EPA-200-R-96-001
;ii!.ji
nli" ii'.lil^'^lf"!,!*1' ' A'l't ' I ' iHJ/l'll'l', H|t' J" II1' "
-------
-------
PREFACE
The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is a federal advisory committee that was
established by charter on September 30,1993, to provide independent advice, consultation, and
recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on matters related
to environmental justice. The.NEJAC is made up of 25 members, and one DFO, who serve on a parent council
that has six subcommittees. Along with the NEJAC members who fill subcommittee posts, an additional 34
individuals serve on the various subcommittees. To date, NEJAC has held seven meetings in the following
locations:
v ' ' -. ' ' . V
Washington, D.C., May 20,1994 "
Albuquerque, New Mexico, August 3 through 5,1994
'.'.. Herndon, Virginia, October25through 27,1994
Atlanta, Georgia, January 17 and 18,1995
Arlington, Virginia, July 25 and 26,1995
Washington, D.C., December 12 through 14,1995
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through 31,1996
As a Federal advisory committee, the NEJAC is bound by all requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) of October 6,1972: Those requirements include:
Members must be selected and appointed by EPA
Members must attend and participate fully in meetings of NEJAC
Meetings must be open to the public, except as specified by the Administrator
All meetings must be announced in the Federal Register
Public participation must be allowed at all public meetings ,
» The public must be provided access to materials distributed during the meeting
Meeting minutes must be kept and made available to the public
i ',''' ". -
. A designated/ederal official (DFO), must be present at all meetings of the NEJAC (and its
subcommittees)
* . ' ., ' '- , I " . - "" ' - ' ' '' - . '
NEJAC must provide independent judgment that is not influenced by special interest groups
Each subcommittee, formed to deal with a specific topic and to facilitate the conduct of the business of"
NEJAC, has a DFO and is bound by the requirements of FACA. Subcommittees of the NEJAC meet
independently of the full NEJAC and present their findings tothe NEJAC for review. Subcommittees cannot :
make recommendations independently to EPA. In addition to the six subcommittees, NEJAC has established :-
a Protocol Committee, the members of which are the chair of NEJAC and the chairs of each subcommittee.
Members of the NEJAC are presented in the table on the following page. A list of the members of each
of the six subcommittees.are presented in the appropriate chapters of the report.
-------
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
(1996)
Designated Federal Official:
Ms. Clarice Gaylord
Director, EPA Office of Environmental Justice
Ms. Christine Benally
Mr. John Borum
Mr. Walter Bresette
Mr. Robert Builard
Ms. Dollie Burwell
Ms. Mary English
Ms. Deeohn Ferris
Ms. Jean Gamache
Ms. Dolores Herrera
Mr. Lawrence Hurst
Ms. Hazel Johnson
Mr. Richard Lazarus
General Members
Chair of NEJAC:
Mr. Richard Moore
Mr. Charles Lee
Mr. Charles McDermott
Mr. John O'Leary
Mr. Michael Pierle
Mr. Arthur Ray
Mr. Salom6n Ronddn-Tollens
Ms, Peggy Saika
Mr. Haywood Turrentine
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez
Ms. Velma Veloria
Ms. Nathalie Walker
Ms. Beverly Wright
EPA's Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) maintains transcripts, summary reports, and other material
distributed during the meetings. Those documents are available to the public upon request.
Comments or questions can be directed to OEJ through the Internet. OEJ's Internet E-mail address is:
environmental.justice.epa@epamail.epa.gov.
Executive Summaries of the reports of the NEJAC meetings are available on the Internet at OEJ's World Wide
Web homepage:
http://es.inel.gov/oeca/oej.html.
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
Page
PREFACE .- .... ................... ......;. : /
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . ............... ES-1
CHAPTER ONE: MEETING OF THE NEJAC EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
1.0 INTRODUCTION .........:.... ,'. . . . . . .... I.".-.,-."......'' 1-1
2.0 OPENING REMARKS .................. . '....,... '.-...'.. 1-2 '
2.1 Remarks of the Chair :.... ............ .. 1-2
2.2 Remarks of the Assistant Administrator for OECA . !.,.. 1-2
2.3 Remarks of the Director of OEJ .. ........ 1.-3
3.0 REPORTS OF EPA PROGRAM AND REGIONAL OFFICES 1-3
3.1 Environmental Education Division ..,.,;........ ; 1-3
3.2 Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance .'-. :. 1-7
3.3 Office^of Policy, Planning and Evaluation .....' -.;..... 1-8
3.4 EPA Caribbean Field Office. 1-10
4.0 PRESENTATIONS . . . . .'. ......'.-..'. '.....' 1-11
4.1 Reportonthe NEPAGuidance .' 1-11
4.2 Superfund Relocation Roundtable 1-12
4.3 Briefing on McFarland, California 1-13
4.4 American Bar Association Directory of Environmental Justice Providers 1-15
/ . . - . . ' x- '
5.0 REPORTS OF THE NEJAC SUBCOMMITTEES 1-15
.5.1 Enforcement Subcommittee 1-15
5.2 Health and Research Subcommittee ...........;. ....;. .'... i-16
5.3 Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee ...-.' 1-16
5.4 International Subcommittee ,..."... 1-17
5.5 Public Participation and Accountability Subcommitte.e 1-17
5.6 .Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee 1-1.9
6.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS . ... ..... . . .... . ., 1-20
6.1 Comments Presented on May ,29,1996 ....... ,1-20
6.1.1 Hussein Bakri, ECO-Access '. '.'... 1-20
6.1.2 Teresa Leal, Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice ... 1-20
6.1.3 James Stone, Yankton Sioux Tribe .-......:. 1-21
6.1.4 Darryl Segars, Office of U.S. Representative John Conyers, Jr 1-21
6.1.5 Margaret Williams, Citizens Against Toxic Exposure '....,.'... 1-21
6.1.6 Seleha.Mendy, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law ......... .. 1-22
6.1.7 Dune Lankard, EYAK Rain Forest Preservation Fund .. 1-22
6.1.8 Earl Tully, Diiie CARE ;... 1-22
6.1.9 Aku Budu-Watkins, Executive Assistant to the Mayor of Detroit : 1-23
6.1.10 Juan Fernandez, National Environmental Commission, Chile ...,;:...-.,... 1-23
111
-------
6.2 Comments Presented on May 30,1996 1-24
6.2.1 Michael Dorsey, Yale University 1-24
6.2.2 Max Weintraub, National Safety Council 1-24
6.2.3 Running Grass, Three Circles Center for Multi-Cultural
Environmental Education 1-24
6.2.4 John Simmons, Kennedy Heights Civic Association, Houston, Texas 1-25
6.2.5 Seth Lubega, Oakwood College, Huntsville, Alabama 1-26
6.2.6 Connie Tucker, Southern Organizing Committee for Economic
and Social Justice 1-27
6.2.7 Juan Rosario, Mision Industrial de Puerto Rico 1-27
6.2.8 Dennison Smith 1-27
6.2.9 Peter Cervantes, Gauchi, Workers' Organizing Committee 1-28
6.2.10 Anna Frazier, Dine CARE ; 1-28
6.2.1 i Ray Campion, Mickey Leland National Urban Air Toxics Research Center 1-29
6.2.12 Jennifer Jamison, National Association for the Advancement
of Colored People 1-29
6.2.13 Arthur Vareia, Citizen 1-29
7.0 WRAP-UP , !..... 1-30
7.1 Leaving of Arthur Vareia from EPA 1-30
7.2 Replacement of NEJAC Members 1-30
8.0 RESOLUTIONS 1-30
CHAPTER TWO: MEETING OF THE ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 2-1
2.0 REMARKS 2-1
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ". 2-2
3.1 Worker Protection Work Group 2-3
3.2 Open Market Trading of Air Emissions Credits Work Group 2-3
3.3 Work Group on the Permitting Process ... 2-4
3.4 Work Group on the Policy on Supplemental Environmental Projects 2-5
3.5 Enforcement Roundtable Task Force 2-6
3.6 Review of Action Items 2-6
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES RELATED TO ENFORCEMENT . 2-6
4.1 Regional Enforcement Roundtables 2-7
4.2 National Environmental Performance Partnership System 2-7
4.3 Issues Related to the Importation of PCBs 2-8
5.0 PRESENTATIONS ..'..... 2-9
5.1 Report on Public Dialogues on Worker Protection .' 2-9
5.2 Targeting of Enforcement 2-11
5.3 Guidance Issues 2-13
5.4 Update on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act 2-14
IV
-------
CHAPTER THREE: MEETING OF THE HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE
1.6 INTRODUCTION ... ... . .. . . '. 1 ...,.;.. 3-1
2.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ....,.............:...... 3-1
2.1 Review of Action Items ; 3-1
2.2 Future Goals of the Subcommittee - .' 3-3,
2.3 Development of National Forum on Health and Research ... 3-4
" * i " . '"''".'-
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES RELATED TO HEALTH AND RESEARCH '.'.'.., . 3-5
3.1 Challenges to the Public Health Care System 3-5
3.2 Interaction with the Institute of Medicine .......'............'.... ... .3-6
3.3 Provision of Comments to the Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice ..-. 3-6
3.4 Domestic Use of Mercury .-.. 3-7
4.0 PRESENTATIONS '....."'!.; .. .'.... 3-8
, . ' ' '"'', '' . ' ' ' *
4:1 Potential Weakening of Standards Governing Lead Testing and Cleanup 3-8
4.2 Report on the Mickey Leland National Urban Air Toxics Research Center .3-10
4.3 Opportunities for Collaboration on National Academy of Sciences/
IOM Environmental Justice Study s.. .......... 3-11
5.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE . . . ... . ...';. ... .... . . ..... .... .........;....... 3-13
5.1 Roberta Luce, Detroit City Forum Lead Prevention Coalition ...... ........... 3-13
" . ' - - * - ' " \ '
6.0 RESOLUTIONS ..:...-[[[ 3-14
CHAPTER FOUR: MEETING OF THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION . . .... ....... ... ., . . . . . . . ;..,... . . , 4-1
2.0 REMARKS ,' . '. . . . .. -. . 4_j
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE .............;'.. ', .;.. .... .. . 4-2,
3.1 , Review of Action Items .'., 4-2
3.2 Coordination With Other NEJAC Subcommittees \............. 4-4
3.3 Update on the IWG I........: ..4-5
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES RELATED TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES . . . . ,....,.. 4-5
4.1 Funding Issues Related to Indian Tribes 4-5
4;2 Accessability to Information ..........................-....!....' 4.5
4.3 Site-Specific Environmental Justice Cases 4-6
4.3.1 Yankton Sioux Indian Tribe .;..,.'..... .;..... 4-6
4.3.2 Copper Range Company, White Pine, Michigan 4-7
4.4 Trust Responsibility and Environmental Protection in Ceded Territory ...'.....,...... 4-8
5.0 PRESENTATIONS ...... . . 1 ., ;; . . .'.'. ..........;...... . 4.9
-------
, 5.2 Update on the World Council of Churches Conference 4-9
5.3 Update on EPA's Tribal Operations Committee 4-9
5.4 Update on the IEN Gathering 4-10
5.5 Tribal Operations and Tribal Solid and Hazardous Waste Issues 4-10
6.0 RESOLUTIONS 4-10
CHAPTER FIVE: MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 5-1
2.0 REMARKS , 5-1
3.0 PRESENTATIONS . . '. 5-1
3.1 Overview of the Bolivia Hemispheric Conference on Sustainable Development ...:... 5-1
3.2 Update on the Border XXI Program 5-3
3.3 Public Participation and Accountability in the Border Environmental Cooperation
Commission .5-5
3.4 Overview of the Activities of the President's Council on Sustainable Development 5-6
3.5 Update on the Habitat II Conference 5-7
3.6 Update on the Gore-Mbecki Report 5-7
4.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE . . 4-8
CHAPTER SIX: MEETING OF THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY
SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION ; 6-1
2.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE 6-1
2.1 Review of Action Items .6-1
2.2 Role of the Subcommittee 6-2
3.0 IMPROVING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS , . 6-4
3.1 Model Plan for Public Participation 6-4
3.2 NEJAC's Interaction with the Communities 6-5
3.3 Enlisting Support on a Regional Level 6-7
3.4 Integrating Public Participation into EPA Policies and Decision Making 6-8
3.5 Disseminating Information Related to Environmental Justice -.'. .-6-8
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES RELATED TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 6-9
4.1 Revisit of RCRA Final Rule ., 6-9
4.2 Review of Draft CEQ Guidance for NEPA , 6-9
4.3 Overview of Public Participation Efforts in Chile . 6-9
4.4 Review of the EPA Grant Process 6-10
CHAPTER SEVEN: MEETING OF THE WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 7-1
VI
-------
2.0 OPENING REMARKS .-......',;....,......... .':...........;. .'...:,...'.... 7-1
- - " . I' ' ,'' '"',..
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE '......_........ 7-1
3.'1 Review of Action Items .........:......, 7-2
3.2 Report of the Public Dialogues on Urban Revitalization and Brownfields 7-2
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES RELATED TO WASTE AND FACILITY SITING , 7-3
4.1 Transportation, Urban Revitalization, and Brownfields 7-3
4.2 Public Health, Urban Revitalization, and Brownfields 7-3
4.3 Environmental Justice Guidance.on Facility Siting under RCRA . -.-.................. 7-3
.4.4, ', National Academy of Sciences/Institute of Medicine Environmental Justice Study' 7-4
5.0 PRESENTATIONS r .............. ."; . . . /. ;'.,-...,....... 7-4
5,1 Status of OSWER Environmental Justice Implementation Activities .7-4
5.2 Status of OSWER Brownfields Activities 7-6
5.3 Status of OSWER Siting Surveys, Policies, and Activities I 7-7
5.4 Waste Minimization and Pollution Prevention ,.... 7-8
5.5 NIEHS Report on the Minority Worker Training Program 7-8
5.6 Reporton the Relocation Rouridtable Meeting .7-9
5.7 Status pf EPA's Military Munitions Rule ......;.............. 7-11
5.8 Tribal and Native American Issues .^ 7-11
5.8.1 Overview of Issues :^.. 7-11
5.8.2 Review of OSWER Activities .:..................,....,....... 7-13
5.8.3 Follow-UpActivities 7-13
6.0 RESOLUTIONS ;. '....'..... 7-14
APPENDICES
LIST OF NEJAC MEMBERS
HANDOUTS DISTRIBUTED DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Vll
-------
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
This executive summary provides highlights of the
seventh meeting of the National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), held on May 29
through 31,1996 in Detroit, Michigan. The Executive
Council of NEJAC met on portions of May 29, 30,
and 31, 1996. Each of the six NEJAC
subcommittees met for a full day on May 29, 1996
and continued deliberations through the morning of
May 30, 1996. Twenty-two members of the
Executive Council, along with ah additional 25
individuals, participated in the deliberations of
NEJAC's six subcommittees. .Approximately 150
persons attended the meetings. The NEJAC hosted
public comment periods on May 29 and 30,1996.
The NEJAC is a federal advisory committee that was
established by charter on September 30, 1993 to
provide independent advice, consultation, and
recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on matters
related to environmental justice. Mr. Richard Moore
serves as the chair of the Executive Council. Ms.
Clarice Gaylord, EPA Office of Environmental Justice
(OEJ), serves as the Designated Federal Official
(DFO) for the council. Exhibit ES-1 lists the persons
elected to chair the six NEJAC subcommittees and
the EPA staff appointed to serve as DFO for each
subcommittee. j .../.;
To date, NEJAG has held seven meetings. OEJ
maintains public transcripts and summary reports of
the proceedings of the meetings. Those documents
are available to the public upon request.
OVERVIEW
Ms. Gaylord opened the meeting for. Mr. Moore by
welcoming participants and reading a written
statement. Mr. Moore's statement indicated that he
had attended separate meetings with EPA
Administrator Carol Browner and Mr. Steve Herman,
Deputy Assistant Administrator (AA) of EPA's Office
of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA),
to discuss the possibility of establishing a work group
to address environmental issues related to Puerto
Ripo, implementation of Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, and interaction of the IvlEJAC with the
Interagency Work Group on Environmental Justice
(IWG). ' ; ,-
Mr. Herman updated the members of the NEJAC on
the integration of OEJ into the organizational
Exhibit ES-1
NEJAC Chairs and DFOs
Executive Council:
Mr. Richard Moore, Chair
Ms. Clarice Gaylord, DFO
Enforcement Subcommittee: , ,
Ms. Deeohn Ferris, Chair '
Ms. Sherry Milan, DFO
Health and Research Subcommittee:
Mr. Robert Bullard, Chair ,
Mr. Lawrence Martin, DFO
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee: \
Mr. Walter Bresette, Chair
Ms. Elizabeth Bell, DFO
International Subcommittee: .
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez, Chair
. Ms. Lorraine Frigeno, DFO >
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee:
Ms. Peggy Saika, Chair
Mr. Robert Knox, DFO
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee:
Mr. Charles Lee, Chair
Mr. Kent Benjamin, DFO
structure of OECA. Stating that he believes the
transition is working well, Mr. Herman said that the
presence of OEJ is bringing about the integration of
environmental justice issues into OECA's policies,
programs, and activities. Mr. Herman also provided
an update on the status of EPA's budget and the
status of international environmental justice activities
at the agency.
Common Themes
During the day and one-half meeting, the
subcommittees discussed a wide-range of issues
related tp environmental justice. Specific issues
raised include improving the coordination among the
NEJAC subcommittees, addressing issjjes related to
multicultural perspectives and environmental justice
concerns related to the process of awarding grants,
.and the trend toward delegation of regulatory
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through 31,1996
ES-1
-------
Executive Summary
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
authority to the states.
Members of the six subcommittees continued to call
for improved coordination and communication among
the six NEJAC subcommittees. In response to
concerns raised at the December 1995 meeting of
the NEJAC, subcommittees participated in joint
discussions of common issues. Issues addressed in
joint presentations or discussed jointly by
subcommittees include:
Native American issues discussed by the
Indigenous Peoples and Waste and Facility
Siting subcommittees
Issues related to enforcement of worker
protection standards, reviewed by the
Enforcement and International subcommittees
The design and scope of an ongoing national
study of environmental justice issues
conducted by the National Academy of
Sciences and the Institute of Medicine (IOM),
addressed collaboratively by the Health and
Research and the Waste and Facility Siting
subcommittees.
Renewed calls for improved coordination among
subcommittees focused on integrating considerations
of public participation into the activities of each of the
subcommittees, as well as incorporating
consideration of issues related to indigenous peoples
into the deliberations of the subcommittees.
Members of the. Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee plan to examine how
best to strengthen the effectiveness of the
subcommittee and to ensure the participation of
community organizations in the public comment
periods sponsored by the NEJAC. The Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee agreed to present to the
NEJAC its concerns that environmental justice
issues related to indigenous peoples are not
communicated to, or discussed in consultation with
this subcommittee.
Members of the NEJAC expressed concern about
issues related to incorporating multicultural
perspectives and concerns about environmental
justice into EPA's various grants programs. In
general, members expressed frustration at the
process used in selecting grant recipients, citing an
apparent lack of sensitivity on the part of selection
panels. Noting that the processes fail to recognize
that the experts on the community are the very
people who live and work in the community, many
members expressed concern about the failure of
many grant programs to formulate strategies for
working with multicultural audiences.
Discussions about the effect on enforcement
standards of the delegation of regulatory authority to
individual states revealed concern among members
that, as states take increasing responsibility for
enforcing certain regulatory programs, EPA could
establish a less commanding control standard.
Recent public forums sponsored by EPA to provide
opportunities for members of the public to comment
on issues ranging from Brownfields redevelopment
and relocation of communities to worker protection
rules prompted calls for additional forums. Forums
under consideration include regional enforcement
roundtable meetings and a national forum on
concerns related to health and research.
SUMMARIES OF THE
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS
Summarized below are the discussions conducted
during the meetings of the six subcommittees of the
NEJAC.
Enforcement Subcommittee
The NEJAC Enforcement Subcommittee discussed
the activities of the four work groups of the
subcommittee and reviewed the action items
formulated during its meeting in December 1995 and
the planning of enforcement roundtable meetings.
The subcommittee also heard numerous
presentations during its two-day meeting.
Presentations included reports on public dialogues
on worker protection, enforcement targeting, and
issuance of guidance related to Superfund reform, as
well as an update on enforcement activities under
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
A summary of the status of the work groups follows:
The Worker Protection Work Group, has been
established to review and provide
recommendations to EPA on its activities
related to enforcement of existing regulations.
The Open Market Trading of Air Emissions
Credits Work Group will review the proposed
guidance on air emissions credits that EPA
may issue in November or December 1996.
The work group also will research studies that
have been conducted of the trading of air
emissions credits to evaluate the
shortcomings of the trading programs.
The Work Group on Permitting (formerly the
Work Group on Agency Integration,
Permitting, and the National Environmental
Policy Act [NEPA] Process) conducted
ES-2
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through 31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Summary
preliminary analysis of the integration of
environmental justice into EPA's permitting
process. In the future the work group will
analyze NEPA to identify opportunities for the
inclusion of environmental justice into the
NEPA process and meet with staff of EPA's
Office of General Counsel and the U.S.
Department of Justice concerning issues
1 related to integrating environmental justice
into the permitting process.
Before it is disbanded at this meeting, the
Work Group on the Policy on Supplemental
Environmental Projects (SEP) will issue a
memorandum discussing EPA's authority
related to SEPs.
The subcommittee also established a task force
committed to planning roundtable discussions of
enforcement agreements between EPA and the
states and between EPA Headquarters and the EPA
regional offices. Members of the subcommittee
agreed to work with members of the Public
Participation and Accountability Subcommittee to
ensure that the Model Plan for Public Participation is
"incorporated into the planning process for the
roundtable discussions.
