Law Department notice on WTC document preservation, Oct 2001

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Conclusions Although many steps were taken to reduce asbestos emissions from the WTC site, problems were encountered in fully implementing the applicable NESHAP requirements for emergency situations, such as ensuring that trucks transporting debris were adequately wetted down before leaving the WTC site. Further, the placement of a WTC debris unloading and transfer operation near schools and residences compounded the potential impact of not implementing normally required NESHAP requirements. Given the likelihood that many buildings across the country may contain asbestos, EPA and State and local agencies need to establish improved monitoring and oversight procedures for ensuring that appropriate NESHAP work practices are followed in responding to situations that cause widespread building damage.

Recommendations We recommend that the EPA Administrator:

4-1. Ensure that EPA Regional and Headquarters personnel are aware of the “Guidelines For Catastrophic Emergency Situations Involving Asbestos,” including its application in the event of future terrorist attacks or other disasters.

4-2. Develop specific monitoring, reporting, and oversight procedures for ensuring that Federal, State, and local responders follow the appropriate Asbestos NESHAP work practices, including initiating enforcement actions when EPA observes violations of NESHAP work practices.

Agency and New York City Comments and OIG Evaluation The Agency noted in its response that ensuring compliance with NESHAP work practices in the immediate aftermath of the WTC collapse and fires was “extremely difficult” not because of a lack of knowledge about what was required, but because of the practicality of implementing these practices under the extreme conditions of duress. Further, the Agency noted that over time, these problems were eliminated to the maximum extent possible. The Agency agreed with the recommendations. The Agency’s full written response to our draft report and our detailed evaluation of that response are contained in Appendices Q and R, respectively.

New York City offered additional information and clarification as to how NESHAP work practices were discussed and implemented at the site. We added this information to the final report. New York City officials objected to the inclusion of testimony from the EPA Superfund Ombudsman hearing on the basis of it being unsubstantiated and to the discussion of lead levels at Stuyvesant High School on the basis of not being relevant to the Chapter. We disagree and have retained that information in the final report. New York City’s response to draft report excerpts and our evaluation of that response are contained in Appendices S and T, respectively.

39 Report No. 2003-P-00012

NYC-WTC_000145394