The Center for Cooperative Research
U:     P:    
Not registered yet? Register here
 
Search
 
Current timeline only
Advanced Search


Main Menu
Home 
History Engine Sub-Menu
Timelines 
Entities 
Forum 
Miscellaneous Sub-Menu
Donate 
Links 
End of Main Menu

Volunteers Needed!
Submit a timeline entry
Donate: If you think this site is important, please help us out financially. We need your help!
Email updates
 



  View mode (info):
  Ordering (info):
  Time period (info):

General Topic Areas

Indoor remediation (34)
Misuse of EPA standards (17)
EPA's reponse (21)
Personal stories (3)
Government statements
Expert opinions/Independent studies (36)
Rescue/recovery workers (18)
Government tests (33)
Deception (22)
Documented cases WTC-related illness (4)

Specific Issues and Cases

The Transfer of the EPA Ombudsman (22)
Asbestos removal in Libby, Montana (7)
USGS assessment (9)
Click here to join: Suggest changes to existing data, add new data to the website, or compile your own timeline. More Info >>

 

Environmental Impact of 9/11

 
  

Project: Environmental impact of 911 attacks

Export to XML Printer Friendly View Email to a Friend Increase Text Size Decrease Text Size


(Afternoon) September 11, 2001

       The New York City Department of Health issues an alert titled, “Terrorist Attack at the World Trade Center in New York City: Medical and Public Health Issues of Urgent Concern.” The notice contains various instructions for the medical community including a “Smoke and Dust Advisory” urging “individuals who have a history of heart and lung conditions or are in areas where smoke or dust is visible ... to remain indoors with the windows shut and air conditioners on recirculate or turned off.” [Centers for Disease Control, 9/11/01; New York City Department of Health, 9/11/2001]
People and organizations involved: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, New York City Department of Health
          

(9:00 p.m.) September 11, 2001

       New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani says in an interview with CNN's Larry King: “The Health Department has done tests and at this point it is not a concern. So far, all the tests we have done do not show undue amounts of asbestos or any particular chemical agent that you have to be concerned about.” [Healthline News, 9/15/2001; ABC News, 9/13/2001; CNN, 9/11/2001]
People and organizations involved: Rudolph ("Rudy") Giuliani
          

(September 12, 2001-December 31, 2001)

       The White House's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) dictates the content of EPA press releases to the EPA's Public Information Officer in a series of emails. “100 percent of what CEQ added was added: 100 percent of what CEQ deleted was deleted,” an internal EPA investigation will later report. [EPA IG, 1/27/2003 cited in Jenkins, 7/4/2003]
People and organizations involved: Council on Environmental Quality
          

September 12, 2001

       Tina Kreisher, a spokeswoman for the EPA, says, “At the moment, we really don't detect any real danger.” [Healthline News, 9/15/2001; ABC News, 9/13/2001]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Tina Kreisher
          

September 13, 2001

       The New York City Department of Health (DOH) issues its second alert since the fall of the towers. The update, titled, “Terrorist Attack at the World Trade Center in New York City: Medical and Public Health Issues of Urgent Concern,” warns the Manhattan public: “Asbestos was used in the construction of the World Trade Center. Tests performed indicate that asbestos may be present in an area marked by Worth St. to the North, Centre and Nassau Sts. to the East, and Exchange and Thames Sts. to the South.” [New York City Department of Health, 9/13/2001 01] The DOH report goes on to say that the “health risk posed by a single exposure of short duration is very low” and that the “risk to persons who have not been present in the affected area following the disaster is also thought to be extremely low.” [New York City Department of Health, 9/13/2001 01]
People and organizations involved: New York City Department of Health
          

(September 13, 2001)

       A fact sheet issued by the New York City Department of Health states that dust and ash from the WTC collapse contains “trace amounts of asbestos” and denies that short term exposure poses a health risk. “Based on the asbestos test results received thus far, the general public's risk for any short or long term adverse health affects are extremely low,” the notice claims. [New York City Department of Health, 9/22/2001]
People and organizations involved: New York City Department of Health
          