The subcommittee's discussion of environmental
justice issues related to enforcement also included
the, roles of EPA and states in enforcement and
issues related to polychlorinated biphenyls (PGB).
The subcommittee was reassured by EPA that
Administrator Browner has made a commitment to
ensure that public participation plays a central role in
the performance partnership agreements. The
subcommittee also discussed the recently issued .
rule concerning the importation of PCB waste and
PCB-contaminated items from Canada and Mexico,
and from other countries with which the United
States has signed bilateral agreements. The
subcommittee plans to review in more detail at its
December 1996 meeting maps generated by the
LandView II mapping software which identify all the
PCB facilities in the country.
Health and Research Subcommittee ,
Much of the discussion of the NEJAC Health and
Research Subcommittee centered on identifying the
future direction of the subcommittee's activities.
Members of the .subcommittee generally agreed to
expand their activities beyond reviewing EPA,
documents to pursue more "action-oriented"
initiatives. The subcommittee identified the following
opportunities: organization of a national forum on
concerns related to health and research; interaction
with the IOM in an effort to participate in the design
of that agency's ongoing national environmental
justice study; and provision of comments to the IWG.
Members of the subcommittee identified specific
goals to be: accomplished by an EPA-sponspred
forum on health and research. The subcommittee
agreed that the forum should address research
methods. Possible key agenda items include
assessing cumulative and multiple risks; assessing
risks to small populations; community-directed
research; tools for information and integration; and
crossrcutting themes, such as how research is
initiated. The subcommittee drafted a description of
the proposed forum as a resolution that was then
adopted by the NEJAC.
The Health and Research Subcommittee also
discussed working in partnership with the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee to provide comment on
the design and scope of the,national study on
environmental justice conducted by the National
Academy of Sciences and IOM.
Members of the subcommittee also drafted a
resolution outlining various comments to be
presented to the IWG at its June meeting, which '
some members of the NEJAC will attend. JThe
subcommittee requested that the NEJAC
recommend that the IWG consider a national priority
the health effects of cumulative exposure to toxics
and synergistic effects of toxics. Among the
conditions of widespread concern are asthma,
learning impairment, behavioral abnormalities and
other neurological disorders, reproductive disorders,
cancer clusters, birth defects and neonatal mortality,
low birth weight, skin conditions, and kidney
.problems.!
The subcommittee also heard presentations on the
potential weakening of standards governing lead
testing and cleanup and a report on the Mickey
Leland National Urban Air Toxics Research Center.
In addition, the Health and Research Subcommittee
forwarded several other resolutions to the NEJAC
related to childhood lead poisoning and mercury
poisoning associated with domestic use in cultural
practices.
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
The deliberations of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee focused on the activities of the
subcommittee, environmental justice issues related
to indigenous peoples, and a number of
presentations. The Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee also conducted a joint session with
the Waste arid Facility Siting Subcommittee to hear
a presentation from EPA's Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER) on tribal operations
and issues related to solid and hazardous waste
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through 31,1996
ES-3
-------
Executive Summary
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
management by tribal authorities.
The members of the subcommittee reviewed
selected action items that had been identified during
the December 1995 meeting of the subcommittee.
After its discussions, the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee forwarded a number of the action
items to the NEJAC as resolutions, specifically
requesting written reports from various EPA regional
offices related to cases involving the California
Basket Weavers Association, Big Mountain, Fort
Belknap, St. Regis Mohawk, Torres Martinez, and
the Navajo nation.
Concerns were raised anew about coordination of
efforts with the other subcommittees of the NEJAC.
The members stated that environmental justice
issues related to indigenous peoples are not
communicated routinely to the subcommittee. The
subcommittee also agreed that the members of the
NEJAC should be educated about the special status
of Native Americans, noting that Native Americans
afe not only people of color but also members of
sovereign nations. The subcommittee agreed to
request a time at the December 1996 meeting to
discuss the issue with the NEJAC.
In addition to improving communication within the
NEJAC, the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
again recommended .a joint meeting of the NEJAC
3nd EPA's Tribal Operations Committee (TOC). The
purpose of the meeting would be to discuss the
relationship between the two groups, identify areas
of mutual concern, and avoid duplication of effort.
The subcommittee's discussion of Environmental
justice issues and concerns related to indigenous
peoples included funding issues related to building
tribal capacity, tribes' accessibility to information, and
trust responsibility and environmental protection in
ceded territory. After discussions of issues, the
subcommittee drafted resolutions on building tribal
capacity and involving tribal governments when
appropriate in the siting of waste facilities, as well as
a resolution calling on EPA and other federal
agencies to honor their trust responsibilities and
comply with Executive Order 12898. Additional
issues included site:specific environmental justice
cases related to the Yankton Sioux Indian Tribe and
the Copper Range Company, White Pine, Michigan!
The subcommittee also requested that NEJAC
recommend that EPA review its mediation and
negotiation policy with regard to tribes.
The subcommittee heard updates on several
conferences at which issues related to indigenous,
peoples were discussed: the National Tribal
Environmental Management Conference, World
Council of Churches Conference, a meeting of the
EPA TOC, and the Indigenous Environmental
Network Gathering.
International Subcommittee
Much of the meeting of the International
Subcommittee was devoted to presentations and
updates on various conferences related to
international environmental justice issues.
Discussions focused on updates on the Bolivia
Hemispheric Conference on Sustainable
Development; the Border XXI Program; public
participation and accountability in the Border XXI
Program; the President's Council on Sustainable
Development; the Habitat II Conference; and the
activities of the Gore-Mbecki Commission. During
their discussions of these topics, the members of the
International Subcommittee expressed common
concerns and themes.
The members of the International Subcommittee
strongly urged EPA to assume a leadership role in
ensuring that environmental justice is integrated into
the international policies of the United States. The
United States has a historic opportunity to ensure
that environmental justice becomes a priority
throughout the world, they noted.
Members of the subcommittee expressed concern
about the lack of community involvement in such
EPA activities as negotiating environmental justice
policy and drafting policy language related to
environmental justice in the international arena.
Concern was expressed specifically about efforts to
draft the environmental justice platform for the
Habitat II Conference scheduled for June 1996 in
Istanbul, Turkey.
In response to a perceived lack of community
involvement in international activities, the
subcommittee agreed to draft a letter for Mr. Moore's
signature to Administrator Browner, expressing the
NEJAC's concern about the apparent lack of public
participation and accountability in the activities of the
Border Environmental Cooperation Commission
(BECC).
Subcommittee, members also expressed concern
about the lack of involvement of the International
Subcommittee in the international activities of EPA.
Subcommittee members stated that EPA's Office of
International Activities (OIA) should have been more
aggressive in involving the international
Subcommittee in several recent key international
activities. Members of the subcommittee stated they
hope that in the future OIA will be more sensitive to
the need to involve the subcommittee to assure
ES-4
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through 31,1996
-------
Hational Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Summary
incorporation of environmental justice concerns in
the development and implementation of its policies
and activities.
Members began drafting a mission statement for the
subcommittee. The subcommittee agreed that its
mission statement should focus on trade and
international policy. Members also stated the belief
that the, membership of the IWG should be expanded
to include representatives of such federal agencies
as the U.S. Department of State and the Office of
i United States Trade Representatives.
Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee
The deliberations of the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee focused on improving
the effectiveness of the subcommittee; improving the
public participation process; and incorporating
environmental justice issues related to public
participation into the processes of both EPA and the
NEJAC. The subcommittee also discussed various
environmental justice issues related to public
participation, such as the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act final rule; review of the draft White
House Council on Environmental Quality guidance
for the NEPA process; overview of the public
participation efforts in Chile; and review of EPA's
grant process.
The activities of the subcommittee included review of
action items agreed upon during its December 1995
meeting £nd discussion of the role of thei
subcommittee within the NEJAC. Members of the
subcommittee discussed the need to strengthen the
effectiveness of the subcommittee and to better
integrate the activities of its members with those of
other subcommittees of the NEJAC. The
subcommittee will examine methods of restructuring
itself so that two members can be assigned as
liaisons to each of the other subcommittees of the
NEJAC. - ' -. ,
The subcommittee also discussed issues related to
improving public participation, such as incorporating
final changes in, and methods of distributing and
evaluating, the NEJAC model plan for public
participation; improving NEJAC's interactions with
communities; enlisting the support of EPA on a
regional level; .integrating public participation in
EPA's policy making and .decision making; and
disseminating information about environmental
justice. .. . :
The subcommittee agreed to revise the model plan.
The members of the subcommittee also discussed ,
the importance of determining how the plan will be
distributed. In addition, the subcommittee .also
discussed the need to periodically evaluate the
model plan for public participation and the public
participation process itself. The members agreed to
develop methods to evaluate both the model plan
and the public participation process.
The members of the subcommittee also discussed
interaction of the NEJAC with communities. Efforts
to bring the NEJAC to communities through activities
like the bus tour of Detroit conducted on May 28,
1996 were identified as alternatives to satellite
, downlinks. The members agreed that such events
help the NEJAC become familiar with issues that are
important to communities. Members of the
subcommittee also agreed that the subcommittee
should play a more assertive role in determining
where the NEJAC should meet and how its members
should interact with the communities in which it holds
its meetings.
In addition to involving the local community in the,
development of NEJAC meetings, the subcommittee
identified a need to enlist on a regional basis more
support for the meetings and activities of the NEJAC.
The members of the subcommittee suggested that,
for each meeting of the NEJAC, the appropriate EPA
. regional administrator might welcome the NEJAC
members to the region. Such a step could help build
a partnership that could work to institutionalize a
process to involve people at the regional level, .the
members agreed.
The members of the subcommittee also stressed that
public participation should be integrated into EPA's
programs and activities at both the regional and
national levels. The role of the subcommittee, they
agreed, should be to assist the efforts of
communities to hold entities like EPA accountable for
involving the public in their decision-making
processes. Members of the subcommittee stated
that it is important to link public participation tools,
such as the model plan for public participation, with
programs within EPA that will have the most strategic
effect on decision making.
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
The members of the Waste and, Facility Siting
Subcommittee reviewed their action items and
received an update On the report on Public Dialogues
on Urban Penalization and Brownfields.
Subcommittee members voted to adopt the report
and to recommend that the NEJAC adopt the report.
In addition, the subcommittee adopted a motion
related to distribution of the document.
The members of the subcommittee discussed a
proposed resolution emphasizing the importance that
EPA and the, U.S. Department of Transportation
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through 31,1996
ES-S
-------
Executive Summary
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(DOT) coordinate their efforts to address overlapping
issues related to transportation, regional land use,
and urban revitajization and the Brpwnfields
Initiative. Members emphasized trie importance of
ipcluding discussions about redevelopment under the
Brownfields initiative and urban revitalization in a
Series of regional workshops coordinated with DOT.
If the Brownfjelds program is to succeed, they
agreed, it must go beyond environmental issues.
Members of the subcommittee voiced much concern
gbout the national study on environmental justice
being conducted by the National Academy of
Sciences arid IOM. Many members of the
subcommittee agreed that the NEJAC should be
Concerned about this study because EPA is one of
the agencies funding the study. The subcommittee
passed a resolution recommending that NEJAC
request that EPA urge the adoption of a
Comprehensive view of environmental justice and
that the study consider the interests of low-income
communities, access to health care, issues related to
education, and similar issues.
The subcommittee heard presentations about the
status of OSVVER environmental justice
implementation activities; the status of OSWER's
activities related to the Brownfields program; the
status of OSWER's siting surveys, policies, and
activities; information about waste minimization and
pollution prevention related to Brownfields; the report
bf the National Institute of Environmental Health and
Sciences on the minority worker training program;
the status of EPA's military munitions rule; and tribal
and Native American issues, as well as an update on
the relocation roundtable meeting.
The dialogue between the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee and the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee about environmental justice issues
related to Native Americans focused on continuing
concern about integrating issues related to
indigenous peoples into the deliberations of other
subcommittees. The joint session was a first step in
educating members of other subcommittees about
the importance of the sovereignty of Native American
nations, as well as cultural characteristics of
indigenous peoples. After the joint session between
the two subcommittees follow-up activities were
planned, including conducting of joint conference
calls and formation of an Indigenous Peoples Work
Group to address many issues that affect indigenous
people, such as regulatory loopholes and mining
Vjfastes, building the capacity of communities to
participate effectively, employment and worker
training, and coordination with federal facilities.
ES-6
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through 31,1996
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 29 through 31,1996
Detroit, Michigan
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Clarice Gaylord M
Designated Federal Official
Richard Moore
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER ONE
MEETING OF THE
NEJAC EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The seventh meeting of the Executive Council of the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) took place on May 29 through 31; 1996 in
Detroit, Michigan. On May 29 through 30, members
of the Executive Council participated, in the
deliberations of one of the NEJAC's six
subcommittees. Mr. Richard Moore, Southwest
Network for Environmental and Economic Justice,
continues to serve as the chair of the Executive
Council. Ms. Clarice Gaylord, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Environmental
Justice (OEJ), continues to serve as the Designated
Federal Official (DFO) for the Executive Council.
The Executive Council hosted two public comment
periods on May 29 and 30, 1996. The public
comment periods were open to the public and
approximately 50 people participated.
Approximately 150 people attended the meetings
conducted in Detroit, Michigan.
Exhibit 1-1 presents a Jist of members who were
present and identifies those who were unable to
attend the meetjng.
This chapter, which presents a detailed discussion of
the deliberations of the Executive Council (hereafter
referred to as the NEJAC), contains eight sections,
including this Introduction. Section 2.0, Opening
Remarks, presents summaries of the remarks of the
chair of NEJAC, the Assistant Administrator (AA) for
the EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA), and the Director of OEJ.
Section 3.0, Reports from EPA Program and
Regional Offices, sets forth summaries of the
remarks of representatives of selected EPA program
and regional offices.
In addition, Section 4.0, Presentations, provides
summaries of presentations on various topics,
including the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) guidance issued by the White House Council
on Environmental Quality (CEQ); the Superfund
Relocation Roundtable; a briefing on McFariand,
California; and the American Bar Association
Directory of Environmental Justice Providers.
Section 5.0, Subcommittees of the NEJAC,
summarizes the reports of the activities of the
NEJAC's six subcommittees. Section 6.0, Summary
of Public Comment, presents a summary of the
comments submitted during public comment periods
Exhibit 1-1
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
; List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 29, 30, and 31, 1996
Mr. Richard Moore; Chan-
Ms. Clarice Gaylord; DFO
Ms. Christine Benally ,
- Mr. Walter Bresette
Mr. Robert Bullard*
Ms. Dollie Bufwell
Ms. Mary English
Ms. Deeohn Ferris
Ms. Jean Gamache
Ms. Dolores Herrera
Mr. Lawrence Hurst*
Ms. Hazel Johnson
Mr. Richard Lazarus
Mr. Charles Lee
Mr. Charles, McDermott
Mr. John 6'Leary
Mr. Michael Pierle**
Mr. Arthur Ray
Ms. Peggy Saika*
Mr. Haywood Turrentine
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez
, Ms. Velma Veloria
Ms. Beverly Wright*
' List of Members
Who Were Unable to Attend
Mr. JohnBorum
Mr. Salomon Rondon-Tollens
Ms. Nathalie Walker
*attendedMoy 29 and 30, 1996 only
**Mr. Kevin Cahill served as proxy
for Mr. Pierle .
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-1
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
on May 29 and 30, 1996. Section 7.0, Wrap-Up,
summarizes the discussion on the leaving of Mr.
Arthur Varela from EPA; review of selected action
items; and the proposed replacement of NEJAC
members. Section 8.0, Resolutions, provides a list
of the resolutions considered by the NEJAC.
2.0 OPENING REMARKS
This section summarizes the remarks of the chair of
the NEJAC, the AA for OECA, and the Director of
OEJ.
2.1 Remarks of the Chair
Ms. Gaylord, DFO, read the opening remarks of Mr.
Moore, who was unable to attend the opening
session of the NEJAC.
In his statement* Mr. Moore welcomed the
participants of the NEJAC and stated that the NEJAC
is composed of a group of private citizens
representing various organizations who voluntarily
donate their time to provide advice to EPA on issues
related to environmental justice. He explained that
the NEJAC is composed of six subcommittees,
including the International and Indigenous Peoples
subcommittees which were meeting for the second
time. Mr. Moore in his talking points, announced
that Mr. Juan Fernandez, Director of Education for
the Chile National Environmental Commission, was
participating to learn about the NEJAC process.
Mr. Moore's statement indicated that he had
attended two meetings, one with EPA Administrator
Carol Browner and the other with Mr. Steven
Herman, AA for EPA's OECA, to discuss the
possibility of establishing a work group to address
environmental issues related to Puerto Rico,
implementation of Title VI, and interaction with the
Interagency Work Group on Environmental Justice
(IWG).
Ms. Gaylord continued reading Mr. Moore's remarks
by expressing his regret of the passing away of Ms.
Jean Sindab and the resignation of Ms. Gail Small
since the last meeting. He welcomed two new
NEJAC members, Ms. Christine Benally, Dine
CARE, and Ms. Dollie Burwell, Warren County
Concerned Citizens Against PCB. In his remarks,
Mr. Moore welcomed Mr. Bill Simmons, International
Indian Treaty Council, as a new member of the
International Subcommittee.
2.2 Remarks of the Assistant Administrator for
OECA
Mr. Herman updated the members of the NEJAC on
the integration of OEJ into OECA. He stated that he
believes the transition is working well - with OEJ's
presence in the division, environmental justice is
Being integrated in OECA's programs, policies, and
activities. In addition, Mr. Herman stated that OEJ
has the benefit of technical resources that the office
would otherwise not have had.
Mr. Herman provided an update on the status of
EPA's budget. He explained that at the December
1995 meeting of the NEJAC, EPA was in the midst of
an extraordinarily "ugly" budget fight that threatened
funds for environmental justice and for programs
across the entire Agency. Mr. Herman stated that
EPA was threatened with a 35 percent budget
reduction, and OECA faced and even deeper budget
cut of 40 percent. Mr. Herman explained that EPA's
budget was passed intact, including the budget for
OECA. He also explained that the budget related to
environmental justice activities also is intact;
therefore, the funding for grants and other activities
will go ahead as planned. Mr. Herman stated that
the credit for the budget victory resides with the
American public, who responded with outrage at the
attacks on EPA. He also stated that appreciation
should be extended to Administrator Browner who
argued both within EPA's administration and to
Congress of the unacceptability of the budget.
Mr. Herman explained that EPA and OECA are
preparing for next year's budget hearing. There is
already a conflict between the President's proposed
budget and the proposed Republican Congressional
budget. He wished to assure the NEJAC, that
environmental justice continues to be a top priority
for Administrator Browner and EPA. He announced
that OECA had hosted a national enforcement
conference a few months ago, where Mr. Robert
Bullard of Clark Atlanta University Environmental
Justice Resource Center, and Ms. Gaylord presented
keynote speeches. In addition, Ms. Gaylord and
OEJ had hosted a workshop on environmental
justice. Mr. Herman stated that environmental justice
has been included in all memoranda of
understanding (MOU) and agreements with EPA
regional offices to ensure that low-income
communities are targeted for the attention of EPA-
Mr. Herman also stated that this activity is occurring
in all program areas, not just enforcement.
Mr. Herman also updated the members of the
NEJAC on international activities at EPA. He stated
1-2
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
that Mr. Robert Knox, OEJ, as well as Vice President
Al Gore visited South Africa. Mr. Herman explained
that the AA for the EPA Office of International
Activities (OIA) had approached OECA about
supporting additional efforts in South Africa to help
build its environmental protection program. He also
stated that EPA held an international environmental,
conference which was attended by representatives
from 80 nations, including most of the African and
Asian countries. The purpose of the conference was
to discuss the coordination of international
enforcement efforts and to build capacity in countries
which are initiating environmental programs.
Mr. Arthur Ray, Maryland Department of the
Environment, expressed concern about the
perception representatives from several EPA
regional offices may be giving to businesses about
increasing the flexibility of regulations. He stated
that he believes increasing the flexibility of
regulations has a direct effect on environmental
justice and that all stakeholders should be on a level
playing field. Mr. Herman replied that he agrees with
Mr. Ray and stated that he attended a meeting on
May 28, 1996 with the regional administrator and
state directors for EPA Region 4. Mr. Herman stated ;
that the issue Mr. Ray highlights affects not only
environmental justice but environmental protection
as a whole. He explained that over the past three
years EPA has recognized the need to reevaluate
past practices of building partnerships with
businesses. ' '
One issue that needs to be addressed, Mr. Herman
observed, is that some people have different ideas
about the concept and meaning of partnerships. For
example, some states view a partnership with EPA
to mean that EPA no longer has a presence in that
state, in contrast to the mutual respect or reciprocity
that EPA considers essential to partnerships, he
said. x Another example Mr. Herman offered was
related to partnerships between businesses and
EPA. He stated that there are many good and
progressive companies that are abiding by EPA
standards for their operations in the United States
and internationally; however, there are other
companies who are taking economic advantage of
these companies and EPA is attempting to end this
abuse. Mr. Herman stated that EPA wishes to award
those companies that are taking the initiative to be
progressive. He concluded that a level playing field
is the cornerstone of EPA's work. '
2.3 Remarks of the Director of OEJ
Ms. Gaylord welcomed the members of the council
in general, new members Ms. Benally and Ms.
Burwell .in particular, and the guests of the council;
She explained that Mr. John Borum, AT&T; Mr.
Saldmon Ronddn-Tollens, Puerto Rico Natural
Resource and Environmental Quality;. Ms. Nathalie
Walker, Sierra Legal Defense Fund; and Mr. Michael
Pierle, Monsanto, were unable to attend due to
conflicts.
