NYT Article on WTC Memorial Design Finalists, 2003

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

^N.Y.C. Air Quality, Post 9/11 YOUR SEPT. 8 PERISCOPE ITEM “ ‘WE Were Not Told to Ue’ About 9/U and Health,” was inaccurate. As you noted in a correction on Sept. 22,1 did not work for the asbestos industry. You did not mention, however, that I in fact started my career working with plaintiffs’ lawyers who repre­ sented victims of asbestos. My work with those victims has given me a clear trader- standing and deep, personal sensitivity to the risks of exposure to asbestos. In the days immediately following the 9/11 at­ tacks, the Environmental Protection Agen­ cy and Council on Environmental Qualitj’, working with OSHA and New York offi- aals, worked to report on New Yoik’s air and water quality swiftly, objectively and accurately. We used the best information available, applied seasoned professional judgment and provided it to the public. As noted in an evaluation by the EPA’s in­ spector general on the air quality of lower Manhattan, the inspector general “spoke to a number of experts in the field of envi­ ronmental monitoring, including physi­ cians, industrial hygienists, and research­ ers. These experts generally agreed that the levels of airborne asbestos detected in the air outside the perimeter of Ground Zero... did not present a significant increase in long- tenn risk to the public.” With respect to the workers at Ground Zero who fa^ signifi­ cant safely and environmental hazards, we consistently advised than to wear respira­ tors and lake extra precautions based on axailable data. To this day, we are continuing our monitoring, support and long-term re­ search operations. The safety and well-being of the people of New York were always, and remain, our highest priority. James U Connaughton Ouiirman, Council on £nvironmental Quohty WASHINGTON, D.C.

NYC-WTC_000142937