TESTIMONY
Thomas
R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H.
Commissioner
New
York City Department of Health
and
Joel
A. Miele Sr., P.E.
Commissioner
New
York City Department of Environmental Protection
before
the
U.
S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
Subcommittee
on Clean Air, Wetlands, and Climate Change
at
9:30
a.m., Monday, February 11, 2002
Alexander
Hamilton U. S. Customs House
New
York City
Good morning. I am Dr. Thomas Frieden, Commissioner of Health for New York
City. With me today is Commissioner
Joel Miele of the New York City Department of Environmental Protection. We appreciate having the opportunity to be
here today. I am very pleased that the
Committee is holding these hearings.
This is a complex and highly technical subject, and we would like to
take this opportunity to explain how the situation is being monitored and let
you know our views on the implications of these findings.
As I have reviewed the record of
activities of DOH and other agencies since the first day of the disaster, one
of the most vivid pictures to emerge, and one that I find quite extraordinary,
is the tremendous cooperation and coordination among federal, state and local
environmental, occupational and health agencies. The degree of teamwork among more than a dozen agencies is probably
unprecedented. For the first several
weeks after September 11th,health and environmental agencies met
daily to discuss environmental health issues.
These meetings and conference calls continued three times a week through
the end of 2001. Weekly conference
calls continue.
I. Department of Health Role:
Following the attack on the World Trade Center, the New York City Health Department had a multifaceted role in overseeing and coordinating many health-related issues. Immediately after the attacks, the Health Department established surveillance systems to (1) monitor emergency departments in the immediate area to assess acute injuries among victims, (2) assess hospital staffing and equipment needs citywide, (3) monitor illness and injuries among rescue workers at the World Trade Center site, and (4) detect unusual disease syndromes that might represent a bioterrorist event at emergency rooms throughout the city.
Other responsibilities included
monitoring water and food safety in the immediate area, conducting rodent and
vector control, initiating a worker safety program, and providing regular
advisories to the public and the medical community regarding issues of public
health concern related to the attack.
The Department also facilitated development and coordination of
environmental sampling plans and results.
Many individuals were exposed to large
amounts of smoke, dust, and airborne substances during and after the initial
collapse of the World Trade Center buildings.
The potential release of contaminants, including asbestos, particulate
matter, volatile organic compounds, dioxins, PCBs, metals and other substances
during and after the explosion was a primary public health concern from the
very beginning, and air monitoring
was established immediately, and continued over time. The Health Department closely reviewed, and continues to review,
the numerous air quality, debris sample results and personal air monitoring
tests being conducted by various agencies.
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.
The numerous substances of potential
concern have led to some confusion about health effects over the short and long
term. 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.
Other substances, such as asbestos, are not expected to have short-term
effects, but if elevated over long periods of time can have serious health
effects. Asbestos was one of the
substances of greatest concern since it was a known building component in the
World Trade Center. However, except for
a few transient spikes found in air sampling during the initial weeks, the
asbestos levels have been within standards.
An indoor study conducted by
Department of Health and the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (ATSDR) of both air and dust samples taken in November and December of
2001 at thirty residential buildings in lower Manhattan showed no elevated
levels of asbestos in the air. Dust
sample tests showed low levels of asbestos in some samples and the presence of
fiberglass in some other dust samples.
Asbestos and fiberglass can be a problem if they become airborne. Airborne fiberglass can cause cough and
skin, throat and eye irritation. While
there are no known long-term effects of fiberglass, it is classified as a
possible carcinogen. While these
findings are not unexpected, they underscore the importance of properly
cleaning surfaces to minimize exposure.
DOH has issued advisories to building owners and residents about
appropriate cleaning methods. DOH has
issued advisories for residents about appropriate cleaning methods.
The standards used are very
conservative. For example, for
asbestos, we are using the indoor air quality standard for reentry into a
school after asbestos removal. This
stringent standard is being applied to outdoor air quality in the residential
areas. Stringent standards are also
being used for other substances, such as dioxins, identified at the perimeter
of the site. It is both duration of
exposure and concentration of the substance that are important to determine
health effects. Many of the standards
were based on exposures for prolonged periods of time. This is a key point. Some substances may cause short-term
effects; others have the potential to cause long-term impact. In some instances, the health effects of
exposures are not known. Standards for other substances 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.
Many residents living and working in
the community have reported short-term health effects, such as acute breathing
problems; worsening of existing respiratory disease such as asthma; eye, nose,
and throat irritation; nausea, and headaches.
Many residents also continue to experience emotional and stress-related
illness and anxiety.