Ms. Gaylord reminded the chairs of the
subcommittees to review the status of outstanding
action items listed on the action item tracking list.
Ms. Gaylord explained that it is the subcommittee's
/responsibility to address all action items for their
subcommittees and that the subcommittees are not
independent bodies; therefore, all advice and
recommendations to EPA must be adopted by the
NEJAC.
3.0 REPORTS OF EPA PROGRAM AND
REGIONAL OFFICES >
This section summarizes presentations made ^by
representatives of various EPA program and regional
offices. Some of the presentations discussed issues
raised during previous meetings of the NEJAC.
3.1 Environmental Education Division
Mr. Michael Baker, Acting Director of EPA's
Environmental Education Division (EED), along with
Ms. Kathleen MacKinnon and Mr. Augusto Medina,
North American Association for Environmental
Education (NAAEE); reported abput issues related to
multicultural perspectives and environmental justice
concerns within the Environmental Education and
Training Partnership, (EETAP) program (see Exhibit
1-2 fora detailed description of the EETAP program).
Mr. Baker first acknowledged the concerns of the
environmental, justice community and then stated
that EED is committed to working with communities
and to working with the NAAEE to strengthen
EETAP's efforts to reach multicultural audiences and
to address issues related to environmental justice.
Noting that the EETAP is an evolving three-year
program, he said he looks forward to working with
the NEJAC.
Mr. Baker explained Nthe context of the training
program to the members of the NEJAC. Mr. Baker
stated that, by law, the training program receives 25
percent of the annual appropriation for the
environmental education division; therefore, during
1996, the EETAP program received 25 percent of
EED's total budget of $7.8 million. Mr. Baker also
stated that the almost $2 million allocation applies
Detroit, Michigan, May29through31,1996
1-3
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
only to the first year of the program; funds for the
second year have not been awarded due to the
budget difficulties EPA experienced this past year.
Mr. Baker stated that it is important for the members
of the NEJAC to note that EED is under
Congressional mandate as to how their funds are
spent.
Mr. Baker stated that during the first phase of the
program, from 1992 through 1995, EPA awarded a
cooperative agreement to a consortium led by the
University of Michigan. The consortium included the
Environmental Education Network, Three Circle
Center, Howard University, and NAAEE. Mr. Baker
reported that for the second three-year phase,
anticipated to run from 1995 through 1998 subject to
Congress, EPA awarded the cooperative agreement
to a consortium headed by NAAEE, which included
the University of Michigan, Project Learning Tree,
Project Wild, Second Nature, and the World Wildlife
Fund. He stated that all partners in the NAAEE
consortium are working to reach multicultural
audiences.
Ms. MacKinnon provided a summary of the
solicitation and decision process for the training
grant. She began her remarks by explaining the
process EPA used to award the cooperative
agreement to NAAEE. In 1995, EPA issued an
invitation for proposals (IFP) that included
requirements for the( specific types of activities that
the training program* had to encompass, as well as
the criteria that would be used in evaluating the
proposals, she said. In addition, Ms. Mackinnon
explained that the IFP required that the training
program reach education professionals from diverse
geographic regions and ethnic and. cultural
communities throughout the United States. The IFP
also required that special emphasis be placed on
ensuring that the needs of diverse, ethnic, and
cultural groups are met, she said. NAAEE was
selected from among three finalists drawn from the
25 proposals EPA received.
Ms. MacKinnon stated that the proposals were
reviewed by personnel from EED and the ten EPA
regional offices, as well as representatives from
other federal agencies. In addition to the
government review of the proposals, representatives
from EPA's National Environmental Education
Advisory Council (the Federal Advisory Committee
Act [FACA] committee sponsored by EED) reviewed
the proposals. Before the final decision was made,
EED conducted extensive site visits with the lead
institutions and their partners to discuss how their
programs could reach traditionally under served
audiences, she said.
Ms. MacKinnon explained that, in putting together
the winning proposal, NAAEE brought together
organizations that had established national
environmental education programs that matched
closely the capabilities criteria set forth in the IFP
and could respond quickly to the programmatic
priorities specified in the IFP. The program partners
assembled by NAAEE participated fully in the design
of the proposal submitted to EPA, and they now
make up the project's governing board, she said.
Mr. Medina provided a detailed summary of the
Exhibit 1-2
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND
TRAINING PARTNERSHIP (EETAP)
PROGRAM
The Environmental Education and Training
Partnership (EETAP) program was created in
September 1995 through a Cooperative
Agreement between EPA in accordance with the
National Environmental Education Act of 1990.
The act enables EPA to establish a training
program for educating professionals through a
cooperative agreement with a college, university,
nonprofit organization, or a consortium of these
institutions. EETAP is a three-year long endeavor
that involves a consortium of 18 partners.
EETAP's goal as specified by EPA is to increase
the public's ability to make responsible
environmental decisions by developing awareness
and knowledge about environmental .issues,
encouraging critical thinking, and promoting
other problem solving skills needed to make
sound environmental decisions. . One of the
objectives of EETAP and its partners is to reach
populations that traditionally have not been
involved in environmental education programs,
such as people of color and urban residents.
The North American Association for
Environmental Education (NAAEE) is a 501(c)(3)
non-profit organization which for over 25 years
has promoted environmental education and
supported the work of environmental educators.
NAAEE plays a unique role with respect to
EETAP since it is the grant recipient, manages the
consortium, and implements some activities as one
of the 18 partners.
1-4
Detroit, Michigan, May29through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
NAAEE response to the concerns expressed by the
NEJAC about the selection of NAAEE as the primary
grant recipient. He reported that on May 13,1996 he
had sent a letter to the NEJAC detailing the steps
that EJETAP is pursuing to further incorporate
multicultural and environmental justice concerns into
the project. These concerns, he said, included
those raised in a letter to the NEJAC from ;Running;
Grass, Director of Three Circles Center for
Multicultural Environmental Education, on behalf of
30 individuals and organizations. Specific concerns
raised were that NAAEE and its partners lack
sufficient technical competence in multicultural and
environmental justice issues, that the EETAP
Advisory Committee must be strengthened in that
area; and that EETAP has not infused strategies to
work with multicultural audiences throughout the
project. In response to these concerns, Mr. Medina
statedthat NAAEE and EETAP propose to establish
a small working group with representatives from the
multicultural and environmental justice communities
to assist EETAP in setting multicultural and
environmental justice goals for the project and to
help the partners of EETAP design and implement
the steps needed to achieve those goals.
Mr. Medina stated that NAAEE will continue to work
with its urban and multicultural commission to
strengthen its environmental education programs
with diverse communities. Mr. Medina then
presented several examples of activities that will be
implemented by EETAP over the next several
moqths to assist under served audiences. Mr.
Medina concluded his remarks by stating that
NAAEE believes EETAP is, including people of color
and that NAAEE and its partners are open to
suggestions to strengthen these efforts.
Ms. Beverly Wright, Xavier University Deep South
Center for Environmental Justice, commented that
the environmental justice community deals
constantly with .criteria established by traditional
scientists, and that'smaller institutions cannot afford
to keep on staff scientists who have the credentials
needed to win the grants. She believed that the
applications may be examined for the credentials of
those listed on the application. She emphasized,
that it is impossible to have individuals with the
appropriate credentials at smaller universities.
Ms. Wright 'went on to explain that the environmental
justice community is frustrated because EPA seeks
comments and advice only after the process has
been completed. Ms. Wright stated that EPA should
examine the application process and seek comments
before the process begins. In response to a
clarification request from Ms. MacKinnon, Ms. Wright
stated that the "we" seems to be absent in the list of
EETAP partners. Ms. MacKinnonvstated that some
organizations that participate in EETAP have
experience working with multicultural audiences and
some do have" people of color on their staff. Ms.
Wright responded that EPA continues to discuss
rninority outreach; however, she said, some groups
already are doing what EETAP proposes, and those
groups also are infusing environmental education
into their regular curriculum.
Ms. Dolores Herrera, Albuquerque San Jose
Community, i commented that the current grant
application process robs members of the community
of their dignity and respect. She explained that two
universities contacted her community after the award
of grants only because the universities were required
to submit a report on their progress. Ms. Herrera told
the representatives of the EED that the" community
experts" are the people who live and work in the
community.
Mr. Bullard requested that the EED provide to the
NEJAC a racial and ethnic profile of recipients of
educational grants and a description of the
population the grant recipients are suppose to, serve.
He asked that the profile be comprehensive, and
include all recipients since the first grant was
awarded. Mr. Baker agreed to provide that
information to the NEJAC.
-1 . ' . - , . ='
Mr. Charles Lee, United Church of Christ
Commission for Racial Justice, echoed Mr. Moore's,
request that members clearly identify the party they
were addressing because, he said, the dialogue is
central to concerns about educating, preparing, and
empowering future generations. He expressed his
pleasure when the National Environmental Education
Act was passed because "it was a sign of hope." He
stated that environmental education must be placed
in the context of environmental : justice.
Empowerment and environmental justice must be
extended to include where we live, work, play, and
leam, Mr. Lee concluded.
Ms. Velma Veloria, Washington State Legislature,
commented that a diversity of people should award
grants and .that greater value should be placed on
the diversity criterion. Ms. Deeohn Ferris,
Washington Office on Environmental Justice, also
commented on the criteria for partners in the grant
process, explaining that the greater diversity of
partners, the richer the learning experience. She
also contested the continuing use of the word
"minorities" by environmental educators and asked
when people of color will be able to "throw off the
yoke" of being socially and economically
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-5
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
disadvantaged.
Ms. Ferris asked the representatives of the EED to
define the term "under served populations." Ms.
MacKinnon responded that under served populations
are audiences that typically have not been reached
through environmental educational efforts in the past
and includes that portion of the public that is served
in an informal setting as well as urban inner-city
multicultural children. Ms. Ferris asked whether the
definition Ms. MacKinnon offered indicated that the
term "under served populations" is "code for people
of color."
Ms. Ferris also inquired about the structure of
EETAP. Ms. MacKinnon replied that EETAP is a
project that is administered by NAAEE and that EPA
strongly encourages consortia-building to help
implement the program. Ms. MacKinnon responded
to Ms. Ferris inquiry about the composition of the
review team that awarded the grant. She explained
that there were various levels of review and the final
review panel was composed of personnel from EPA
and the National Environmental Education Advisory
Council, She agreed with Ms. Ferris' comment that
there probably was little multicultural representation
on the review panel. Ms. Ferris then requested that
the EED provide the NEJAC with a cultural profile of
the review panel for the EETAP program grant. In
addition, Ms. Ferris requested that the NEJAC also
be provided with a racial profile of the National
Environmental Education Advisory Council, as well
as a report on the council's effort to follow up on the
effects of its decisions. Mr. Baker agreed to provide
both profiles to the NEJAC, along with the grant
information that Mr. Bullard requested.
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez, Farm Labor Organizing
Committee, began his remarks by stating that the
problem organizations such as NEJAC are facing is
the widespread perception among U.S. institutions
that environmental justice issues are irrelevant to
their respective missions. He stated that too few
people in'the government are knowledgeable about
environmental justice. He observed that people of
color, who are spearheading the movement, are the
people who are knowledgeable about environmental
justice; and there is not a higher education degree
for environmental justice. Mr. Velasquez stated that
the government does not have the expertise to be
funding the programs it is funding. The system, he
said, was designed to "fund birds rather than
people," noting that the World Wildlife Fund is
unaware of the realities involved in achieving
environmental justice. Mr. Valasquez recommended
that the government increase awareness of
environmental justice and redesign the system to
fund relevant organizations that understand the
reality of environmental justice. Mr. Velasquez
concluded that the government should promote
"heartfelt change in institutions relevant to life
experiences."
Mr. Ray asked the presenters to clarify a section of
the NAAEE's May 13 letter to the NEJAC. He noted
that although the letter states that within the current
structure of EETAP there are no partners that focus
exclusively on multicultural or environmental justice
issues, he believed that the IFP mandates the
participation of diverse organizations. Ms.
MacKinnon responded that the legislation does
require that the program reach multicultural groups
and that the EED's thinking was geared toward
reaching diverse audiences, rather than building
diversity- in the structure of the program. Mr. Ray
commented that he hopes EED's thinking will be
expanded as a result of the testimonies heard today.
Mr. Ray also asked how it will be possible to identify
additional subcontractors with only four months left
in fiscal year (FY) 1995. Ms. MacKinnon explained
that the program operates from year to year and that
activities for the current fiscal year were not initiated
until late 1995. Although the program is funded
under a three-year award, she added, funds are
appropriated annually.
Ms. Mary English, University of Tennessee, offered
the EED representatives a portrayal on south-central
Appalachia, which is not predominantly populated
with people of color and where the cultural
perspective differs from that pf the mainstream.
Pointing out that communities there are truly.
disadvantaged, she suggested that, when reviewing
the application process and the composition of
EED's FACA, EPA should consider other cultural
composition considerations.
Ms. Burwell asked how EED ensures accountability
for environmental justice in the grant decision-
making process. Mr. Baker replied that EED
includes representatives from OEJ. He went on to
say that Mr. Daniel Gogal, OEJ, is working with EED
to recommend persons to review grants.
Ms. Jean Gamache, Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes
of Alaska, reminded EED to remember Indian
country needs when awarding grants.
Mr. Moore concluded the dialogue with the
representatives of the EED by observing that through
EPA's commitment to environmental justice, it is
supposed to include integration through all programs,
1-6
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
departments, and divisions. However, several
complaints have been received against the office
centering on the lack of respect received. He hoped
that from the dialogue heard today it is learned how
important it is to do things before and with
communities, not for them.
The members of the NEJAC then discussed several
, recommendations related to the presentation and the
dialogue with the representatives of the EED. Ms.
Ferris suggested that a task force be organized to
, address issues related to the grants process. Ms.
Gaylord noted that OEJ has revised the office's
procedures for the review of applications and
selection of recipients. She stated that OEJ
performs site investigations and verifies partnerships
with the community. Mr. Lee recommended NEJAC
establish a work group on environmental education,
with a focus on funding issues and later on the grant
programs. Ms. Ferris emphasized that the work
group should draw on the expertise of the public and
experts in the area of environmental education and
the grant process'. Ms. Benally also noted that it is
difficult to draw the line between environmental
justice grants and environmental education grants
since both involve the educational process. The
members of the NEJAC then approved the motion.
3.2 Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
Ms. Sylvia Lowrance, Principal Deputy Assistant
Administrator, OECA, expressed her pleasure at the
opportunity to make £ presentation to the NEJAC.
She explained that she had an opportunity to meet
with senior managers who are .involved in
enforcement programs throughout EPA to discuss
their strategy to increase enforcement efforts and
return EPA personnel to the .field after the
government furlough. Ms.,Lowrance explained that,
for most of the year, EPA had functioned on
piecemeal funding, at a level much lower than the
usual. The drop in funding, she suggested, explains
disruptions of EPA's activities. She said she
believes that the debate between EPA and Congress
went beyond budget issues to the future of
environmental and health protection. Ms. Lowrance
commented that the debate was difficult but the
Congressional attempts to roll back EPA's budget
failed, The budget was increased by approximately
$1 billion over the appropriations bill that President
Clinton vetoed because the latter cut environmental
protection too; she said. Ms. Lowrance reported that
the environmental justice budget was allocated $3
million for grants for small communities, as well as
additional operating funds for the NEJAC.
Ms. Lowrance then stated that the budget debates
established a baseline for what the American public
wants for environmental protection. EPA is
beginning to participate in appropriations hearings for
FY97, she said, adding that she is not certain
whether EPA will have a budget by October 1,1996.
However, she said, EPA has improved its negotiating
position with both political parties. Mr. Lee wished
that the NEJAC go on record to applaud the stand
that Administrator Browner took on the budget.
Ms. Lowrance then stated that the budget problems
had enormous effects this year on EPA. In
enforcement, the furloughs caused the breakdown of
many basic functions, she said: Currently, Ms.
Lowrance continued, OECA is working to return its
inspectors to the field offices and increase its
enforcement efforts to earlier levels.
Ms. English asked Ms. Lowrance to comment on the
progress of delegating regulatory authority to states,
Ms. Lowrance responded that "devolution" is a timely
issue- as state environmental programs mature, the
states are taking responsibility for certain legal
authorities, she added. She also discussed
Performance Partnerships Agreements program
between states and the federal government which
are designed to define environmental priorities. Ms.
Lowrance explained that not all states are the same
but that, to the maximum extent possible, states are
being allowed to implement their own programs
when they are capable of doing so, However, she
added, if a state does not meet standards, EPA will
monitor that state's program. Ms. Lowrance
announced that OECA plans to meet with the states
in the near future to discuss' the issue of federal
enforcement in a delegated state.
Ms. Benally asked if tribal representatives are invited.
to the meeting with the states because she stated
that some states assume they are the ones at the
table who have the only jurisdiction over tribes. She
went on to say that often states dp riot remember the
sovereign status of tribes. Ms. Lowrance replied that
all parties are involved in the planning process. She
stated that OECA has an annual planning meeting
which includes tribal representatives, states, and the
federal government to discuss needs in the coming
years. In addition, Ms. Lowrance explained that-
OECA meets separately with the tribal
representatives through EPA's Tribal Operations
Committee (TOC). ,
Ms. English also inquired about the "bubble concept"
that is applied to the air emissions trading permits.
She stated that the concept has implications for
small populations living within fairly localized areas,
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-7
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
particularly as the idea is expanded to include other
media. Ms. Lowrance replied that she also has
expressed personal concern about this issue
because as programs devolve, EPA maintains less
of a commanding control standard. She stated in
whatever approaches EPA takes, the Agency needs
to be cautious and monitor progress.
Ms. Lowrance then discussed the current activities of
the IWG and its relationship with the NEJAC. Ms.
Lowrance explained that, since she met with the
NEJAC in December1995, she has worked to make
progress with the IWG. The IWG met in April to
discuss its role, she said. At that time, the IWG
considered identifying a number of candidate
projects to undertake. Ms. Lowrance explained that
the IWG wishes to sponsor a manageable number of
activities. The IWG she said had made a good start
with all 13 federal agencies completing strategies
and finalizing progress reports. Ms. Lowrance added
that the IWG hopes to explore issues related to
relocation, as well as other key issues in which the
IWG could serve a useful role, such as the
Mississippi Delta Project and LandView II. She
noted that, at its next meeting, the IWG will select
specific projects.
Ms. Lowrance suggested that Mr. Lee and several
members of the NEJAC and the IWG meet to
facilitate better coordination and communication
between the two entities, possibly at the next
meeting of the IWG scheduled during the third week
of June. She, also noted that many of the resolutions
adopted by the NEJAC are food for thought for the
IWG. Ms. Ferris requested that, in soliciting
comment on the development of mechanisms of
coordinating between the IWG and the NEJAC, other
members should be present, in addition to Mr. Lee.
Mr. Lee added that, in discussing environmental
justice, people should speak for themselves and that
the members of the NEJAC should serve as
facilitators for the process.
Mr. Moore commented that it is important to move
the process along; however, when members of the
NEJAC interact with the IWG, that interaction should
occur through the formal structure of the NEJAC -
for example, through the protocol committee. Mr.
Moore also observed that the environmental justice
community receives mixed messages about the
federal government's commitment to environmental
justice, citing the closing of the Department of
Interior's (DOI) Office of Environmental Justice. Ms.
Lowrance replied that she personally will investigate
the closing of the environmental justice office at DOI
and added that all federal agencies should have an
environmental justice presence.
Mr. Velasquez asked why the office of the United
States Trade Representatives (USTR) is not
represented on the IWG. He stated the United
States should be integrating environmental justice
into their trade negotiations and policies. Ms.
Lowrance stated that she will begin discussions with
USTR and looks forward to receiving the
International Subcommittee's recommendations on
these issues.
Ms. Ferris inquired if the U.S. Department of State
has a representative on the IWG. Ms. Lowrance said
no. Ms. Gaylord commented that when Executive
Order 12898 was first issued, its focus was on
domestic agencies; however, she said, the issue
should be expanded to include such agencies as the
U.S. Department of State and the USTR.
Mr. Richard Lazarus, Georgetown University,
pointed out that the Enforcement Subcommittee has
completed its report, which has been forwarded to
OECA, and is looking forward to comments on that
report. Mr. Lazarus explained that the report
describes projects of the Enforcement Subcommittee
and the various activities of its work groups. He
explained further that under one project, the work
group is attempting to identify existing authorities
EPA possesses under permitting provisions to
enforce environmental justice when denying permits
based on cumulative effects. He stated that he
discovered EPA has an existing memorandum on the
issue. In addition, he asked whether the members of
the subcommittee could gain access to EPA's
resources, particularly the Office of the General
Counsel, to help conduct the research. Ms.
Lowrance replied that comments on the Enforcement.
Subcommittee's report are in draft form and that the
memorandum is in review and will be distributed
when the review has been completed. Ms. Lowrance
added that OECA will do what it can to help if the
exact needs can be communicated. Ms. Ferris
stated that the work groups of the Enforcement
Subcommittee will prepare a needs assessment to
identify the assistance the work group will require.
Mr. Velasquez concluded the discussion with a
request for a report to the NEJAC on the interaction
of IWG with the U.S. Department of State and the
USTR.
3.3 Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation
Mr. Robert Wolcott, Deputy AA for the EPA Office of
1-8
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
Policy, Planning and Evaluation (OPPE), with Mr.
Daniel Axelrad and Ms. Tracey Woodruff of that
office, presented to the members of NEJAC a
briefing on the Cumulative Exposure Project. Mr.
Wolcott predicted that the Cumulative Exposure
Project could be a powerful tool for community-based
evaluations of multiple pathways of exposure to
contamination. He explained that through the project
OPPE is attempting to develop a "topography" map
of cumulative exposures in communities. Mr.
