It took over a year to get the leadership in Congress to support the $90 million for the medical screening of World Trade Center workers. Federal resources for the monitoring program, even 8 months after they were appropriated, have still not been dispersed and apparently will not be dispersed until May 2004 at the earliest. Why is this happening? This is wrong. We should figure out to move the system forward.

And I hope that NIOSH will explain why they are proposing to change the system, and at the very least their changes should not in anyway disturb the monitoring the program that is already in place and not have gaps in that monitoring programs.

And are there sufficient funds in place to properly provide the long term monitoring that is needed? We have never had a situation in history where pulverized toxic air has been exposed to people. And we need a long term commitment to monitor these health risks so that we can possibly plan in the future for better preventive equipment to protect people at disaster areas.

And why are the representatives of the workers so directly impacted by health concerns so unhappy with the work of the city on the health registry?

And why are there still privacy concerns about the health registry survey?

Why did the registry not work out a protocol for providing information and referral for those injured who seek help? I had my staff call the registry and they didn't refer them to any other screening or to any health treatment. And why, after 2 years of planning, cannot the city of New York, the great city of New York do a better job with this health registry?

In light of the revelations about the EPA's public announcements on the safety of the air after the disaster, the immense difficulty the New York City House members in a bipartisan way along with our Senators had in convincing Washington to support funding, we have to ask why is not Washington focusing on these issues. And I would like permission to place in the record an article that was in the Daily News today that talks about memos from top scientists that were released to the city about the health crises in the air and the lack of information and support that got out to the workers. They were not informed. I request permission to put this article in the record.

Mr. SHAYS. Without objection, so ordered. [The information referred to follows:]

The day after the World Trade Center collapse, a top federal scientist warned in a strongly worded memo against the quick reoccupation of buildings in lower Manhattan because of possible dangers from asbestos and other toxic materials.

"We feel that the issues surrounding a decision to enter or reenter previously occupied premises is enormously complex," wrote Dr. Ed Kilbourne, an associate administrator at the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), in response to a White House request for a health advisory.

"A number of environmental hazards, especially asbestos- contaminated dust, may be present in the area," Kilbourne said in his two-page report to Dr. Kevin Yeskey, then the director of bioterrorism preparedness and response at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

Kilbourne's memo to Yeskey - which the Daily News recently obtained - was written after the
White House asked the CDC to produce fact sheets on asbestos for release to the public. The
ATSDR, which is in charge of assessing dangers from hazardous chemicals, often works
closely with the CDC.

"We are concerned about even being asked to write a document for the public about reentry at this point," Kilbourne wrote. "Does this mean that unrestricted access to the WTC vicinity is imminent?"

"Sampling data received here in Atlanta from EPA [the Environmental Protection Agency] have so far been scanty," Kilbourne added.

He noted that one of the first five bulk dust samples analyzed by the EPA from the WTC site contained 4% asbestos, which he labeled a "substantial concentration."

He warned Yeskey that it was "important to characterize how far significant levels of
asbestos extend before allowing unrestricted access by unprotected individuals."

"We are aware of other potential toxic hazards in the WTC area about which you haven't asked," the memo went on to say. "Contaminant groups of concern include acid gases, volatile organic compounds and heavy metals."

The worried tone of Kilbourne's memo was in sharp contrast to the upbeat official view the following day from then-EPA Administrator Christie Whitman.

"Monitoring and sampling conducted on Tuesday and Wednesday have been very reassuring about potential exposure of rescue crews and the public to environmental contaminants," said the first EPA press release from Whitman on Sept. 13.

Browse Display

Page 2 of 2

The EPA's inspector general revealed in August that the White House rewrote early agency press releases to downplay environmental hazards.

On Sept. 17, federal and city officials allowed thousands of people to return to their homes and workplaces in lower Manhattan, while rescue and firefighting operations continued in a sharply restricted zone around Ground Zero.

By then the EPA had analyzed 57 samples of dust in lower Manhattan, and 19 - or one-third - showed asbestos levels higher than the agency's own 1% danger threshold.