September 14, 2001

       EPA and OSHA announce that the majority of air and dust samples monitored in New York's financial district “do not indicate levels of concern for asbestos” and that ambient air quality “meets OSHA standards.” The two agencies also say that OSHA has new data indicating that indoor air quality in downtown buildings “will meet standards.” The agencies' conclusions are based on samples taken on September 13. “OSHA staff walked through New York's Financial District ... wearing personal air monitors and collected data on potential asbestos exposure levels. All but two samples contained no asbestos.... Air samples taken ... inside buildings in New York's financial district were negative for asbestos. Debris samples collected outside buildings on cars and other surfaces contained small percentages of asbestos, ranging from 2.1 to 3.3—slightly above the 1 percent trigger for defining asbestos material.” [Environmental Protection Agency, 9/14/01; Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 9/14/01] But the EPA improperly implies that the one percent level is a safety benchmark (see (September 12, 2001)), even though it had previously acknowledged that airborne asbestos particles are unsafe at any level (see September 14, 2001). Furthermore, its test results are not accurate, as they are based on the outdated polarized light microscopy (PLM) testing method, which is incapable of identifying fine fibers and which cannot reliably detect asbestos when it is present in concentrations below one percent (see November 20, 1990).
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
          

September 14, 2001

       EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman is quoted by Newsweek saying that the smoke plume at the World Trade Center disaster site is “not a health problem.” She says: “We have found particulate matter in the air, but other than being an irritant to those people who are out there breathing it deeply that's why people are wearing protective gear and masks it is not a problem for the general population.” [Newsweek website, 9/14/2001 cited in Jenkins, 7/4/2003]
People and organizations involved: Christine Todd Whitman, Environmental Protection Agency
          

September 14, 2001

       John L. Henshaw, Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, states: “Our tests show that it is safe for New Yorkers to go back to work in New York's financial district. Keeping the streets clean and being careful not to track dust into buildings will help protect workers from remaining debris.” [EPA, 9/14/2001]
People and organizations involved: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), John L. Henshaw
          

September 14, 2001

       EPA spokeswoman Bonnie Bellow says, “There's nothing at this point that indicates that business can't resume” in the Wall Street area on Monday as scheduled. [Newsday, 9/15/2001; Newsday, 9/15/2001 cited in Jenkins, 7/4/2003]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Bonnie Bellow
          

September 15, 2001

       EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman says with regard to Manhattan's air quality, “[T]here is no reason for concern.” She says that her agency is regularly sampling airborne particles and that findings indicate that most locations have an asbestos level of less than one percent—the amount above which the EPA considers a material to be “asbestos-containing” —but notes that the highest recorded reading so far was 4.5 percent (see (Between 10:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. September 11, 2001)). [Newsday, 9/16/01] But the EPA is wrong to use the one percent level as if it were a safety benchmark (see (September 12, 2001)). Furthermore, its test results are not accurate, as they are based on the outdated polarized light microscopy (PLM) testing method which is incapable of identifying fine fibers and which cannot reliably detect asbestos when it is present in concentrations below one percent (see November 20, 1990).
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Christine Todd Whitman
          

September 16, 2001

       The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) publishes a “fact sheet” on the dust and debris that blanketed surrounding streets and penetrated numerous buildings during the collapse of the World Trade Center. The first section, titled, “What is in the dust,” states only: “Dust is a mixture of very fine particles that originally made-up the materials of the WTC and the aircraft that struck it. These particles differ depending on what material the dust came from, how the dust was created, and what happened to the dust after it was released. Analysis of dust samples will provide information on components of the dust. We expect that materials that would be present would be at concentrations lower than those normally associated with health effects.” The flyer makes no effort to name the toxic chemicals and other harmful substances that were known to have been in the two towers. [Kupferman, 2003; US Department of Health and Human Services, 9/16/2001]
People and organizations involved: US Health and Human Services (HSS)
          

September 16, 2001

       The EPA and OSHA release a joint statement asserting that the air in downtown New York City is safe to breathe. “[N]ew samples confirm previous reports that ambient air quality meets OSHA standards and consequently is not a cause for public concern,” the agencies claim. [EPA, 9/16/01] But it is later learned that the press release had been heavily edited under pressure from the White House's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). Critical passages in the original draft were either deleted or modified to downplay public health risks posed by contaminants that were released into the air during the collapse of the World Trade Center. [Newsday, 8/26/03; EPA Office of Inspector General, 8/21/2003]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Council on Environmental Quality
          

