The announcement by the federal Environmental Protection Agency that it will clean every apartment in lower Manhattan below Canal Street is going to emerge as a classic of government goofiness. The general idea — to clean up the dust and soot left by the attacks of September 11 — may seem wonderful at first blush. But even the most naive New Yorker would inquire as to the cost before engaging a cleaning person to scour his apartment. And that matter seems to have eluded the politicians who have put the public checkbook at the disposal of the downtown cleanup operation.

In a press conference to announce the initiative at the EPA’s New York City office, the commissioner of the city’s Department of Environmental Protection, Christopher Ward declined, despite repeated queries from the assembled press, to give even a ballpark figure for what this program will cost. However, he did throw out there that cleaning the average apartment will cost somewhere around $3,000 to $5,000. That’s for an estimated 15,000 apartments in the covered area. That could mean a price tag ranging up to $75 million.

The EPA tells us that residents will have to request that their apartments be cleaned. So the cost will be limited by the demand. But it’s hard to see what incentive there will be for people to turn down a free sprucing up. The cleaning process will likely be a hassle for apartment dwellers, but paranoia about lingering toxins will ensure a healthy uptake on the offer. It turns out, though, that environmental testing for asbestos and other pollutants will mostly take place after the government has cleaned the apartments, ensuring that we’ll learn next to nothing about how necessary, or unnecessary, the great cleanup process will have been.

The logical thing would be to test first and then ask people if they want a free cleaning. If the EPA is correct in telling us, as they have been, that there is no immediate health risk presented by World Trade Center debris, it seems only logical to take time up front to see if there are dangerous levels of toxins, and where such cleaning needs to be done. What happens if such problems are encountered, say, north of Canal Street? It would also make sense for the government to require that the apartment owner or tenant cover a portion of the cleanup for the apartments it goes in to. Nothing exorbitant. But enough to keep a government program from being mistaken for a free lunch.