In Brooklyn’s Bensonhurst on 86th Street, the construction site for a proposed homeless shelter was found to have asbestos by the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) during a recent inspection. As a result, a stop-work order was issued last Friday (16th) in accordance with the law. Asbestos is a mineral fiber commonly used in construction materials in the past. Improper handling during demolition or construction can release fibers into the air, posing a threat to public health as inhalation of these fibers may lead to lung cancer or other serious illnesses.
In response, community activists Linda Yuan, Mr. Zheng, and four others visited the Department of Buildings (DOB) on Tuesday (20th) to participate in a public reception, where they questioned officials about whether the developer had submitted false reports and if there were oversights in the DOB’s review process for extending the demolition permit, further seeking clarity on the relevant handling mechanisms.
According to the stop-work order posted by the DEP at the site last Friday, the construction was found to be in violation due to the following reasons: (1) the ongoing work involves asbestos operations; (2) these operations contravene section 24-136 of the New York City Air Pollution Control Code and its accompanying Asbestos Rules; (3) the project poses a threat to public safety.
In accordance with section 24-136(h) of the law, the DEP ordered an immediate halt to the construction and emphasized the need to take measures to prevent further work. Resuming work is contingent upon the submission of a complete asbestos assessment report (ACP5), investigation report, and laboratory test results for approval by the DEP.
Since 1987, the New York City Department of Environmental Protection has regulated construction activities involving asbestos. According to regulations, most buildings constructed before 1989 may contain asbestos and require asbestos testing by certified inspectors before construction. If a project disturbs asbestos, licensed contractors and air monitoring companies must be hired to handle the situation. Violators may face fines ranging from $1,200 to $10,000 per infraction.
Once asbestos is disturbed, fibers can be released into the air, making it difficult for the body to expel them. Long-term exposure can result in serious diseases such as lung cancer, mesothelioma, and asbestosis. Therefore, unauthorized asbestos operations pose significant risks to the health of workers and community residents, constituting a serious public safety concern.
Community members found on the Department of Buildings’ website that the developer had submitted an asbestos assessment report to the DOB on May 12, claiming that inspectors had taken samples on April 4 and concluded on April 11 that no asbestos-containing material (ACM) was detected in the building.
However, the conclusions of this report were in stark contrast to the stop-work order issued by the DEP after an inspection on May 17. The community raised suspicions that the developer had submitted a false or incomplete asbestos report and questioned whether the DOB had properly reviewed the data before approving the demolition permit, suggesting possible negligence in the review process.
In addition, community volunteers discovered that the documents uploaded by the developer when applying to extend the demolition permit at the end of April were incomplete, with only one page submitted without a signature. This raised concerns about oversight in the review process. Thus, on May 20, community members directly confronted DOB officials with two questions: (1) How does the DOB handle the submission of false or incomplete documents by developers? Will an internal audit be initiated? (2) Will the demolition permit approved on May 7 be revoked?
DOB staff on-site responded that asbestos inspection and work stoppage fall entirely under the jurisdiction of the DEP, with the DOB solely responsible for building permit reviews and not involved in asbestos evaluation determinations, as “asbestos falls entirely under the DEP’s jurisdiction.”
The DOB further clarified that the developer’s application for an “extension of the demolition permit” was supplemented by a “post-approval amendment (PAA)” method. While the missing signature page was noted by the community in the system, DOB personnel pointed out that the initial application was complete, and such supplemental documents do not necessarily require a new signature but only additional explanations for the modified content.
When community volunteers inquired whether the DOB would conduct an internal audit or revoke the demolition permit upon discovering a false or incomplete asbestos report submitted by the developer, DOB staff stated that unless directed by the Borough Commissioner, they would not launch an investigation. If the public wishes to file a formal complaint, it must be submitted through the “DOB Help” website (https://a810-efiling.nyc.gov/eRenewal/dobNowHelp.jsp).