"I may be dumb but I'm not stupid."
Worry not, I went through a good lot of posts, it seem >50% do not even read OP posts. How many times do poster tell you about abatement permits and asbestos dump costs when you are not required. From an asbestos manager, you are legal to remove the asbestos yourself, especially outdoors.
I agree with hiring a machine with a claw/skilled guy and have dumpsters on site; not sure if you must remove the asbestos first. In less then 2hours the house will be leveled, in roughly 4 hours most of the remains will be in dumpsters.
"Worry, yes!"
I think I may be the one of the few persons posting on this thread who has done a SFR demolition on a house in Florida. As a retired Florida licensed plans examiner and lifesafety inspector (among other state-awarded qualifications) one of the things we are averse to hearing, is,
"how we do it in _______ ." (fill-in your state)
Perhaps the adopted Jacksonville code of ordinances for enforcement actions would carry more weight for you:
Sec. 320.706. - Noncompliance.
SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF SECTIONSEMAIL SECTION
(1)
Any person, firm, corporation or agent who violates a provision of this building code or of codes hereby adopted by reference, including the tenant, lessee or manager of any leased, rented or managed property, who fails to comply therewith or with any of the requirements thereof or who erects, constructs, alters or repairs or has erected, constructed, altered or repaired a building, structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system in violation of a detailed statement or plan submitted and permitted thereunder shall, upon conviction thereof, be guilty of a class D offense and punished accordingly.
(2)
The City is authorized to file a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction for civil penalties as follows:
(a)
The civil penalty for violations committed by an unlicensed, uncertified individual to perform work or by a property owner who performed such work him or her self on any structure or property regulated under this Chapter shall be as follows:
(1)
$1,000 for a first violation;
(2)
$2,000 for a second violation; and
(3)
$3,000 civil penalty for a third or subsequent violation, and the violator shall be prohibited from obtaining a building permit for work not associated with the correction of the violation for a period of three months.
Additionally, the violator shall be prohibited from applying for any permit until such civil penalty awarded pursuant to this Section has been paid in full. Prohibitions against issuance of a building permit contemplated in this Section shall not become effective until the judgment requiring such prohibition becomes final.
As is often mentioned, ignorance of the law is not accepted as a viable defense. The stakes in this scope of work proposed dwarf the legal cost compared to the cost of ignoring the legal process, and then being caught-out.
In research concerning the regulations, codes or other controlling legislation in the State of Florida, where asbestos-containing material (ACM) is mentioned, I came-across an interesting criterion. While four or fewer residential units (one unit, one family) are eligible for some leeway in how the work to remove ACM is conducted, and the permitting required,
if the SFR (single family residence) has been used in the past in a commercial capacity, it loses the exceptions mentioned for four or fewer residences, and must comply with the Florida Administrative Code for facilities where ACM is present.
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) administers an asbestos removal program under Chapter 62- 257, Florida Administrative Code. The Asbestos NESHAP has been adopted by reference in Section 62-204.800, Florida Administrative Code (FAC).
Another issue which should be mentioned is that since the parcel is contiguous to a commercial facility owned by the
same RPO there is a possibility that if the scope of work is to include anything on the adjoining commercial site then the SFR and the adjoining facility together fall under the FAC mentioned above ("Part of a larger installation"). The SFR is not then eligible to benefit from the 'four dwelling units or less' exception. In a similar vein, doing the demolition of the SFR first, and them applying to do demolition on the adjoining site could be construed by the AHJ as an attempt to skirt the FAC governing ACM regulation. That is definitely a case for legal counsel.
I'm not trying to be a 'nattering nabob of negativism' as one of our federal office-holders once called it, but while either a licensed asbestos contractor or the RPO can apply for the permits, if it is required and not done, then the legal burden can extend to
both.
In accordance with Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA established National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) to protect the public. In 1982, EPA delegated primary authority for the implementation and enforcement of the Asbestos NESHAP to the state of Florida. Currently it lies within the Florida Division of Air Resource Management. The NESHAP regulation states that either the owner of the building or operator of the demolition or renovation operation can submit the notification. Usually, the two parties decide together who will notify. If no adequate notice is provided, one or both parties can be held liable.
This is not an example of simply getting a permit for a detached garage on your property. It is much-more involved. The punitive costs to the RPO for ignoring the process in-place for dealing with ACM are onerous and financially burdensome. You would expect that the permitting would cover all the issues. However, before any work is begun (are you familiar with the State of Florida required document for '
notice of commencement?' This protects you from liens by unpaid sub-contractors or problems with your AHJ), I would want to see those documents posted at the site as they are required to be. No,
"we expect all the permits approved this week, we're going to get a head-start on this. I cannot afford any crew downtime."
Neither can you. I always tell the permit applicant, "I have the simplest of requests for approval. Comply with code."