NYC-WTC_000195741

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Second, the NYC DOH recommendations are for people reoccupying commercial offices, as well as homes, yet the recommendations omit any mention of applicable OSHA regulations, or that all of the dust must be presumed to contain asbestos.”’ All of this is under EPA oversight.”® Yet, not only does the EPA allow these recommendations to be made by NYC DOH, the EPA actually refers people to them. As a result, the people of Lower Manhattan are being advised to clean asbestos-laden dust with wet rags and mops, with no enforcement of OSHA regulations or EPA regulations requiring the use of properly trained personnel to abate hazardous materials. This is clearly not the intent of federal law, for if average citizens could remediate hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants with a wet rag, there would be no need for a National Contingency Plan in the first place.

The EPA has the ability to correct these wrongs and act in accordance with the law. Even if a decision had been made for the City to take responsibility for indoor air, federal statutes provide for the EPA to act when nonfederal authorities are either unwilling or unable to do so, and to do so in a timely manner.”’ The EPA is aware of the inadequate measures taken by the City. It was the EPA that faxed us the initial September, 2001 DEP notice to building owners, which contained no enforcement measures or resources for remediating homes and businesses. The EPA received independent test results in October, 2001 that showed elevated levels of hazardous materials inside people’s apartments. The EPA heard testimony from residents at the Senate field hearing in New York The press accounts from the last two months alone should make the agency aware that hazardous materials are still contaminating peoples’ homes. The EPA cannot plead ignorance, nor can it point fingers at FEMA. To do so is to misrepresent the law.

As stated before, the EPA should be operating in New York City in accordance with the National Contingency Plan and PDD 62. The NCP exists so that there is a transparent, accountable and coordinated decision-making process. If decisions were made in Lower Manhattan pursuant to the NCP, the EPA has provided no evidence of the process. Because the Federal Response Plan activated the NCP, the EPA has the responsibility to manage hazardous materials remediation. The NCP is authorized by CERCLA, despite the fact that Lower Manhattan is not a Superfimd site, nor does the EPA need to use Superfund Trust Fund money in exercising its authority under the law?^° The NCP gives the EPA the authority and the resources to ensure that hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants do not pose a threat to public health. The EPA has failed to uphold this law in response to the collapse of the World Trade Center. It must remedy ^s situation by complying with the NCP now.

“Recommendations for People Re-Occupying Commercial Buildings and Residents Re-Entering Their Homes,” (www.ci.nyc.nv.us/html/doh/html/alerts/wtc3.htmn. printed on January 24"’’2002 3:42pm. 40 CFR 300.135 (1); 40 CFR 300.150; Executive Order 12580, later amended by Executive Order 12777;40 CFR 300 40 CFR 300.410 (c)(l)(v); 42 U.S.C 9604 (a)(4); CRS Report RL30798, Environmental Laws: Summaries ofStatutes Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, by Martin R. Lee, January 4, 2001. ‘“40 CFR 300

23

CITY_21MC100_003076441

NYC-WTC_000195763