EPA response on environmental conditions and federal role, February 2002

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document FEB-19-2002 16:26 USEPR R2 DEPP SPmPB 1 212 637 3771 P.05/07

In addition, we have made every effort to disseminate to foe public foe results of our monitoring. Our web site fwww.epa.eov1 contains foe results of all of our outdoor monitoring. going back to September. We have endeavored to present the information gained from our monitoring in a form readily understandable and accessible to foe general public.

It has become clear in recent days that despite our best effort:, some results that were developed by other federal agencies and that would have been of interest to foe public were not disseminated through our web site. Even though that data was consistent with our own, I still believe the public interest would have best been served by malting it available promptly. That is why I have directed my staff to review both our internal and inter-agency procedures for evaluating for inclusion on our web site such information that comes into our possession. I am conunitted to foe public’s right to know.

Fortunately, the xwults of our Ksting of outdoor onviroiusestBl conditions to date have consistently indicated that air quali^ in Lov'er Manhattan does not pose a long-term risk to those who live, work, or visit there. Of course, f iat does not necessarily apply Io workers ar Ground Zero - for them, we continue to urge the use ofprotective gear as they perform their very difScult and dangerous work.

1 am also pleased that over the same poiod of time, testing done by other agencies has j confirmed the results which we have found. For example, when looking at asbestos, analysis I

done by the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) through use of their AVZRIS remote sensing device is consistent with studies done by foe EPA. As Commissioners Frieden and Miele testified at your hearing yesterday about their analysis of various testing and monitoring done at the site, 'The data from air quality tests thus for have been, in general, reassuring. None of foe testing done to date has shown results that would indicate long-term health impacts."

Although I am encouraged by foe results of this testing. I am not yet satisfied. Too many I I questions remain about possible short-term health affects and about short-term exposures to materials not previously evaluated, such as fibrous glass, gypsum, mica, etc. To help fill-in our knowledge about fose issues, our Office ofResearch and Development has already launched tests on mice, to evaluate foe health affects ofshort-term exposum offoe particulates generated bV the destraction of the World Trade Center.

In addition, 1 have asked foe President’s science ^visor. Dr. Jack Marburger, to convene an inter-agency panel to pull together all foe work foe various federal agencies are doing to study environmental conditions and possible resultant health risks in Lower Manharian. I also asked him to put out a request for information about wok those outside foe federal government may be doing. It is important that foe numerous efforts that are ongoing in this area be pulled together, evaluated, and synthesized, so that foe public m L. -uHy and clearly informed about foe work that has been conducted by various fed^ agencies and others.

2

NYC-WTC_000151690