Firm Hired to Check Air Quality After L.A. Warehouse Fire Has Controversial History

The latest chapter in the ongoing saga of environmental disaster and corporate cover-ups has unfolded in Los Angeles, where a warehouse fire sparked widespread concerns about air pollution. In response to these worries, logistics company Lineage hired Arkansas-based Onterris to test air quality. Critics are now pointing out that this firm has a history of downplaying health risks on behalf of polluters.

Onterris’ predecessor, Center for Toxicology and Environmental Health (CTEH), has been accused of manipulating environmental data in several high-profile cases over the past few decades. This pattern of suspicious behavior raises serious questions about Onterris’ integrity and ability to provide unbiased assessments of air quality.

A disturbing example of CTEH’s work involved a 2023 train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, where Norfolk Southern hired the company to test for hazardous chemicals. While CTEH officials claimed that their testing showed the air was safe for residents, independent experts later pointed out that they had failed to consider potentially hazardous compounds and took samples for too short a period.

In other instances, CTEH produced clean toxicology reports for Murphy Oil Corp.’s Chalmette refinery in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina, despite an EPA plan for soil sampling. Similarly, when BP hired CTEH after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, two members of Congress warned its CEO about CTEH’s history of producing findings that defended corporate interests.

The business model of these firms creates a perverse incentive for polluters to release hazardous materials without facing consequences. By hiring companies with a track record of downplaying health risks, polluters can essentially get away with releasing hazardous materials into the environment without facing consequences.

Now, in the wake of the Los Angeles warehouse fire, residents are questioning the validity of Onterris’ air quality reports. The company’s claims that the air is safe despite plumes of smoke spreading across the city have been met with skepticism by independent experts and local activists. Dr. Jill Johnston, a UC Irvine exposure scientist and environmental epidemiologist, notes, “We’ve been out there collecting samples doing the best we can.” It’s clear that Onterris’ testing has fallen short.

The lack of transparency in the hiring process for air quality testing firms is also troubling. How did Lineage choose Onterris, a company with such a dubious history? What measures are in place to prevent similar conflicts of interest in the future?

As the situation in Los Angeles continues to unfold, it’s essential that we examine the business practices and motivations behind companies like Onterris. We need to ask tough questions about how these firms secure lucrative contracts with polluters while consistently producing findings that downplay health risks.

This controversy reveals not just a flawed system for addressing environmental disasters but also a deeper cultural problem – one where corporate interests often take precedence over public safety. The people of Los Angeles deserve better than air quality testing that prioritizes profits over people’s health.