Wolcott reminded the members of the NEJAC that
the project is tremendously complex in technical
areas. He requested that the members of the NEJAC
view the project with a critical eye to suggest to
OPPE how the project can be shaped to best fit the
needs of communities. He also acknowledged Ms.
Hazel Johnson, People for Communjty Recovery,
who since 1991 advocated for such a tool to be
developed.
Mr. Axelrad reported that project is a follow-up to the
environmental equity report issued by EPA in 1992.
He explained that the Cumulative Exposure Project
responds to the issues raised in the report by
focusing on assessment of exposure that involves
combined analysis of numerous emitters, pollutants,
and pathways and a national analysis of exposure
across populations, communities, and geographic
areas., Mr. Axelrad explained further that results of
the project include national distributions of
information .about exposure concentrations of air
toxins, and pollutants in drinking water and food.
The project also has provided experience in
addressing multiple pollutants through application of
existing methods and data, he stated.
Mr. Axelrad said that the project will:
Help focus environmental policies on those
communities and populations that have the
highest cumulative exposures
Help target resources on the most important
sources and pollutants
Provide a , tool for community-level
assessments
Mr. Axelrad announced that OPPE also is conducting
a pilot study with the Greenpoint Wjlliamsburg
neighborhood in New York City, New York in an
attempt to merge local level data with the data
developed from the project at a national level. The
goal is to determine whether combining local and
.national data can produce a more complete
assessment of cumulative exposures in a
community.
The cumulative exposure project, Mr. Axelrad
announced, will be reviewed by an internal EPA
review team and EPA's Science Advisory Board
.(SAB). The internal review has been conducted for
preliminary results of the air toxins study and is
planned for the other two components, he said. The
SAB will perform a mid-course review to evaluate
methodologies and will host a public .meeting on
June 27 and 28, 1996 to review the project. Mr.
Axelrad reviewed the proposed timeline for the
project, which is based on SAB's comments. OPPE
projects that the national estimates probably can be
completed by early 1997 and a plan for the release
of the data will be developed by mid-1997, he stated.
In conclusion, Mr. Axelrad stated that OPPE has
performed some initial analysis of the preliminary air
toxins results but much further analysis remains to
be done.
Ms. Woodruff displayed several, maps that
demonstrated the preliminary results of the project.
When Ms. Gamache pointed out that the maps did
not include Alaska and Hawaii, Ms.. Woodruff
explained that key databases are not available for
those states. Ms. Woodruff urged the NEJAC to
request that EPA develop the databases needed for
the project. Mr. Walter Bresette, Lake Superior
Chippewa, also observed that neither Lake Superior
or the St. Lawrence River, to which his Indian Nation
relates, appeared on the map.
Ms. Woodruff explained that the map demonstrates
OPPE's ability to view air toxins across the United
States by county. The map illustrates the highest to
the lowest levels of toxins by color. She explained
that while mapping can be visually impressive, it also
can be dangerous, because a map can distort how
an individual views an issue. She then presented a
map of the metropolitan Washington, D.C. area to
demonstrate the project on a smaller scale. Ms.
Woodruff pointed out the high concentrations of air
toxins in the center of the map, primarily the result of
emissions from vehicles. Ms. Woodruff repeated that
OPPE would like to release the data and is
developing a plan to do so; however, she said,
OPPE .does not have expertise to know the types of
data the community wants and needs. She asked
that the NEJAC examine the data and identify the
types that communities need. Mr. Wolcott stated that
there are strong concerns about the project and the
mapping process. He emphasized that OPPE was
soliciting response from the NEJAC that would help
identify deficiencies in the project and help guide the '
project to best meet the needs of communities.
Ms. Ferris replied that it is important to recognize that
grassroots leadership propelled the project and that
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31, 1996
1-9
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
evolution must occur if the project is to be
successful. In response to inquiries, Mr. Axelrad
stated that soil contamination is. examined more
easily at a community level. He also noted that
radionuclides are included in the emissions that are
being analyzed. Mr. Axelrad added that the race and
age categories are subdivided to identify groups with
different sensitivities to contaminants. He added that
OPPE will examine issues related to occupational
exposures to toxins. In addition, he replied that
social scientists do serve on the SAB. In response
to the questions about tribal concerns raised by Ms.
Ferris; Mr. Wolcott stated that it is very important to
focus on tribal issues, and he suggested that a
cooperative project with the tribal community be
considered. Mr. Wolcott also explained that, in
developing the project, it will be essential that OPPE
examine all types of communities.
Mr. Lee agreed with Ms. Ferris that the work being
conducted is evolutionary and that not all health risks
have yet been documented. He commented that the
Asian-Pacific population has yet to receive full
attention from EPA to identify health risks particular
to that group. Ms. Woodruff replied that preliminary
work has revealed substantial threats,to the health of
that population group. Mr. Ray recommended that
EPA ensure that OPPE have appropriate funds and
personnel to continue its work. Mr. Wolcott agreed,
adding that he had found it necessary to transfer
resources from other projects to accomplish the work'
that has been completed to date. He urged the
NEJAC to support Mr. Rays' recommendation.
Ms. Gamache stated that Alaska suffers from many
" of the effects of cumulative exposure because of the
high levels of fish consumption among Native
Alaskan populations. She urged OPPE to examine
different populations when analyzing the various
exposure pathways. Mr. Wolcott agreed and stated
that he is very interested in conducting a session
with indigenous peoples to learn their concerns. Mr.
Bresette stated that as chair of the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee, he would like to have a
meeting as well. He added that the International
Subcommittee should be involved because the
pertinent issues include transport of emissions
across borders.
Ms. English also expressed the appreciation of the
Health and Research Subcommittee to OPPE for its
groundbreaking efforts. She said that the
subcommittee is planning to host a national forum on
the effects of multiple and cumulative exposure and
expressed the hope that OPPE would participate.
Ms. Gamache recommended that this same briefing
be presented to EPA's TOG.
.The NEJAC passed a motion that the NEJAC
request that the EPA Administrator give full support
to the continuance of the project and related projects
that develop from it. In addition, the motion called for
all program offices, especially the Office of Research
and Development, to fully support, and identify
barriers to, the success of the project. Mr. Ray
suggested that a representative of the NEJAC attend
the SAB meeting at which the project is to be
reviewed.
3.4 EPA Caribbean Field Office
Mr. Carl Soderberg, Director, EPA Caribbean Field
Office and Ms. Melva Hayden, Environmental Justice
Coordinator, EPA Region 2 presented an update on
the action items that resulted from comments offered
during the public comment period conducted by
satellite downlink during the December 1995 meeting
of the NEJAC.
Mr. Soderberg began the briefing with an update on
issues related to the San Juan Cement Company in
the Esperanza community located in Puerto Rico.
He announced that the company has decided to
withdraw its application to bum hazardous waste
because of the high cost of compliance with
standards established by EPA. He then stated that
the EPA Caribbean Office held a public meeting with
the community on May 9,1996 to discuss the closure
plan. At the meeting, EPA had agreed to share the
plan with the community.
Mr. Soderberg then discussed the action item related
to high energy costs in Puerto Rico. He explained
that energy production in Puerto Rico must be self-
contained and a reserve maintained to compensate
for any loss of power. Puerto Rico does not have
access to other power-generating units, as is the
case of communities located on the mainland, he
said; therefore, extra capacity must be maintained.
Another factor contributing to high energy costs, he
explained, is that Puerto Rico is virtually dependent
on oil, which he noted is very expensive. Mr.
Soderberg explained that, over the preceding winter,
prices increased by 20 percent because of tariffs
placed on oil. He told the members that, while EPA
has no control over the setting of tariffs, the EPA
Caribbean Office had been successful in convincing
the governor of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to
shift the Greenlights Program from the Power
Committee to the Energy Affairs Administration
where it will be pursued with more vigor. Mr.
1-10
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
Soderberg also announced that Johnson & Johnson
agreed to serve as a mentor to assist in the
implementation of the Greenlights Program.
Mr. Soderberg also described a joint initiative with a
nongovernmental organization (NGO) in Puerto Rico
to develop a supplemental environmental project
(SEP) that would establish a windmill-powered
generating plant to promote alternative sources of
energy which meet sustainable development needs.
He also announced that EPA will participate with the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the NGO in a
council of environmental organizations which will
foster community participation.
Mr. Soderberg then described various environmental
justice activities the EPA Caribbean Office had
sponsored or participated in. The Caribbean Office
held one-day seminars on Superfund and EPA
programs that also were broadcast on radio, he said.
In addition, the office sponsored workshops
conducted by the New Jersey Institute of Technology
for NGOs on sampling techniques. The office also
hosted workshops on enforcement conducted by
staff from EPA Headquarters. Mr. Soderberg noted
that the workshops were conducted in Spanish, with
English translations available. He also announced
that the office recently hired additional staff.
Ms. Hayden then addressed the NEJAC, announcing
that EPA regional administrators are attempting to lift
the ceiling on the number of FACA committees that
can be sponsored by the EPA regional offices. She
stated that a long-term goal of EPA Region 2 is to
establish a FACA committee in Puerto Rico. Ms.
Ferris inquired whether such a regional committee is
the same committee she had heard was being
established in the Caribbean region. Ms. Hayden
responded that that body is not a FACA committee,
but a work group sponsored by the Puerto Rico
Department of Natural Resource to which EPA had
been invited to participate. Ms. Hayden added that
details about the structure of the work group and its
goals are not yet known. .
The members of the NEJAC then discussed the
proposed resolution on Puerto Rico, especially the
action item directing the formation of a work group on
Puerto Rico. Mr. Charles McDermott, WMX
Technologies Inc., asked what the role of the work
group on Puerto Rico would be. Ms. Gaylord
responded that the work group would be a part of the
NEJAC to address issues in Puerto Rico related to
the delegation of environmental laws, site-specific
cases, and enforcement. She stated that is would
have a broad range of activities but the specifics
have not been identified. She explained that the
work group would be composed of one person from
each subcommittee including the chair; local
community representatives; and representatives from
the government of Puerto Rico, not the entire
NEJAC.
Mr. McDermott asked if the NEJAC is still prohibited
from visiting Puerto Rico. Ms. Gaylord replied that at
the request of the EPA Region 2 administrator and
the community, the work group would meet in Puerto
Rico. ;
Ms. English asked whether the work group's period
of existence was to be finite and whether a time limit
should be included in the resolution. While Puerto
Rico's envjronrriental issues are important, she
explained, there are limits to the NEJAC's abilities to
address additional issues. Ms. Ferris disagreed,
saying that she would resist term limits on the work
.group because the NEJAC has been asked to
pursue those issues. Ms. Ferris added that, before
the members place term limits on the work group, the
work group first should decide its function. Ms.
English asked if it was possible to define the function
of the work" group in the resolution. Ms. Ferris
expressed hesitation in defining the function of the
group to exclude topics that might become pertinent
in the future. Mr. Ray suggested modifying the
resolution to read, "Support the creation of a NEJAC
Work Group on Puerto Rico to assess environmental
issues." Ms. Ferris also suggested a modification of
the resolution to read, "Solicit input and ensure
community participation in planning implementation
of the above listed activity."
The latter modification was inserted into the work
group action item. Members of the NEJAC then
voted to adopt the resolution on Puerto Rico, as
amended. , v
4.0 PRESENTATIONS
This section summarizes presentations on various
topics, including reports on the guidance for the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) issued by
the White House Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ); the Superfund Relocation Roundtable; issues
in McFarland, California; and the American Bar
Association (ABA) Directory.
4.1 Report on the NEPA Guidance
In the absence of Mr. Brad Campbell, CEQ, who was
unable to attend the meeting, Mr. Herman discussed
the guidance for NEPA recently released by the
CEQ. Mr. Herman stated that a copy of the draft had
been transmitted to Mr. Moore for review by the
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-11
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
NEJAC. He requested that the members of the
NEJAC submit written comments and suggestions to
Ms. Gaylord by June 15, 1996. He reminded the
NEJAC members of their eagerness for CEQ to
complete the guidance and so urged the members to
submit comments.
Ms. Ferris requested that the deadline for submittal
of comments be extended to a more realistic date.
Mr. Herman replied that the deadline could be
extended to July 1, 1996. Mr. Bullard asked for
clarification from EPA on the status and the timeline
forthe NEJAC's comments on an internal EPA draft
document that also examines environmental justice
and NEPA. Mr. Herman responded that EPA's first
priority is to solicit comments on CEQ's NEPA
guidance; then OECA can focus on its internal
document.
Mr. Herman emphasized the importance of the new
guidance. However, he noted that, without the
benefit of the new NEPA guidance, EPA successfully
applied Executive Order 12898 in a NEPA process
involving Haskell Indian University, located in
Lawrence, Kansas. He explained that the tribe
protested the construction of proposed highways
through tribal prayer sites. As a result of using the
NEPA process, the tribe was able to prevent the
construction. Mr. Herman also commented that the
tribe was very pleased with the assistance from
OECA and the EPA regional administrator.
, 4.2 Super-fund Relocation Roundtable
Mr. Lee reported that the Superfund Relocation
Roundtable had taken place May 2 through 4,1996
in Pensacola, Florida. He said that the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee appreciates EPA's
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response's
(OSWER) efforts to respond to the subcommittee's
resolution on relocation. Mr. Lee also pointed out
that, on May 11, 1995, Mr. Elliot Laws, AA for the
EPA OSWER, issued a memorandum to the EPA
regional offices calling for the development of a
consistent national relocation policy. In the
memorandum, Mr. Laws offered each regional office
the opportunity to designate pilot sites where the use
of relocation would be explored thoroughly, said Mr.
Lee. He also stated that, in June 1995, EPA Region
4 undertook a relocation pilot project at the Escambia
and Agrico Superfund sites in Pensacola, Florida.
Today, the Escambia site is the only national
relocation pilot, he pointed out. Mr. Lee then
introduced Mr. Timothy Fields, OSWER.
Mr. Fields commented on the development of a
national relocation policy. He stated that EPA must
be flexible when using relocation as a fool for
response to Superfund issues. He explained that
historically EPA used permanent relocation when:
Health risks posed to a community are
unacceptable and cannot be avoided by any
other means
An engineering decision about the cleanup
requires that the community be relocated
permanently
Mr. Fields stated that the policy should be broadened
to explore other factors beyond engineering and risk
factors. Mr. Fields stated that a new relocation policy
should be issued by end of 1996 and that comment
on that policy will be solicited from the IWG,
Superfund Relocation Roundtable, NEJAC, and the
Pensacola pilot relocation project. Mr. Fields also
noted that OSWER is working with other federal
agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).
Mr. Fields reported that on April 30, 1996, EPA
issued its Proposed Plan for Interim Action at the
Escambia Superfund Site in Pensacola, Florida,
which provides for the initial relocation of 66
households. In addition, Mr. Fields noted that EPA
is reevaluating, in cooperation with welfare
authorities, the potential for additional relocations, as
well as evaluating other authorities within EPA to
provide for even more relocations. He explained that
EPA will attempt to relocate as many people as
necessary. Mr. Fields explained that meetings will
be conducted with the community in Pensacola to
ensure that the relocations are in the best interest all
those affected. In addition, once the final decision
has been made, OSWER will assign an EPA staff
member to Pensacola'to ensure that plans are
carried out properly and consider carefully the
implications of Executive Order 12898. He added
that two senior remedial project managers, will be
assigned to the Pensacola project.
Ms. Suzanne Wells, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (OERR), briefly discussed the
successful process used to plan the Roundtable.
She explained that, in keeping with the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee's resolution on the
significance of the relocation issue to environmental
justice communities,.a planning committee had been
established. The committee consisted of members
of the NEJAC, members of affected communities,
industry experts, and EPA staff. Ms. Wells observed
1-12
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council;
Executive Council
that the successful dialogue of the roundtable was;
in part, the result of the planning process. EPA will
document the methods used in that planning
process, she said in conclusion.
Mr. Lee expressed appreciation to the experts and
the 19 communities that participated in the
roundtable. He also acknowledged Ms. Wells'
contributions to the project, in spite of furloughs at .
EPA. Mr. Lee then introduced Ms. Margaret
Williams, Citizens Against Toxic Exposure (GATE),
to speak about the Pensacola community. Ms.
Williams stated that contamination from two sites in
Pensacola had migrated into the community; the
contamination had been confirmed through soil
samples, she said. She stated that the members of
, the community have a strong desire to relocate. Ms.
Williams also expressed appreciation for progress
being made to relocate members of the community
arid thanked the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee for considering and acting on the
case. She stated her hope that her community's
struggle to relocate will make the relocation of other
communities easier in the future. Ms. Williams
observed that cost estimates show that it is more
cost-effective to relocate households permanently
than to move them temporarily during remediation.
1 \
Mr. Lee introduced a resolution on the Superfund
relocation pilot project in Pensacola, Florida. (See
Chapter 7, Section 6.0, Resolutions, fora summary
of the resolution.) He stated that the resolution
requests that EPA undertake several action items
related to the relocation issue.
The members of the NEJAC then voted to adopt the
resolution and the action items on the Superfund
relocation pilot project.
4.3' Briefing on McFarland, California
Ms. Elizabeth Adams, Project Manager, EPA Region
9, presented a briefing on McFarland, California. Ms.
Adams stated that McFarland, California is a small
Latino agricultural town in which 14 children had
been diagnosed between 1975 and 1989 with 11 .
types of cancers, including leukemia and brain, liver,
and bone cancer. In 1984, local and state agencies
identified and confirmed a cluster of childhood
cancers in McFarland, she said. Ms. Adams then
explain that, from 1984 through 1990, an
investigation conducted by the California Department
of Health Services (DHS) into the cancer cluster
included an epidemiological study; sampling of soils
and drinking-water wells, review of,data on air
population, ;health examinations of more than 1,700
children, and a four-county study of childhood cancer
rates. Ms. Adams stated that the results of the
investigation revealed concentrations of
contaminants at levels above the maximum
contaminant levels (MCL) in the water samples;
however, in 1991, California DHS concluded that the
study demonstrated no environmental links to the
cancers. She also explained that, from 1990 through
1995, California DHS reviewed the cancer registry
and determined that seven more childhood cancers
had been diagnosed in McFarland.
Ms. Adams stated that, in March and April 1995,
community members petitioned EPA under
regulations promulgated under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) and Executive Order 12898
to reinvestigate the link between the cancers and the
contamination. Through the petition, the residents
requested a preliminary assessment and site
inspection (PA/SI) of McFarland which would include
sampling of air, surface water, drinking water, and
soil. In addition, the petitioners requested that:
' ' ' r - '
Warning signs be erected and an alternate
water supply be provided
{ _'
Residents be relocated temporarily or
permanently
A technical assistance grant be provided
A community involvement plan be drafted
Ms. Adams explained that the legal mechanism for
petitioning for a PA/SI is set forth under section
105(d) of CERCLA and Section 300.405 of the Code
of Federal Regulations. "She added that the PA/SI
process is a tool used frequently in the Superfund
process to review all existing data. Any person.
potentially threatened by a release of a hazardous
substance, she noted, has the right to petition the,
government for a PA/SI., Ms. Adams showed the
members of the NEJAC a flowchart illustrating the
PA/SI process.
A preliminary review of the data collected in the past
for McFariand shows that the samples collected for
air were insufficient, Ms. Adams stated. She
explained that EPA has accepted the petition of the
residents, a,rid that the primary concern of EPA
Region 9 is to assess current environmental
conditions in McFarland.
Ms; Adams highlighted the project goals, which
include comprehensive environmental sampling to
address community concerns, such as sampling of
soils, drinking water, surface water, and air.: Ms.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-13
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Adams explained that EPA does not have the
expertise to determine the causes of past childhood
cancers; however, health agencies will review EPA
studies, she added. She explained that EPA Region
9 has secured funds for sampling drinking water and
soils and is expected to begin sampling the drinking
water wells and home taps by late summer 1996.
Ms. Adams then discussed the relocation request of
the residents of McFarland. She explained that,
because the review of past data does not show an
environmental link to the cancers, EPA cannot
consider relocation at this time. EPA will continue to
evaluate the need for relocation as data is collected
and analyzed, she added. In addition, Ms. Adams
described several challenges that lay before EPA
Region 9, such as a mixed reaction from the
community to the reopening of the case. She
explained, during the earlier investigation, the
residents of McFarland had received much attention
from the media. Some residents believed that the
attention resulted in a 38 percent unemployment
rate; community officials therefore are worried about
another economic backlash from the proposed
investigation, she said. Another challenge, Ms.
Adams stated, is uncertainty about allocation of
funds to continue the site investigation. Ms. Adams
urged the NEJAC to become involved in the case
and to assign one of its subcommittees to examine
the issues. In conclusion, Ms. Adams stated her
hope that the McFarland case will be an example of
improved effort on the part of EPA.
Mr. Moore thanked the EPA Region 9 staff for
providing to the NEJAC the update on the status of
the McFarland community. Stating that it would be
an injustice if he did not discuss the history of the
community, Mr. Moore explained that McFarland was
built on the site of a former pesticide dump and also
suffers from pesticide drifts from fields. Mr. Moore
went on to explain that the community's water has
been contaminated and that children are being bom
with deformities. The community began to organize
itself in response to these conditions, he said. He
noted that several citizens of McFarland, unable to
arrange a meeting with EPA, participated in several
sit-ins and demonstrations at the offices of EPA
Region 9. Mr. Moore stated that the situation was
politically sensitive because of the influence of
agribusiness in the area. He emphasized that the
community has suffered many illnesses and
frustration for many years. In conclusion, Mr. Moore
reminded the representatives from the EPA regional
offices to remember residents of communities like
McFarland in all their activities. They should "work
with the residents of McFarland, rather than for
them," he added. Mr. Moore also suggested that the
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee may be able
to play an active role in the McFarland case, as well
as make effective use of the public participation
model developed by the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee.