September 18, 2001

       EPA Administrator Christie Whitman announces that results from further air and drinking water monitoring near the WTC site and the Pentagon indicate that there are few significant risks to public health. “We are very encouraged that the results from our monitoring of air quality and drinking water conditions in both New York and near the Pentagon show that the public in these areas is not being exposed to excessive levels of asbestos or other harmful substances,” she says. “Most” of the 62 dust samples taken by the agency contained less than one percent of asbestos. [EPA, 9/18/01] The EPA incorrectly uses the one percent level of ambient asbestos as if it were a safety benchmark (see (September 12, 2001)). Moreover, the test results Whitman cites are based on the less sensitive and outdated polarized light microscopy (PLM) testing method which is incapable of identifying ultra-fine asbestos fibers and which cannot reliably detect asbestos when present in concentrations below one percent (see November 20, 1990). Whitman's statement also observes that where asbestos levels have exceeded the EPA's one percent “level of concern,” the “EPA has operated its 10 High Efficiency Particulate Arresting (HEPA) vacuum trucks to clean the area and then resample.” She adds that the trucks have also cleaned the “streets and sidewalks in the Financial District in preparation for ... return to business.” [EPA, 9/18/01] However, it is later discovered that the contractor hired to clean the streets failed to equip the vacuum trucks with the required HEPA filters. [Kupferman, 2003; New York Daily News, 8/14/2002]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Christine Todd Whitman
          

September 21, 2001

       EPA Administrator Christie Whitman assures New Yorkers that environmental conditions in Manhattan—both inside and outside—are safe, and provides a summary of the tests that have so far been performed on the city's air and drinking water.
Water - Whitman says: “As we continue to monitor drinking water in and around New York City, and as EPA gets more comprehensive analysis of this monitoring data, I am relieved to be able to reassure New York and New Jersey residents that a host of potential contaminants are either not detectable or are below the Agency's concern levels. Results we have just received on drinking water quality show that not only is asbestos not detectable, but also we can not detect any bacterial contamination, PCBs or pesticides.” She does say however that “following one rainstorm with particularly high runoff, we did have one isolated detection of slightly elevated levels of PCBs (see September 14, 2001).”

Outdoor air - Whitman says that outdoor air sampling does not indicate the existence of significant public health risks. This claim is based on results obtained using the outdated polarized light microscopy (PLM) testing method (see September 12, 2001) which is incapable of identifying ultra-fine fibers and which cannot reliably detect asbestos when present in concentrations below one percent (see November 20, 1990). Even though Whitman denies a significant risk to public health, she does say “seven samples taken at or near Ground Zero have had marginally higher levels of asbestos that exceed EPA's level of concern,” and that her agency has “done a total of 101 dust samples, of which 37 were slightly over the one percent asbestos.” Whitman does not mention that the EPA's “level of concern” is not a safety benchmark (see (September 12, 2001)) but rather the detection limit of the polarized light microscopy (PLM) testing method (see November 20, 1990).

Indoor air - Whitman claims, “New Yorkers and New Jerseyans need not be concerned about environmental issues as they return to their homes and workplaces.” But the EPA has no data indicating that indoor air is actually safe. The only indoor tests that have been conducted by the EPA were in the EPA's Region 2 offices located in the Federal Building and a few neighboring buildings—and the results from several of these tests were positive for chrysotile asbestos (see September 13, 2001-September 19, 2001). [Nadler, 3/18/2002; EPA, 9/21/01]

People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Christine Todd Whitman
          

September 22, 2001

       The New York City Department of Health issues a press release reiterating earlier public statements regarding the air quality in Manhattan and announces that the agency has distributed over 50,000 copies of the New York City Department of Health's recommendations for tenant re-occupancy (see September 17, 2001). The press release quotes New York City Health Commissioner Neal L. Cohen, MD, who asserts that “there are no significant adverse health risks to the general public....” and “all residents and business owners should check with their building managers or owners to make sure that their buildings are safe, and have been certified for re-occupancy.” Residents and business owners who are permitted to return to their buildings “should follow Health Department recommendations to minimize exposure to dust and other particulate matter that may cause throat and eye irritation,” he says. The statement goes on to say that only people who live or work “within the general vicinity of the blast zone ... and who have been approved to resume tenancy are advised to wear a dust mask while outside. Dust masks are not necessary for residents in other areas.” Tenants following the DEP's cleanup guidelines should find it “unnecessary to wear a mask while inside buildings,” the statement says. [New York City Department of Health, 9/22/01]
People and organizations involved: New York City Department of Health, Neal L. Cohen, M.D.
          

