# Presentation: 590263

## Air Quality and The World Trade CenterDisaster

**Notes:**

Presentation for the
National Air Quality Conference
February 7, 2002
San Francisco

## Region 2 and The World Trade Center Disaster

- What Happened on September 11- Our Experience
- What Challenges Did We Face
- What Was the Nature of the Monitoring Response
- Environmental Impact - What We Have Found
- What We Have Learned About Preparing for Disasters

**Notes:**
There are five main topics that I want to cover with this presentation.
1.	 -	I want to begin by telling you about what happened on 			 September 11 and the activities in the succeeding weeks
      -	Region 2 is continues to devote considerable resources in 					response to the World Trade Center Disaster.
		-	Our Emergency Response Team has been on site full time since the 11th.  But even within my own Division we are devoting about 10 FTE to the effort
2.	-  I want to tell you the challenges we faced and you may face
3.	-	I want to tell you about how we planned our response

4.  -  I will briefly touch on what we are finding with regard to the environmental impact of the disaster 
5.	-	Finally, I will share with you what we have learned and are learning from this experience
		-	While hopefully this is an isolated experience, there are lessons that can be applied to other emergency actions

## What Happened on September 11How a Disaster Starts

- Photo by
- John Ciorciari
- Taken From Region 2
- Office Window

**Notes:**
-	You are all one phone call away from “Oh Shoot!” 
-     I want you to know about the challenges we faced and still face       
      so you can prepare for a disaster that we all hope will never happen
-	This picture was taken from our office window on a beautiful Fall
      morning.  This is how our experience started.

## What Happened on September 11The Aftermath

- Photos by Jack Hoyt, an EPA volunteer

**Notes:**
The Aftermath
What was left in its wake?
-	 A site is estimated to contain 1.2 million tons of debris - that stood      seven stories high in places
-      A scene of devastation so vast the it goes unnoticed that five other World Trade Center buildings were destroyed - including one 47 stories high!
-	A dust plume traversed lower Manhattan and Brooklyn and dust       was six or more inches thick in places
-     A building that was pulverized by cataclysmic forces so great that      concrete did not exist in chunks and metal was splintered

-     Asbestos debris used for insulation in 40 of Tower One’s floors

## What Happened on September 11The Aftermath

- Photo by Ronald Voelkel

**Notes:**
The Aftermath
-	EPA and other agencies were immediately asked to assess the risk to rescue and recovery workers, residents returning to their apartments, and to office workers and school administrators
-	A large number of City, State and Federal Agencies responded and so a tremendous inter-agency effort needed to be coordinated 
-	Fires were burning in the debris piles - emitting acrid choking smoke
-    Like underground fires in landfills and coal mines - the fires could not
     be easily extinguished 
-	Most times you can smell the burning as soon as you enter the 			Lower Manhattan area
-	People complain about sore throats and stinging eyes - including the
      occupants of our own building

## What Happened on September 11The Aftermath

**Notes:**
The Aftermath (cont)

- The fires and dust were only part of the environmental impact 

- a fleet of diesel powered construction equipment, trucks, barges and support equipment are removing and transporting debris which will last until May

-  debris was transported to the Staten Island landfill where it is sorted as part of a criminal investigation

- Plans are already underway for rebuilding the site with a long term impact on air quality

## What Challenges Did the EPA Face?

**A disaster so huge it outstripped available Agency resources**
**Immediate impact on a huge urban population **
**Potential exposures to pollutants that are not routinely measured and for which no health standards exist**

**Notes:**
-	The effort required a huge inter-agency coordination task - with tasks being shared
-    Because of the population exposure answers about risk were needed immediately 
-    The disaster was unprecedented - modern skyscrapers have never collapsed and burned in urban centers and so there was little knowledge of what was likely to be emitted
-     Schools, offices and residences were in immediate proximity of ground zero or debris handling facilities - the area initially cordoned off contained perhaps a population of a million including workplaces 
-     Even for pollutants we knew existed - like asbestos - there are no ambient standards
-	As could be expected people who live, work or send their children to 	school in Lower Manhattan are greatly concerned about the health 		impact of the recovery operations
-	Huge Public and Media Relations load

## What Challenges Did the EPA Face? (cont)

**Determining which pollutants are out there in concentrations that were hazardous**
**Facilities we take for granted like phones, utilities and office spaces, were lost**
**A lot of people are going to want a lot of things from you before you are in any position to deliver them**

**Notes:**
-	 EPA consulted the DOH’s and health experts to give us guidance on what kind of pollutants may be emitted.
-	Monitoring instruments that made sense in other situations were useless because there was no source of power, phone lines, or were just hazardous to technicians
-	EPA’s Manhattan Office although habitable, had no phones, computers
-	As could be expected people who live, work or send their children to school in Lower Manhattan are greatly concerned about the health 		impact of the recovery operations

- Answers were needed immediately about:
Is it safe for the rescue workers?
Can residences, offices, and school be re-habitiated?
What measures should be undertaken to clean up dust, debris?
Questions regarding National Security like how soon can the Stock Exchange reopen?

