Mindfully.org This Domain & Website Are For Sale. Serious Inquiries Only. Contact Here

Home | Air | Energy | Farm | Food | Genetic Engineering | Health | Industry | Nuclear | Pesticides | Plastic
Political | Sustainability | Technology | Water

EPA's 9/11 Air Ratings Distorted, Report Says 


[NY Times article below]

WASHINGTON—In the days after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, White House officials persuaded the Environmental Protection Agency to minimize its assessment of the dangers posed by airborne dust and debris from the skyscrapers' collapse, according to an internal agency report.

The White House Council on Environmental Quality "convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones" from news releases, said the report by the EPA's inspector general office, an internal watchdog.

For instance, a draft EPA news release for Sept. 16, 2001, warned that the air near the attack site could contain higher levels of asbestos, a carcinogen, than is considered safe.

After input from the White House environmental council, the release as issued by the EPA said the asbestos levels met government standards and were "not a cause for public concern."

The report also concluded that the EPA lacked sufficient data and analyses when, on Sept. 18, it announced that the air in Lower Manhattan was safe to breathe.

Evaluation Report: EPA’s Response to the World Trade Center Collapse: Challenges, Successes, and Areas for Improvement Report No. 2003-P-00012 / EPA Office of Inspector General 21augu03

Street level conditions in 
Lower Manhattan after collapse.

Source: wtcphotos by flagsoncars.com


At the time, air-monitoring data was not yet available for pollutants such as particulate matter and polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, the report stated.

It said the EPA should have qualified its assertion, warning that the air was not safe for children, the elderly or cleanup workers at the site that became known as ground zero. Also, while outdoor air in the surrounding area was safe, indoor air was not, the report said.

The report, released late Thursday, said "competing considerations, such as national security concerns and the desire to reopen Wall Street, also played a role in EPA's air quality statements."

But White House and EPA officials said Friday that in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks, public health was their prime concern as they worked together to provide the most responsible advice in an extraordinarily chaotic situation.

"We were trying to quickly get out the best information we could so that people didn't overreact and also so people didn't underreact," said James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. The council coordinates environmental policy throughout the administration.

A New York lawmaker charged that the White House hid crucial information that could have helped residents and workers protect their health.

"EPA officials lied when they initially were telling people that the air was safe," said Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler, whose district includes the attack site. "That's an outrage."

But acting EPA Administrator Marianne L. Horinko, who was involved in the Sept. 11 response, said the inspector general's report "trivialized a national emergency and focused on nits."

Horinko said she "vehemently" disagreed with the report's assessment, saying that EPA officials used their best professional judgment and the best science available when declaring the air safe.

"As soon as you have data you should tell the public what that data is, and what the data are telling you," Horinko said. "Even in the early days, the data were telling us that the vast majority of people were not going to have serious problems."

After terrorists flew hijacked jets into the World Trade Center and toppled its twin towers, dust, debris and smoke filled the air in Lower Manhattan, inundating buildings, stinging eyes and searing lungs.

The immense scale and reach of the acrid plume raised fears of possible widespread health risks from asbestos, lead, concrete dust and a variety of other chemicals.

The EPA played a key role in assessing the health risks posed by the dust and soot, and the agency has continued to oversee the cleanup.

Nadler, other New York officials and public health activists have consistently criticized the EPA for underestimating the risks and failing to do enough to protect public health. Those critics say the inspector general's report was confirmation from inside the EPA that their concerns were valid.

According to the report, the White House had a role from the start in shaping EPA statements after the Sept. 11 attacks. On Sept. 12, the EPA deputy administrator sent an e-mail to senior agency officials stating that "all statements to the media should be cleared through the [National Security Council] before they are released," according to the report.

An official at the White House Council on Environmental Quality was designated to help the EPA obtain such clearance.

Examples of White House influence on the EPA's public messages included advice given to those living close to the World Trade Center, according to the new report.

EPA officials were said to believe the nearby residences should be cleaned by professional crews, but the agency's news release did not include such instructions.

When asked about it, an associate EPA administrator said: "It was in a press release; it was removed by" the official with the environmental quality council, according to the report.

In another example, the report said a draft EPA news release for Sept. 13 warned that "even at low levels, EPA considers asbestos hazardous in this situation."

After the White House suggested changes, the release as issued read: "short-term, low-level exposure of the type that might have been produced by the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings is unlikely to cause significant health effects."

The report also criticizes the EPA for failing to more actively address indoor air pollution. The dust settled in furniture, curtains, rugs and air vents in nearby buildings.

Many months after the attacks, residents continued to complain of health problems such as chronic coughs, which health experts say were caused by corrosive concrete dust, ground glass and other lung irritants.

