NYC Law Department release
Independent mirror · updated as the City releases more · v1.2.6
← Document results/DEP Box 44/No folder label
Document / 7 pages

Draft screening levels asbestos, fiberglass, silica, Apr 2002

Machine-extracted title · confidence 85%

Correspondence discussing draft EPA screening levels for asbestos and silica in indoor air and settled dust during post-WTC response.

NYC-WTC_000164455–000164461
Page image
Scanned page image, NYC-WTC_000164457
OCR text

OCR status: ok · source: pdftotext

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

*

From: DeVoney, Danielle Sent: Monday, April 01. 2002 11:58 AM To: '[email protected]’; [email protected]: [email protected]: Roden beck, Sven; [email protected]: [email protected] : DeVoney, Danielle; [email protected] : [email protected] : [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]: Randi J. Walker; Patricia M. Fritz Cc: [email protected] : [email protected] : [email protected] Subject: draft screening levels for asbestos, FG and silica in indoor air and settled dust Importance: High

Hi- Main points of discussion on these issues for today’s call are outlined below. I’ve tried to identify the main technical issues, so we can reach consensus, or identify additional information we need to consider on each point. I have included tiered screening values for fibrous glass which take into consideration both dust and air levels. There are two versions of these screening levels which take different approaches as outlined below. I thought this would be useful for the discussion. 1) Sampling methodology for fibers. The microvac technique seems to be the most well developed method. It is a written and approved ASTM method which would give us surface loading information. 2) Use of K factors, or other techniques to extrapolate from settled dust to air screening values. Questions: a) Does the group feel Millette’s K factors are well enough supported to apply in this case? b) What other options exist? (see “Dust Ideas 1 April.wpd” below) c) Can K factors be applied to non-fibrous dust components?

3) What risk estimate should be used for asbestos screening values?

A straight 1 year continuous exposure scenario gives a screening values of 0.028 f/cc. However, if this is based on sampling during daily activity, it may underestimate due to episodic higher exposures. Earlier screening level for this tier was set at 0.01 f/cc. One option would be to use non-aggressive air sampling in conjunction with settled dust levels and modeling of activity based episodic exposures for a combined risk assessment. 4) Sampling methodology and screening values for silica. We are still working on determining a dust sampling method for silica. The sampling method should be defined prior to determining a screening value for these data.

□ AsbScreenDr 1 Apri l.wp d □ AsbCalcslApril.xls

NYC-WTC_000164457

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

NYC-WTC_000164457Source: 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 →