|
April 1, 2004: Last July, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, held a peer
review in New York City of findings about airborne pollution
resulting from the World Trade Center collapse. Recently, a
report of that review appeared on the Net, in the EPA document
"Summary Report of the Exposure and Human Health Evaluation of
Airborne Pollution from the World Trade Center Disaster". The
peer review had two tiers of participants. The first was a group
of 7 reviewers-- experts in areas such as air and transport
monitoring, environmental chemistry, public and occupational
health and other related subjects. The second tier was made up
of some 50 observers. Observers were not members of the general
New York City public nor was their role passive: they were
to comment and provide input. The observer tier included
representatives from New York City legal, environmental
and health agencies, plus area universities. Also included
were city council members, a community board member and
representatives from downtown neighborhood groups.
Another listed observer was "Alex Salvagno". Representing "AAR
Environmental". At the time of the peer review, Alex Salvagno,
a contractor specializing in environmental clean-ups, was facing
federal indictments on multiple charges. Ones of operating
a racketeering conspiracy to violate clean air and toxic
substance laws, money laundering and obstruction of justice.
Salvagno has since been convicted. Salvagno's company
at the time of his criminal enterprises was AAR Contractor,
based in Albany County in upstate New York. AAR Contractor
had the same New York State Department entity address as
AAR Environmental.
For roughly a decade, Salvagno and AAR perpetrated asbestos
abatement frauds which impacted public buildings across a wide
area of New York State. Buildings included elementary schools,
hospitals, prisons, hotels, churches and state offices. The most
notable example was the New York State Capital Building in
Albany. Salvagno and AAR frequently either didn't remove asbestos
from buildings they were contracted to abate, or did so without
the required treatment: doing what are called "rip and skip"
operations, releasing "snowstorms" of asbestos particles into the
air. Workers were not provided with adequate safety equipment,
but were supplied with phony training certificates. Many were
underage or recent immigrants. In order to meet laws requiring
that abatement be verified by independent laboratories, Salvagno
set up a dummy lab, with himself as hidden owner. One method of
scientific testing employed at the Salvagno lab was to hold air
filters out of windows of moving cars and after removing flies
caught in the process (the windshield effect) claim results came
from an abatement site.
At the time of the EPA Peer Review regarding post 9/11 airborne
pollution in downtown Manhattan, Alexander Salvagno was only
under indictment. Indictments are only accusations. But given
the nature and breadth of these particular accusations and their
EPA source, why would upstate environmental contractor Alex
Salvagno be included in this New York City focused, EPA sponsored
peer review? A review of this magnitude, dealing with long term
public health issues with the potential to affect thousands of
people? QT has followed the AAR case for several years. One
thing that initially caught my attention were the many unanswered
questions surrounding the case. Particularly involving political
connections. AAR was after all, a major public contractor.
Another point of interest was the degree of AAR deception. This
was a sophisticated, complex and deeply cynical fraud.
During the AAR trial, witnesses quoted both Alex Salvagno and his
father Raul (an AAR partner) as sometimes pooh-poohing asbestos
as much of a real threat. Perhaps the Salvagnos said this to spur
low level employees into working in dangerous conditions. If so,
they were heartless liars and cheats. Or perhaps they said it to
assuage their own conscience about leaving asbestos particles
floating in the air of grade schools they'd been paid to clean.
In that case they were slightly guilty liars and cheats. But even
if the Salvagnos truly believed asbestos posed little risk, they
were still liars and cheats-- with their entire professional life
a giant scam. From which they collected millions of dollars from
taxpayers and individual homeowners. With Alex Salvagno serving
on industry boards and giving expert advice on an environmental
danger which to him, didn't really exist.
Carola Von Hoffmannstahl-Solomonoff
For confidential tips and comments mailto:editor@mondoqt.com
Note: ontheqt@nycap.rr.com should no longer be used
|
