WTC environmental investigation report, Sep 2002

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Final Technical Report of the Public Health Investigation Page 55 of 56

LCDR Jeffery A. Church, REHS, MPH CDR Tim Radtke, CIH LT Hayden R. Hardie, CIH LCDR Robert B. Knowles, MS, REHS LCDR Nathan C. Tatum, PE

New York State Department of Health

Robert Chinery Randi J. Walker

World Trade Center Environmental Assessment Working Group

Formed on September 15, 2001, the World Trade Center Environmental Assessment Working Group is made up of representatives from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Department of Labor. Other governmental (e.g.. New York State Department of Health, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and New York City Department of Environmental Protection) and private organizations (unions, research institutions, companies) participated on the Working Group. The purpose of the group is to coordinate public health and occupational sampling and data review among the three federal agencies in support of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and the New York State Department of Health.

* Cumulative exposure is expressed as a constant air concentration over a specified period of time. If a worker is exposed to a constant concentration of 1 mg/m^ of quartz throughout the workday, for an entire year, that is equivalent to 1 (mg/m^) work-year. (One milligram per cubic meter of air is 1 mg/m^).

+ In order to compare a continuous residential exposure to a workday exposure, the estimated air level was adjusted to be comparable to a shorter workday exposure across the entire year.

+ It should be noted that children might be at slightly higher risk than adults in sensitive populations. However, the estimated 0.08 (mg/m^) work-year exposure is significantly below the departure threshold of 1 mg/m^ per work-year exposure, and therefore no adverse effects would be expected.

± This estimate was derived by looking at cancer incidence studies and by relating the incidence of lung cancer to silicosis risk estimates. Both methods provided similar risk estimates. However it should be noted other authors caution about directly linking silicosis and lung cancer risk estimates (39).

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gOv/asbestos/lowermanhattan/ResSamp_Sep2002_Text.htnil 07/18/2003 NYC-WTC_000178442