Mr. Velasquez asked the representatives of EPA
Region 9 what action EPA will take that will differ
from the original data collection performed by
California DHS. He also inquired whether California
has a registration law for pesticides. In response,
Ms. Adams said that the recording of pesticide use
has been required only recently; lists, she noted,
currently are being compiled. Toxicologists are
examining the lists to identify the most toxic
pesticides in the area, she said. Ms. Adams also
explained that EPA will test for both indoor and
outdoor air and dust pathways; that approach was
not taken in the DHS investigation, she said. Mr.
Velasquez cautioned that, in the effort to identify the
25 worst pesticides the less toxic ones must not be
excluded completely from consideration. Ms. Adams
agreed, stating that EPA will consider the products of
the chemical breakdown of each pesticide, as well.
Ms. Ferris inquired whether EPA is taking into
account the synergistic effects of the chemicals on
human health. Ms. Adams replied that identifying
synergistic effects is most difficult. Ms. Adams
explained that their efforts to consult experts and
work with other EPA regions to identify multiple
pathways, had encountered much resistance and
that it is difficult to balance the needs of the
community, as well.
Ms. Ferris then stated that EPA has not undergone
the reregistration of pesticides and that decisions are
being made that are based on insufficient
information. She also stated that legal levels of
exposures may not be healthy levels of exposure for
all populations.
Mr. Velasquez expressed his frustration that the
farming community is not protected from pesticides.
He stated that he objected to the licensing of any
chemicals shown to be carcinogenic. He
commented that the government should prove that
the illnesses under discussion are caused by
pesticides and therefore should be considered
occupational injuries. Mr. McDermott suggested that
one of the subcommittees of the NEJAC should draft
a resolution addressing this issue. Ms. English
stated that the Health and Research Subcommittee
already had developed a resolution that could be
amended to refer to chemicals used in agriculture.
1-14
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National EnvironmentalJustice Advisory Council
Executive Council
Mr. Bresette asked whether the centers for Disease
Control (CDC) was involved in the McFarland case.
Ms. Adams responded that CDC was represented on
the panel that reviewed the state's investigation. Ms.
Adams also noted that the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) received
a petition to-become involved in the McFarland case;
the agency had neither rejected nor accepted that
petition, she noted. Ms. Adams stated that she
believes that ATSDR is waiting for EPA's response
to the case.
Ms. Benally inquired about the concerns of the
members of the Navajo Nation who offered public
comments about uranium mines. She said that it is
part of the environmental justice initiative to train
community members to perform sampling; instead,
she stated, consulting companies are performing the
sampling at sites. Ms. Benally also inquired about
the criteria used to select sites. Ms. Lori Lewis,
Environmental Justice Coordinator, EPA Region 9,
responded that she had scheduled a meeting for
May 31,1996 wjth Ms: Benally and representatives
from Dine CARE to discuss the issue of uranium
mines on lands of the Navajo Nation. She also
stated that she was not certain what criteria Ms.
Benally referred to. Ms. Benally replied that she had
heard that officials selected sites "by throwing darts
at a map on the wall."
4.4 American Bar Association Directory of
Environmental Justice Providers
/ * ' . , , .
Mr, O'Leary announced that the American Bar
Association (ABA) Director/of Environmental Justice
Providers is in draft form had,been published. He
explained that the directory lists approximately, 165
entities that are willing to provide pro bono services;
and the directory soon will be available in print and
on the Internet. Mr. McDermott applauded Mr
O'Leary's efforts and asked if the organizations listed
in the directory had been screened for reliability. Mr.
O'Leary replied that the ABA had reviewed each
entity listed.
5.0 REPORTS OF THE NEJAC
SUBCOMMITTEES
Each NEJAC subcommittee met for a full day on May
29, 1996 and continued their deliberations through
the morning of May 30,1996. This section presents
summaries of the action items and proposed
resolutions developed during those discussions as
well as updates on the activities subcommittee. Full
summaries of the deliberations of the subcommittees
are presented in subsequent chapters of this report.
5.1 Enforcement Subcommittee
Ms. Ferris, chair of the Enforcement Subcommittee,
reported to the NEJAC on the progress the
Enforcement Subcommittee had made to date. She
stated that the subcommittee has established four
work groups that focus on worker protection, open
market trading of air emissions credits, integration of
environmental justice, and SEPs. In addition, the
subcommittee established a task force on
enforcement roundtables. Ms. Ferris explained that
the Worker Protection Work Group has been
examining the issue of exposure of workers to
pesticides. The work group will meet in June and will
provide recommendations at the next meeting of the
NEJAC. Ms. Ferris then discussed the activities of
the Open Market Trading of Emissions Credits Work
Group, which has been conducting dialogues with
EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR). She stated
that the dialogues have resulted in commitments
from" OAR to:
Develop a training program for communities
on state implementation programs
Provide a statement identifying toxins that will
be considered pollutants under the open trade
rule , ,
Conduct research to identify the effects of the
trading programs on communities
Ms. Ferris reported on the activities of the Agency
Integration, Permitting Process and NEPA Work
Group. The work group has conducted a preliminary
assessment of statutory authorities EPA can use to
integrate environmental justice. The work group
plans to meet with the Office of the General Counsel,
trie U. S. Department of Justice, and, OECA to
discuss the authorities identified by the work group,
she said. Ms. Ferris also reported that the work
group was renamed the Permitting Process Work
Group.
Ms. Ferris then updated the NEJAC on the status of
the Enforcement Roundtable task force. She
explained that the subcommittee agreed to establish
two pilots project to construct a mechanism for
integrating community input into the enforcement
priority development process. She also explained
that the roundtable will focus;on issues related to the
state performance partnership agreements with EPA.
Ms. Ferris stated that she had received a
commitment from Mr. Herman to examine the
resources available.
She then explained that the subcommittee continues
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31, 1996
1-15
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
to discuss concerns about SEPs. Ms. Ferris
emphasized the importance of using SEPs to help
communities that have been affected by the
contamination. She stated that EPA should broaden.
its interpretation of what is appropriate. She
announced that the International and Enforcement
subcommittees will undertake a joint examination of
SEPs and develop a case study of the activities at
the electric utility in Catano, Puerto Rico.
Ms. Ferris reported that enforcement targeting is an
issue the environmental justice community has
discussed for a long period of time. Ms. Ferris
requested that the OECA make a presentation to the
NEJAC on enforcement targeting technology that
has been developed.
She stated EPA's Office of Civil Rights (OCR)
presented a briefing to the Enforcement
Subcommittee related to enforcement of Title VI of
the Civil Rights of 1964. She stated that OCR
distributed a document that lists each Title VI action
that has been filed by communities to date and
summarizes the status of each case.
Ms. Ferris also stated that the Enforcement
Subcommittee recommends that the NEJAC hold
semiannual conference calls with EPA regional
administrators and environmental justice
coordinators to keep abreast of current information.
The members of the NEJAC voted to adopt the
motion. Ms. Ferris also pointed out that the action
item on the Common Sense Initiative should be
modified to include the interrelationship of all
designated programs related to reinventing
government, such as ISO 14,000, the XL program,
and the environmental leadership program.
5.2 Health and Research Subcommittee
Ms. English, reporting for Mr. Bullard, chair of the
Health and Research Subcommittee, summarized
the resolutions that the subcommittee had discussed
and adopted. The resolutions included
recommendations on lead testing and cleanup
standards, development of a national forum on risk
and small populations, increased coordination with
the IWG, an examination of mercury poisoning
associated with domestic use, and supporting the
recommendations of the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee related to the environmental justice
study of the National Academy of Sciences and
Institute of Medicine (See Chapters, Section 6.0 for
the summary of the resolution). Members of the
NEJAC voted to adopt the resolutions of the Health
and Research Subcommittee.
5.3 Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
Mr. Bresette, chair of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, opened his report by stating that the
subcommittee had a productive meeting and that its
joint meeting with the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee also was very informative and
productive. Mr. Bresette then read the resolutions
that the subcommittee had adopted during the
preceding two days. The resolutions include, follow-
up by EPA Region 9 related to the uranium mining
on Navajo Nation and Cahuilla Reservations;
appointing Native American staff to serve in EPA
tribal operations; a paper by EPA on ways in which
it can assume permitting authority and issue site-
specific regulations in Indian country; review of EPA
Region 8 actions related to Lake Andes Landfill on
the Yankton Sioux Reservation; and recommend
action that EPA suspend a pending decision on an
underground injection control permit for the proposed
Copper Range .solution mining operation. In
addition, the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
recommended that EPA should review its policies on
mediation and negotiation; educate other federal
agencies about Executive Order 12898; involve tribal
governments in issues related to storage, disposal,
and treatment of hazardous waste; and continue to
build capacity for tribal environmental programs.
(See Chapter 4, Section 6.0, Resolutions, for a
summary of the resolutions).
After reading the resolutions adopted by the
subcommittee, Mr. Bresette commented that no
environmental justice analysis had been conducted
in the Copper Range Mine case. Mr. Lee moved to
adopt the resolutions of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, and the NEJAC so voted.
Ms. Gamache commented that the work being
conducted by the other subcommittees is related to
indigenous peoples. She requested that the NEJAC
create a formal structure through which that
subcommittee can work with the other
subcommittees on issues of concern to indigenous
peoples. Ms. Gaylord responded that the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee could devise its own
mechanism. Mr. Moore also responded that joint
meetings, such as that held with the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee are excellent initiatives.
Ms. Gamache agreed but expressed concern about
time, stating that, if the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee spent most of its time with other
subcommittees, there would be insufficient time left
to conduct its own work. Mr. Lee moved that the
Protocol Committee investigate the issue and
recommend that issues related to indigenous
1-16
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
peoples.be integrated into all program offices at
EPA.
/
5.4 International Subcommittee
Mr. Velasquez, chair of the International
Subcommittee, discussed the resolutions that the
International Subcommittee had adopted over the
preceding two days. The resolutions include
recommendations that the NEJAC:
Submit comments concerning the lack of
public participation, in general, and from
communities in particular along the border in
the Border XXI plan
Send a letter to the President's Council on
Sustainable Development to commend jts
report on international issues and offer the
support of the subcommittee in the
implementation of the recommendations
Send a letter to the EPA Administrator
expressing the concern of the subcommittee
related to the poor public participation and
lack of accountability by the Border
Environmental Cooperation Commission -
(BECC) and request that the Administrator
forward these concerns to Secretary
Conrovos and the chairs of the BEGC
Endorse the draft Declaration of the Rights of
the Indigenous Peoples
Endorse the Declaration on the Effects of
Mining on Indigenous Peoples and Lands
The members of the NEJAC will vote by mail on the
adoption of the resolutions.
Mr. O'Leary expressed concern that the OIA should
have been, more aggressive in involving the
International Subcommittee in several key
international activities, including the.Gore-Mbecki
partnership and the upcoming Habitat II conference
in Turkey. Mr. O'Leary commented that just as with
the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, the
International Subcommittee is in the process of
developing a working relationship with OIA. Mr.
O'Leary hopes in the future that OIA becomes more
sensitive to involving the subcommittee in the
development and implementation of its policies and
activities.
Mr. Velasquez concluded his report with comments
about the significance of NEJAC and International
environmental justice concerns. Exhibit 1-3 presents
the full text of Mr. Velasquez's comments.
5.5 Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee
Ms. Peggy Saika, Asian-Environmental Network and
chair of the Public Participation .and Accountability
Subcommittee, reported on the activities of the
subcommittee during the preceding two days. Ms.
Saika began by stating that the true work of the
NEJAC is reflected in the public comment periods
held during the meetings. She explained that the
members of the subcommittee believe that the other
subcommittees should take the time to ensure that
public participation is integrated into all activities.
'Ms. Saika reported that during the deliberations of
the subcommittees, a dynamic tension existed as to
what the appropriate role of the Public Participation
and Accountability Subcommittee should be in
relation to the other NEJAC subcommittees. She
explained that one view was that the members of the
subcommittee should be involved in the work of the
other subcommittees because public participation
should be reflected in their activities. She stated that
issues presented to the public participation
subcommittee often do not fit well into the work of the
other subcommittees. Therefore, she said, Public
Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
proposes:
The subcommittee should be restructured to
include 10 members, so that 2 can be
assigned as liaisons to each of the other
, _ - subcommittees. The liaisons would meet with
the other, subcommittees, and the Public
Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee then would convene to provide
true integration of issues.
The EPA regional environmental justice
coordinators and administrators should be
involved in the planning process for the
NEJAC's meetings, especially those
representing the region in which each
meeting is held in order to welcome the
members of the NEJAC to the region. -
The NEJAG should explore the possibility of
hosting regional NEJACs that reflect this
body. The subcommittee believes such an
approach would enable the national NEJAC
to hear more issues. .
Ms. Wright noted that, to support the search for the
mission of the subcommittee, a pilot project will be
developed to explore issues related to public
participation at the regional level. She also stated
that representatives from, the ten EPA regional
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31, 1996
1-17
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit 1-3
NEJAC AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
"The significance of the integrating NEJAC work into the international platform is going to be probably,
or could be, if our government accepts it, one of the most important things that our government has ever done.
[U]nderscoring the significance of that... since the establishment of our country, there's been an ongoing economic
phenomenon. We have the type of economy that needs to keep growing in order to keep going, it needs to keep
expanding hi order to continue to be successful. The internationalization of our economy has been going on for
quite some time. Trade agreements like NAFTA, the development of the World Trade Organization, GATT, these
don't make things actually happen, they facilitate an economic phenomenon that's being going on for quite some
time.
"That economic phenomenon has had devastating impact on people's lives in the history of our country. If
you go back to the past century, and , let me put this in perspective, the way we people of color see ourselves in the
history of our country. [W]hen World War II started, when the Japanese overran Asia, the American analysts called
that imperialism. When Hitler did the same thing in Europe, they call it a barbarous dictatorship. When America
did it, they called it manifest destiny. The stealing of Indian lands, the genocide policy of Indian peoples of our
country, the stealing of Mexican lands, the forced signing of the treaty [of] Guadalupe Hidalgo that literally
stripped the owners of those land grants that were given to them by the King of Spain and the Governor of Mexico-
all of these things were part of this economic expansion during ... [under] President James Folk's administration
(which was one of the key architects of that expansiveness policy).
"Now we're going international. This is just another phase of that economic phenomenon that's been
going on for all that time and now we're seeing the same impact that the American indigenous people have had
we're seeing it hi Mexico, we're seeing it in the Caribbean, we're seeing it world wide, [we're seeing it]
everywhere we carry this economic policy and this economic expansion.
"What there was [needed] back a century ago was an Environmental Justice Council that you could have
drawn on from the people of color to avoid the collective sins of our nation[. W]e're still reaping what we have
sowed and we are sowing more than we're going to reap down the road because America does not need any more
new enemies, and America needs no more injured peoples. But it is happening right now. It's happening in
Mexico. The forced changing of the Mexican constitution to facilitate these trade agreements, the privatization that
is going on is having a horrendous impact on people of color throughout the world. We're se'eing an increase in the
rise of child labor because governments hungry for investment are looking the other way when America's
corporations setup their sweat shops and hire children to make your Nike tennis shoes and everything else.
"I mean, this is the heart of the subject of environmental justice that this council is trying to educate
[about] and [to] integrate this concept in all aspects of our government. The carriers of our policy and the carriers
of what we represent as a nation. So the integration of environmental justice and everything that our country does
domestically [and] internationally can be the most important thing our government has ever, ever done to make
development "sustainable."
"When I said making the world "sustainable" - a different twist, sustain what? Sustain the constant
exploitation that we've seen for generations and generations? Economic development necessarily must be tied to
items that are essential ingredients if we're going to have peace hi this world. One is democracy and the other is
justice, and they go hand in.hand with development. When.you exclude one or two of those, you're going to have
what we have had, a repetition of what we've had in this country with the Indian peoples and the Mexicans and the
black people, the slave trade industry - that was all part of that economic phenomenon. So I think that [the] ability
of this council to interject itself and be utilized, and I say this not hi a thinking we can turn the train around hi the
middle of the track. We understand the realty of that, but we have to see the good faith of the people who govern
these various institutions that make these decisions (whether they be domestic or they be international) and carry
our government and implement the policies of our government. [We have] the good faith of those people wanting to
see that justice and democracy is a reality to the people who have been negatively affected and it's time that
America turned that around. The establishment of this council was a door opening.
"Now let's make it really work."
Baldemar Velasquez
Chair, International Subcommittee
at a Meeting of the NEJAC, May 31,1996
1-18
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
offices would be asked to focus oh the issue of
accessibility to EPA.
Ms. Saika announced that the subcommittee revised
the Model Plan for Public Participation that the
NEJAC approved at the December 1995 meeting
(See Chapter 6, Section 3.1, for the full text of the
model). She explained that the document will be
repackaged with a cover memo from the chair of
NEJAC and the Public Participation check list
developed by the IW<3. In addition, the
subcommittee is developing a plan for distributing the
document. Mr. Lee pointed out to the other
members of the NEJAC that the public participation
opportunities created by the NEJAC should not be
underestimated. He explained that the Waste and
.Facility Siting Subcommittee is trying to pioneer new
methods of public participation using the Model Plan
for Public Participation, as it did with the public
dialogues on urban revitalization and Brownfields
and the Superfund Relocation Roundtable.
v .
Mr. Lee also explained that he is fearful that all the
work that has been conducted with the model will be
lost if the processes and methods are1 not evaluated.
Mr. Lee suggested that models be developed that
track the progress of the methods implemented. Ms,
Saika responded that evaluation is an important
component of the public participation model and that
the public comment periods will be evaluated. She
stated that the subcommittee will take on that
responsibility. The ability to document the work will
be very important for future endeavors, she added.
Ms. Saika emphasized that the model developed by
the subcommittee is meant to be functional, not'
simply to sit on a shelf. ,
Ms. Ferris inquired if the public participation
subcommittee evaluated the use of satellite
downlinks to further increase public participation in
the NEJAC. Ms. Saika replied that the issue was on
the table for discussion by the subcommittee and
that she also wished to discuss the issue With Ms.
Ferris and Mr. Moore. In addition, Ms. Wright
observed that evaluating the public participation
process is not just connected to NEJAC and the
subcommittee, but also EPA and the regions.
Ms. Ferris then'commented that the Enforcement
Subcommittee will sponsor Enforcement Forums to
discuss community involvement In interagency
agreements that establish enforcement priorities.
She described the current difficulty in explaining the
confidentiality of litigation to communities. She
asked that the Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee comment on the process. Ms. Saika -
responded that the subcommittee wishes very much
to be Involved, in the forums. '
5.6 Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
Mr. Lee, chair of the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee, summarized the action items and
proposed resolutions developed by the
subcommittee. He reported that the subcommittee
had requested that the NEJAC vote on the following:
LandVlew II and issues related to community
mapping
« Report of the Public Dialogues on Urban
Revitalization and Brownfields
Worker training program of the National
Institute of Environmental Health Studies
(NIEHS) -
Environmental Justice Study of the National
Academy of Sciences/Institute of Medicine
(IOM)
Mr. McDermott stated that LandView II is an
extremely valuable mapping tool and that it has the
potential to guide communities in establishing
priorities. He also believes that products such as
LandView II can help guide the private sector in its
planning and implementation of its various roles and
programs. Mr. McDermott pointed out that there
exists at least three database development projects
at EPA alone that involve mapping and he strongly
urged EPA to ensure that all three databases are
compatible to enable easier access for the public.
Ms. Gamache requested that the report of the Public
Dialogues on Urban Revitalization and Brownfields.
be modified to include the revitalization needs of
tribes and communities located in" United States
territories. Mr. Lee agreed stating that this ,is a
strong concern of the subcommittee. Mr. Ray stated
that he is hesitant to endorse the report until he has
read the document. Ms. Ferris agreed, adding that
she is hesitant to adopt a resolution that appears to
endorse the Brownfields Initiative because not all
grassroots organizations agree with the concept. Mr.
Lee acknowledged that he believes the report needs
clarification; however, the report, he explained, does
not endorse EPA's Brownfiejds Initiative but reports
on the issues that were raised by the participants at
the public dialogues that took place in 1995. The
members of the NEJAC decided to vote by mail on
the resolution related to the Brownfieids report so
that all members would have an opportunity to read
the report.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-19
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
The NEJAC voted to adopt the remaining resolutions
of the subcommittee.
6.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
This section provides a summary of the comments
offered during the public comment periods held on
May 29 and 30 in Detroit, Michigan. The full
transcript of the proceedings of the meeting of the
Executive Council contains a verbatim record of
public comments.
6.1 Comments Presented on May 29,1996
Mr. Moore opened the session with a welcome to all
participants. He characterized the session as very
important to the NEJAC. Mr. Moore then provided a
brief overview of environmental justice in the country.
He cautioned against what he views as a trend in the
federal government and among other organizations
to institutionalize environmental justice issues.
Addressing briefly the passage of California
Proposition 187 and the recent televised beatings of
Latino men and women in California, Mr. Moore
expressed outrage that the latter incident did not
provoke widespread condemnation. He reminded
everyone that hundreds of people face similar
situations every day. Mr. Haywood Turrentine, AGC
Education and Training Fund, agreed, citing the
recent burnings of churches in several southern
states.
Referring to a recent meeting with the EPA
Administrator and the regional administrator in EPA
Region 6, Mr. Moore acknowledged the discussion
of several regional and funding issues highlighted at
previous NEJAC meetings. In response to a
comment by Ms. Herrera that she had not been
informed of the presence of Administrator Browner
in Albuquerque, Ms. Gaylord confirmed that OEJ will
forward information as the office receives it to
improve how it informs NEJAC members of
Administrator Browner's anticipated travel.
