Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiNOLA Watch: Gulf Stream Fails the Smell Test
Last Wednesday, on Capitol Hill, at a hearing packed with reporters, photographers, constituents, and industry reps, Representative Peter Welch (D-VT) zeroed in on a key moment in April 2006 that contradicted the testimony of Jim Shea, CEO of Gulf Stream.
Shea's company was paid $500 million to supply the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) with 50,000 trailers housing displaced persons in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Residents in some trailers would later complain of health problems including bloody noses, burning eyes, acute respiratory illnesses, and even miscarriages -- as Amanda Spake reported in The Nation months before most in the mainstream media paid attention to this scandal. Shea testified that his company did nothing to hide any pertinent information about health issues associated with Gulf Stream trailers.
Yet in April 2006, as CNN prepared to air a story on elevated formaldehyde levels found in the trailers, Gulf Stream sent a statement to the network which Rep. Welch read aloud at the hearing: "We are not aware of any complaints of illness from our many customers of... travel trailers over the years, including travel trailers provided under our contracts with FEMA." Rep. Welch asked Shea, "Did your company make that statement?"
"We were speaking retrospectively," Shea said awkwardly, "prior to the March issue -- when [the problems] started."
Rep. Welch continued: "On March 20, 2006... you received a statement -- this was before you issued the 'no complaint' statement -- and I'll quote, 'There is an odor in my trailer that will not go away. It burns my eyes and I am getting headaches everyday. I've tried many things, but nothing seems to work. Please, please, please, help me'.... How do you square your statement to CNN -- 'we are not aware of any complaints of illness' made in April 2006 -- with a statement from a customer [in March] that was a complaint?... Had you received any complaints before April 2006 when you issued your statement to CNN that you had had no complaints?"
Shea paused a good five seconds before responding. "The complaints related to this matter that we received were two," he said.
"So the answer to my question is yes, you had received complaints prior to April, but you told CNN you had no complaints, correct?"
"And we were speaking of our history with FEMA as a program, sir," Shea said.
"Sir, that's a justification for saying something that was untrue," Rep. Welch said.
It was a bizarre hearing in that the Titans of deregulation -- the Republicans -- were arguing that a clear formaldehyde standard for trailers needed to be established in order for corporations to be held accountable. No one disagreed with the need for a clearer standard. In fact, Chairman Henry Waxman explained that a similar hearing was held in 1981 and members of Congress told FEMA, Housing and Urban Development, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) that a standard for formaldehyde levels in trailers was needed. (I can't imagine that Republicans were leading the charge on that.) "So I agree with my Republican colleagues when they say this is a failure of government. Government should have set standards.... But I also think this is a failure of industry," Rep. Waxman told four CEOs of trailer manufacturing companies. "Because some of you did testing and you found that there was a problem and that was the end of it. Several of you didn't do any tests at all, even though reports were coming out about high formaldehyde levels in trailers causing people to be sick."
Rep. Waxman pointed to Gulf Stream's testing of 11 occupied trailers over two years ago. Each one had levels of formaldehyde greater than 100 parts per billion, "the level at which acute health effects begin to appear in healthy adults," according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Environmental Protection Agency, SPSC, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and the World Health Organization. Four of the trailers had levels above 500 parts per billion, "the level at which OSHA requires medical monitoring of employees." In testing nearly 40 unoccupied trailers awaiting allotment to displaced families, Gulf Stream found that formaldehyde levels in half of them were above 900 parts per billion, "the level that EPA says no one should be exposed to for more than eight hours in a lifetime." Another company that built 5,000 units for FEMA -- Forest River -- hired a contractor to test its unoccupied trailers. The contractor advised that warning signs be placed outside the trailers reading, "Hazardous -- do not enter."
Rep. Waxman said, "Gulf Stream never told any family living in its trailers about [its] test results. The company did spend a month carefully crafting a letter to FEMA about the test results." Gulf Stream wrote that "the formaldehyde levels [in the eleven] occupied trailers fall below the OSHA standard" of 750 parts per billion -- the maximum allowable workplace exposure. It failed to mention the testing on the unoccupied trailers or describe the measured formaldehyde levels in the 11 occupied trailers that were cause for concern.
Dr. Michael McGeehin, Director of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects at the CDC, testified that a CDC study released in February concluded that all of the residents still living in 15,000 trailers -- down from 143,000 -- should be moved by FEMA due to formaldehyde exposure.
Rep. Waxman said, "The taxpayers paid $2 billion for trailers that now have to be scrapped as junk." He asked the four CEOs whether the government should get some of its money back from the companies? None of them offered support for that notion -- three remained silent, while Shea said that the CDC's results could have been impacted by residents' activities such as smoking or cooking fish. (In contrast, the CDC concluded that the formaldehyde levels were probably higher during hotter months and when the trailers were newer than those measured in the February report. McGeehin also disagreed with Shea that cooking fish would raise formaldehyde levels.)
