World Trade Center environmental data report, 2001-2002

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

It also concluded that EPA presented “an overriding message that there was no significant threat to human health” even though there was cause for caution. “When EPA made a September 18 announcement that the air was ‘safe’ to breathe, it did not have sufficient data and analyses to make such a blanket statement,” said the OIG, adding that the agency lacked data on other pollutants, such as particulates and chemicals like PCBs, and had samples of dust showing that 25 percent contained asbestos, a potent carcinogen.

According to the report, on the morning of Sept. 12, EPA former Administrator Christie Whitman issued a memo stating, “All statement to the media should be cleared through the NSC (National Security Council) in the White House before they are released.” A contact person at the Council on Environmental Quality was named to vet all press releases.

The Inspector General’s 165-page report compares EPA’s own drafts of press releases to their final versions after having been vetted by the White House. Here are some examples:

• Although EPA’s position has been that WTC residents should obtain a professional cleaning, the final press release” deleted this information and instructed them to refer to the city’s Department of Health instructions instead. • Although EPA had wanted to give specific warnings for “sensitive populations”—i.c. asthmatics, parents of young children, the elderly, etc.—those warnings were also removed. • One press release that would have said “recent samples of dust gathered by OSHA show higher levels of asbestos in EPA tests” was changed to state "samples confirm previous reports that ambient air quality meets OSHA [Occupational Safety and Health Administration] standards and consequently is not a cause for public concern." • In another draft, the language would have said asbestos levels in some areas were two to three times higher than national was changed to “slightly above the 1 percent trigger for defining asbestos material." • A draft that would have said initial tests failed to turn up dangers instead added the statement: "Our tests show that it is safe for New Yorkers to go back to work in New York's financial district." • A statement warning of potential lead and asbestos exposure at Ground Zero was changed to state that while some contaminants had been found, "the general public should be very reassured by initial sampling."

EPA Acting Administrator Marianne Horinko told MSNBC news that the press releases and how they might have been changed ought to be balanced against an awareness of the dimensions of the challenge on 9/11. Coordinating communication among agencies was a “huge challenge for us,” she says.

In the early days and weeks of the World Trade Center disaster, says Horinko, there was such chaos that mistakes were inevitably made. “Did we rush out (too soon) with data? On balance, I think we used our best professional judgment in an atmosphere where people were clamoring for answers.” But the agency wasn’t trying to deceive the public, she claims. (26)

In the future, Horinko told NEHA, there will certainly be efforts to make sure people are not reassured wrongly and that health risks are accurately described.

In the Inspector General’s report, Tinsley tempers her criticism with a recognition of the unprecedented challenges of the agency and the bravery and dedication of its employees. “This

94

NYC-WTC_000145012