## EPA’s Air Monitoring InvolvementFirst Steps

- Response by Emergency Response Teams
- Starts within hours of  collapse
- Crude sampling equipment for survey purposes
- Coordinate state, City and federal responses
- Divide responsibilities regarding Outdoor Air, Indoor Air
- Plan short and long term monitoring network
- Plan for data interpretation and distribution

**Notes:**
-	Emergency Response Teams - Superfund contractor’s mobilized immediately - used data rams and asbestos, some grab samples

-	Many agencies responded Federal - 	EPA (ERT + ORD) / OSHA / CDC (NIOSH - National Institute for Occupational	Safety & Health + ATSDR) / GSA
-	State -	NYS DEC & DOH / NJDEP
-	City - 	NYC DEP / DOH / Department of Design & Construction / Board of Education
-	Private - 	Con Edison / Turner Construction / Port Authority / Operating Engineers Union / etc.
-	In addition EPA ORD (NERL)  has set up a meteorological station near the barge loading operation (SODAR) which measures mixing height

-  In addition, 6 portable meteorological monitoring sites were located surrounding the WTC site - RAWS.

## EPA’s Air Monitoring InvolvementMONITORING PHASES

-  Initial Hazard Assessment
- aimed at workers at ground zero
- within hours of collapse
-  Longer Term Assesment
- week three onward
- aimed at residents, students and workers in Lower Manhattan

**Notes:**
1.	Initial Hazard Assessment (first two weeks)
	-	Much of the work done by the Emergency Response Team
	-	Aimed at protecting workers at Ground Zero
	-	Consisted of personal monitoring and short term, quick sampling 		for many different pollutants at or close to the site
	-	Water and radiation monitoring as well as air
	- Coast Guard Strike Team

2.	Re-habitation (week 3 onward)
	-	Assure that the air and water are reasonably safe for healthy 				residents, students and workers to return to Lower Manhattan
	-	Includes indoor monitoring after clean up and prior to re-							habitation
		EPA supported NYC DOH & CDC
	-	Increased standard monitoring for targeted pollutants at many 				locations in the neighborhoods surrounding the site

## EPA Air Monitoring InvolvementMONITORING PHASES (cont.)

-  Risk Evaluation
- week 8 to 6 months (more or less)
- aimed at New York City metropolitan area population

**Notes:**
3.	Risk Evaluation (2 - 6 months more or less)
	-	Monitoring to collect information to assess the cumulative effect of 		many different exposures
	-	Quicker than a full blown risk analysis (which also will be done)
	-	To be done by NYS and EPA (Region 2 & ORD)
		EPA is the lead
	-	Includes organic and particle speciated monitoring to look more 				closely at potential problem pollutants

##  EPA Air Monitoring Involvement WHAT MAJOR SUBSTANCES ARE BEING MEASURED?

**Asbestos (ambient & bulk)**
**PM-10 / PM-2.5**
**Crystalline Silica**
**Metals including lead, mercury and chromium**
**Dioxin and PCBs**
**Volatile Organic Compounds including Benzene**
**Phosgene and Cyanide**
**Hydrogen Sulfide / SO****2**
**plus more**

**Notes:**
Measured Pollutants
-  Obviously, particles of all sorts and asbestos were obvious candidates for monitoring

-  The smoldering debris pile was identified as a potential source of VOCs and SVOCs including Dioxin.

-  Of course, measuring pollutants is of limited value unless you can interpret the results and as we will talk  about - define benchmarks

-  Similarly, its not of much comfort to the public unless it can be processed and distributed in some sort or timely way.

##  EPA Air Monitoring Involvement STANDARDS & BENCHMARKS

- We used established standards where available and modified guidelines intended for other purposes
- NAAQS for PM, Pb, CO, SO2
- AHERA school re-entry standard for asbestos
- OSWER residential guidelines for dust/bulk material
- OSHA PELs(Permissible Exposure Limits) for lead, certain VOCs, asbestos
- Otherwise, we developed risk-based screening levels (e.g., dioxin, PCBs)

**Notes:**
-	There are few pollutants where an appropriate benchmark existed, 	i.e., one geared to 24 hour exposures of sensitive populations.