While Republicans were careful to express support for people who became sick as a result of living in the trailers, they were far more aggressive in defending the manufacturers. Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) mocked the proceedings, "Just full disclosure... in the room we're in right now we're at 80 parts per billion... if you need to leave, let us know...." Representative Dan Burton (R-IN) said, "I haven't seen any evidence that they violated any rule and haven't done their job to perfection. I'm kind of disappointed that we have you four here, beating up on you."
Despite Republican efforts to free the trail manufacturers from any responsibility, it was Representative Elijah Cummings who perhaps best summarized the failure of both industry and government to protect public health: "Our country is becoming mired in a culture of mediocrity, and a failure to be empathetic to human beings. So we can talk about standards here, there, and everywhere. But the question still remains: do we get what we bargain for, or are we getting something that does harm?"
While the CDC is now convening the relevant agencies to address the standards issue, and a federal class-action lawsuit against the trailer manufacturers and FEMA is pending, displaced people in 15,000 trailers still are in need of more permanent, safe homes.
With reporting from Capitol Hill by Greg Kaufmann, a freelance writer residing in his disenfranchised hometown of Washington, DC.
Katrina vanden Heuvel is Editor and Publisher of The Nation.
Copyright © 2008 The Nation
17 Comments so far
Show AllKEM PATRICK asked what formaldehyde is used for.
Unfortunately, it appears everywhere - processed wood, permanent press clothing, etc.
For a more complete (and frightening) list, go to:
http://organicconsumers.org
and search on "formaldehyde".
These are classic examples of how the MSM fails us. I strongly suspect that if Republican representatives were expecting to see their shameful performance on television during the nightly news they would think before doing things like this.
But our 'news' is mostly concerned that 'there may be a recession'.....How I just LOVE being patronized.
There you go, CountCoup. Be good if we can buy them for what they're worth and sell them back to the corporations for what they think they're worth. Be and endless supply of funds with which to buy the next batch of lice.
It would be good to know how much these corrupt persons expect to steal during their terms and give them that amount as a signing bonus.
Thank you for the link ~JOZEF~ I never knew that.
Wow___ that government phamplet reads a new trailer or home may read as high as (0.03ppm)which is rather high. And according to this article, half of the FEMA supplied trailers had readings above (900ppm) That is a great big difference from (0.03). I do believe someone should be sent to prison .
This bit of wisdom from the Great Communicator Himself: "Politics has been called the second oldest profession. It is amazing how much it resembles the first."
To NativeSon, and the others on this article and its postings.
Why cut out the money?
Why not have a group of citizens who gather funds from themselves and their fellow citizens through donations. Hold the money in large accounts, publishing the weekly growth rates, and then take the money and offer it to the politicians who make the corrupt decisions in the first place.
If they are "up for sale" then let the people get in on the bidding process. Obviously, the fact that the voters put them into office, and are often slow to remove them when they prove to be corrupt has little effect; why not just move in on the "buyers of those politicians, they citizens voted for. Give the PEOPLE a chance to buy a politician, after all this IS the land of opportunity.
You could even have "lobbyists" just for the purpose to go behind the other lobbyists, find out what they are offering the politicians then up the anti.
This might make the business lobbyists begin to fear the group, call it for example the
"Citizens Out Bid Committee" or COBC for short. There would be safety in numbers, one two and three dollar donations would add up, and since the COBC members would not directly benefit from the "outbidding", they could do so with a clear conscience which the politicians usually do not have anyway ;that is a conscience, whether clear or foggy. Sooner or later the business lobbyist would be so far out of the running, they would then be required by process of elimination to stop bribing the politicians. When that occurred the COBC could then, "cut the politicians off" and start using the money collected for other serious social needs, but always keeping the possibility that they would need from time to time to start that "ole out bidding process all over again".
You go to a "liars convention" with the clear purpose to either be the best liar, or learn to be the best liar, FROM the best liars, then come back next year for some heavy competition.
Short of this, not much else would work other than "burning down Washington and starting all over again'. That might be more expensive than to just bribe them into doing what they were elected to do; represent the best interests of the PEOPLE.
By the way, the donations to COBC would be Tax deductible, which for the Politicians would be like tracking dog shit into the limo on their shoes.
The aggressiveness of corruption in American Society today requires significant thought before stepping outside your door. Who wants to do business with these offensive Corporations or their purveyors. Who wants to breath dirty air, see the effects of acid rain on the landscape, filter the water before watering the garden, purchase toxic food, know that animal extinction is rapidly progressing, and realize that Global Warming could trigger events that could kill much of humanity. Government too has become toxic in that it now serves the interests of Corporations whose principal owners are hell bent on replacing Nation States with Corporate dominion. The corruption at the top has become so heavy that clear evidence of it's tilting toward collapse is seen daily in all walks of life. The tilt is slow at first until it reaches a point after which it plummets rapidly out of control to an expected crash. How much more needs to happen before the rapid fall begins? It appears that we are all losers. Whose number one?
