The Times-Picayune
October 8, 2008

A federal agency that issued a flawed study on formaldehyde exposure deserves some of the blame for the length of time that hurricane victims living in FEMA trailers were exposed to the toxin.

A House subcommittee that investigated the issue blasted the Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry, and rightly so. The agency, which is under the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, issued an initial report in February 2007 that suggested formaldehyde concerns could be addressed by opening vents and windows to air out the trailers.

That report looked at the risk posed by a couple of hours of exposure per day, not the kind of intense exposure that comes with living in a FEMA trailer over a long period of time, as hurricane victims have done. FEMA sought information on short-term effects, a CDC spokesman said.

But at the time, Christopher De Rosa, a toxicologist and senior official at the agency, pointed out in a letter to a FEMA attorney that there is no safe level for long-term exposure to formaldehyde. He also raised the issue repeatedly with his superiors, but they responded by ordering him to stop sending e-mails about the matter, and ultimately demoted him.

His agency waited eight months before it started warning of long-term exposure to formaldehyde, which can irritate the eyes, ears and throat and is considered a carcinogen. Meanwhile, FEMA continued to cite the flawed study that minimized the risk.

The subcommittee says that hurricane victims ended up living in trailers with elevated levels of formaldehyde at least a year longer because of the agency's failure to quickly correct its mistakes.

The agency isn't the worst offender. When FEMA was finally notified about the study's shortcomings, the official who received the notice stuck it in a desk drawer and didn't tell other FEMA officials about it, the subcommittee report said.

That's inexcusable, but it's not the only example of FEMA ignoring the formaldehyde issue. Some staffers at that agency had pressed for air quality tests after the Sierra Club found problems in 2006, but they were rebuffed by FEMA attorneys who said that testing "would imply FEMA's ownership of this issue."

The CDC has responded to congressional criticism by touting its subsequent actions on formaldehyde. A spokesman said that the subcommittee focused on a single study and ignored follow-ups and initiatives that have been launched in the past two years.

But that doesn't excuse the agency's tacit role in FEMA's sluggish response to health concerns. Speaking up sooner and louder could have made a difference.