The Industrial Code sections cited by plaintiff as predicates for his Labor Law § 241(6) cause of action are inapplicable. Industrial Code (12 NYCRR) § 23-1.7(e)(1) does not apply because plaintiff's accident did not occur in a passageway and Industrial Code (12 NYCRR) § 23-1.7(e)(2) does not apply because the debris that allegedly caused plaintiff's fall "`was an integral part of the work he was performing'" ( Alvia v. Teman Elec. Contr., Inc., 287 A.D.2d 421, 423, citing Sharrow v. Dick Corp., 233 A.D.2d 858, 860).
Plaintiff has no viable Labor Law § 200 claim against either defendant Bank of New York or defendant Verde Electric since the hazard for which he would hold those defendants accountable was the very hazard he had undertaken to remedy ( see Kolwalsy v. Conreco Co., 264 N.Y. 125, 128-129; Skinner v. GT Realty Corp. of New York, 232 A.D.2d 627). In addition, the record discloses that the bank, sued in its capacity as lessee of the premises where the accident took place, had neither actual nor constructive notice of the alleged hazard and did not supervise, direct, control or manage the individual trades or their workers in the performance of their work ( see Comes v. New York State Elec. Gas Corp., 82 N.Y.2d 876).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.