Formaldehyde is found in cigarettes. It's also found in brand new (up to a year old) polyester carpets, and is a major player in sick building syndrome. Other volatile organic chemicals found in new buildings are outgassing from the glue in plywood, outgassing from paint and finishes, outgassing from urethane foam in new furniture.
The EPA headquarters in the D.C. area was a sick building when they put it up. We talked to one of the employees about it.
To NativeSon. One of the big problems is that Congress has abandoned its oversight responsibilities.
The first layer of 'keeping a close watch' should be within the administration. There's one or more Inspector Generals who should be watching for exactly this. But, we've reached the point where those have been completely declawed. If they rock the boat, they get fired.
That's where the Congress is supposed to step in. That was the idea behind the three co-equal branches of government, each with checks and balances on the others.
But, that's fallen apart also. Each party now views that as a political exercise rather than a duty to the citizens they are supposed to represent. The Republicans refused to do any oversight on an administration of their own party while they were in power.
And the Democrats are just as bad. They view these sorts of hearings not as a chance to do real over-sight, correct problems and punish wrong-doers, but instead as just a chance to score some cheap political headlines to aid their own grabs for power.
This happened over two years ago. Why are their hearings now? Look at the campaign calendar and you'll know the answer.
Also, look in vain for any real actions with teeth. Once upon a time such a committee would issue 'criminal referrals' to prosecutors based on what they found. Don't hold your breath waiting for anyone in FEMA or these companies to go to jail.
So, the problem we have is that both political parties have sold the citizens and our interests down the river to facilitate their own grabs for power.
Why scrap the trailers? Our congresscritters always complain about the expense of maintaining a home in DC. So, lets just get 535 of these, park them outside the capital, then tell each Rep and Senator to live in one.
Google: formaldehyde in construction and you will get all the info you want. Or go to:
http://www.ehso.com/ehshome/chemicals_formaldehyde.htm
I bet GulfStream got a lot of money for each of those cheaply built trailers, most of which have never been used.
Remember the Fema contract for bags of ice for Katrina victems? An outfit got $37 million to supply bags of ice, then was paid $12 million to store some unused bags of ice for two years. Then Fema decided that ice was to old to be safe for use and the company recieved $3.5 million to melt the unused ice.
I would have melted their ice for $1.5 million, but it was a no bid contract.
I don't know what Formaldehyde is used for in construction? What purpose does it serve and why is it even necessary to use it for travel trailers, mobile homes or homes of any type?
Anyone know?
Thanks NativeSon.
How much money did "Gulf Stream" donate to the Repub-lickin's? Might want to check it out. And, did CNN ever run their story?...since-before- or--after? Maybe they still treat it as "entertainment" ...those who have sufferred and continue to suffer....$500 Bilion more dollars that this adminestration wasted on unsuspecting (americans) sorry, I can't capitalize the "A" any more...unless, I capitaize it for ASHAMED!
It is simple and true. Human nature is corrupt, from the youngest to the oldest member. Accepting this fact is the first step in preventing disasters. Human nature may not be overcome just yet, but planning ahead for it's consequences is the only answer. If the Republicans had not been so intent upon "deregulation" it most likely would have been the Democrats, or whatever party is in control. Regulation does not stop corruption, it simply establishes measures of accountability. Regulation can only be established by regulations. This is why so many politicians are found to be guilty of corruption. The party seeking favors in the deregulation if a certain area do not seek out the lower ranking individuals; they go to the top. The legislators, who create the legislation, that creates the regulation.
A society cannot legislate a conscience into a person, or gathering of people. It would be safe to assume that more than one person working for or with a company that knowingly commits an act that they would not commit against one of their own as in family, or friends is ;corrupt. Or in a case where they would allow a faulty product to be distributed, each person who knew the facts and said nothing is just as culpable as the leaders, like water corruption tends to "roll down hill". It can even be contagious.
A society can however keep close watch, if this had been followed the fiasco in the article above would not have taken place. When those close watches are still breached then the offending company should pay the highest penalties. Gulf Stream should pay heavy penalties, and then the company members who participated should loose those jobs, and take those resume "highlights" to the job market. If there is little or no accountability to the society by the offenders against that society then that society is in collapse, or on its way.
If the people do not watch the ones they send to watch the others, they loose sight of them, and they scamper away like mice in dark silo of grain, to gorge themselves on the free food (money).
It probably would help to Apportion the income Tax, where all of this money all of these "mice" want bad enough to poison their fellow human being over. Why take the chance that another group of "mice" such as the one's presnetly in Washington, "the Big Silo" may be replaced with even larger greedier mice. Control the grain (money)----then they either starve to death or move on, or miracle of miracles leave corruption to the monkeys, and other animals.
Just a thought.......
Thanks for your time.....
This is just yet ANOTHER example of how corporations willfully lie and cheat when it comes to the safety of their products. They don't care about people, just profits and speaks volumes to the fallacy of capitalism.