EPA NESHAP excerpts coordination memo, July 2003

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

buildings 4. 5 and 6 because City officials were advised by the property, owner and one of the larger tenants^ which happened to be a.Feder.a.l . ag.eRcy,..tbat .there was no asbestos in the above ground structures. In any event, throughout the WTC site, proper planning was taken in the removal of asbestos-containing material and proper procedures were followed in removing any asbestos­ containing material, which were below grade, and to minimize exposure to .asbestos-co.ntaining..mate.n.al.,....Health..and..s.afety.meetings.w^^^^^ 6:00 p.m. to deal with, among other things, removal of asbestos-containing material. A number of City, State, and Federal agencies, including OSHA, DEC, FEMA,EPA..U.SACE,..andDEP,..aswen.as.the..const.mch Bechtel participated in these meetings. All participants contributed their expertise and collaboratively played a role in the decision making at these meetings. These meetings discussed, among other things, removal of asbestos-containing material and the adequate wetting down of the material. Procedures for removal of the material were continuously revised considering the location and nature of the material and any other issues affecting removal. Also, in this regard, a health and safety plan for the site was created to address issues such as the removal of asbestos-containing material. All agencies, including the EPA, reviewed this plan and provided input into the final version of the plan. As set forth below, proper procedures, including measures to insure adequate wetting down of asbestos­ containing material, were taken.City officials-told-HS-that-the City’s Asbestos Control Program rules did not apply beeause-of-the emergeney situation. -Further; a N¥€DBC official told us that the Port Authority4iad removed aeeessiblo asbestos-eontainingmateFialfFomthe-WTCbuildingspriortoSeptember-ll-. Consequently-; in his view -asbestos was- not- a primary eoneern in the -demolition:

NYC-WTC_000153083