Nina Lavin, a jewelry designer who lives in Lower Manhattan, developed chronic bronchitis and moved into a hotel for 10 months after high levels of asbestos were detected in her apartment. She said Friday she was not surprised by the EPA inspector general's conclusions.

"You couldn't be in this neighborhood at the time and think the air was OK," Lavin said. "I am grateful that the report has, against all odds, come out revealing some of the truth."

Although her apartment was cleaned, the EPA refused to scrub the ventilation system in the 460-unit building, she said.

Nikki L. Tinsley, the EPA inspector general, said the main aim of the report was to learn from mistakes to ensure an improved agency response in the event of future large-scale terrorist attacks.

There have not been any major studies of the health effects on the general public of the pollution caused by the collapse of the World Trade Center, according to the report.

However, New York City and federal health officials are studying residents and employees of Lower Manhattan to try to identify long-term lung effects.

Several studies have found that a high percentage of rescue workers and firefighters suffered from lung ailments and ear, nose and throat problems in the months after the attack.

Public health activists in New York were disappointed that the top EPA officials disputed the conclusions of the agency's inspector general.

"It is troubling," said Joel Shufro, executive director of the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health, an advocacy and training group. "There is still a significant amount of asbestos and heavy-metal contamination in Lower Manhattan, which should be cleaned up to protect public health."

* Times staff writer John J. Goldman in New York contributed to this report.

source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-epa23aug23,1,7647261.story?coll=la-home-leftrail 23aug03

EPA Watchdog Rips White House on NYC Air 

AP 23aug03

WASHINGTON—At the White House's direction, the Environmental Protection Agency gave New Yorkers misleading assurances that there was no health risk from the debris-laden air after the World Trade Center collapse, according to an internal inquiry.

President Bush's senior environmental adviser on Friday defended the White House involvement, saying it was justified by national security.

The White House "convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones" by having the National Security Council control EPA communications in the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, according to a report issued late Thursday by EPA Inspector General Nikki L. Tinsley.

"When EPA made a Sept. 18 announcement that the air was 'safe' to breathe, the agency did not have sufficient data and analyses to make the statement," the report says, adding that the EPA had yet to adequately monitor air quality for contaminants such as PCBs, soot and dioxin.

In all, the EPA issued five press releases within 10 days of the attacks and four more by the end of 2001 reassuring the public about air quality. But it wasn't until June 2002 that the EPA determined that air quality had returned to pre-Sept. 11 levels—well after respiratory ailments and other problems began to surface in hundreds of workers cleaning dusty offices and apartments.

The day after the attacks, former EPA Deputy Administrator Linda Fisher's chief of staff e-mailed senior EPA officials to say that "all statements to the media should be cleared" first by the National Security Council, which is Bush's main forum for discussing national security and foreign policy matters with his senior aides and Cabinet, the inspector general's report says.

Approval from the NSC, the report says, was arranged through the White House Council on Environmental Quality, which "influenced, through the collaboration process, the information that EPA communicated to the public through its early press releases when it convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones."

For example, the inspector general found, EPA was convinced to omit guidance for cleaning indoor spaces and tips on potential health effects from airborne dust containing asbestos, lead, glass fibers and concrete.

James Connaughton, chairman of the environmental council, which coordinates federal environmental efforts, said the White House directed the EPA to add and delete information based on how it should be released publicly. He said the EPA did "an incredible job" with the World Trade Center cleanup.

"The White House was involved in making sure that we were getting the most accurate information that was real, on a wide range of activities. That included the NSC—this was a major terrorist incident," Connaughton said.

"In the back and forth during that very intense period of time," he added, "we were making decisions about where the information should be released, what the best way to communicate the information was, so that people could respond responsibly and so that people had a good relative sense of potential risk."

Andy Darrell, New York regional director of Environmental Defense, an advocacy group, said the report is indicative of a pattern of White House interference in EPA affairs. "For EPA to do its job well, it needs to be allowed to make decisions based on the science and the facts," he said.

Marianne L. Horinko, EPA's acting administrator, said the White House's role was mainly to help the EPA sift through an enormous amount of information.

"We put out the best information we had, based on just the best data that we had available at the time," said Horinko, who headed the agency's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, which oversaw the World Trade Center environmental monitoring and cleanup.

"And it was using our best professional judgment; it was not as a result of pressure from the White House," she said. "The White House's role was basically to say, 'Look, we've got data coming in from everywhere. What benchmarks are we going to use, how are we going to communicate this data? We can't have this Tower of Babel on the data."'

The EPA inspector general recommended that EPA adopt new procedures so its public statements on health risks and environmental quality are supported by data and analysis. Other recommendations include developing better procedures for indoor air cleanups and asbestos handling in large-scale disasters.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-EPA-Air-Safety.html 23aug03

If you have come to this page from an outside location click here to get back to mindfully.org
Please see the Fair Use Notice on the Homepage