NEW YORK - September 8 - A new report issued today by the Sierra Club warns that despite mounting evidence of the devastating health consequences of pollution caused by the September 11th attack, the federal government has introduced new policies that increase the potential risks to health in the event of another toxic disaster.

The report, Harmful Legacy of Pollution and Deception at Ground Zero: How Post 9/11 Disaster Policy Endangers America, describes new federal policies for national disasters that compromise worker safety standards and fail to require precautionary health warnings for unknown contaminants, and - in the event of a "dirty bomb" attack - allow lower cleanup standards for radiological contamination.

"If we don't learn from the past, we are at risk in the future," said Suzanne Mattei, Sierra Club NYC Executive and author of the report. "Our government refuses to admit that its response to the toxic 9/11 pollution caused additional harm. And in the Hurricane Katrina disaster, they did it again. They compared test results to inappropriate guidelines, ignored indoor contamination, gave risky advice to residents and failed to protect workers. It was history repeating itself."

The Hurricane Katrina response followed a post-9/11 National Response plan, the Sierra Club report explains, that fails to require enforcement of worker health and safety rules, and also fails to require that health warnings be based on a precautionary, "better safe than sorry" approach to unknown contamination. A major new study by the Mount Sinai World Trade Center Medical Monitoring Program has found that nearly 60 percent of all rescue and recovery workers have contracted long-lasting respiratory illness.

"And now the Bush administration has actually made the situation worse," Ms. Mattei said. The Sierra Club report describes the administration's new policy for cleanup when a terrorist attack releases radioactive contamination - for example, if a 'dirty bomb' or illegal nuclear device were used.

"Under this new directive, decisions about long-term cleanup would balance public health against a list of economic considerations that even includes the impact on tourism," said Ms. Mattei. "The federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) already has cleanup guidelines that apply to radioactive contamination. Why treat the pollution caused by terrorists more leniently than pollution caused by business negligence or an accident?""

The report also exposes other troubling trends, including new Department of Homeland Security directives that exempt many actions from public environmental review and instruct employees to destroy certain documents when they are "no longer needed." The Sierra Club is concerned that these actions undermine Congressional oversight and public disclosure.

The report calls for Congress to strengthen its oversight of environmental disaster response. It also urges that the EPA and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) should carry out their duties to protect environmental health and safety, free from political interference.

###