Democrats launch probe into state decision to decline NASA help after Harvey

Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, D-Houston, requested all documents related to the decision to decline an offer from NASA to monitor air pollution in the wake of Hurricane Harvey. Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, D-Houston, requested all documents related to the decision to decline an offer from NASA to monitor air pollution in the wake of Hurricane Harvey. Photo: Yi-Chin Lee, Houston Chronicle / Staff Photographer Photo: Yi-Chin Lee, Houston Chronicle / Staff Photographer Image 1 of / 5 Caption Close Democrats launch probe into state decision to decline NASA help after Harvey 1 / 5 Back to Gallery

Three House Democrats have requested documents that may shed light on a decision by state and federal officials to decline an offer from NASA to monitor air pollution in the wake of Hurricane Harvey.

Despite early signs hinting at the storm's toxic impact, officials from the Environmental Protection Agency and Texas' Commission on Environmental Quality declined NASA's offer to fly a plane with advanced air quality monitoring sensors over Houston, the Los Angeles Times has found.

In separate letters sent to the three agencies Wednesday, U.S. Reps. Lizzie Fletcher, Eddie Bernice Johnson and Mikie Sherrill requested all documents related to that decision, which they called "deeply troubling."

"Instead of gathering the most accurate air quality data possible, state and federal officials apparently decided they would rather not know about potential toxic chemical releases that could have been impacting our communities and first responders," they wrote. "If this is true, it is not only an embarrassment, it is unacceptable."

Fletcher, a Houston Democrat elected in November, chairs the environmental subcommittee of the House Science Space and Technology Committee, which oversees NASA. Johnson, D-Dallas, chairs the committee, while Sherrill, D-N.J., chairs the investigations and oversight subcommittee.

EARLIER: State official defends decision to rebuff NASA’s Harvey help

Last year, a Houston Chronicle and Associated Press investigation identified more than 100 toxic releases related to the storm that were not made public or were vastly understated, including one that was highly carcinogenic. Officials, citing available air measurements, previously had said post-Harvey air pollution did not pose a health threat.

One of the three congressional letters was addressed to Michael Honeycutt, the director of TCEQ's toxicology division and chair of the EPA's Science Advisory Board. Honeycutt on Tuesday defended the decision not to use NASA's plane, telling the Chronicle his agency's analysis, which involved low-flying helicopters equipped with infrared cameras, was the best approach.

Information gleaned from the plane would have been used "for research purposes," said Honeycutt, who has espoused views on pollutants and human health that advocates have said are "totally inconsistent with mainstream thinking."

"I do this for a living. I know what data we need," Honeycutt said Tuesday. "Getting data we don't need doesn't really help. Flying from that far up you can't pinpoint exactly where pollution is coming from."

In a statement, EPA spokesman John Konkus said the agency did not decline NASA's offer to fly its plane over the Houston area, noting that the EPA deployed its own chemical-detecting technology to monitor post-Harvey air quality.

However, the Times obtained emails showing that an EPA deputy regional administrator told NASA and Texas officials days after the storm that he was "hesitant" to have the jet "collect additional information that overlaps our existing efforts" until he learned more about NASA's mission.

The EPA official wrote to Honeycutt and other agency officials: "EPA concurs with your assessment and we will not plan to ask NASA to conduct this mission."

Rock Owens, an environmental lawyer for the Harris County Attorney's office, said the EPA's excuses for not using the plane "do not make sense to me."

"In the face of a serious lack of data, additional data from a more accurate set of instruments would have meant a better scientific analysis," Owens said. "The excuses given by EPA do not make sense to me."

Reporters Mike Morris, Kevin Diaz and Lise Olsen contributed to this story.

jasper.scherer@chron.com

twitter.com/jaspscherer



NEWS WHEN YOU NEED IT: Text CHRON to 77453 to receive breaking news alerts by text message | Sign up for breaking news alerts delivered to your email here.