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 (34)
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
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


November 24, 1984

       The EPA establishes the National Office of the Ombudsman under the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The amendment says the function of the new office is “to receive individual complaints, grievances, and problems submitted by any person with respect to any program or requirement under the RCRA.” The Ombudsman has the authority to decide which complaints to investigate, conduct an independent investigation of a complaint, assist the person or group that makes the complaint, and make non-binding recommendations to the EPA based on the ombudsman's findings. [US Senate, 6/25/2002; GAO, 2001 Sources: Robert J. Martin]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency
          

September 30, 1988

       Congressional authorization of the EPA National Ombudsman office expires with the sunset of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (see November 24, 1984). [National Council for Science and the Environment, n.d.]
          

1991

       Following the expiration of Congressional authorization (see September 30, 1988) for the ombudsman office, the EPA decides to continue the program and expand the office's jurisdiction to include similar functions within the Superfund division. [US Senate, 6/25/2002]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency
          

October 18, 1992

       The EPA hires Robert J. Martin as the agency's National Ombudsman (see November 24, 1984). [US Senate, 6/25/2002]
People and organizations involved: Environmental Protection Agency, Robert J. Martin
          

January 3, 2001

       The EPA publishes a “Draft Guidance for the National Hazardous Waste Ombudsman and the Regional Superfund Ombudsmen Program,” which attempts to “clarify” the National Ombudsman's function. [US Senate, 6/25/2002 Sources: Federal Register, Vol 66, No. 2, 1/3/2001] The current ombudsman, Robert Martin, argues that the guidelines are actually designed to limit the scope of the ombudsman's authority, by placing the office under the authority of the head of Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), an EPA division the ombudsman may investigate. [The Washington Post, 11/29/2001]
People and organizations involved: Robert J. Martin, Environmental Protection Agency
          

July 27, 2001

       The General Accounting Office (GAO) issues a report on the National Ombudsman's office at the request of the Chairman of the House Sub-Committee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. [US Senate, 6/25/2002; House Sub-Committee on Environment and Hazardous Materials, 7/16/2002] The report criticizes the EPA's January guidance (see January 3, 2001) and concludes that the EPA's national and regional ombudsmen do not have sufficient autonomy. [The Washington Post, 11/29/2001] The GAO report recommends the following:
Strengthen the ombudsman's independence by moving the office outside of the solid waste program;

Provide the ombudsman with a separate budget and staff;

Increase the ombudsman's accountability by requiring the office to develop specific criteria for its investigations. [Sources: GAO, 7/27/2001]

People and organizations involved: General Accounting Office
          

(September 28, 2001)

       National Ombudsman Robert Martin sends a memorandum to EPA Administrator Christie Whitman suggesting that the agency implement the recommendations in the General Accounting Office's July 2001 report (see July 27, 2001). He advises against a proposal under consideration that would move his office to the Office of Inspector General (OIG). He argues that doing so would not increase the ombudsman's independence and notes that the ombudsman's mission is very different than the OIG's. [US Senate, 6/25/2002; Martin, 11/26/2001]
People and organizations involved: Robert J. Martin, General Accounting Office, EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG), Christine Todd Whitman
          

Morning November 27, 2001

       EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whitman announces that the National Ombudsman Office will be relocated to the EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG) and that control of all National Ombudsman cases will be likewise transferred to the OIG. She claims the change “will give the ombudsman more independence and the impartiality necessary to conduct credible inquiries.” [EPA, 11/27/2001] The planned change would give the EPA OIG authority to exercise editorial control over the ombudsman's comments if they concern criminal investigations. [Associated Press, 4/8/2002] Additionally, under the plan the EPA OIG would decide which cases are investigated. Decisions regarding budgets and staff would also be handled by the OIG. [Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 4/23/02] Ombudsman Robert Martin vehemently objects to the plan, telling The Washington Post in an interview that putting his office under the OIG would effectively dissolve the national ombudsman function at the EPA. “I translate that as the IG is taking over my cases. They're going to review and determine whether complaints citizens have made have merit,” Martin explains. “They're going to be doing my job.” [The Washington Post, 11/29/2001; Associated Press, 4/8/2002]
People and organizations involved: EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG), Robert J. Martin, Christine Todd Whitman
          

Afternoon November 27, 2001

       EPA ombudsman Robert Martin writes to EPA Administrator Christie Whitman criticizing her decision (see (September 28, 2001)) to transfer his office to the Office of Inspector General (OIG). Martin challenges her assertion that this would result in greater autonomy, noting that the IOG had previously “interfered with [a]... National Ombudsman investigation” of the Marjol Batter Site. [Sources: Memo from Robert Martin to Christie Whitman, 11/26/2001]
People and organizations involved: Christine Todd Whitman, Robert J. Martin, EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG)
          