October 3, 2001

       EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman and John Henshaw, US Department of Labor Assistant Secretary for OSHA, announce that their two agencies “have found no evidence of any significant public health hazard to residents, visitors or workers beyond the immediate World Trade Center area.” But later in the statement, they acknowledge that to date, “Of 177 bulk dust and debris samples collected by EPA and OSHA and analyzed for asbestos, 48 had levels over 1 percent, the level EPA and OSHA use to define asbestos-containing material.” Additionally, they say that out “of a total of 442 air samples EPA has taken at Ground Zero and in the immediate area, only 27 had levels of asbestos above the standard EPA uses to determine if children can re-enter a school after asbestos has been removed....” [EPA, 10/3/01]
People and organizations involved: Christine Todd Whitman, John L. Henshaw
          

October 5, 2001

       New York City Health Commissioner Neal L. Cohen, MD, says that despite smoky conditions in areas of Lower Manhattan, “test results from the ongoing monitoring of airborne contaminants indicate that the levels continue to be below the level of concern to public health.” [New York City Department of Health, 10/5/01]
People and organizations involved: Neal L. Cohen, M.D., New York City Department of Health
          

October 11, 2001

       The New York Daily News reports, “[EPA spokeswoman Bonnie] Bellow says none of the agency's tests for the presence of asbestos, radiation, mercury and other metals, pesticides, PCBs or bacteria have shown any evidence of any significant public health hazard.” [New York Daily News, 10/11/2001 cited in Jenkins, 7/4/2003]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Bonnie Bellow
          

(October 25, 2001)

       Joel A. Miele, Sr., commissioner of the city's Department of Environmental Protection, claims his agency has “bent over backwards to be as conservative as possible in our testing ... and there is no significant danger” to anyone's health. “People are safe, not just at the site, but at the perimeters,” he adds. [Newsday, 10/26/2003 cited in Jenkins, 7/4/2003]
People and organizations involved: The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Joel A. Miele Sr.
          

October 25, 2001

       The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) publishes a notice for residents of Lower Manhattan reassuring them that the DEP, in collaboration with other government agencies, is doing everything it can to protect public health. The agencies are taking samples of the air, dust, water, river sediments and drinking water and analyzing them for the presence of pollutants, the statement says, and comparing them to a variety of government “benchmarks, standards and guidelines.” The notice claims that current monitoring indicates that containment levels do not represent a significant threat to public health. [EPA, 10/25/01]
People and organizations involved: The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)
          

October 26, 2001

       New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani says NYC government agencies have found that environmental conditions in Lower Manhattan “are not health-threatening ... what I'm told is that it is not dangerous to your health.” [New York Daily News, 10/27/2001]
          

(October 31, 2001)

       EPA Administrator Christie Whitman continues to reassure the public regarding environmental conditions in Lower Manhattan and says: “Those of us in government and the media share an obligation to provide members of the public, in a responsible and calm manner, with the information they need to protect themselves and their families from any environmental hazards that may result from the attacks on the World Trade Center.” [New York Daily News cited in Asthma Moms, 10/31/01]
People and organizations involved: Christine Todd Whitman
          

