NYC Law Department release
Independent mirror · updated as the City releases more · v1.2.6
← Document results/DEP Box 43/E-mails 2002 M. Gilsenan
Document / 1 page

Power washing and facade cleaning near WTC site during drought,

Machine-extracted title · confidence 85%

Discussion of power washing activities for building facades near WTC site during drought conditions and enforcement of emissions standards.

NYC-WTC_000163614

Folder label: “E-mails 2002 M. Gilsenan

Page image
Scanned page image, NYC-WTC_000163614
OCR text

OCR status: ok · source: pdftotext

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Gilsenan, Michael From: Kelpin, Gerry [NYCDEP/QUEENS/GERALDINEK] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 1:51 PM To: Prero, Judah; Collins, Betsy; Hoffer, Mark; Sturcken Charles (E-mail); Kelpin Gerry (E-mail) Cc: Gilsenan, Michael; Radhakrishnan, Krish Subject: RE: Power Washing

There are two things here. First, we have the buildings around WTC site that may still need to be cleaned up, which may require power washing the facades. While we have them address the potential problems from the spraying by various degrees of containment, if you are going to restrict the activity during the drought, please talk to Mike and Krish.

As Judah mentions, we can enforce for the emission that comes off of power washing activities. We do get complaints at times and have issued NOVs. A lot of the time, the companies do contain the spray or restrict access to the area they are working in. We also get complaints about the smell of additions but that should have no bearing on this discussion.

---- Original Message---- From; Prero, Judah Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 12:37 PM To: Collins, Betsy; Hoffer, Mark; Sturcken Charles (E-mail); Kelpin Gerry (E-mail) Subject: RE: Power Washing I do not find it to be covered by any provision in the drought rules. If we got creative, I guess we could say that the mere action of spraying a building will result in the wetting of the street, which is prohibited, but I honestly do not care for that all that much.

However, under the Air Code, we can issue an NOV for emission of water vapor that may cause detriment to heath, safety, welfare or comfort of any person, or injury to plant and animal life, of which may cause damage to property or business. To my knowledge, this has only been read to mean that the water vapor itself causes the detriment (such as -1 get wet walking nearby and it bugs me) and not that the use of the water itself is a detriment. Being that spraying, I would guess, will often result in getting people wet, this mat be a roundabout tool - but this provision is enforced by Gerry Kelpin's inspectors.

---- Original Message— From: Collins, Betsy Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 12:30 PM To: Prero, Judah Cc: Hoffer, Mark; McCarthy, Anne Subject: Power Washing Judah - Charlie was going to speak to Mark about power washing the sides of buildings. Is it illegal? We (BCS) don't see it in the rules but think we issued violations for it in the last drought. Charlie thinks we should issue violations now as well. Let me know what you think....

Betsy Collins Deputy Commissioner Bureau of Customer Services Department of Environmental Protection 59-17 Junction Blvd. Flushing, NY 11373 718-595-6650 [email protected]

1

NYC-WTC_000163614

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

NYC-WTC_000163614Source: 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 →