December 7, 2001

       Eighteen United States Congressional representatives write to EPA Administrator Christie Whitman requesting that she refrain from transferring the National Ombudsman's office to the EPA's Inspector General until after Congressional hearings on the issue have been held in early 2002. Nine additional Congressional representatives write to Whitman on December 19 (see December 7, 2001). [US Senate, 6/25/2002]
People and organizations involved: EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG), Christine Todd Whitman
          

December 19, 2001

       Nine US Congressional representatives write to EPA Administrator Christie Whitman asking that she refrain from transferring the National Ombudsman office. Eighteen Congressional representatives have already submitted the same request to Whitman (see Afternoon November 27, 2001). [US Senate, 6/25/2002]
People and organizations involved: Christine Todd Whitman
          

January 7, 2002

       EPA National Ombudsman Robert Martin agrees to investigate the World Trade Center environmental case at the request of US Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York. [US Senate, 6/25/2002]
People and organizations involved: Jerrold Nadler, Robert J. Martin
          

January 10, 2002

       EPA National Ombudsman Robert Martin and the Government Accountability Project (GAP) file a lawsuit challenging EPA Administrator Christie Whitman's plan to relocate the ombudsman's office to the EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG) (see Morning November 27, 2001). [Associated Press, 1/10/02]
People and organizations involved: Robert J. Martin, Christine Todd Whitman, Government Accountability Project (GAP)
          

January 11, 2002

       US Federal District Court Judge Richard W. Roberts issues a temporary restraining order preventing EPA Administrator Christie Whitman from implementing a plan (see Morning November 27, 2001) to transfer the ombudsman's office and investigative files to the EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG). The restraining order will expire in early April (see April 6, 2002). [Salon, 1/14/02; US Senate, 6/25/2002]
People and organizations involved: Richard W. Roberts, Christine Todd Whitman
          

February 23, 2002

       The EPA's National Ombudsman's office convenes a hearing on the environmental issues that resulted from the attacks on the World Trade Center. Hugh Kaufman, the EPA ombudsman's chief investigator, remarks during the hearing that he believes the EPA, as well as state and city officials, have intentionally utilized inferior testing methods in order to avoid finding evidence that environmental conditions threaten public health. “I believe EPA did not do that because they knew it would come up not safe and so they are involved in providing knowingly false information to the public about safety,” Kaufman, says. “Not just EPA, the state and the city, too. We also had testimonies that all the agencies—local, state, and federal—have been consorting together every week to discuss these issues.” [CNN, 2/24/02] Numerous experts testify at the hearing, criticizing the EPA's response to the September 11 attacks, including David Newman, an industrial hygienist with the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health (NYCOSH); Dr. Thomas Cahill, of the University of California at Davis; Marjorie J. Clarke, PhD, an adjunct professor at Lehman and Hunter College, City University of New York; Alison Johnson, Chairman of the Chemical Sensitivity Foundation, among others. Government officials and employees were invited to participate—including officials from the EPA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the US Geological Survey, the governor's office, state agencies, the mayor's office and city agencies—but did not appear. “This is the first time this has happened in this type of hearing,” Hugh Kaufman, tells United Press International. [Newsmax, 2/24/2002 Sources: Transcripts of EPA National Ombudsman Hearing on EPA response to WTC contamination, 2/21/2002]
People and organizations involved: Federal Emergency Management Agency, US Geological Service (USGS), Marjorie J. Clarke, PhD, Alison Johnson, Environmental Protection Agency, Thomas Cahill, Hugh Kaufman, Cate Jenkins, PhD., Jerrold Nadler
          

February 27, 2002

       Following the February 23 hearing (see February 23, 2002) on the environmental contamination that resulted from the attacks on the World Trade Center, EPA National Ombudsman Robert Martin recommends that the EPA take immediate steps to protect the environment and health of children and young adults attending schools in and around Ground Zero. [Martin, 3/27/2002]
People and organizations involved: Memo from Robert Martin to Christie Whitman, 11/26/2001
          

March 11th, 2002

       Doug Lair, the supervisor of EPA On Scene Coordinator Charlie Fitzsimmon, in a letter to EPA National Ombudsman Robert Martin, claims that Fitzsimmons spent only “two weeks in New York City in September” and that “he has minimal knowledge of the World Trade Center response activities conducted beyond the two weeks he spent there.” [Martin, 3/27/2002] This statement contradicts evidence that Fitzsimmons and another OSC were actually at the WTC site for a longer period of time (see October 5, 2001) (see October 9, 2001-October 19, 2001).
People and organizations involved: Robert J. Martin, Charlie Fitzsimmons, Doug Lair
          

March 27, 2002

       The EPA's National Ombudsman's office publishes a report criticizing the EPA's response to the contamination that was caused by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Robert J. Martin, the EPA National Ombudsman, finds that the “EPA has neither fully used its legal authorities nor its existing hazardous materials response capabilities as a leader of the National Response System to aid the victims of the terrorist attack....” [Sources: Findings and Recommendations to Date, 3/27/2002]
Observations -

The EPA “initiated the National Contingency Plan (NCP) by mobilizing EPA On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) [from various locations in the US to work] in Lower Manhattan (see (8:50 a.m. EST) September 11, 2001) to sample indoor and outdoor air, dust and water to, among other things, determine the levels of contamination.”