-  There are no ambient standards for asbestos, VOC’s, Dioxin, PCBs, bulk dust, etc

Agencies need to be resourceful in developing benchmarks - in the case of asbestos bulk dust, and dioxin - levels that would trigger a cleanup under Superfund

-  A huge role for risk assessors and toxicologists who normally have more time to research and consult colleagues in order to estimate “safe” levels - not here.

-  All the uncertainties of risk assessing are exposed to the media and the public and the Agencies will need to defend them to their best abilities

##  EPA Air Monitoring Involvement Distributing the Data

- Early on the Decision is Made to Load All Data Onto the Web
- www.epa.gov,   September 11Response
- This Includes Reference Benchmarks for Interpretative Purposes

**Notes:**
EPA Web Site
-- For those of you that haven’t visited our Web Site, you should www.epa.gov and follow the links, interactive maps with actual monitored data, discussion of the nature of the pollutant and its benchmark level 
-- Our site contains:
    asbestos / bulk asbestos / PM-2.5 / PM-10 / PCBs / dioxin 	chromium / benzene / lead
--  EPA’s site has links for other sites [and this can be a problem]
Other Web sites
--  New York State DEC’s web site has hourly PM-2.5 and PM-10 levels sampled using TEOMs
--  Each pollutant has a text explanation and a benchmark discussion 

## Slide 15

**Notes:**
Monitoring Network
-	As can be seen, there is extensive monitoring going on in Lower 		Manhattan, across the East River in Brooklyn and on Staten Island 		near the landfill
-	For key pollutants, the number of monitoring sites beyond the 			normal network: 
		asbestos - ~40 
		PM-2.5 - 6 (25 total)
		PM-10 - 6 (12 total)
		speciated VOCs - 21
		metals - ~15
		Dioxin - 12

## PM10 Daily Values

**Notes:**
Particulate Matter

-- Here are some examples of the data we are collecting - note levels are not extraordinary 

-- In fact the next slide shows trends a little closer up

## PS64 PM2.5 Averages for August and September 2001 (pre and post attack)

**Notes:**
Particulate matter trends

--  Here we see PM-2.5 levels bracketing the WTC disaster at a site in lower Manhattan though not adjacent to ground zero

--  It shows what we know that fine particle levels throughout the metro area are more affected by transport and secondary particle formation than the emission from the cleanup

--  The highest levels of fine particles coincide with ozone episodes 

## Park Row Dioxin Trend

**Notes:**
Dioxin Levels

--  Dioxins were an early concern because of the fires in the debris piles and the types of materials be partially combusted - such as plastics and synthetic materials so common in our workplaces

--  Initially, we responded with dioxin sampling near ground zero - using equipment that was designed for emergency response and much higher detection levels

--  Starting in early October - we started using the Agency’s preferred method - with 24 hour samples

--   Located on Pace University and Manhattan Borough Community Colleges this are public exposure sites - both remaining open.

--  the good news is that not only are the levels no greater than 5% of the level of concern - but levels are declining -  probably due to the extinguishing of the fires.

## Environmental Impact - What We Have FoundWHAT DID WE FIND?

- At Ground Zero levels of particles, benzene, asbestos are elevated and are a potential health threat to workers.
-  EPA recommends workers use respirators at all times.

**Notes:**
Air Quality at Ground Zero

--  EPA actually probed the debris pile and found elevated levels of Benzene, asbestos and particles

--  EPA has established worker wash stations, washes down trucks and other vehicles, has vacuumed the streets with HEPA vacuum trucks, and works with City Agencies in an aggressive street washing and sweeping program.

--  EPA early on emptied its storage of respirators and made them available - [anecdote about sufficient number]

## Environmental Impact - What We Have FoundWHAT DID WE FIND? (CONT)

- 	Elsewhere - although short-term irritant health effects may persist as long as smoke and dust are present near the site, levels of contaminants in the air and dust in the neighborhoods near the site are not high enough to cause long-term health effects.

