EPA report on WTC air monitoring and cleanup, April 2003

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

*

The workgroup issued a revised COPC document in May 2003 that included responses to the peer review panel’s comments. Given the significance of the panel’s comments, the fact that additional information has been developed since the peer review was conducted, and the potential for this document to be used as a basis for future indoor cleanups, we believe the revised COPC document should oW • be submitted for a second peer review as suggested by the TERA panel.

Actions Can Be Taken to Provide Additional Assurance That Indoor Cleanup Is Protective of Human Health The residential cleanup effort represents a significant undertaking by EPA, FEMA, and New York City. Nonetheless, it has been criticized by some groups. The geographical coverage of the cleanup, limited to residences south of Canal Street, has been questioned. The testing and cleanup procedures have been criticized, particularly the fact that EPA has not required all apartments within a building to be cleaned. In addition, not requiring the cleaning of all HVAC systems was criticized as a limitation that could lead to re-contamination of clean residences.

Additional actions can be taken to provide greater assurances that the program is fully protective of human health. These actions include:

• Ensuring that the cleanup meets minimum Superfund site cleanup goals, 7* Treating impacted buildings as a system, • Employing sampling methods (i.e., aggressive) to ensure that asbestos is at or I below acceptable levels, • Including workspaces as well as residential buildings, and a • Including.^l geographicwre^^pac^byWTCdust. __

1 Discussions on each of these actions follow.

Indoor Cleanup Level Does Not Meet Minimum Superfund Levels

Although the indoor cleanup in Lower Manhattan was not being conducted as a Superfund cleanup. Superfund regulations and guidelines provide useful criteria for evaluating the health protectiveness of the Lower Manhattan cleanup and whether it provides reasonable assurance that the public’s risk of exposure to asbestos and other contaminants had been minimized.

The NCP describes specific criteria for determining the cleanup goals for contaminated sites placed on the National Priorities List. The NCP requires that for known or suspected carcinogens, acceptable exposure levels are generally concentration levels that represent between a 1-in-10,000 and 1-in-1,000,000 increased lifetime cancer risk. The NCP lists nine factors, including cost.

50 Report No. 2003-P-00012

NYC-WTC_000145690