Comments offered during the public comment period
held on May 29,1996 are summarized below in the
order in which they were made.
6.1.1 Hussein Bakri, ECO-Access
Mr. Hussein Bakri began by sharing the experiences
of communities affected by pollution originating from
the Ford Assembly Plant in Dearborn, Michigan. He
spoke about how people in these communities are,
he said, "imprisoned in their homes" because of
smoke and toxics in the air. Mr. Bakri also spoke
about the activities of ECO-Access and confirmed
that the organization had established offices
throughout the United States. Mr. Bakri pleaded for
assistance in achieving cleaner air.
Discussing what NEJAC can do, Mr. Ray expressed
empathy, adding that, although members of the
NEJAC cannot solve all the problems, they can
communicate his views to those who can take
actions. Ms. Gaylord acknowledged that
accountability for the issues raised during the public
comment sessions has been an issue in previous
meetings. She cited the recent development of a
tracking list that identifies follow up actions agreed
upon by the members of NEJAC as example of
steps the Council has taken to address
accountability. She added that an inquiry about
possible violations of environmental regulations by
the Ford assembly plant can be submitted to OECA,
or through another avenue, as NEJAC recommends.
Mr. Moore offered NEJAC's assistance in addressing
Mr. Bakri's concerns.
6.1.2 Teresa Leal, Southwest Network for
Environmental and Economic Justice
Ms. Teresa Leal stated that she represents the
people of color communities located along the U.S.-
Mexican border. Those communities, she stated, are
fighting an " unbalanced war" with the Border
Environmental Cooperation Commission (BECC).
She spoke about the lack of participation by the
communities in BECC meetings or throughout the
decision-making process. She noted the frustration
felt by many members of the community who want to
participate. Characterizing BECC's recent attempt
to bring in members of the community as "token
symbols," Ms. Leal requested that the BECC process
be restructured so that communities can participate
and believe in the process.
In response to Ms. English's inquiry about who
BECC reports to, Ms. Gaylord responded that BECC
reports to EPA's OIA. Ms. Lorraine Friggerio, OIA,
briefly discussed the bilateral structure of BECC.
Ms. English, in turn, responded that, if EPA is
involved, it seemed appropriate to consider that
some of BECC's activities, particularly community
involvement, require evaluation and oversight.
Mr. Moore noted that the International Subcommittee
would present recommendations on the issues
raised by Ms. Leal's testimony. He -recommended
that the Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee share the Model for Public
Participation with BECC to illustrate the true process
1-20
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
of public participation. Agreeing, Ms. Saika noted
that the circumstance under discussion is a perfect
example of an opportunity to link the model with
actual examples.
6.1.3 James Stone, Yankton Sioux Tribe
. Mr. James Stone first stated the concerns of the
members of the Yankton Sioux Tribe about EPA's
failure to take action against dumping of waste at a
landfill on Yankton Sioux tribal lands. He described
the dumping of wastes on five sites, the protests of
the tribe in response to the dumping, and EPA's
failure to support tribe's claims. Mr. Stone criticized
EPA's statement that the case is a "jurisdiction issue"
that falls outside EPA's responsibility because EPA
does not have permitting authority for landfills. Citing
the involvement of South Dakota members of
Congress who he said "didn't want EPA telling them
what to do," Mr. Stone discussed meetings among
representatives of the district, EPA, the tribe, and
mediators. He complained that representatives of
EPA did not present their case fully at the meetings.
Mr. Stone then described negotiations to move the
landfill off the reservation and the ensuing media
headlines that he said he believes misrepresented
the interests of the tribe. He also noted that the tribal
assistance program in EPA Region 8 has not been
very helpful in the case.
Mr. Stone specifically requested the development of
regulations that allow EPA to assume permitting
authority for landfills on reservations and guide tribes
through what the termed the "gray" issues of
jurisdiction.
Mr. Bresette confirmed that the Indigenous Peoples
.Subcommittee would present recommendations
addressing Mr. Stone's concerns to the NEJAC
Executive Council. The NEJAC should support the
recommendations of the subcommittee, Mr. Moore
added, particularly if the subcommittee recommends
that a work group be established to address the
issues presented by Mr. Stone.
6.1.4 Darryl Segars, Office of
Representative John Conyers, Jr.
U.S.
Mr. Darryl Segars stated that he is a staff attorney
representing U.S. Representative John Conyers (D-
Mich.). Mr. Segars noted that the Congressman
learned about the NEJAC meeting only that morning
and had requested that Mr. Segars attend to
welcome the NEJAC to Detroit. Stating that Rep.
Conyers is very supportive of environmental
concerns, Mr. Segars, noted that the freshman
Republicans have learned that environmental issues
are very important to Americans. He stressed the
importance of getting out the vote in the upcoming
elections. Mr. Segars also responded to Mr.
Turrentine's earlier remarks about the burning of,
churches, announcing that Rep. Conyers, as the
ranking member of the. U.S. House of
Representatives Judiciary Committee, has
participated in recent judicial hearings about the
, burnings. Some changes may be made in some civil
rights and arson laws, he added.
Mr. Bresette inquired about Rep. Conyers' position
on the White Pine Mine in Michigan. Responding
that he did not know, Mr. Segars asked Mr. Bresette
to call him the following day.
In .a later discussion, Mr. Bresette described the
situation at White Pines Mines. The proposed
mining operation, he stated, would release sulphuric
acid at a level a thousand times greater than the
volume of the Exxon Valdez oil spill into an area
located five miles from Lake, Superior. Adding that
Native peoples hold the ceded territory, Mr. Bresette
claimed , that EPA Region 5 is ignoring the
environmental justice "issues associated with the
mine and plans to approve a permit for the operation
of the mine.
6.1.5 Margaret Williams, Citizens Against Toxic
Exposure
Ms. Margaret Williams, president of the Citizens
Against Toxic Exposure (GATE) in Pensacola,
Florida, urged the NEJAC to help the community
fight against contamination with arsenic and dioxin,
among other substances, that exceeds
recommended levels defined by EPA. Some of the
problems associated with the contamination in her
community are bone and lung cancer, disorders of
the immune system, reproductive problems, birth
defects, and skin rashes, she said. Citing a
decrease in property values, she emphasized that
the people are "trapped" in the community there
because they cannot afford to leave.
Ms. Williams also requested the NEJAC's support for
the community's relocation efforts. Imploring EPA to
live up to its mission of providing environmental
protection, Ms. Williams stressed that many lives are
at stake. She added that 41 deaths suspected to be
related to the contamination have occurred since
1992. She emphasized that the community cannot
wait another four to five years for studies of the
problem. |n conclusion, she said that the community
is not seeking special favors; the people want the
opportunity to live free of toxic chemicals.
Detroit, Michigan, May29through31,1996
1-21
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Mr. Moore mentioned the Superfund Relocation
Roundtable co-sponsored by EPA and the NEJAC
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee and held
May 2 to 4,1996 in Pensacola. Mr. Lee added that
the affected Pensacola communities are the subject
of a national relocation pilot project and that Mr.
Elliott Laws, Assistance Administrator, of the EPA
OSWER, has made a commitment to follow up on
the issues raised during the roundtable. Stating that
relocation is a very serious environmental justice
problem, Mr. Lee noted further that the issue is very
complex, involving many technical and social issues.
He confirmed that the Pensacola Relocation
Roundtable was on the agenda for discussion on
May 30,1996. (See Section 4.2 of this chapter for a
summary of the discussion about the Superfund
Relocation Roundtable.)
6.1.6 Selena Mendy, Lawyers Committee for
Civil Rights Under Law
Ms. Selena Mendy urged the NEJAC to adopt the
resolutions of the Waste and Facility Siting
Committee that address the relocation issue affecting
the Pensacola community, described previously by
Ms. Williams. However, Ms. Mendy stated her
objections and those of the community to several
aspects of the proposed relocation plan, notably
those related to the planned segregation of the
relocated communities. She stated that 86 percent
of the population in the area of one Superfund site is
African-American and that 96 percent of the
population at the other Superfund site is African-
American. She added that the relocation plan does
not address the fact that both are low-income
communities; the average annual income fee of
people of color in these communities is $4,900
versus $18,000 annual income of the non-people of
color members.
The relocation plan, Ms. Mendy emphasized, fails to
address the total number of Superfund sites in the
area. She criticized the plan to set aside land for
community and industrial use because that land will
not be cleaned to levels required for residential use;
that decision, she stressed, fails to consider
combined effects of contaminants (such as dioxin,
arsenic, lead and varoius others). The relocation
plan, she stated further, does not call for the
relocation of all families. She stated that the plan
should be modified to include all 300 families
currently living in the affected communities.
Mr. Lee agreed with Ms. Mendy's comments about
the consequences of segregated communities. He
also expressed concern that communities are being
relocated to Superfund sites.
6.1.7 Dune Lankard, EYAK Rain Forest
Preservation Fund
Mr. Lankard began by observing that December 18,
1996 is the 25th anniversary of the Alaskan Native
Claims Settlement Act. As a result of that act, he
said, he has witnessed terrible destruction he
described as "ecocide" and "genocide" of the land.
He cited, for example, widespread clear-cutting of
timber and strip mining, as well as the Exxon Valdez
oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska.
Mr. Lankard commented that approximately 79
percent of the $5.3 billion in punitive damage
settlements and $286 Exxon Valdez million in
compensatory damages from the spill will go to non-
native peoples. Alaskans have been left to, fend for
themselves, he said, and the Native peoples are
losing their land and way of live. He expressed his
concern about the billions of dollars in punitive
damages that he said will create problems and forge
a division of classes; he emphasized that the money
should be used to enhance and preserve the land
and the way of life of native peoples.
Mr. Lankard expressed concern about the level of
oversight EPA and the NEJAC can provide for
Indigenous peoples in the proper use of settlement
funds. He asked that members of the NEJAC
provide assistance to:
Accomplish the placement of an indigenous
person such as A. Dedier on the Natural
Resources Trustee Council as a replacement
for Mr. George Frampton
Persuade President Clinton or Vice President
Gore to visit Alaska to support restoring
Alaskan lands in the best interests of the
people.
Ms. Ferris inquired about the makeup of the Natural
Resources Trustee Council. Citing her work for
environmentalists in litigating the Exxon Valdez oil
spill, Ms. Ferris offered to'talk with Mr. Lankard about
providing assistance to achieve the appointment of
an Indigenous person to the council.
6.1.8 Earl Tully, Dine CARE
Mr. Earl Tully began by stating that he had followed
the NEJAC to its meetings in Atlanta, Georgia;
Washington, D.C.; and now Detroit, Michigan. He
1-22
Detroit, Michigan, May29through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
'Executive Council
commented that he hears the same discussion at
every meeting. He added that he is still waiting to
receive a copy of the,transcript of the NEJAC
meeting held in Atlanta in January 1995, the session
which was chaired by Mr. Bresetie.
Mr. Tully then discussed the confusion he had
observed about the role of government leaders of the
Navajo tribe and their role in regulating themselves
as Native peoples. The Navajo tribe voted against
casinos, he said, but tribal leaders said it was a way
to increase revenue and now they are exploring
mining as a means of raising more revenue. 'He-
stressed that, when meetings are held with ,
representatives of the tribe, that you should not listen
to one representative, but to the tribe as a whole.
The tribe "just wants to be left alone," with clean air,
land, and water. In conclusion, Mr. Tully stated that
the tribe wants the individuals who are policy makers
and decision makers to meet with them to discuss
several issues, notably in situ uranium mining, gas
and oil contamination from the Peabody Coal Mine,
and the Big Mountain Black Mesa area.
Ms. Gaylord stated that a copy of the transcript from
the NEJAC meeting in Atlanta would be sent to Mr.
.Tully on Monday, June 3, 1996. [ Editors note: Mr.
Bresette served as chair of the discussion of Native
American issues at the Interagency Public Meeting
on Environmental Justice held January 20, 1995.]
6.1.9 Aku Budu-Watkins, Executive Assistant to
the Mayor of Detroit
Ms. Watkins welcomed all participants to Detroit.
Referring to the bus tour of'Detroit conducted May
28, 1996, she described what can happen when
developers come into an area and discover that they
cannot build new facilities because of contamination.
She emphasized the need to disseminate the truth
about the effect of the contamination in Detroit
Ms. Watkins then discussed the recent
establishment of the city's Department of
Environment. She expressed her appreciation that
the NEJAC was meeting in Detroit and stated her
belief that inspite of the many problems, there are
many accomplishments for members to observe.
Detroit has "a long way to go," she said, but she t
added that the city is working with neighborhood and
community associations to bring people together to
address problems. Adding that the mayor has
involved many people jn addressing environmental
issues, Ms. Watkins noted that, although people
have different priorities and backgrounds, they are
working together. , Singling out a group called
Healthy Detroit, Ms. Watkins explained that the
organization represents many groups of citizens
committed to improving the total quality of life. The
organizations currently are studying cleanup
methods and identifying sources of funding for
cleanups,
Mr. Lee commented that he sees a real sense of
hope coming out of the devastation in Detroit. Any
approach to economic redevelopment, he stressed,
must address issues related to decaying urban
centers. Mr. Ray commended the efforts of Ms.
Watkins and invited Ms, Watkins to become involved
in. the activities associated with Earth Day. Ms.
Ferris; suggested that the National Black Women's
Health Project, the Washington Office on
Environmental Justice, and interested environmental
justice groups work together.
6.1.10 Juan Fernandez, National
Environmental Commission, Chile
The statements of Mr. Juan Fernandez were
translated into English and the responses of
members of the NEJAC to Mr. Fernandez were
translated into Spanish. Translation was provided by
Mr Cart Soderberg of EPA's Caribbean Field Office.
Mr. Fernandez thanked the NEJAC for the
opportunity to speak and to participate in the
meeting. In particular, he thanked Ms. Delta Periera,
OEJ, who he said had invited him to the meeting and
made it possible for him to attend. Concern for the
environment is a new issue for the people of Chile,
he .noted. He then discussed Chile's new focus oh
the environment which arose since the end of military
dictatorship. In 1994, he said, Chile instituted a
basic law for protection of the environment that.
includes provisions for research, education, and
investigations.
Stating that he is the director of training and
education, Mr. Fernandez emphasized that training
is one of the most important programs of the
Commission. It is very important, he said, to train the
.public about the environment, particularly in how to
protect air, water, and land resources. Training has
been incorporated in the curriculum of 'the
Department of Education, and the Department also
is working on providing informal training through the
participation of NGOs, he added. Citing a World
Bank project to train and provide funding to
communities, Mr. Fernandez pointed out that
communities can help solve environmental problems.
He added that there is a strong ethical concern for
the environment that builds solidarity among people.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-23
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
He concluded that problems the United Sates may
have also are problems that Chile may have.
Mr. Moore thanked Mr. Fernandez for his comments.
6.2 Comments Presented on May 30,1996
Mr. Moore opened the public comment period by
suggesting a moment of silence for those people,
family, colleagues, and friends, "who aren't with us
today and who are with us in spirit".
Comments offered during the public comment period
held on May 30,1996 are summarized below, in the
order in which they were made.
6.2.1 Michael Dorsey, Yale University
Mr. Michael Dorsey identified himself as a former
lecturer at the University of Michigan, who taught
courses on environmental justice; a PhD candidate
at John Hopkins University and as a former member
of the President's Council on sustanable
development. He then presented his concerns about
the Environmental Education and Training
Partnership (EETAP) program and the awarding of
the grant to North American Association for
Environmental. Education (NAAEE). He spoke
specifically about what he described as EPA's poor
coordination and management of the program.
There is a growing controversy, he stated, about
issues related to funding and awarding of grants
associated with EETAP. (See Section 3.1 of this
chapter for a summary of the presentation on the
EETAP program.)
Mr. Dorsey then addressed what he described as
problems with the EETAP program, notably:
The lack of representation of people of color
and people from low income communities.
The lack of discussion about making EETAP's
partners accountable for environmental
justice issues
The lack of involvement on the part of EETAP
organizations in the broader environmental
justice arena
The growing concern among community and
grassroots organizations about who is being
funded to do work in their communities
Noncompliance with Executive Order 12898.
Citing another cooperative agreement signed
recently, Mr. Dorsey remarked that the EETAP
agreement excludes minority groups.
Mr. Dorsey identified four recommendations: (1) the
NEJAC should demand that EPA's Environmental
Education Division (EED)-develop explicit criteria for
the involvement of low-income communities and
organizations; (2) the NEJAC should demand that
EPA and EED make explicit the criteria that defines
how EED will address the needs of low-income
communities, (3) the NEJAC should demand that
EPA and EED define how they will evaluate the
potential success of the program in ensuring that
low-income communities and organizations are
involved and their needs are addressed, and (4) the
NEJAC should demand that EPA and EED work with
the Coalition of Environmental Educators for Justice.
In conclusion, Mr. Dorsey emphasized that the
NEJAC should determine the effect of all cooperative
agreements on low-income organizations.
6.2.2 Max Weintraub, National Safety Council
Mr. Max Weintraub stated that he represents the
concerns of the National Safety Council about
funding under EETAP. He stated that there is no
evidence that EETAP is working with its partners to
serve traditionally under served populations. Under
served communities are being ignored, he stated.
Addressing budget and funding expenditures, Mr.
Weintraub discussed the misdirection of budget and
funding money. Citing the outrageously inefficient
expenditure of taxpayer funds, he criticized EETAP
and the NAAEE for "reinventing the wheel."
Mr. Weintraub recommended strongly that EPA
should not provide financial support to EETAP.
Environmental education should be supported, he
stated, but the NEJAC should demand that EED
maximize the success of the EETAP program.
6.2.3 Running Grass, Three Circles Center for
Multi-Cultural Environmental Education
Running Grass stated that he is the executive
director of the Three Circles Center for Multi-Cultural
Environmental Education and a long-time member of
the NAAEE. He has presented many workshops at
NAAEE's conferences, he said, and stated that he
knows the organization yen/ well.
1-24
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
Running Grass then shared an experience he had in
San Francisco which involved elementary schools
located near Superfund sites in Fort Ord, California.
This case, he said, is just one example of close
proximity of schools across the United States to toxic
waste sites. He stressed that children are on the
front line, exposed to dangers in their communities
and at their schools. Emphasizing that both students
and teachers should address the potential risks, he
stated that culture-specific environmental education
is needed.
Running (Brass stated further that EETAP is an
excellent example of the systemic exclusion of some
races. He cited as evidence the cooperative
agreement between NAAEE and EED that he said,
does not include representation of people of color or
environmental justice organizations. NAAEE wants
the authority to decide which new organizations will
be brought into the partner group, he continued, and
the power to decide who will be admitted to the
advisory, board. He strongly suggested that EPA
investigate the continued exclusion of the Coalition
of Environmental Educators for Justice from the
EETAP programs.
Running Grass recommended that EPA; be
challenged on how NAAEE was awarded the
cooperative agreement award, how the current
partners were chosen, and why no requirements
have been imposed on those entities to involve
communities. NEJAC should inform EED and
NAAEE that they cannot bypass the Coalition of
Environmental Educators for Justice. He. concluded
his remarks ,with a recommendation that the NEJAC
form a committee to address the problems with the
EETAP program, to monitor the situation before the
fiscal year ends, and to look at the broader issues of
racism. ,
Mr. Bullard responded that the testimonies of Mr.
Dorsey, Mr. Weintraub, and Mr. Grass highlight
issues related to funding - who is doing the work
and who is being funded. He suggested that, if
appropriate, Running Grass establish a coalition and
move beyond negotiation and talk. He stressed that
racial discrimination in any form must be challenged.
Ms. Ferris added that, when environmental-activists
state their concerns about funding, they are not
doing so because they want more money. Funding
inequities are symptomatic of a larger problem, she
said, which is the exclusion of people of color and
low-income people and the exclusion of communities
from the process of making decisions that affect their
lives. Ms. Ferris recommended that a task force be
established to make inquiry into EED procedures.
Ms. Wright observed that education in environmental
justice is very important. She then expressed
outrage that environmental activists and educators
are unable to obtain access to environmental
education funding. She recommended that NEJAC
move forward to establish a work group to address
the inability of environmental justice activists,
educators, and community organizations to gain
access to the funding process.
Mr. Moore responded that the issue of funding was
to be addressed during a presentation by
representatives of EED. ,
6.2.4 John Simmons, Kennedy Heights Civic
Association, Houston, Texas
Mr. John Simmons stated that he represents the
Kennedy Heights Civic Association in Southeast
Houston, Texas. He stated that in this community,
homes are built above three storage pits once used
by Gulf Oil Company (now Chevron USA Inc.) to
store oil chemical byproducts, including methane.
He explained that when the developer built the
homes, it did not drain the pits. In addition, methane
gas has been found in Kennedy Heights homes. The
community's water supply is transported through
pipes that sit in toxic waste, he said, adding that
when the water lines break, the residents drunk in
the contamination from the pits. As a result, many
people in the community experience health-related
problems, he stated. Mr. Simmons emphasized that
the, children of the community are sick, and cited the
continued testing of the 2,000 residents of the
Community for evidence of the effects of
contamination.
Mr. Simmons expressed outrage about the
difference between how the Texas Railroad..
Commission is responding to the problems in his
predominantly African-American community and
those of a predominately white community in another
part of Harris County. He stressed that homes in
the white community are not built on top of crude oil
pits, as are those.. in the Kennedy Heights
neighborhood, yet the Commission has ordered the
cleanup of that community. He then discussed the
recent disclosure of correspondence dating from the
1960s between Gulf Oil and the realtors who sold the
property. The_correspondence, he said includes
statements that the Kennedy Heights property "is a
good place for a colored or a poor neighborhood."
