x-^to sr4j.
*. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency	20-P-0062
^ ¦¦ \ Office of Inspector General	December 16,2019
mZ'
\»
At a Glance
Why We Did This Project
We conducted this audit to
determine whether the air
quality monitoring and related
activities conducted in the
greater Houston area by the
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the state of
Texas:
•	Addressed potential
high-risk areas.
•	Indicated any potential
health concerns.
•	Accurately communicated
air monitoring results and
potential health concerns to
the public.
On August 25, 2017, Hurricane
Harvey made landfall on the
U.S. Gulf Coast as a
Category 4 storm. Many of the
Houston area's air monitors
were shut down and secured
prior to the storm's landfall to
prevent damage. The EPA and
state and local agencies
subsequently conducted mobile
monitoring to assess air quality
conditions, including the levels
of hazardous air pollutants,
which are also called air toxics.
This report addresses the
following:
•	Improving air quality.
Address inquiries to our public
affairs office at (202) 566-2391 or
OIG WEBCOMMENTS@epa.gov.
List of OIG reports.
EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency Planning
to Better Address Air Quality Concerns
During Future Disasters
Developing EPA guidance for
collecting and communicating air
quality data could improve public
confidence in the agency during
future disaster responses.
What We Found
Most air toxic emission incidents during
Hurricane Harvey occurred within a 5-day
period of the storm's landfall. The majority
of these emissions were due to industrial
facilities shutting down and restarting
operations in response to the storm and
storage tank failures. However, state, local and EPA mobile air monitoring
activities were not initiated in time to assess the impact of these emissions.
Additionally, once started, monitoring efforts did not always generate data
considered suitable for making health-based assessments, in part because there
was no guidance outlining how to monitor air quality following an emergency.
The air monitoring data collected did not indicate that the levels of individual air
toxics after Hurricane Harvey exceeded the health-based thresholds established
by the state of Texas and the EPA. However, these thresholds do not consider
the cumulative impact of exposure to multiple air pollutants at one time. Further,
the EPA's thresholds are based on short-term exposure to a single air pollutant
and do not consider lifetime exposures. Consequently, the thresholds may not be
sufficiently protective of residents in communities that neighbor industrial facilities
and experience repeated or ongoing exposures to air toxics.
We did not identify instances of inaccurate communication from the EPA to the
public regarding air quality after Hurricane Harvey. However, public
communication of air monitoring results was limited. As a result, communities
were unaware of the agency's activities and data collection efforts. This lack of
awareness can diminish public trust and confidence in the EPA.
Recommendations and Planned Agency Corrective Actions
We recommend that the Assistant Administrator for Land and Emergency
Management develop guidance for emergency air monitoring in heavily
industrialized areas, develop a plan to provide public access to air monitoring
data, and assess the availability and use of remote and portable monitoring
methods. We also recommend that the Region 6 Regional Administrator develop
a plan to inform communities near industrial areas of adverse health risks and to
limit exposure to air toxics in these communities, and conduct environmental
justice training. We further recommend that the Associate Administrator for Public
Affairs establish a process to communicate the resolution of public concerns.
Two of our six recommendations are resolved with corrective actions pending.
The remaining four recommendations, which we revised after we issued our draft
report, are unresolved pending receipt of corrective action plans from the EPA.

-------