FEMA Denies Newsom?
In the wake of the destructive wildfires that ravaged Southern California, federal officials have decided against conducting widespread soil sampling on properties impacted by the fires, despite concerns from state leaders about potential contamination. California Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration recently urged the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to reinstate soil testing as part of the cleanup efforts. However, FEMA has firmly declined, citing a shift in its policies since 2020.
Nancy Ward, Director of the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), wrote to FEMA urging comprehensive soil sampling at affected properties, emphasizing that failure to test could result in undetected contaminants, such as arsenic and lead, lingering in the soil and potentially affecting the health of residents. She raised concerns about long-term risks to both human health and the environment if contaminants were left behind during rebuilding efforts.
Despite these warnings, FEMA remains resolute in its decision. The agency explained that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) would focus solely on clearing debris and removing the top 6 inches of soil from affected areas. Soil testing, FEMA stated, is not part of the Corps’ assignment, and they believe that their current approach provides sufficient safety for public health. FEMA’s decision follows a reevaluation of past recovery efforts, where they found that testing soil did not yield significant new findings, as many contaminants were already present before the fires.
This approach has drawn criticism from local authorities, as California’s Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) still recommends additional soil testing after the removal of hazardous waste and debris. CalRecycle guidelines specify that the first 3 to 6 inches of soil should be cleared, but it also calls for further testing to ensure toxins like arsenic and lead are fully addressed. Local scientists, including researchers from the University of Southern California (USC) and Loyola Marymount University, have started their own soil sampling initiatives to monitor potential contaminants and provide updates to residents about safety concerns.
While some experts, like USC’s Seth John, suggest that the absence of FEMA-funded testing may not be cause for alarm, they also acknowledge that additional testing could provide peace of mind to residents and help address concerns about the long-term safety of affected properties. Ultimately, they agree that while soil testing is a good precaution, it can be expensive and time-consuming, and it is not always essential from a scientific perspective.
As the state continues its recovery efforts, it remains clear that local communities and scientists are taking matters into their own hands, further highlighting the gap between federal policies and local concerns. The federal government’s focus on streamlining recovery, while ensuring public safety, contrasts with the state’s and community’s insistence on more detailed testing to safeguard the environment and public health.