Mr. Simmons stated that the community needs
assistance from EPA. After inquiring about how and
whether the NEJAC would help the community, he
added that they heed assistance to help themselves.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-25
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Ms. Ferris responded that the NEJAC would help the
community by "any necessary" means.
Mr. Lee then inquired about the possibility of
relocating the residents of the community. Mr.
Simmons responded that more testing had been
completed, but that before the Railroad Commission
would release the results of the testing to citizens,
the community had to petition the state for help. Mr.
Simmons emphasized that members of the
community continue to die while Chevron insists on
implementing a comprehensive test plan that is
expected to take 7 to 12 months to complete.
Mr. Ray asked about the involvement of state or
federal environmental agencies in the issue. In
response, Mr. Simmons stated that the state of
Texas and EPA Region 6 had told the community
that crude oil falls under the jurisdiction of the
Railroad Commission. That is why the community
needs help from NEJAC, he added.
In response to Ms. Herrera's question about the
deferral by EPA Region 6 of the issue to the state,
Ms. Gaylord stated that it appeared that the issue fell
under the environmental laws that are delegated to
the states. She said she was unsure, however, why
the Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission had not become involved. Ms. Shirley
Augerson, environmental justice coordinator for EPA
Region 6, responded that the case had been referred
to the Texas Railroad Commission and that EPA is
waiting to hear from the commission. She stated that
EPA Region 6 has not "washed its hands" of the
issue, but stressed that EPA has an obligation to
give Texas ample opportunity to respond. She
confirmed that she would follow up on the issue upon
her return to her office.
Ms. Burwell assured Mr. Simmons that many
members of the NEJAC have been in his position
and that his concerns have been heard. Ms.
Johnson also offered to help Mr. Simmons. She
stated that she had experienced similar problems
and could provide advice and recommendations.
Mr. Moore then recommended the establishment of
an ad hoc work group to investigate the situation and
to develop and present recommendations to the
NEJAC. Mr. Lee, Ms. Herrera, Ms. Wright, Mr.
Turrentine, Ms. English, and Mr. Moore volunteered
to serve as members of the work group.
6.2.5 Seth Lubega, Oakwood College,
Huntsville, Alabama
Mr. Seth Lubega, spoke against the long-term
dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane (DDT)
contamination affecting the citizens of Triana, a
community located near Huntsville, Alabama. He is
the director of environmental justice programs at
Oakwood College and also represents an African-
American community that long has suffered from
environmental injustice. ,
Citing the manufacture and disposal of DDT in the
area that began in the late 1940s, Mr. Lubega stated
that residues were discharged to a creek system that
feeds into the Tennessee River. The well that
provides the water supply for the community was
closed in 1994, he added, because of high levels of
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) detected in it. He
stated that results of tests performed on residents of
the communities revealed the highest concentration
of DDT ever found in human blood. He added that
the National Cancer Institute also conducted a study
of the coincidence of contamination with DDT and
PCB and the incidence of breast cancer in the Triana
community. He urged that the NEJAC help the
citizens of Triana prevent further contamination and
identify those entities from which the citizens can
obtain assistance. NEJAC also could assist the
citizens in learning the protocols for requesting
assistance, he said.
Mr. Ray commented that he had worked for many
years on the enforcement case related to Triana. He
said he had participated in public meetings held in
Triana in the 1980s. Mr. Ray echoed Mr. Lubega's
criticism of the continuing testing of citizens, who he
said are being treated like guinea pigs. The citizens
raised the same questions 15 years ago, he
observed, that they are raising today.
Mr. Lee recommended that Mr, Lubega contact the
National Academy of Sciences/IOM which has
established a committee on environmental justice.
Ms. Gaylord confirmed that the issues raised by Mr.
Lubega will be referred to the environmental justice
coordinator in EPA Region 4. She added that the
NEJAC also will respond directly to Mr. Lubega's
concerns.
Mr. Moore concluded that Mr. Lubega's testimony is
another example of the many life and death
situations that exist. Many agencies do not know
what to do about such communities, he
acknowledged. But, he added, "we must make a
commitment to ensure we press forward on issues in
1-2S
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31, 1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
communities that have been going on for many
years."
Ms. Johnson repeated Mr. Lubega's plea to end
testing in the community and stated that she is
willing to work with groups that want to help his
community.
6.2.6 Connie Tucker, Southern Organizing
Committee for Economic and Social
Justice .
Ms. Connie Tucker first recommended that the
NEJAC, through its Health and Research
Subcommittee, develop some case studies that
examine communities which have experienced
contamination over a 10-year period. For example,
five racially and geographically diverse communities
could be used in the case study to develop
recommendations for addressing long-term health
problems that are never resolved.
Mr Bullard responded that he would present Ms.
Tucker's recommendation to the members of tine .
Health and Research Subcommittee.
6.2.7 Juan Rosario, Mision Industrial de Puerto
Rico
Mr. Juan Rosario stated that he comes from a small
town in Puerto Rico. He asked when the NEJAC
plans to visit Puerto Rico to hear the views of
communities there. Responding to statements
issued by various EPA offices that indicate that the
NEJAC cannot visit Puerto Rico because it is
classified as an " exotic place," Mr. Rosario started '
that Puerto Rico was not an exotic place when the
United'States tested Agent Orange in its rain forests
or when the United States tested malathion and
diazinon on the people of Puerto Rico'.
Mr. Rosario stated in conclusion that Puerto Rico is ,
a good, place to start implementing environmental
justice and requested that the people of Puerto Rico
be given the opportunity to speak for themselves. A
petition bearing several thousand signatures
requested that the NEJAC visit Puerto Rico also was
presented.
Mr. Moore responded that grassroots organizations
in Puerto Rico consistently have asked for /
assistance from the NEJAC. The NEJAC
consistently hears about the lack of enforcement
there, he added. Ms. Veloria, inquired about
previous discussions of a visit by the NEJAC to
Puerto Rico. Ms. Gaylord responded that this issue
is under discussion, but added that the previous
recommendation was to form a work group on Puerto
Rico composed of community residents, NEJAC,
EPA Region 2, and the local government. That
process is still being reviewed by the EPA Region 2
Administrator,
Mr. Velasquez added that it is very important that
NEJAC have full grasp of the cultural exploitation
that has taken place in Puerto Rico over many years.
6.2.8 Dennison Smith
Mr. Dennison Smith first stated that he is an attorney
advising citizen groups and civic associations in
Guyana, South America. He described several
environmental problems there, including the rupture
in August 1995 of a dam fora gold mining operation
and the subsequent release of toxic effluent into*the
country's largest river which is part of the Amazon
River basin. As a result of such disasters, he stated,
citizens are experiencing health problems. Stressing
that the disaster had been predicted six months
before it occurred, Mr. Smith discussed the events
that lead up to the failure of the dam. The dam, he
added, was allowed to reopen and resume
operations in February 1996. .
Mr. Smith also addressed Guyana's enormous debt,
which, he stressed, contributes to an already volatile
situation. In an effort to reduce its debt, Guyana is
"opening its doors" to the International Monetary
Fund (IMF), the World Bank and other institutions,
yet he emphasized, Guyana lacks a regulatory
framework to govern foreign investments.
Mr. 'Smith urged the NEJAC to request that EPA
assess the damage caused by the mining and dam
accidents and to provide technical assistance to
affected communities. Mr. Smith then stated that
Guyana needs assistance to develop regulations for
the country's environmental protection agency. He
repeated his observation that the lack of regulations
affects the, citizens of Guyana because foreign
companies take advantage of the country's weak
regulatory framework.
Ms. Gamache referred to a meeting held in London
at which the effects of mining oh indigenous peoples
and lands was discussed; representatives of Guyana
attended that meeting, she said. She inquired
whether the Declaration on the Effects of Mines on
Indigenous Peoples and Lands, developed at the
London meeting, had been submitted to the
members Of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
to be forwarded to the Executive Council for
adoption. She then confirmed she would send
copies of the Declaration to Mr. Smith and to the
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-27
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
members of the NEJAC. She recommended further
that the document be submitted as a resolution to the
NEJAC for their endorsement. (See Section 5.4 of
this chapter for the discussion related to reports
submitted by the subcommittees)
Ms. Ferris asked whether Guyana was working on
the South American Free Trade Agreement with the
United States. Mr. Smith responded that, as far as
he knew, Guyana had no plans to join any free trade
zone, although that appears to be the direction the
country is headed. He added that Guyana is a small
country that traditionally has fallen under the
"dictates of the United States."
Mr. O'Leary requested additional clarification about
a report prepared by EPA about the recent dam
disaster. Mr. Smith responded that the report was
prepared by a joint United Nations and EPA
emergency response team. He stated that one of
the team's criticisms was the lack of data provided
by the Omai Gold Mine Company. The team also
criticized aspects of the methodology used by the
company to respond to the disaster. Mr. Smith
added that he did not believe that the company had
performed monitoring of groundwater. At Mr.
O'Leary's request, Ms. Gaylord agreed to furnish a
copy of the report to the members.
When Mr. Ray recommended that the situation be
referred to the attention of the Indigenous Peoples
and International subcommittees, Mr. Velasquez
responded that the International Subcommittee will
present to the NEJAC recommendations that
address Mr. Smith's concerns.
6.2.9 Peter Cervantes, Gauchi,
Organizing Committee
Workers'
Ms. Pamela Tau-Lee, University of California Center
for Occupational and Environmental Health,
submitted a letter from Peter Cervantes. His letter
outlined the concerns of the committee about
pollution prevention efforts conducted by workers at
the Red Lion Coliseum Inn. The workers are
predominately women of color-Asian and Latino
immigrants employed as room cleaners. The letter
stated that the workers are required to use cleaning
products containing diethylene glycol ether, dibutyl
phthalate, and tributoxyethyl. The letter continued to
state that the women are experiencing symptoms
that include respiratory problems, skin rashes,
headaches, and reproductive complications. The
owners of the Red Lion Coliseum Inn have refused
their request to use safer cleaning products.
The letter, requested that the NEJAC send a letter to
Mr. Paul Allen, owner of the Red Lion Coliseum Inn,
to request that he replace the products containing
the chemicals with safer cleaning products.
6.2.10
Anna Frazier, Dine CARE
Ms. Anna Frazier commented on inequities in
awarding environmental justice grants. She stated
that communities are now experiencing injustices in
the funding of studies conducted to assess
environmental justice. Stating that Dine CARE and
other community organizations are struggling with
large universities that have much more extensive
resources needed to secure these funds, she
emphasized that the communities that are faced with
problems know best what those problems are and
how to solve them. As an example, she spoke about
Mr. Phil Harrison, who has worked for 15 years with
victims of pollution related to uranium mining in the
Red Valley area on the Navaho reservation, yet was
recently surprised to find that a university in Boston,
Massachusetts used him, to obtain millions of dollars
in environmental justice funds to study victims of
uranium mining. She added that Mr. Harrison was
compensated only $500 for providing interpretation
services and making arrangements.
Ms. Frazier then described how Dine CARE's recent
application to the NIEHS National Indian
Environmental Health Services for funds was denied;
instead, she said, those funds were awarded to a
large university to study the people on her
reservation. Ms. Frazier concluded her remarks with
a request that the NEJAC evaluate grant policies and
regulations that adversely affect citizen's groups that
can not compete with the extensive resources of
large universities and who generally are excluded
from the peer review process. Ms. Lori Lewis, the
Environmental Justice Coordinator for EPA Region
9, responded that she will follow up on the issue
directly with Ms. Frazier and Mr. Earl Tully.
Ms. Wright added that Ms. Frazier's testimony
highlights a deeper problem that permeates the
environmental justice community, specifically, she
said, that the people making decisions about grants
and funds do not understand environmental justice.
Seconding Ms. Wright, Mr. Lee added that funding
inequities underscore the "bigger issue" of the
access to decision making and the peer review
process.
Ms. Gamache commented that Ms. Frazier's
testimony illustrated the failure of Western science to
consider the knowledge and expertise of indigenous
1-28
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
peoples. The repercussions of that failure, she said,
include the failure of agencies to look at how
contamination is absorbed into subsistence foods.
Ms. Gaylord reminded the members of the NEJAC
that a list of environmental justice grant opportunities
available through EPA and other agencies had been
included in, their meeting materials for their
information and use. Ms. Ferris added that this
would be another focus for the new NEJAC work
group on grants:
6.2.11 Ray, Campion, Mickey Leland
National Urban Air Toxics Research
Center
Mr. Ray Campion stated that he had made a
presentation to the Health and Research
Subcommittee, and expressed his thanks for their
excellent suggestions for increasing community
involvement. He added that Mr. Bullard agreed to
provide him with a list of experts to help review some
of his center's programs related to assessment of
personal exposure. Mr. Campion spoke briefly about
the activities of the center in assessing the public
health risks associated with air toxics. The members
of the center's board, he stated, have backgrounds
in environmental justice issues.
Referring to an EPA rule that she suggested might
provide guidance, Ms. Ferris inquired about the
research available on. the effects of open market
trading of air emissions credits on personal
exposure. She expressed interest in obtaining
'information about the effects on people who live
under the trade zone.. Mr. Campion responded that
some relationship might be identified in the risk
assessments that eventually will be done.
6.2.12 Jennifer Jamison, National
Association for the Advancement of
Colored People
Ms. Jennifer Jamison stated that she represented the
NAACP and of the Ecology Center of Ann Arbor,
Michigan. She cited two communities in Ann Arbor
Inkster and Hamtramck-that have focused on
ecology issues. Inkster, she stated, which is located
one mile from one of the largest emitters of mercury
in the country, has .a 54 percent minority population
and high unemployment. Hamtramck, also a
minority community that has high unemployment and
high poverty rates, has experienced problems with a
waste treatment facility. She identified the
relationship between the Ecology Center and the
NAACP as one of the few existing collaborations
between environmental and civil rights groups. Ford
Motor Company may join the partnership, she added.
Ms. Jamison concluded her remarks by thanking the
NEJAC for the opportunity to share information and
stating that she was honored to be in the company of
the people in the room.
6.2.13
Arthur Varela, Citizen
Mr. Alex Varela, who was unable to attend the
meeting, submitted written testimony to the NEJAG:
In his letter, Mr. Varela bade farewell to the members
of NEJAC as he leaves EPA to pursue other career
and personal options. His statement reflects his
personal views, hot those of EPA, he wrote. In the
letter, he stated that environmental justice cannot be
measured in the number of court victories,
amendments of regulations, or agreements settled.
The measures of environmental justice, Mr. Varela,
lie within the people and communities who have
been touched and empowered through the
environmental justice movement.
In his letter, Mr. Varela discussed the evolution of the
environmental justice movement in EPA and the
federal government. He cited the increasing protests
within EPA in the 1970s by employees interested in
environmental justice issues, the development of
EPA's equity report in 1990, and the publication of an
issue of the a National Law Journal devoted to the
environmental justice issue. That publication, he
wrote, had a profound effect on the movement and
on'EPA. Mr. Varela also referred to the continuing
challenges EPA employees face under the current
administration. Citing, for example, the development
of the Environmental Justice Strategy under
Executive Order 12898, Mr. Varela stated that
concepts of "cultural diversity" and "spiritual use of
natural resources" has been deemed too
controversial to be included in the strategy,
Mr. Varela's written testimony then discussed
environmental justice as a movement. He cited in
particular an article published recently by the
Brookings Review that questioned the foundations of
environmental justice. The article, he stated, ignores
overwhelming evidence of government actions,
which are racial disparate on its face, such as Farm
Worker protection and nuclear bomb testing and
cleanup in the Pacific Islands. Environmental justice
js a moral issue, not purely an economic one, he
wrote.
Mr. Varela included lists of environmental justice
myths and topis and identified some failures and
disappointments of the environmental justice
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
1-29
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
movement. He concluded by recognizing and
thanking the people he had worked with. Attached to
his letter for inclusion in the public record were three
documents: "Minorities Slighted by EPA" by Arthur
.Wiley Ray, Esq. and Arthur A. Varela, Esq., Howard
Hilltop, April 6, 1990; "Recommendations to the
Presidential Transition Team for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency on Environmental
Justice Issues," submitted by the Lawyer's
Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, December
1992; and "A Winning Hand?" by Christopher H.
Foreman, Jr., Brookings Review, Spring 1996.
7.0 WRAP-UP
This section summarizes discussions pertaining to
the leaving of Mr. Arthur Varela from EPA and the
proposed replacement of NEJAC members.
7.1 Leaving of Arthur Varela from EPA
Mr. Ray wished to take a moment to recognize the
contributions of Mr. Varela to the environmental
justice movement. Noting that Mr. Varela is leaving
EPA, Mr. Ray requested that Mr. Varela's letter sent
to the NEJAC be entered into the record of the
meeting. (See Section 6.2.13 for a summary of Mr.
Varela's statement.)
Mr. Ray requested that NEJAC adopt a resolution to
recognize Mr. Varela for his dedication and for his
work with people of color and low-income
communities in the environmental justice movement.
The NEJAC voted to adopt the resolution.
7.2 Replacement of NEJAC Members
Mr. Lee made a motion that NEJAC request that the
EPA Administrator understand the importance of
continuity when selecting individuals to fill the seats
of NEJAC members scheduled to be vacant. Mr.
McDemnott pointed that many of the existing
members bring unique perspectives to the meetings
and that this is not a typical FACA. Mr. Ray agreed
with both Mr. Lee and Mr. McDermott and stated that
he would hate to have to go through growing pains
experienced since the first NEJAC meetings. Ms.
Gamache added that the institutional memory that
has been created is vital to the future of the NEJAC
as well as the environmental justice movement. The
NEJAC adopted the action item and Mr. Lazarus
volunteered to draft a letter to the EPA Administrator.
8.0 RESOLUTIONS
This section summarizes the key resolutions
discussed during the meeting. Additional resolutions
are identified under appropriate chapters of the
subcommittees.
NEJAC Resolution #1:
NEJAC commends the efforts of OEJ to implement
new methods, such as satellite downlink, for public
comment; and requests that EPA:
Compile a complete catalogue of
environmental problems in Puerto Rico and
the status of EPA efforts to address them;
Prepare a report and evaluation regarding
EPA's present institutional and organizational
capacity to address environmental problems
in Puerto Rico, including the role of EPA
Region 2 and its Caribbean Field Office;
Contact other Federal agencies to ascertain
their involvement in addressing environmental
problems in Puerto Rico;
Arrange for Administrator Browner to make a
visit to Puerto Rico at her earliest
convenience;
Support the creation of a NEJAC work group
on Puerto Rico to assess environmental
issues;
Solicit the input and ensure community
participation in planning the implementation of
the above-listed activities;
Communicate the contents of this resolution
to participants on the NEJAC public comment
session and make a special solicitation of
their recommendations regarding the role of
EPA and other Federal agencies; and, make
a report on these items at the next NEJAC
meeting.
NEJAC Resolution #2:
Request that Administrator Browner support the
continuance of OPPE's Cumulative Exposure Project
and related projects that develop and recommend
that all EPA program offices (particularly ORD)
support the project and identify any barriers to
success.
1-30
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
NEJAC Resolution #3:
Recognize Mr. Valeria for his distinguished, creative,
and continued efforts in promoting the interests of
communities in the area of environmental justice.
The NEJAC appreciates his consistent support and
wishes him well in his future endeavors.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through31,199S
1-31
-------
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 29 and 30,1996
Detroit, Michigan
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Sherry Milan
Designated Federal Official
-------
-------
CHAPTER TWO
MEETING OF THE
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Enforcement Subcommittee of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
.. conducted a two-day meeting on Wednesday and
Thursday, May 29 and 30,1996, during a three-day
meeting of the NEJAC in Detroit, Michigan. Ms.
Deeohn Ferris, Washington Office on Environmental
Justice, continues to serve as chair of the
subcommittee. Ms. Sherry Milan, Office of
Enforcement Outreach, U.S. . Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) continues to serve as the
Designated Federal Official (DFO) for the
subcommittee; however, Ms. Rose Harvell, EPA
Office of Site Remediation and Enforcement (OSRE),
represented Ms. Milan at the meeting.
This chapter, which provides a detailed discussion of
the deliberations of the Enforcement Subcommittee,
is organized in five sections, including this
Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks, summarizes the
opening remarks of the chair and others. Section
3.0, Activities of the Subcommittee, summarizes the
subcommittee's discussions about its activities,
including the subcommittee's work groups* Section
4.0, Environmental Justice Issues Related to
Enforcement, summarizes the subcommittees
discussions about enforcement. Section 5.0,
Presentations, provides an overview of each
presentation, as well as a summary of the questions
and comments of the members of the subcommittee.
Exhibit 2-1 presents a list of the members who
attended the meeting and identifies those members
who were unable to attend.
2.0 REMARKS
Ms. Ferris, as chair of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, opened the meeting with a welcome
to the members present and to Ms. Harvell. Ms.
Ferris then introduced Mr. Steven Herman, Assistant
Administrator, EPA Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance (OECA). She stated that Mr.
Herman would attend this meeting of the
subcommittee as well as the meetings of the other
NEJAC subcommittees being held that day and on
the next day.
Ms.; Ferris added that the subcommittee should
discuss how to prepare for the addition of new
members of the NEJAC during the interim before the
Exhibit 2-1
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members Who Attended the Meeting
May 29 and 30, 1996
Ms. Deeohn Ferris, Chair
" Ms. Rose Harvell, Acting DFO
Ms. Christine Benally
Mr. Richard Lazarus
Mr. Charles McDermott
Mr. Richard Moore
Mr. Arthur Ray
Ms. Peggy Shepard
Ms.'Pamela Tau-Lee
Mr. Rex Tingle
List of Members
Who Were Unable To Attend
Mr. Grover Hankins
Ms. Sherry Milan, DFO
next meeting of the NEJAC scheduled for December
1996. Ms. Ferris noted that she would like to see the
work groups move forward after the new members
have Joined the subcommittee and recommended
that the subcommittee discuss ways in which new
members can ensure that the work groups do make
progress in addressing issues.
