Building exterior cleaning RFP revisions, April 2002

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Gilsenan, Michael

From: Chapin, Diana Sent: Wednesday, April 03,2002 9:10 AM To: Gilsenan, Michael Subject: FW: suggested changes in exterior cleaning RFP

Call me to discuss

---- Original Message---- From: Jim Miller [mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 6:27 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected] Subject: suggested changes in exterior cleaning RFP

Please review the following suggested changes. If acceptable, a revised RFP could be issued at the pre-bid conference. I recognize these changes come very late in the process.

Revise DEP Building Exterior and Rooftop Cleanup specifications to provide a more informed and relevant Scope and Background Discussion

Specifically, revise clean up protocols to more effectively correspond to risk:

DEP will use conservative (protective) cleaning method for all debris regardless of asbestos content. The DEP will clean building exteriors utilizing state-of-the-art cleaning methods designed to remove particulate source materials in a safe and effective manner. These methods are derived from modifications to traditional abatement techniques. Because of the very low probability of exposure to elements contained in the solidified debris, these methods are protective to the public and to cleaning personnel.

Initially require worker and resident protections as specified, including changing areas, worker personal protective equipment (PPE), monitoring, etc., and allow downgrading of these requirements secondary to objective data (i.e., visual assessments, personal and area air monitoring).

Limit requirement of covering roof openings to within 15 feet of observed debris locations.

Remove the requirement for filing of ACP 7

Restate Scope of Work language as follows:

Delete last sentence in paragraph 3: "Based on these results and the most stringent assessment and evaluation, this material is assumed to be ACM and shall be cleaned by NYS DOL licensed contractors with DEP and NYSDOL certified workers." This contradicts the DEP approach to assessing and mitigating WTC dust since 9-11. DEP should indicate that results of its bulk sampling data indicates that the debris generated by the collapse of the WTC towers is not a homogenous material. Results of air sampling by DEP and others indicates that WTC debris does not tend to aerosolize and is not a significant source of airborne asbestos fibers. In addition, field observations indicate the WTC debris is non-friable and represents a low hazard potential.

DEP should state its approach to assessing and mitigating WTC dust since 9-11. 1

NYC-WTC_000163638