NYC Law Department release
Independent mirror · updated as the City releases more · v1.2.6
← Document results/DEP Box 03/E-Mails Sent M. Gilsenan 2001-2002
Document / 1 page

Exterior cleanup scope abatement versus clarification, April 2002

Machine-extracted title · confidence 50%

DEP memo documenting discussion regarding questions about cleanup scope, contractor enclosure requirements, and public perception concerns.

NYC-WTC_000139639

Folder label: “E-Mails Sent M. Gilsenan 2001-2002

Page image
Scanned page image, NYC-WTC_000139639
OCR text

OCR status: ok · source: pdftotext

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Gilsenan, Michael From: Gilsenan, Michael [DEPNET1/DEPGPO2/MichaelGi] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 12:53 PM To: 'Chapin, Diana 001' Cc: 'Avaltroni, Robert'; Sturcken, Charles; 'Radhakrishnan, Krish' Subject: Exterior Cleanup-Jim Miller Questions

I just spoke to Jim and he had some questions regarding our scope of work. At first he was happy that our scope was for a cleanup and not an abatement, because we were not 1) requiring contractors to enclose the work area 2) not requiring decon. I informed him that we never require enclosure of outside areas because it's not feasible and that decon areas will be required as per our regs. I told him that our scope of work outlines the work to be preformed and our regs dictate the rules to follow. He then stated that this sounds like an abatement project to him and he is concerned about the publics perception. He is going to have DOH's consultant speak to Krish for further clarification. He also mentioned to me that OEM is checking with FEMA to see if they would pay for cleanups that were non ACM.

This led into a discussion on testing each and every bldg, and the delays associated with same . I'm not sure where he is going with this, however, I did state that a decision like this is not for me to make or him for that matter. My sense was that, after his consultants discussion with Krish, he would present his concerns (to whom I don't know). BEC will continue on the path as we've discussed unless I hear otherwise from you. Thanks

1

NYC-WTC_000139639

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

NYC-WTC_000139639Source: 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

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 →