worry about
> lawsuits but for the cost of training 2
> people, materials, and landfill fees you can
> clean up a locomotive. There might be a
> hundred reasons why a plan like that would
> not work but it is worth looking into if the
> alternative is cutting up a pacific.

> Tom Gears


ryarger@rypn.org

> Has anyone investigated further the full
> costs of a non-profit group becoming an
> abatement entity, especially the
> insurance/liability issue?

In this day and age I can almost guarantee that you could not afford the insurance! I would also be willing to bet that the biggest chunk of the cost of a full-fledged asbestos abater is the insurance. Say the "A" word and the hysterics begin especially since hold harmless clauses are no longer valid arguements. The tracking has to be maintained and liability follows for all involved ... and maybe 30 years down the road you could get sued.


lamontdc@adelphia.net

As a licensed California general contractor I know something of the asbestos removal qualifications. The licensing and testing fall under the dept. of Consumer affairs (contractors License). Testing and certification is fairly easy with fees very reasonable. Insurance is not that big of a problem either and the normal contractors liability package will cover the additional certification. As was mentioned though when you have employees involved in this process you are on the hook for perhaps 30 or more years in tracking and reporting. You could be responsible for their health problems during this time period. I have been involved in asbestos abatement and the process is very straight forward, easy without any problems.

There are currently many public institutions, hospitals, going through the abatement process. If you have had occasion to be in a hospital during the process you will notice that there doesn't seem to be any problems with carrying out the abatement as the process and the normal hospital routines are going on side by side without to many worries.

>Bob, this idea might be problematic. Unless there's some terribly tortured construction of the regulations dealing expanding on the language in 501(c)(3)-such as the part for "testing for public safety", I don't see how commercial abatement of asbestos would meet the requirements for an exempt purpose.

Even if it was- you can bet that the for profit sector would raise hell to "close the loophole" and the moneys raised in this venture would be subject to Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT)in short order.

So essentially, the effect would be to have a non-profit running a regular business.

superheater@beer.com