The Trump administration never obtained a permit from Washington to identify and remove asbestos before it tore down the White House’s East Wing in October.
The omission, brought to light by a public records request to the D.C. Department of Energy and Environment, highlights in a legally gray area due to the White House’s unique position as a federal jurisdiction within the nation’s capital.
And the decision not to follow city protocol, as the White House and the Trump administration have in the past, deepens controversy over the abrupt demolition of the 83-year-old building.
The White House is still legally responsible for taking safety precautions, but federal standards do not require a regulator to sign off on abatement plans beforehand.
“For the White House to take this out of the normal permitting process and have it handled in a very, very special way by EPA or by White House employees without any oversight, that would be problematic,” said Bob Sussman, a principal at Sussman and Associates and former EPA appointee during the Clinton and Obama administrations.
The White House said it did abatement for hazardous materials earlier in the year and complied with federal standards. It has not specifically confirmed asbestos remediation when asked.
President Donald Trump, a former real estate developer, ordered the building, first constructed in 1902, be taken down to make room for a 90,000-square-foot ballroom.
The ballroom plans add to the president’s push to leave an architectural thumbprint on the nation’s capital, alongside efforts to refurbish the ’60s-era Kennedy Center; paint the gray and slate-colored Eisenhower Executive Office Building white, though the administration has canceled the contested paint job; and make classical architecture the default style for new federal buildings.
But the sudden demolition of the storied East Wing sparked public criticism after Trump failed to consult historic preservation experts, involve architectural planning commissions or alert the public before the major overhaul of the so-called people’s house. Critics have also panned the planned ballroom for its extravagant design, warning that it would overwhelm the historic White House executive residence and West Wing.
Asbestos safety advocates were also quick to sound alarm bells. The East Wing was built during an era in which the fibrous minerals were widely used in building materials, popular for their flame-suppressing qualities.
“Given the construction era and numerous renovations, I suspect there was likely asbestos,” said Linda Reinstein, president and co-founder of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization.
Treasury Security Scott Bessent also acknowledged that “maybe parts of the East Wing could have been asbestos” during an October interview on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.”
Protocols and jurisdiction
A White House spokesperson in response to questions for this article replied with the same statement it sent POLITICO’s E&E News in October: “Any hazardous material abatement was done in September. A very extensive abatement and remediation assessment was followed, complying with all applicable federal standards.”
Asbestos poses steep health risks when disturbed and sent airborne. When inhaled, the tiny fibers may lodge themselves to the lungs, or the protective membrane around the lungs, that can develop into serious illnesses like lung cancer or mesothelioma.
A robust set of federal, state and local rules — monitoring air emissions, limiting dust, requiring protective gear for workers, labeling hazardous waste, etc. — have been put in place to protect against such risks.
EPA regulations prescribe a strict set of rules governing the entire life cycle of asbestos debris: inspection, notification, abatement and disposal. It’s often up to state or local governments to enforce those rules, and some, including Washington, have more stringent regulations in place.
For example, EPA doesn’t issue asbestos permits, but Washington law requires entities to obtain an asbestos abatement permit before demolishing or renovating most buildings built before 2000.
The D.C. Department of Buildings requires a raze permit for any demolition in the city, which requires a copy of an asbestos survey and proof of abatement.
As the White House construction began, DOB was peppered by requests from the public to intervene. But the city has washed its hands of the project.
“DOB does not have jurisdiction over the construction, renovation, or demolition of federal properties,” a department spokesperson said, adding that it “began receiving illegal construction inspection requests related to activity at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,” and on Oct. 21, “it then blocklisted the address to avoid future issues regarding that matter.”
The White House has previously followed city protocol for asbestos abatement. It twice sought asbestos permits from the district earlier this year related to renovations in the executive residence.
Those permits detail the location of the activities and what kind of asbestos material was determined to be present, as well as where contractors would dispose of the material. In one case, asbestos was located in floor tile in an office. In another instance, it was present in glue, pipe gaskets and insulation in the White House air conditioning system.
Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser’s office declined to comment for this story. The Department of Energy and Environment directed all inquiries to the Trump administration and EPA.
“The federal government is responsible for all aspects of the White House demolition,” the department wrote in a statement.
Jon Jarvis, who served as director of the National Park Service during the Obama administration, said the White House may be exempt from local asbestos protocol because it’s a national park site.
“As a general rule, for exclusive federal jurisdictions, such as military bases and many national parks (Yellowstone for instance) state and local laws do not apply,” he said in an email. “Only federal statutes and regulations are applicable.”
Still, authority over White House asbestos abatement is murky.
EPA guidance on the rules and regulations regarding asbestos demolitions says that “under the Clean Air Act, federal agencies are subject to, and must comply with, all federal, state, interstate, and local requirements respecting the control and abatement of air pollution, in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.”
An EPA spokesperson referred questions to the White House.
No paper trail
Aside from its statement, the White House has released no other information about the hazardous material abatement the spokesperson said was completed in September. But experts say removal at the White House would have been visible if done properly.
Asbestos abatement processes are “super obvious,” explained one former EPA asbestos inspector, granted anonymity for fear of retribution.
“It’s not the kind of thing you can do and nobody would notice,” the former inspector said. “There’s big sheets of plastic hanging in doorways and fans pulling air. There are mandatory warning signs, ‘abatement happening. Do not enter.'”
If asbestos removal and abatement processes weren’t completed properly, “there’s ongoing risk,” the former inspector said, adding, “I’m just speculating, because I have no idea what the survey found or didn’t find.”
Normally, the asbestos abatement process would create a trail of public records, but none have surfaced yet.
EPA asbestos standards for demolition and renovation require numerous reports — a notice of demolition and renovation, waste disposal plans, etc. — be submitted to the agency.
Public record requests filed by E&E News to EPA and various other federal agencies remain in progress. Reinstein said all but one of her requests for information have gone unanswered; the General Services Administration said in a response letter it “is not involved with the current renovation or construction activity at the White House.”
“Without a paper trail, we have no way of knowing what was done,” Reinstein said. “We remain deeply concerned and deeply suspicious. Regulations and records exist for a reason: to protect public health.”
Pushback
Several Democratic lawmakers have also been pushing for answers.
The top Democrats on the Senate environment, energy and homeland security committees sent a letter to the White House requesting environmental assessment documents. A spokesperson for Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said they have not received a response, “not even an acknowledgment of receipt.”
The White House has also not responded to similar inquiries from House Democrats, a spokesperson for Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), ranking member of the Natural Resources Committee, confirmed.
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) directed his questions on asbestos abatement to ACECO, the contractor hired to lead the East Wing demolition. On its website, the company states that it provides demolition and services and coordinates asbestos and lead paint abatement via licensed subcontractors.
ACECO Chair Michael Citren directed Markey’s questions to the White House, adding that “our contract requires all information regarding this project to be held in the strictest confidence,” according to a copy of the response sent to E&E News.
ACECO did not respond to additional requests for comment. Amid public criticism of the Trump administration’s decision to take down the East Wing, ACECO faced public pushback, including negative reviews on Yelp. The online platform temporarily barred additional ratings, saying they may not accurately reflect the company.
“This business recently received increased public attention, which often means people come to this page to post their views on the news,” Yelp’s website states. “While we don’t take a stand one way or the other when it comes to this incident, we’ve temporarily disabled the posting of content to this page as we work to investigate whether the content you see here reflects actual consumer experiences rather than the recent events.”
Of the few who could be involved, Rich Ponak, asbestos program coordinator for Region 3, the EPA region overseeing Washington, might be one.
Ponak, who is prohibited from speaking with the media as a federal employee, didn’t respond to questions. But his LinkedIn profile has one repost, from England-based asbestos surveyor and consultant John Basham:
“Did Donald Trump have a Refurbishment & Demolition (R&D) asbestos survey carried out prior to the work at the White House? … Somehow, I doubt it. 😉”
Reach reporters Ellie Borst and Heather Richards on Signal at eborst.64 and h_richards.99, respectively.
