| Title Page Previous Next Contents | Part 2. The day after: How officials responded >What category of catastrophe? |
Before
this disaster was regarded as a pollution event, it was a crime scene, an
international terrorist incident unparalleled in history, and even an act of
war. The World Trade Center terror attack was so complicated—involving so many
mass casualties, so vast a crime scene, so many firefighting and rescue
challenges, and so many national and international implications, that arguably
it was too big to respond to quickly.
Yet
one of the city’s first decisions was to declare Lower Manhattan and the Ground
Zero area environmentally safe. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
administrator Christie Whitman said, “Given the scope of the tragedy from last
week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C., that
their air is safe to breathe and their water is safe to drink.” New York Mayor
Rudolph Giuliani has said that tests of air and water had turned up “no
significant problems.”
Critics
would later charge that the city and EPA did not have sufficient
information—scarcely any samples of air and dust taken at this point—to make such
a declaration. More than a year later, EPA itself in a draft of a “Lessons
Learned” report from the Inspector General’s Office would state outright that
such a declaration was premature. In reality, the nature of the emergency
outstripped available agency resources. (3)
Three months later, fires still burned and
smoldered beneath the World Trade Center wreckage, releasing high levels of
benzene, as well as other toxic compounds, such as dioxin.
What
made that critical management decision particularly problematic was that three
months later, fires still burned and smoldered beneath the World Trade Center
wreckage, in the process releasing high levels of benzene, an organic compound
that can lead to leukemia, bone marrow damage and other diseases after long-term
exposure, as well as other toxic compounds, such as dioxin.
Besides
this, the dust created by the initial building collapse and the debris being
trucked out was brought through open doors and windows, through ventilation
systems and tracked in on shoes, into homes, offices and schools in the area.
For
many months, the events of September 11 would severely test the community
disaster response plans of New York City especially, including five local
agencies that dealt with environmental health, and their coordination with
another dozen state and federal agencies.
Volunteers
found themselves way, way over their heads; agencies, too, were reeling from
the attack. The challenges before them were monumental—addressing environmental
health problems, occupational health and safety problems, identifying potential
disease or injury trends, monitoring exposures, and finally communicating those
hazards to decision makers and the public.
That
second day, with so many people still unaccounted for in New York, it is
understandable that people would risk their own health to save lives. All kinds
of numbers would be thrown around to try to assess the numbers lost. Whatever
the ultimate death toll, it will be "more than any of us can bear,"
said New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, hours after the horrific attacks--a quote
often repeated to show the mayor’s leadership in an atmosphere of confusion,
fear and anguish. His leadership was widely touted, and Queen Elizabeth of
England even acknowledged his behavior by knighting him. (4)
![]() |
Photo: Paul Olivier |
Two
years later, Forras remembers the Mayor standing next to then-EPA administrator
Christie Whitman, saying the air’s safe.
“When you have someone of the caliber of Mayor Giuliani saying it, they
took that as gospel,” says Forras. “For me, it’s very scary. We lost another
firefighter, and that makes one in New York and two volunteers who have died of
pneumonia. My lungs are totally shot, and I’m afraid that’s what many of us are
going to die of.”