EPA memo re: wipe sampling and cancer risk at WTC,

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document implemented by the landlord, although in this case mdividual ottices were cieaneu oy the landlord. Here also the dusting from the WTC was minimal and fine. No windows were broken in either the apartment building or the office building.

The resident was in a very high-contamination situation for 2 days. Upon returning to her/his apartment, the citizen was in another 4 day high contamination exposure while cleaning the apartment and bein^, present while cleaning was going on of other apartments and common areas. The resident has remained in contaminated circumstances while at home and in the office for approximately 3 months after inadequate cleaning procedures.

The levels of asbestos exposure during the first two days exposure is estimated to be 500 s/mL. This level is 100 times the highest level found by the HP Envir. nmental study in passive conditions in two buildings damaged but still standing near the World Trade Center.” EPA did not appear to have monitoring equipment in place at this time. If it had, the portals could have been occluded with heavy dusts and no readings would have been possible.

The level of asbestos during the 4 days cleaning and living in the apartment is estimated to be 10 s/mL, a point midway between vacuum cleaning and broom cleuiing from Table 2 for the low exposure building.

The level of asbestos for the balance of the time, a 3 month period at home and at an equally contaminated office, is estimated to be 0.10 s/mL. This is the same as the air level actually found in an apartment on Warren Street before the cleanup, but under passve conditions. This level is assumed to apply to the apartment now under active conditions after some minimal cleanup, where the carpets retain most of fie original asbestos. The cumulative exposure is as follows:

s/mL X time pertod (years) s total dose (s*year/mL) 500 2/365 2.74 10 4/365 0.11 1.0 1/4 yr 0.25 total dose (cumulative exposure) 3.1

The increased risk for mesothelioma is 1 in 100. The increased risk for lung cancer is 1 in 1000. The person has a risk of nearly 1/1000 for developing asbestosis, and would probably have abnormal radiological findings of the chest.

To continue this scenario, the resident continues to live in the apartment for another 15 years before moving to Arizona because of decreased lung function. FLe additional exposure to asbestos, added onto the exposures to date, are as follows:

s/mL X time period (years) total dose (s-year/mL) cumulative dose from above 3.1 1.0 15 15 total dose (cumulative exposure) 18.1

-13- (latenet Version)

NYC-WTC_000140271