NYC Law Department release
Independent mirror · updated as the City releases more · v1.2.6
← Document results/DEP Box 03/E-Mails Hotline M. Gilsenan
Document / 2 pages

Professional cleaning standards and asbestos testing, April 2002

Machine-extracted title · confidence 75%

Technical memo addressing HEPA vacuuming appropriateness, definitions of professional cleaning, and rug asbestos fiber concentration interpretation.

NYC-WTC_000138411–000138412

Folder label: “E-Mails Hotline M. Gilsenan

Page image
Scanned page image, NYC-WTC_000138411
OCR text

OCR status: ok · source: pdftotext

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Gilsenan, Michael From: Vincent Coluccio [[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:47 AM To: Christopher D'Andrea; Jim Miller: Jeanine Prudhomme; Nancy Jeffery: Roger Hayes Co: m ichaelgi@dep. nyc.gov Subject: Re: DOH Referral from hotline

Jim

Routine HEPA vacuuming is certainly appropriate here.

There is no standard definition of professional cleaning, and it begs the question as to what the cleaning company did. For example, did they remove rugs and matting, HEPA vac and steam clean them and clean the floor before replacing them? This might be a best case cleaning scenario. On the other hand, did they just pass a (non-HEPA) vacuum over the rugs? These types of questions may become more prevalent as tenants begin to reflect on actions taken in their apartments by cleaning services during the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

Two side points - She is requesting bulk dust testing, however if she is HEPA vacuuming every day there shouldn't be enough dust available in her apartment for a bulk sample. Also, the asbestos fiber value for the rug is presented as 42 fibers/cc, which is an airborne concentration and not a loading value.

Vin

»> Jim Miller 04/01/02 08:09PM »> Vin—Does HEPA vacuuming seem appropriate for these conditions? Is there a standard definition re what constitutes "professional cleaning"?

Mike—Does her concern for dusty common areas warrant a referral to DEP for a site visit?

»> WTC Hotline <[email protected] > 04/01/02 I spoke at length this morning with a woman named i P|| She lives at Pll i She has 2 young children and is concerned about their health. She re-occupied her apt in October but didn’t test her apt until February. In Feb, she hired Pure Solutions to test the dust/air for $1500, they found asbestos fibers in her rug (42 fibers/cc) she obtained a HEPA Vac and has been cleaning every day. She also had her apt professionally cleaned. She has a few issues she needed follow-up on:

1) Her landlord tested indoor air but not dust, she wants bulk dust testing (I added her address to request list) 2) She is concerned that the common areas in her building have not been adequately cleaned or tested for dust. 3) Her landlord told her that he would not replace any rugs unless she signed a release form saying that she would not sue in the event the rugs were contaminated 4) FEMA told her that in order to get funding to replace her rugs herself 1

NYC-WTC_000138411

OCR can misread numbers and units. Confirm readings against the page image before using them.

NYC-WTC_000138411Source: NYC Law Department, mirrored locally

Related records

Browse subjects →

Ranked by indexed similarity. Reasons describe shared subjects and filing context; check the source records.

Same-box records

DOH lab analysis comments, April 2, 2002 · Box DEP Box 03

NYC-WTC_000138458

DOH review of air sample analytical methods regarding asbestos fiber differentiation and carpet cleaning/disposal guidance for post-9/11 contamination.

5 shared non-person entities · 1 shared topics · Same agency, volume and box · similarity 0.970

machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗

Filed elsewhere

More like this page

Similar subjects in other documents. Similarity does not establish the same event, measurement or conclusion.

Page similarity is temporarily unavailable or this page has no indexed vector.

Others also read

Readers open these alongside this record — through an Ask answer, the same folder, or indexed similarity. Not a claim they are about the same event.

Compare copies and versions →