Efforts to reach Kilbourne and Yeskey for comment were unsuccessful. ATSDR spokeswoman Jill Smith confirmed the memo's authenticity but said Kilbourne was traveling and would not be available.

A spokesman at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, where Yeskey is now assigned, said he was on sick leave and could not be reached.

Today, a House of Representatives subcommittee will meet in Manhattan at Mount Sinai Medical Center to probe the federal government's handling of public health issues stemming from 9/11.

At the hearing, doctors will report that one-third of nearly 7,000 Ground Zero workers enrolled in a screening program at Mount Sinai are still experiencing health problems related to their work at the site.

Perhaps committee members can locate Kilbourne and Yeskey and ask what the White
House knew and how it used the scientific advice it was offered the day after 9/11.
E-mail:

jgonzalez@edit.nydailynews.com

LOAD-DATE: October 28, 2003

Document 1 of 2 next

About LexisNexisTM

| Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy | Support Identifier Copyright 2003 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mrs. MALONEY. I am in the process of developing legislation which I hope will be a bipartisan effort which will focus on many of the issues that we are talking about today.

First, the legislation would make sure that everyone who was injured from their time at Ground Zero, the volunteers, the bucket brigade, the firefighters, fire officers, iron workers, construction workers; all of those that do not have health coverage, that they get health coverage that covers their health concerns because they risked their lives to save other people.

And I ask a final question: How in the world are other first responders going to respond to disasters if they see that the first responders who rushed to September 11 are not, at the very minimum, given health care and health screening and health monitoring for their health concerns because of their selfless act to rush and save the lives and work to reconstruct our city?

I would like to place in the record the draft of the legislation. It also calls for the monitoring to continue for 20 years and for research to look into what this means, this new type of toxic air that Americans or no one on Earth has ever experienced before on their long term health needs. And it tries to facilitate a better coordination and oversight.

Coming here today I saw a bumper sticker that said "Remember 9/11." You see them everywhere. "Remember 9/11." But I hope that today with this focus that Washington will also remember, the city will remember and we will get the proper care to the workers. And I hope that this is the beginning of a new and urgently needed focus on the health impact of September 11.

And I strongly commend the work of the chairman on the Gulf war syndrome, and for his attention and for being here today. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney follows:]

Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International

Relations

"Assessing September 11" Health Effects: What Should Be Done?"

October 28, 2003

Thank you Congressman Shays, not only for holding this hearing, but also for your long-term
commitment to issues of public health, including your aggressive oversight of the response to
Gulf War Syndrome. Regrettably I have heard from too many people that have compared our
response to the health impacts of 9/11, to our response to Gulf War syndrome.

The primary question today is everything being done to help that could be done? That is why I
asked Chairman Shays to have this hearing. As I regretfully expect we will hear today the
answer is, no.

Fully one third of those that have been screened at Mount Sinai are still experiencing persistent
WTC related long-term health problems. There is substantial evidence of high levels of upper
airway and lung problems; respiratory and digestive conditions, psychological trauma problems
and there are certainly more injured that are waiting to be documented. But there still seems to
be no coordinated response from Washington. Anyone looking at thousands sickened by one
event would think it should be treated as a health emergency of the highest order. But is doesn't
seem that there's been any sense of urgency from the federal government.

I hope this hearing can help sort all this out. I know I have a lot of questions:

First, what is being done to actually assist the injured medically? Is there a coordinated
assistance for those that need help: volunteers, construction workers, residents and first
responders who have been injured and have not been able to work since their time at ground
zero, many of whom have lost health insurance? Do those who were injured know that many can
apply to the Victims Fund and do they know that they must apply before the December 31"
deadline? What is happening with the processing of workers compensation claims? And most
importantly are those injured receiving the proper care? Why has there been such reluctance on
the part the Federal government to provide sufficient funds for monitoring and why have the
funds been so slow in getting disbursed?

It took over a year to get the leadership in Congress and the President to support the $90 million
for the medical screening of World Trade Center workers. Federal resources for the monitoring