New York Times article on EPA criticism regarding WTC

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

^iiH!

Danger ■ In The Dust SttK S'

EPA assured public before actual testing By Laurie Garrett SrArPWBITEB In the aftermath of the Sept. 11,2001, attacks on the World ’Trade Center, testing to monitor levels of debris dust didn’t begin for 10 days — and analysis of the findings didn’t become available until October. Months later EPA scientists would conclude that the dust caused lung disease in test animals — ailments that mimicked those reported in people who lived and worked near Ground Zero. The Environmental Protection Agency was not in possession of information about the debris dust in the air when it assured New Yorkers, fewer than two days after the World Trade Center collapse, that the public had no reason for concern about the air being ♦■'4' breathed. In the tests, conducted in May 2002, EPA scien­ tists exposed mice to dust from Ground Zero. The mice developed respiratory ailments, the severity of which closely corresponded to the dust levels, accord­ g- .A ing to the study, winch is available at www.epa.6ov. Though air monitoring for such specific substances as asbestos, lead and various h^vy metals was StV’ under way throughout the city, testily tire air for pul­ verized concrete and glass did not begin until Sept. 21, and in most locations not until October. The first results weren't available until Oct. 4. w ■■ According to an internal EPA report released Fri­ E-sb6 / day, the EPA was directed by the White House in the - days after Sept. 11 to amend its press releases by adding reassuring statements and removing caution­ J ary ones. On Sept 16, tire day before the stock mar­ ket reopened, the EPA insisted, “Our tests show that it is safe for New Yorkers to go back to work in New I York’s financial district.” Workers and residents shortly began returning to their downtown offices and homes. “People went back to their apartments because [former EPA director] Christie Todd 'Whitman said it was safe,” Dr. Steven Levin ofThe Mount Sinai Hos­ pital said in an interview. *T have patients who knew it was wrong—they could feel it. But their employer said, “The EPA says it’s safe.’ ” Levin is studying the health of 6,100 patients in the wake of the disaster. “If I have outrage over anything, this is it. 'Who do you believe? Ifyou can’t trust the EPA, it’s a terrible Newsday Photo / Jiro Ose conscience for public health.” Smoke rises from #10 World Trade Center debris at Qround Zero In October 2001. Levin and other medical professionals say thou­ sands of New Yorkers have developed respiratory ill- “Some pec^e are sure to have diJBBculty,” Levin Though smne monitors initially showed an uptick in nesses associated with exposure to the dust said. “No constmction goes on without generating the levels ofsome chemicals, including PCBs and as- Though physicians and scientists say they believe dust or smoke. So Fm definitely worried.” At its pub- bestos, none reached a level that alarmed the EPA. 8 they can rule out long-term effects such as cancer, lie meetings, the Lower Manhattan Development Most levels returned to below regulatory standards . they are concerned about the potmitial fin- penna- Corp, has not addressed the issue of air quality dur- within a week after the attacks. S nent sensitivities that cause su&rers to gasp for air. ing reconstruction. The EPA’s own publications and Web site show the 'S While scientists agr£~9mt people wme harmed by The EPA initially monitored only -for a narrow first air samples collected tor fine particulate analy- g the dust, the question is how many. range ofpossible tmdns and pollutants—those sped- sis were taken around Ground Zero 10 to 16 days § Thou^ air quality has returned to normal for fied under the Clean Air Act—and not for those that after the attack, and results weren’t-known until lower Manhattan and Brooklyn and poses no threat doctors and researchers have -pinpointed as most early October. Coarse particulate samples weren’t g to public health, the Centers for Disease Control and problematic: both large and fine particulates of pul- collected until early October, after lower Manhattan g PrOTention and the New York City health depart- verized concrete and glass. streets had been cleaned and the bulk of the debris a ment plan to follow thousands of people for more On Sept 11 fewer than a dozen air-sampling moni- outside the immediate World Trade Center site had P than a decade to monitor long-term health effects. tors — designed to do routine tests of air for viola- been removed. Because of the nature of tiie lung ailments they tions of the Clean Air Act—were in place in down- Yet on Sept 13,2001, the EPA issued the follow- g are seeing. Levin and other physicians say they are -town Manhattan and in Brooklyn. They were not de- ing statement “Monitoring and sampling conducted £ concerned about Ground Zero reconstruction, be- signed to test particulate matter levels, but instead ' on Tuesday and Wednesday [Sept. 11 and 12]have 5 cause the dust diesel fumes and other airborne parti- to measure levels of asbestos, lead, PCBs, dioxins, ------------ 7------------:-------------------------------------- cles are likely to exacerbate the ailments. various heavy metals and assorted chemicals. , See AIR onA42

NYC-WTC_000151903