November 1, 2001

       Several government experts testify at a New York City Council meeting on environmental conditions following the collapse of the World Trade Center towers. [New York Daily News, 11/1/2001] Kathleen Callahan, deputy regional director of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), insists that New Yorkers living and working near the World Trade Center site are not in danger. “The vast majority of our tests find levels of these contaminants pose no significant long term health risks to residents, business employees and visitors beyond Ground Zero,” she says, repeating what earlier EPA statements have asserted. Downplaying the danger of those areas where higher asbestos levels have been found, she states—falsely (see September 1989) (see October 3, 2001-March 1, 2004) —that “EPA and Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards are set many times below the level at which you would expect health impacts.” She advises New Yorkers who live or work in the affected areas to “follow the recommendations of the New York City Departments of Health and Environmental Protection on how to clean up properly (see September 17, 2001).” [EPA, 11/1/2001] Another expert, Dr. Jessica Leighton, assistant city health commissioner for environmental risk assessment, similarly states that people living and working in Lower Manhattan have little to worry about. She says in response to a question whether or not “people are safe at the present level” of contamination: “As far as the science has shown us right now, that is absolutely correct.” Like Callahan, she claims that EPA standards are overly protective. “The standards or tolerance levels that are being used are very conservative,” she claims. “For example, for asbestos, we are using the standard that is used for indoor air quality for reentry into a school after asbestos removal, which is the most stringent standard, as the tolerance level or standard for outdoor air quality in the residential areas. This is also true for other substances, such as dioxins, identified at the perimeter of the site.... Moreover, these standards have been designed to include many safety factors so that acceptable levels of exposure are far below the levels at which health effects are expected to occur.” [New York City Department of Health, 11/1/2001] Joel Kupferman, executive director of the New York Environmental Law and Justice Project, questions the accuracy of Leighton's and Callahan's statements and accuses them of withholding some test results. [New York Daily News, 11/1/2001] Kathryn Freed, a New York City Council Member who represents Lower Manhattan, said she was not convinced by agency assurances, noting that firemen are already showing symptoms of emphysema, a terminal disease for which there is no cure. “Just because it doesn't reach a certain level is really irrelevant when people are sick,” says Marc Ameruso, a member of the area's community board. [New York Times, 11/1/2001]
People and organizations involved: Kathleen Callahan, Jessica Leighton, PhD., Joel R Kupferman, Kathryn Freed
          

(November 8, 2001)

       EPA spokeswoman Mary Mears is quoted by Newsday: “Given the levels of asbestos we don't think there is any kind of significant health risk for people working or living near the site. But there could be some risk to the workers who are actually on the site where the levels tend to be the highest.” [Newsday, 11/9/2001]
People and organizations involved: Mary Mears
          

November 26, 2001

       Jessica Leighton, Ph.D., the assistant commissioner of environmental risk assessment at the New York City Department of Health, testifies before a number of committees of the New York State Assembly. She says that the department has taken a lead role in monitoring the environmental conditions near the WTC site and that there are few concerns that there will be long term effects on public health. “Some substances, such as the particulate matter from the dust or the smoke in the air, can be irritating but are not expected to have long term effects for most people,” she says. “Other substances, such as asbestos, are not expected to have short term effects, but if elevated over long periods of time can have long term effects.” [New York City Department of Health, 11/1/01]
People and organizations involved: Jessica Leighton, PhD.
          

November 26, 2001

       Kathleen Callahan, deputy regional director of the US Environmental Protection Agency, testifies before the joint New York State Assembly Committees on Environmental Conservation, Health, and Labor. She reiterates past EPA assertions that WTC contaminants pose no long term risks to local residents. “We've tested for the presence of pollutants such as asbestos, fine particulate matter, lead, volatile organic compounds, dioxin, benzene, metals, PCBs and other chemicals and substances that could pose a threat to the public and workers at the site,” she says. “Fortunately, the vast majority of our tests find levels of these contaminants that pose no significant long term health risks to residents, business employees and visitors beyond Ground Zero. And despite recent press accounts which suggest otherwise, these findings have not changed. In fact, environmental conditions off the site have improved in recent weeks.” Callahan also says that people concerned about contamination in their homes “should follow the recommendations of the New York City Departments of Health and Environmental Protection on how to clean up properly” (see September 17, 2001). [Sources: Speech, Kathleen Callahan, 11/26/2001]
People and organizations involved: Kathleen Callahan
          

Early December, 2001

       The EPA outside air monitoring station at Stuyvesant High School records an asbestos level of 124 fibers per square millimeter, which significantly exceeds acceptable background levels. [New York Daily News, 12/20/2001]
People and organizations involved: Stuyvesant High School, Environmental Protection Agency
          

(Early January 2002)