“[T]he United States Geological Survey (USGS) testified that the plume of contaminated dust from the attacks was highly caustic with pH readings at least as high as 12.1 (see September 20, 2001).”

“The Director of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, has concluded that all dust from the World Trade Center attack must be presumed to be asbestos containing material (ACM) (see January 31, 2002).”

“During the last thirty years as a leader of the National Response System, EPA has used the National Contingency Plan as a framework to perform indoor air testing and remediation where there have been releases of hazardous material into homes, schools, and/or offices throughout the United States.”

Conclusions -

“A clear reading of the definition of hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), leads to the reasonable conclusion that all of the material, released from the attack may be a hazardous waste.”

“[A]ny cleanup of this dust, should have been and must now be performed in Ml compliance with the OSHA regulations including but not limited to 29 CFR 1910 and 1926.”

“The EPA is not being honest about the presence of EPA On Scene-Coordinators in New York (see October 5, 2001) (see October 9, 2001-October 19, 2001) (see March 11th, 2002).”

“EPA has not fully discharged its duties under PDD (Presidential Directive) 62 (see November 28, 2001), the National Contingency Plan (NCP) (see 1972), and the 2001 OMB Annual Report to Congress on Combating Terrorism (see August 2001). EPA has abandoned its responsibilities for cleaning up buildings (both inside and out) that are contaminated, or that are being re-contaminated, as a result of the uncontrolled chemical releases from the World Trade Center terrorist attack.”

Recommendations -

“EPA Region II should, pursuant to authorities under Presidential Directive PDD 62, and the National Contingency Plan (NCF) immediately clean the ducts and upgrade the ventilation systems to install high efficiency filtration at the Stuyvesant High School during spring break.”

“EPA Region II should execute authorities under Presidential Directive PDB 62, the National Contingency Plan (NCP), and consistent with Administrator Whitman's statement in Libby, Montana four days before the World Trade Center terrorist attack, issue legal guarantees to all building owners, building managers, local businesses, the New York City Board of Education, and condominium and coop owners to protect them from assuming the costs of cleanup from the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center.”

“Consistent with Presidential Directive PDD 62, the National Contingency Plan (NCP), and Administrator Whitman's statement in Libby, Montana four days before the World Trade Center terrorist attack, EPA Region II should cleanup all impacted buildings (interiors and exteriors) in conjunction with corresponding remediation at ‘ground zero.’ ”

People and organizations involved: Robert J. Martin, Environmental Protection Agency
          

April 6, 2002

       US District Judge Richard W. Roberts extends, by five days, a temporary restraining order (see January 11, 2002) against the EPA, prohibiting the agency from implementing plans (see Morning November 27, 2001) to transfer the function of the EPA's national ombudsman to the Office of Inspector General (OIG). [Associated Press, 4/8/2002]
People and organizations involved: Richard W. Roberts, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG)
          

April 12, 2002

       US District Judge Richard W. Roberts vacates a temporary restraining order (see January 11, 2002) against the EPA, which had prevented the agency from transferring the function of the EPA's national ombudsman to the Office of Inspector General (OIG) (see Morning November 27, 2001). The case is referred to the United States Office of Special Counsel. Within hours, EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whitman and the EPA Office of Inspector General move to implement the planned changes (see Morning November 27, 2001) to the EPA National Ombudsman office. [US Senate, 6/25/2002]
People and organizations involved: Richard W. Roberts, Christine Todd Whitman, EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG)
          

(April 19, 2002)

       The EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG) changes the locks to the office of National Ombudsman Robert Martin while he is away on official travel and sick leave. The contents of the office—computers, phones and the files of pending cases—are removed. [US Senate, 6/25/2002]
People and organizations involved: Robert J. Martin, EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG)
          

April 22, 2002

       On Earth Day, Robert Martin resigns from his position as the EPA national ombudsman in protest of the EPA's decision to curb his autonomy by placing his office under the jurisdiction of the EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG). Martin believes EPA administrator Christie Todd Whitman's decision to relocate jurisdiction of the office was caused by Martin's criticisms (and those of his chief investigator, Hugh Kaufman) of her potential conflicts of interest in respect to a Denver Superfund Site, the Marjol Battery site in Throop, PA, and his criticism of the EPA's response to environmental consequences following the World Trade Center attack in Lower Manhattan. In his letter of resignation, Martin accuses the EPA of concealing data regarding WTC toxic substances from residents, workers, and students in Lower Manhattan. [US Senate, 6/25/2002; Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 4/23/02]
People and organizations involved: Christine Todd Whitman, Hugh Kaufman, Memo from Robert Martin to Christie Whitman, 11/26/2001
          


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