Students of Stuyvesant High School,
who returned to their school on October 9, 2001, reported similar
complaints. DOH performed an analysis
of these complaints, which shows that the average daily rate of headaches,
respiratory, skin, eye, throat, and injury complaints of Stuyvesant was higher
in October and November of 2001 than in the previous year, and higher than four
other NYC public high schools. The data
also shows that complaints decreased from October to November 2001.
DOH has also been working with the
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to develop a protocol for a
World Trade Center Registry, which, if funded, would generate and maintain a
database that can be used as a basis for conducting studies that can provide a
more complete picture of short- and long-term health and mental health impacts
among affected populations.
The City Health Department recognizes
residents’ concerns and will continue to work closely with local, state and
federal agencies to monitor air quality and to inform the public of findings as
soon as results are available. Together
with the City Department of Mental Health, which is also under my jurisdiction,
we are addressing resident’s mental health concerns by promoting the ongoing
Project Liberty program, a statewide disaster-recovery initiative that offers
free crisis counseling, education and referral services. DOH will continue its community outreach
and education efforts. Now I would like
to turn to Commissioner Miele to discuss DEP’s role in our joint efforts.
II. The role of the Department of
Environmental Protection
In addition to DEP’s operation of the
City’s sewer and water systems, our expertise in regulating asbestos in New
York City was a significant portion of our responsibilities following September
11th. Since 1985, DEP has
been the New York City agency with responsibility for regulating asbestos
abatement. Starting September 12th,,
DEP operated a network of outdoor air monitors that have been used for
monitoring outdoor asbestos levels.
Aside from repairing water and sewer infrastructure, assessing and
mitigating risks caused by the presence of asbestos-containing material has
dominated DEP’s work in responding to the Trade Center attack.
Since September 11th, DEP
or its contractors analyzed 3060 samples from 37 outdoor monitoring sites in
lower Manhattan; 500 samples collected adjacent to the four schools in the
vicinity of the Trade Center; and 328 samples taken in the four boroughs of the
City outside of Manhattan. The map and
all sampling results to date from the sites shown on this map are available to
anyone on DEP’s website: www.nyc.gov/dep. Of these samples, only 9 of the total of
3864, or 0.2%, exceeded the federal re-occupancy standard for indoor air. These 9 samples were all taken in the
vicinity of Ground Zero. As
Commissioner Frieden noted, there is no established standard for asbestos in
outdoor air. Unlike carbon monoxide, nitrogen
oxides and other gases whose presence in outside air is regulated under the
Clean Air Act, asbestos is a once-prevalent building material, and previous
work at standard-setting has focused on establishing safe levels for asbestos within
buildings. On September 12th,
when my colleagues and I were creating our monitoring networks, we knew that
there were no reliable, scientifically-based, acceptable standards that would
tell us what level of asbestos in outdoor air might be considered “safe” or
“unsafe.” Therefore, we opted to use
EPA’s indoor post abatement re-occupancy of schools standard as our
threshold level of concern since we felt it was more protective.
Let me briefly explain our sampling
methodology. The samples are collected
on filters and examined under PCM (Phase Contrast Microscopy) utilizing a
specific method developed by the National Institutes for Occupational Safety
and Health. The PCM analysis counts all
fibrous particles, including asbestos.
PCM sample results are compared to the clearance/re-occupancy standard
for indoor air following an asbestos abatement project. This standard is 0.01 fibers per cubic
centimeter. Samples found to be above
this standard are re-examined using TEM (Transmission Electron
Microscopy). The TEM analysis identifies
the type of particles collected. TEM
results are compared to the clearance/re-occupancy standard for indoor air in
schools after an asbestos abatement project. This standard is 70 structures of asbestos per square
millimeter. The standard was established
pursuant to the federal “Asbestos Hazard and Emergency Response Act”, usually
known as “AHERA”.
Based on all federal, state and local
test results, public health experts have consistently expressed confidence
that, based on sampling, airborne asbestos levels do not pose a threat to human
health. Health professionals have
stated that short-term exposure to airborne asbestos, at levels equal to or
lower than 0.01, carries an extremely low risk of causing asbestos-related
illness.
Before allowing occupants in any
residential or commercial building near the Trade Center site, the City’s
various agencies, acting through its Office of Emergency Management, required
building owners to take these steps:
ü
assess the building’s
structural strength and stability using qualified professionals;
ü
restore gas and
electrical service;
ü
restore building water
service, including flushing, re-filling
and cleaning roof tanks where necessary;
ü
assess the presence of
hazardous materials such as asbestos, and remediate as required under
applicable City regulations using qualified professionals; and
ü
inspect, clean and
repair mechanical and HVAC systems.