       EPA spokeswoman Bonnie Bellow tells the Washington Post: “There is nothing we have found that is at a significant level that would say you should not come here to live or work.” [The Washington Post, 1/8/2002]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Bonnie Bellow
          

(Early February 2002)

       EPA spokeswoman Bonnie Bellow states, “Based on our findings, and now really more than 10,000 samples of a wide range of substances, we have found no significant long term risk posed by the outdoor air.” [USA Today, 2/7/2002 cited in Jenkins, 7/4/2003; USA Today, 2/7/2002]
People and organizations involved: Bonnie Bellow, Environmental Protection Agency
          

(February 9, 2002)

       New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg proclaims, “Every test that has been done says the air quality was in acceptable limits.” [New York Daily News, 2/10/2002 cited in Jenkins, 7/4/2003]
          

(February 11, 2002)

       Thomas R. Frieden, MD, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Health, testifies before the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and says: “The data from air quality tests thus far have been, in general, reassuring. None of the testing done to date has shown results that would indicate long term health impacts.” But his assessment is based on a flawed interpretation of the AHERA standard. He incorrectly (see October 3, 2001-March 1, 2004) says in the testimony that “the clearance/reoccupancy standard for indoor air in schools after an asbestos abatement project ... is 70 structures of asbestos per square millimeter.” [Sources: US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, February 11, 2002]
People and organizations involved: Thomas R. Frieden
          

December 20, 2002

       The EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment releases a draft of “Exposure and Human Health Evaluation of Airborne Pollution from the World Trade Center Disaster” for public review. The draft report evaluates outdoor levels of various contaminants to which the public may have been exposed. The draft report also includes results from rodent respiratory toxicology studies which suggest a link between short-term exposure to WTC contaminants and mild lung inflammation and cough. [jipsee Federal Register: December 27, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 249); EPA, 12/20/2003]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency
          

August 21, 2003

       The EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG) releases its investigative report on the EPA's response to the environmental consequences resulting from the collapse and burning of the World Trade Center towers. [BNA Daily Environment Report, 3/20/2003 Sources: EPA August 21, 2003] The report, titled, “EPA's Response to the World Trade Center Disaster Collapse: Challenges, Successes, and Areas for Improvement,” concludes:
The agency did not have sufficient data to support its claim that air in Lower Manhattan following September 11 was “safe to breathe” (see September 16, 2001).

The White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) “heavily influenced” the EPA's press releases, minimizing the risk to public health. Selected emails analyzed by OIG “indicated that CEQ dictated the content of early press releases” (see (September 12, 2001-December 31, 2001)).

The EPA does not have an adequate system for reviewing and approving the content of EPA press releases.

The EPA misled the public by failing to acknowledge that “health standards do not exist” for the cumulative simultaneous impact of exposure to more than one toxin and that the synergistic effects resulting from these combinations are not well-understood.

The EPA Region 2 incorrectly applied AHERA and NESHAP asbestos standards as safety benchmarks when in fact these referred to the detection limits of certain testing methods (see (September 12, 2001)).

The EPA failed to consider the short-term impacts of acute exposure to various toxins.

The EPA lacked sufficient data on 10 of the 14 “pollutants of concern” identified by scientists as possible components of the WTC dust and debris.

The EPA based its assessments on a risk standard of 1-in-10,000 for only some of carcinogenic pollutants thought to be contained in the clouds instead of the 1-in-1,000,000 acceptable-risk standard. It also ignored the agency's traditional reliance on the 1-in-100,000 level, which usually triggers corrective action.

The OIG determined there is “no evidence that EPA attempted to conceal data results from the public.” However, EPA scientist Cate Jenkins provides evidence the EPA and the City of New York DEP did in fact alter and in effect, conceal data results (see July 15, 2004).

The OIG finds that the EPA should have implemented the National Contingency Program (see 1972), which would have given EPA jurisdiction over other government agencies and control over the issue of indoor air contamination. Critics of this report will argue that the EPA had in fact implemented the NCP immediately after the attacks (see After November 1, 2001).

People and organizations involved: EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG), Cate Jenkins, PhD., Council on Environmental Quality
          


Except where otherwise noted, the textual content of each timeline is licensed under the Creative Commons License below:

Creative Commons License Home |  About this Site |  Development |  Donate |  Contact Us
Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use