Abatement fraud in NYC

How good is your data?  Spending countless hours as a chemistry major at university, and then working as a chemist for many year, good documentation practices have been driven into my subconscious.  But that only applies to me generating data.  I am confident of the quality of the data in my lab notebook:  after all, it's mine.

What about the lead analysis I did at my internship?  I'm sure about how the samples were collected.  But what about the lab reports?  Are the numbers even real?  Well, I'm forced to assume they are.  I got the numbers directly from the laboratory.

What about the mercury sampling I had done at my last house?  I watched them do the sampling.  But what about the results?

How do I know they weren't lying?

I haven't given much though to what I, as an ordinary person, would do in the situation of needing environmental testing.  The people I purchased that house from had done lead testing.  What would I do?  Just call an 'inspector'?  How does a person verify their honesty/quality, beyond calling to verify the license is current?

This fellow, creating a ruckus in New York City, demonstrates both the fractured nature of public offices as well as the consequences of underfunding government agencies.  The result?  Moaning and wringing hands over the inability of the state to control this, then crying that too many agencies aren't working together.  Is anyone going to sit down, ask "so how can we do this better?" and then change something? change anything?

.

Making up for lost time?

No. However, it is nice to see OSHA trying to look scary. The explosion at Imperial Sugar in Georgia has the Chemical Safety & Hazard Investigation Board report released earlier this week. The 3rd paragraph of the story in the NYTimes has a link to the document. Lots of pretty good photographs, with diagrams, etc. I haven't read one of their reports before. 89 pages of reading for a chilly Autumn evening. The Times article reports the proposed $8.7 million fines. This popped up on my radar right after the news today brought up the fines announced against BP following their explosion in Texas a few years ago. In both cases, I'm far more curious about how much these companies will actually pay. We all know that "proposed fines" bears no semblance to "actual fines". The Times article about BP included: Labor Secretary Hilda Solis has repeatedly said that “there’s a new sheriff in town,” signaling that she would take a more aggressive approach in enforcing wage and labor laws, after what she said was lax enforcement under President George W. Bush. This might be more plausible, if OSHA hadn't been so lax for the past 39 years. How often do they prosecute anyone for anything? BP is cited for 439 willful and egregious violations. This is finally the trigger to request the Attorney General to prosecute criminal charges. Are they going to? If 15 deaths & 439 willful violations don't do it .... what will? The Strib also reported (the only point in their article which wasn't in the Times): Since the 2005 accident, four additional people have died at the Texas refinery, including one employee and three contractors. BP was fined $50m by the Department of Justice in 2007 to settle criminal charges stemming from the Texas explosion. Reports the BBC News. This subtly gets to the point most in the US miss. These criminal charges are from failure to comply with the Clean Air Act. In other words, the EPA had them prosecuted. These people likely won't be criminally prosecuted from OSHA. Like everything else with the gov't: wait and see ... wait and see ...

Colt v. US

COLT INDUSTRIES, INC., Plaintiff/Cross-Appellant, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee No. 89-1165 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 880 F.2d 1311; 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 10672; 89-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P9450; 64 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5231; 30 ERC (BNA) 1179; 19 ELR 21450 July 24, 1989, Decided Taxpayer was assessed civil penalties in a consent decree because it failed to eliminate violations of the Clean Air Act. In satisfaction of the civil penalties imposed by the consent decree, the taxpayer remitted payment. The taxpayer then claimed the payment as an ordinary business deduction under I.R.C. § 162(a). Does anything more clearly demonstrate the fact businesses see non-compliance fines as just an ordinary business cost?

that's all, folks

Title 29 - Labor Chapter 15 - Occupational Safety & Health Sec. 666 - Civil and criminal penalties (e) Willful violation causing death to employee Any employer who willfully violates any standard, rule, or order promulgated pursuant to section 655 of this title, or of any regulations prescribed pursuant to this chapter, and that violation caused death to any employee, shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for no more than six months, or by both; except that if the conviction is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person, punishment shall be by a fine of not more than $20,000 or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or by both. Now, here we go: > "civil and criminal penalties" gives a first impression that the plural applies to criminal, as well as civil. Nope. There's only one criminal provision under the federal (and Minnesota) Occupational Safety & Health Act. It's here. You need to actually achieve killing your employee. Not only that, but it also needs to meet the legal definition of "willful", which isn't the same as used in normal conversation. There's one of those op-ed pieces on a blog bemoaning the state of affairs when killing your worker carries a lower penalty than assaulting a burro on federal property. A claim I've read before. The author, however, failed to provide a bibliography along with the word 'bibliography'. So, I'm not sure how valid his numbers are, or where they're from. Which is sad, because I would like to use some of them & would have been happier if I didn't need to go looking for the information from primary sources. Like the burro. Or ... "By comparison with other federal agencies, OSHA is hardly the big bully it is often painted as. For example, the penalty for killing a burro on federal land is one year in jail, and the penalty for mail fraud is up to 30 years behind bars. The Environmental Protection Agency [in the course of] one year obtained prison sentences totaling 256 years." e.g. I'd like to know which year that was & where the burro law is. He also stated: "... there are fewer OSHA compliance officers than there are U.S. fish and game wardens. In other words, the large mouth bass and the wild turkey are afforded better [protection] than U.S. workers."