While
property owners were accomplishing these tasks, DEP and its sister agencies, again acting through the Office
of Emergency Management, assumed
responsibility for cleaning streets, sidewalks and common areas so that there
was a safe outdoor environment to reach
the buildings for contractors and workers who were retained by owners and
managers to effect all necessary exterior and interior cleanup of private
buildings . To assist property owners,
DEP engaged in the following tasks, among others:
ü
developed and
distributed advisories to building owners and occupants;
ü
established HELP lines
for concerned owners or tenants to respond to complaints or concerns about
proper abatement procedures for contractors;
ü
provided telephone
consultation to building owners, contractors, consultants and tenants related
to asbestos clean-up;
ü
performed site
inspections and conducted building surveys;
ü
reviewed sampling data
submitted by building owners, their contractors and consultants;
ü
reviewed the scopes of
work for clean-up of asbestos-containing material; and,
ü
developed emergency
certification procedures and offered daily certification exams to ensure a
properly trained and qualified work force was available.
·
Although city, state and federal
agencies have provided oversight and guidance on interior clean-up, that task
remains the responsibility of building owners and occupants. For example, some building owners identified
the presence of asbestos-containing material (ACM) during their assessment for
hazardous materials in areas of the buildings under their control. Once material is identified as ACM, New York
City rules require that a licensed
contractor with certified asbestos workers perform the clean-up
activities. As noted above, DEP
technical staff has been continuously available to assist in the development of
plans for handling asbestos clean-up activities. At the completion of the clean up activities, the City’s
regulations require clearance air sampling by licensed professionals prior to
allowing re-occupancy of areas where asbestos work had been performed.
As general guidance to lower Manhattan
residents, the Department of Health developed a fact sheet “Recommendations for
People Re-Occupying Commercial Buildings and Residents Re-Entering Their
Homes.” This fact sheet, along with
others on related topics, was distributed very widely in lower Manhattan. These fact sheets offer general information
on air quality issues as well as practical, “how-to” information on dealing
with dust, debris and other potentially hazardous conditions that residents
face as they return to their homes.
Finally, I have a few words concerning
the potable water supply and the marine waters that surround the City. Although I believe the Subcommittee’s major
objective is to review issues associated with air quality, I would like to take
a few minutes to assure the Subcommittee that neither New York Harbor, nor the
City’s potable water supply were degraded by the Trade Center attack.
As a result of
the attack, DEP and EPA were concerned that rainwater washing off the Trade
Center site and into the sewers and the harbor could be polluted. Manhattan’s sewers –- as well as most City
sewers --- are combined sewers, meaning
rainwater flooding into the sewers from the streets ends up in the same pipe as
the sanitary flow. During a rainstorm,
a percentage of this combined flow ends up at our treatment plants, and the
remainder of the combined flow is discharged untreated into surrounding waters
through outfalls located at the bulkheads.
In the case of lower Manhattan, the combined sewers serving that area
lead to a very large pumping station at East 13th St in
Manhattan. From there, the sewage is pumped
to Greenpoint, Brooklyn where it is treated at the Newtown Creek wastewater
treatment plant.
DEP routinely samples raw sewage going
into the Newtown Creek plant, as well as treated effluent coming out of Newtown
Creek, several times each day. We also
regularly take samples from open waters at various locations in New York
Harbor, including near the Battery. DEP
tests these samples for “conventional parameters,” such as temperature, pH,
dissolved oxygen, suspended solids and coliform. These conventional parameters have consistently remained within
their normal ranges since September 11th.
Using the more sophisticated testing
capabilities that EPA has at its disposal, beginning September 11th,
their staff immediately began supplying us with results from tests for
“unconventional parameters” on samples of
run-off from the Trade Center site, harbor waters, and sewage. These unconventional parameters include
PCB’s, dioxin, asbestos and other organic chemicals and contaminants for which
the City’s harbor water quality laboratories do not routinely test. Initial runoff samples taken near Rector
Street showed elevated levels of PCB’s, dioxin, asbestos and metals. Follow-up samples showed concentrations of
these substances below levels of concern.
Samples of harbor water and samples of effluent from the Newtown Creek
plant also show the presence of “unconventional parameters” at levels too low
to be of concern.
Finally, let me reassure all New Yorkers
that continuous sampling of the drinking water supply at the reservoirs, in the
aqueducts, and within the City’s distribution system have shown all parameters
to be within the normal range and below any levels of concern.
***
Thank you Mr.
Chairman and Senators for this opportunity to present testimony. We look forward to answering your questions.