**Notes:**
Air Quality Impact on the General Public
--  This statement is not sufficient to assuage all public concerns, particularly when other heath symptoms are present:
-	coughing, eye irritation, throat irritation
--  I and co-workers have experienced it in our office space

--  Issue of what is safe.  Urban air is not generally safe as shown by NATA and ozone nonattainment

--  A health assessment is the better way of assessing longer term risk - but not timely enough for decision makers today

## What We Have Learned About  CRISIS MANAGEMENT

**You need to plan in the calm times prior to the disaster **
**Chose an incident response model and stick to it **
**a centralized response with clear lines of responsibility is critical **
**work needs to be divided**
**The incident response plan supersedes existing organizational lines**

**Notes:**
Crisis Management
Plan now when you you have the luxury of time

There are a number of incident response models - chose one and stick with it

The demands of an emergency may overwhelm the emergency response teams and assistance and expertise will be needed from elsewhere - know where to get it ahead of time

The normal organization structure was not designed for emergencies, and incident response models take precedence

## What We Have Learned About  CRISIS MANAGEMENT

**Data systems are very important and often overlooked**
**In the public’s eye it’s all about Risk Communication**

**Notes:**
Data Systems
-  Whatever the network you establish it’s likely you will generate huge volumes of data
-  The data will likely not be in a convenient electronic form in a timely enough way - you need to have a plan to get it processed quickly

Risk Communication
-  The public and elected officials will want to know if the air is “safe” or not - this is a concept that we are not in a position to say.

-  The trick will become how to provide the assurances about what we know without overstating the case or without fuzzing it up with so much jargon the public considers it double-talk or a cover-up.

## What We Have Learned AboutCRISIS RESPONSE

- Ensure that field and office staff are getting **sufficient direction, support and resources **to do their job
**Keep** **meetings** **SHORT**!
**Responsibilities get blurred**
- people need to be able to work outside of their normal areas of responsibilities

**Notes:**
Ensure that field and office staff are getting sufficient support and resources
-	Be able to quickly provide space to the response team so that they 			can work as a unit
-	Shortfalls in trained and cleared staff, laboratory resources, 							equipment, vehicles and space can delay or complicate the response

Meetings are huge time wasters
--  Plan to have some individuals that are not involved in the daily activities so they can plan and think and are not caught up in the daily insanity

Normal Agency Lines of responsibility are not appropriate
-	EPA is given responsibilities (e.g., indoor clean up, worker safety)
	without commensurate authority

## What We Have Learned AboutPLANNING AIR MONITORING

**Inventory monitoring resources and develop plans to tap them **
**Ensure different Agency elements understand each other capabilities **
**Know the capabilities of other state, federal and city agencies and plan with them**
**Establish benchmarks ahead of time****	****	**
**Know background concentrations**

**Notes:**
Know your capabilities - have people talk to each other
-  what you don’t realize may surprise you - for example, Superfund folks know their response folks but may not normally work with air program and monitoring folks and vice versa

-  similarly - many different agencies have expertise - like OSHA for example, which can supplement the data base

Establish or compile benchmarks ahead of time
-  it may also surprise you that what you may think pollutants which health effects are well understood - for example Asbestos - have no usable standards for ambient concentrations

Know Background concentrations beforehand
-  knowing concentrations of pollutants isn’t always sufficient - for example, high benzene concentrations around a disaster may just be typical for urban background 

## What We Have Learned AboutRISK COMMUNICATION

**Knowing the answers makes risk communication easier**
**Data management and interpretation problems can undermine Agency credibility**
**You need to get the data out there QUICKLY**
**don’t OVERSTATE what you know**
**ESTABLISH teams to manage, interpret and post data**

**Notes:**
Data management and interpretation problems can undermine agency credibility
-	Develop an emergency response data management infrastructure
-	Establish a data base which will be available to populate with data 			collected during the response action
	Identify in each EPA organization who the points of contact are 				based 	on their familiarity with the system
	>		this will ensure that all parts of EPA and the public get critical data
-	Determine whether specific regulations, guidelines or benchmarks 	apply and use them in evaluating public health impact
-	Create an ad hoc team to manage, interpret and post data 

## What We Have Learned AboutPUBLIC OUTREACH

**The public will be skeptical of what you say**
**Don’t expect to be thanked**
**Be prepared with as much information as possible**

**New York Daily News**
**Wednesday, November 21, 2001**

**Notes:**
The Programs and Communications must work closely together
-	Early on develop a plan for the public dissemination of information 	during	emergencies
-	Delays and inconsistencies in the release of information hurts 		credibility and the perception of responsiveness
-	Be prepared for Gadflies and responsible scientists to appear           and challenge Agency findings and statements - no one gets press coverage by agreeing with you
-	A responsible, professional press office is invaluable
-  Programs need to streamline data interpretation and assessment
Outreach
-  Find your friends and allies and work with them
-  Don’t take it personally

## Summarizing What We Learned PREPARING FOR DISASTERS

- Plan Now
- Inventory Resources - people and monitoring equipment
- your organization and others
- Have a data processing plan
- Know your Background levels and Benchmarks

**Notes:**
A centralized response structure is needed for an effective response
-	Emergency response action may last longer than anticipated.  Based 		on staffs’ talents and availability, there may be a need to align 						responsibilities