News article on WTC worker health study results, 2003

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Raising a stinks/ about the EPA A s traumatized New Yorkers trudged through ash-covered streets after 9/11, many wondered how dangerous it was to J. JLbreathe the acrid air that smelled of chemicals and death. Common sense said the asbestos, benzene and other toxins released in the collapse would harm those who inhaled them. But the Eiivi- ronmental Protection Agency insisted otherwise. A week after the attacks, then-EPA Administrator Christie Whit­ man said, “I am glad to reassure the people of New York... that the air is safe to breathe and their water is s^e to drink.” She offered no data to prove this. In fact, the air downtown was not safe. Six weeks after the attacks, Daily News columnist Juan Gonzalez reported that internal government documents revealed that toxic. substances were in the air and soil around Ground Zero at levels far exceeding federal standards. But instead of focusing on a cleanup, the EPA had launched a coverup. Whitman even wrote an Opinion article for this paper in October 2001. Given The News’ coverage, she declared, “the public could un­ derstandably conclude that the situation at Ground Zero presents a major environmental health hazard to area residents and employ­ ees. That would be inaccurate.” Turns out. Whitman was, ahem, inaccurate. A recently released EPA inspector general’s report says she should not have made such a “blanket statement” because the facte proved otherwise, ft also says James Connau^ton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, “influenced EPA press releases” to down­ play the health risks of breathii^ the air in lower Manhattan. In oth­ er words, 'Whitman and Connai^ton were blowing smoke. Whitman’s explanation for that? “We didn’t want to scare people.” She also argues that when r^cue workers declined to wear protec­ tive clothing and masks, “we couldn’t force them to do it.” why did they decline? Because Whitman had told them the air was safe. The inspector general’s report recommends that the EPA now “em­ ploy aggressive testing” in residential and commercial buildings. Washington owes at least that much to New York. A News poll of New Yorkers foimd that 77% believe the EPA’s vol­ untary cleanup program downtown was insufficient and that the fed­ eral government should pay for a full decontamination of commer­ cial and residential building affected by 9/11. The feds did more than tell white lies about the white ash that wafted over lower Manhattan. Now they must set the record straight about who knew what when, and undertake a new cleanup that will ensure that downtown buildings are absolutely safe.

NYC-WTC_OOO143146