Addressing the need for resources, Ms Ferris said
that the subcommittee has had much assistance in
arranging meetings, but that more assistance is
needed for the preparation of reports and in support
of .ongoing efforts, such as work groups. She said
that the report of recommendations produced by the
subcommittee in 1995 was developed with resources
from sources other than EPA. Ms. Ferris indicated
that she would like to see EPA strengthen its staffing-
in 1996 and 1997. She stressed that, if the
subcommittee is to continue moving forward with its
: goals, additional staffing is necessary. As an
example of the effect of limited support Ms. Ferris
pointed to several pilot projects that have been
suggested to obtain comment from communities but
for which no action was taken. In particular, she
noted that no action was taken on suggestions to
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
2-1
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
solicit comment from communities about state
performance partnership agreements and
Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with the
EPA regional offices. In conclusion, Ms. Ferris
stated that if more resources are not provided, it will
be difficult for the subcommittee to do its work.
In response to Ms. Ferris' comments, Mr. Herman
stated that he would review with Ms. Clarice Gaylord,
Director of the EPA Office of Environmental Justice
(OEJ) and others, the level of support that currently
is being provided to the Enforcement Subcommittee.
He pointed out that performance partnerships are a
new initiative and that some states have been more
successful than others in soliciting response from
communities affected by enforcement actions. Mr.
Herman stated that the partnerships will be a
worthwhile effort.
>
Mr. Arthur Ray, Maryland Department of the
Environment, said that EPA Region 3 is inconsistent
in its interactions with the various states located in
the region. He explained that although the regional
office has signed MOUs with each of the states in the
region, representatives from EPA Region 3 never
solicit comments from the states. Mr. Ray also
indicated that he was unsure of the nature and
purpose of performance partnerships.
Mr. Herman then responded that six performance
partnerships have been signed between various
states and EPA. He acknowledged that while some
partnership agreements are very detailed, others
establish only a general framework for activities. He
added that several partnerships feature substantial
public participation components. Mr. Herman added
that the partnerships are in their first year and that
EPA should improve upon the public participation
components of those partnerships. Mr. Herman also
stated that he wishes to develop a more constructive,
"less paternalistic" relationship with the states and
stressed the importance of mutual respect in the
relationship between the EPA regional offices and
the states.
Mr. Ray commented that the compliance assistance
plans that EPA has developed must define the fine
line that exists between compliance and
enforcement. Mr. Herman commented that some
sectors of the regulated community have not yet
become part of the enforcement system. He
indicated that EPA is attempting to define the line
between compliance and enforcement, explaining
that OECA presently is analyzing compliance rates,
risks, and violations in relationship to new rules that
have been established. He said that, throughout
these efforts, EPA is attempting to maintain the
"bottom line of protecting the public."
Ms. Ferris discussed legislation recently passed by
several states which enables companies to keep
confidential the results of .internal audits. She
expressed concern that the passage of legislation
governing the confidentiality of internal audits will
restrict the level of public involvement that has been
achieved, for example, under the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA) and other laws. Mr. Herman responded
that, in mid-May, he had testified before Congress
against such legislation. (Copies of Mr. Herman's
testimony to Congress were distributed to the
members of the Enforcement Subcommittee later in
the day.) He stated that, in Arizona, companies such
as Intel, Inc. have said they da not need the
legislation. However, he added that 18 states have
passed statutes that allow companies to keep
internal audit results confidential.
Mr. Herman said that he and Ms. Mary Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of Air and
Radiation, sent a memorandum to the EPA regional
offices notifying them that state Title V programs
might not be approved if the states do not provide for
criminal prosecution, injunctive relief, and protection
for whistle blowers. He added that EPA should be
promoting openness. Mr. Ray commented that, in
the state of Maryland, there has been disagreement
over the issue. He urged Mr. Herman to follow up on
EPA's threat to withhold approval of state Title V
programs. Mr. Ray observed that, in the absence of
such a threat from EPA, companies will leave
Maryland and other states that have passed similar
legislation because the regulatory climate is less
restrictive in other states in which such a statute has
not been passed. Mr. Herman responded that EPA
is not making empty threats against states. He
stated that EPA has asked the U.S. Attorney General
to review the specific statutes to determine how their
provisions governing audits and secrecy should be
interpreted.
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
The members of the NEJAC Enforcement
Subcommittee discussed the activities of the
subcommittee, including an update on the activities
of the four work groups of the subcommittee, a
review of the action items developed during the
December 1995 meeting of the subcommittee, and
an update on the regional enforcement roundtable
meetings. Exhibit 2-2 presents a list of the work
2-2
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
groups of the subcommittee and the names of the
subcommittee members participating on each group.
3.1 Worker Protection Work Group
Ms. Ferris recalled that during the December 1995
meeting of the subcommittee, the subcommittee
established the worker protection work group to
analyze EPA's activities related to enforcing existing
regulations, particularly those that pose problems for
workers. The work group also was assigned the task
of providing recommendations to EPA about the *
regulations. , '
Ms. Ferris recommended that the Worker Protection
Work Group determine its needs for staffing and
research. To obtain resources from OECA, she said,
the work group should outline the projects it plans to
undertake.
Exhibit 2-2
WORK GROUPS OF THE
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
Worker Protection Work Group
Rex Tingle, Co-choir
Pamela Tau-Lee, Co-choir
Other members not assigned at this tune
Open Market Trading of Air Emissions
Credits Work Group
Arthur Ray, Chair
Peggy Shepard
Grover Hankins
Work Group on the Permitting Process
Richard Lazarus, Chair
Arthur Ray
Charles McDermott
Eileen Gauna, EPA
Mary O'Lone, EPA OGC
Work Group on the Policy on
Supplemental Environmental Projects
Richard Lazarus, Chair
Other members not assigned at this time
Enforcement Roundtable Task Force
Grover Hankins, nominated chair
Arthur Ray
Richard Lazarus
Christine Benally
3.2 Open Market Trading of Air Emissions
Credits Work Group
Mr. Ray, chair of the Open Market Trading of Air
Emissions Credits Work Group, discussed the
activities of the work group since the December 1995
meeting of the subcommittee. Mr. Ray reviewed his
initial concerns about the open market trading of air
emissions credits, adding that EPA realizes the need
to examine more flexible methods of compliance. He
.then explained that; under the credit program,
companies can either purchase credits or
accumulate them through improvements in their
compliance activities. With the program, he said,
industry can better plan their compliance activities,
and companies in each region can trade credits
among themselves. Mr. Ray reported that EPA
plans to establish a model program by which states
will implement their own programs and which first
must be approved by EPA.
Mr. Ray explained that there is concern about the
effects on the trading programs of such air toxics as
nitrous oxide, sulfur dioxide, and volatile organic
compounds. He stated that the work group should
examine the issues by researching studies that have
been conducted. Ms. Ferris expressed agreement
that the work group should gather such information
to evaluate the shortcomings of the various credits
trading programs.
Mr. Ray said that during a conference call with
representatives of EPA's Office of Air, EPA had
indicated that the Agency expects to issue guidance
on air emission credits in November or December
1996. Mr. Ray stated that in response to his request
for the work group to provide comment on the
guidance, EPA agreed to discuss .the guidance with
interested parties this summer. He also reported that
EPA will provide to the states training in
implementing .the guidance.
Ms. Ferris asked how EPA will enforce the guidance.
Mr, Ray responded that EPA cannot directly enforce
the provisions of the guidance but that, by
"developing it,. EPA will have the opportunity to shape
how states implement their programs for the trading
of air emissions credits.
Mr. Charles McDermott, WMX Technology Inc.,
requested that Mr. Ray clarify the purpose of EPA's
guidance on air emissions credits trading programs
and the audience to whom the guidance is directed.
Mr. Ray responded that the guidance is directed at
states that will be implementing such trading
programs. He explained that the guidance will
describe who can participate in the program, the
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
2-3
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
level of emissions to be allowed, how trades should
be conducted, and the type of system to be used for
banking and recording credits. Mr. Ray added that
representatives from the Office of Air have
committed to address public participation in the
guidance and also had promised to include language
which specifies that trading programs for air
emissions credits will not include air toxics. He
added that the work group will review existing
research on the affect on the public of the trading
programs.
Ms. Ferris suggested the work group coordinate its
activities with those of the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee. In addition, she
suggested that Mr. Ray determine the resource
needs of the work group.
3.3 Work Group on the Permitting Process
Mr. Richard Lazarus, Georgetown University Law
School and chair of the Work Group on the
Permitting Process (formerly called the Agency
Integration, Permitting, and the NEPA Process Work
Group), summarized the status of the work group's
activities. He stated that a package that had been
distributed to the subcommittee members included
his memorandum about the integration of
environmental justice into EPA's permitting process.
Mr. Lazarus explained that his objective in preparing
the memorandum was to begin an examination of the
possible use of EPA's permitting authority to promote"
environmental justice. The memorandum, he said,
reflects his belief that EPA's statutory authorities and
responsibilities may well be broader than their
application in the past has evidenced. For example,
he continued, in tine Louisiana Energy Services case,
he believed EPA could have considered what
discretionary authority the agency might have been
able to put to effective use. The memorandum, Mr.
Lazarus stated, explores the areas of authority the
agency might possess, rather than focusing on
EPA's statutory obligations and resposibilities.
Mr. Lazarus cautioned that he did not intend that the
memorandum offer the final word on the issue. Far
from it, he said, adding that he sees distribution of
the memorandum as a vehicle for consideration of
the issue.
Mr. Lazarus explained that the memorandum first
provides some examples of what environmental
justice means in the permitting context, and then
examines several EPA Appeals Board decisions
related to environmental justice. Finally, the
memorandum 'surveys several environmental
statutes in search of open-ended language that
might serve as the basis for addressing
environmental justice concerns through EPA's
permitting authority.
Mr. Lazarus described three different ways of
thinking about environmental justice within the
permitting context. First, environmental justice might
simply refer to EPA's authority to consider the
aggregate and cumulative effects of environmental
pollution in a particular community. For example,
EPA's decision to grant a permit to a particular
facility, and the conditions set forth in that permit,
would take into account the multiple pathways of
exposure to which that community already was
subjected by existing facilities. A second way to take
environmental justice into account during the
permitting process would be to consider
disproportionality separately from compliance with
environmental standards. For example, EPA could
be authorized to deny or establish conditions for a
permit when the affected community already was
subjected to pollution levels exceeding those faced
by other communities without evidence of
noncompliance. A third way, which has been of
special interest to the work of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, to take environmental justice into
account in permitting would be to consider EPA's
authority to use its permitting leverage to build
enforcement capacity within the community.
Mr. Lazarus next summarized the memorandum's
conclusions about EPA Appeals Board decisions it
examined related to environmental justice. He
identified two areas of concern: the tendency of EPA
to develop its legal positions within an adversarial
context and of the lack of resources to support
appeal of cases on the part of environmental justice
plaintiffs. Mr. Lazarus also stated however, that the
decisions indicate some possibility that existing
statutory authority offers the potential for EPA to
consider environmental justice in permit decisions.
Finally, Mr. Lazarus summarized the section of the
memorandum that surveys several environmental
laws to identify open-ended statutory language
capable of supporting EPA's use of its permitting
authority to address environmental justice concerns.
Mr. Lazarus described several clauses that he
thought were promising, including sections of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Clean Air
Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Safe Prinking
Water Act. He also stated that he had examined the
statutory provisions governing EPA's monitoring and
inspection authority and discovered two provisions
2-4
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
that he believed EPA could use to build enforcement
capacity within communities.
Ms. Ferris noted that the appointment of a
community representative as a monitor is consistent
with policy recommendations her organization has
made to EPA. She explained that her organization
and EPA have discussed the establishment of
independent on-site monitors to verify for the
community and workers that companies are
conducting business in compliance with applicable
laws and regulations. Mr. Lazarus responded that he
believes there is great potential to design
mechanisms that allow the community to oversee
compliance with the permit. He cited an example in
the Clean Air Act under which a facility could be
required as a condition of a permit to, provide
resources to the community, perhaps in the form of
training. ,
Mr Lazarus then said that he had not analyzed the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to identify
opportunities for the inclusion of environmental
justice issues, but added that EPA is researching the
issue. Mr. Lazarus said that, when he receives the
EPA analysis of environmental justice and the NEPA
process, formal discussion can take place. Ms. Mary
O'Lone, EPA Office of General Counsel, stated that
the analysis, of NEPA and environmental justice
issues would be ready for distribution in
approximately one week. Mr. Ray recommended
that the NEPA analysis should be shared with the
entire subcommittee.
Ms. Ferris asked whether additional analysis of
NEPA Was necessary, particularly in light of the
applicability of the statute to the Louisiana Energy
Services case. She also asked whether a separate
work group should be established to examine NEPA.
The subcommittee decided that because the NEJAC
planned to examine NEPA issues and because
guidance is being developed by the White House
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), ho work
group on the issue was necessary.
Mr. Lazarus requested that EPA consider the issues
identified in his memorandum, saying that language
in existing statutes is just one way through which
EPA can address environmental justice issues. He
said that the Solid Waste Disposal Act already
includes regulatory language that justifies EPA's
authority to address environmental justice issues.
He suggested that perhaps EPA should reinterpret
its reading of the statutes to determine the authority
each grants. He requested that the subcommittee
comment on the memorandum he prepared and that
it be provided to representatives of EPA.
Mr. McDermott commended the quality of Mr.
Lazarus'-memorandum and stated that industry
would be very supportive of permit integration. Mr.
McDermott said that permit integration brings greater
certainty to the permitting and site selection process;
uncertainties, he added, are difficult for industry to
deal with.
Ms. Ferris said that milestones for reviewing the
memorandum should be established and that the
subcommittee should meet with OGC and the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ) concerning the issues
identified in the memorandum. The subcommittee
then agreed to the establishment of a deadline of.
July 8, 1996 for submitting comments on Mr.
Lazarus' memorandum. Ms. Ferris suggested that
the agency integration work group be renamed the
Permitting Process work group.
Mr. Ray announced that he had received a concept
paper about improving the permitting process from a
permits improvement team led by Mr. Elliott Laws,
Assistant Administrator, EPA Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response (OSWER)/ He noted that
the paper had little to do with environmental justice.
Mr. Ray explained that the paper covers general
permits, compliance assistance, pollution prevention,
and.the establishment of benchmarks. He asked for
a report on EPA's activities in those areas. Ms.
Ferris commented that the permit improvement team
has been active for about two years and that,the
team did encourage participation from individuals
from outside the Agency!
-3.4 Work Group on the Policy on
Supplemental Environmental Projects
The subcommittee discussed the progress of the
workgroup on the policy on supplemental.
environmental projects (SEP) of which Mr. Lazarus
is the chair.
Mr. Lazarus expressed an interest in preparing a
legal memorandum discussing EPA's authority
related to SEPs. He,stated his belief that EPA is
.interpreting its authority too narrowly and is being too
conservative. Ms. Ferris asked the subcommittee
whether the work group on the SEP policy should
continue. Mr. Ray suggested that Mr. Lazarus
prepare a memorandum outlining specific
recommendations to the subcommittee. The
subcommittee then agreed to dissolve the work
group.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
2-5
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
3.5 Enforcement Roundtable Task Force
Ms. Ferris opened the discussion by stating that the
subcommittee should consider establishing a task
force that is committed to planning enforcement
roundtable discussions of enforcement agreements
between EPA and the states and between EPA
Headquarters and the EPA regional offices.
Ms. Ferris added that the task force should proceed
as a means through which the subcommittee can
help enhance community influence upon regional
and state enforcement agreements and state
performance partnerships. Ms. Ferris added that
EPA intends to reduce oversight of states if states
reach certain benchmarks. Under performance
partnership agreements, she stressed the
importance of obtaining the community's views on
the agreements. After further discussion, the
subcommittee voted to establish an Enforcement
Roundtable Task Force, and agreed to schedule a
conference call to discuss the feasibility of
establishing regional roundtable meetings. Mr.
Lazarus stated that he hoped that Mr. Graver
Hankins, Texas Southern University and member of
the subcommittee, would serve as the chair of the
Enforcement Roundtable Task Force.
3.6 Review of Action Items
Ms. Ferris led a discussion of action items that had
been identified at the previous meeting of the
subcommittee in December 1995. Selected action
items and recommendations are summarized below.
Recommend that EPA(OSRE) develop criteria
for delegation of the Superfund program to
qualified states and ask that EPA share its
analyses of Congressional legislation.
Ms. Harvell distributed a copy of the memorandum
prepared by Mr. Timothy Fields, Deputy AA for
OSWER in which he discuss.es the criteria for the
delegation of the program to qualified states. Ms.
Harvell reported that the memorandum states that
the establishment of such criteria currently is "on
hold." She added that several states participate in
the work group established by Mr. Fields to address
delegation issues.
Ms. Ferris said that her organization had raised the
issue of establishing criteria for delegation of
Superfund to ensure that equal protection is
addressed. It is rumored that many states may not
want responsibility for implementing Superfund
because they do not have the funds to run the
program, she said.
Recommend that EPA's Office of Site
Remediation Enforcement brief the Waste
and Facility Siting and the Public Participation
and Accountability subcommittees about
issues related to Superfund administrative
reform and enforcement.
Ms. Ferris recommended that material presented at
the December 1995 meeting of the subcommittee
by Ms. Linda Boomazian, Director of OSRE's Policy
and Program Evaluation Division, be shared with
the other subcommittees.
Coordinate briefing on Common
Initiative (CSI) forNEJAC
Sense
Ms. Ferris clarified the action item, stating that it
refers to a briefing on the interaction between CSI,
EPA's Project XL, EPA's environmental leadership
program (ELP), and ISO 14000. Specifically, she
added, the briefing should discuss their
interrelationship and the extent of public
participation in the projects. Ms. Ferris explained
that ELPs should enable communities to monitor
industries selected to participate in these types of
programs, thus assisting EPA in the enforcement
process.
Additional action items reviewed include distribution
of a series of fact sheets prepared by EPA's Office of
Regulatory Enforcement (ORE), and which had been
circulated at the national enforcement conference.
Ms. Robin Lancaster, ORE, requested comments
from the Enforcement Subcommittee and suggested
that a conference call be arranged to discuss the
comments. Ms. Harvell suggested that the group
provide comments on the handouts by July 8,1996.
ORE was requested to follow-up with the
subcommittee to establish a conference call.
A copy of the report prepared by the Health and
Research Subcommittee was distributed to the
members of the Enforcement Subcommittee. The
Health and Research Subcommittee asked that the
Enforcement Subcommittee review the enforcement
section of the report.
\
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES
RELATED TO ENFORCEMENT
This section summarizes the discussion of the
subcommittee about issues related to enforcement.
Presented below is the discussion of enforcement
2-6
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
roundtables, EPA and state roles in enforcement,
and issues related to polychlorinated biphehyls
(PCB)V L -
4.1 Regional Enforcement Roundtables
Mr. Herman stated that he does not view the
.proposed roundtable meetings as a substitute for
taking enforcement actions when it is appropriate.
He said that such meetings would have the
additional value of providing opportunities for
resolving issues by bringing an informed community
together with industry to make decisions. Mr.
Herman asked that the subcommittee share its ideas
on the structure and content for the proposed
regional enforcement roundtables:
Ms. Ferris stated that direct community involvement
in the planning of the meeting is essential. She
pointed to the NEJAC Brownfields public dialogues
as an example of one effort to solicit community
views on EPA's Brownfields program. She noted
that each city on the tour had been selected by a
committee comprised of members of the NEJAC
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee, local
environmental groups, and the EPA staff of OSWER.
Ms, Ferris added that in preparing for the recent
Superfurid Relocation Roundtable held in Pensacola,
Florida, community organizations took the lead in
making sure that key community organizations were
invited. In addition, the meeting included a site tour
to increase awareness of the problems in Pensacola.
In response to Ms. Ferris' comments about previous
recommendations of the subcommittee for the
development of pilot projects that would solicit input
from communities about enforcement agreements
and state performance partnership agreements, Mr.
Herman stated that the subcommittee should
determine how the roundtables can provide the
opportunity for the Agency to "hear community
views."
Mr. Herman added that inviting representatives of
industry to participate in the meeting could help to
start a dialogue between companies, communities,
and the regulatory agencies. Such a dialogue, he
noted, could help to resolve issues more quickly and
help to avoid litigation. Ms. Christine Benally, Dine
CARE, stated that, to avoid intimidating members of
the public, the initial meeting should take place
without the presence of representatives of
companies invo)ved in enforcement actions. She1
stated that such companies can become involved
later in the process. Mr. Herman agreed about
seeking the participation of appropriate
representatives; he pointed to the need to have the
local manager of a plant, rather than a legal
representative of the company, attend the meeting.
Mr. Ray commented that members of affected
communities must understand what the meetings are
intended to accomplish; otherwise they will not
participate in them, he said. He suggested that EPA
could use the roundtable meetings to convey to the
communities information about enforcement issues
within the local area. He also noted that EPA's
Enforcement Targeting and Evaluation Branch could
provide information that might be helpful in deciding
where to hold the enforcement roundtable meetings,
as well as to identify pertinent information about local
facilities. Mr. McDermott stated that the use of
mapping softwa're packages, such as LandView II, is
extremely valuable because it illustrates the
aggregation of industry in a single area.
&
Noting that organizing a meeting involves more than
logistics,- Ms. Pamela Tau-Lee, University of
California, recommended that EPA consider using
the model plan for public participation that had been
developed by the NEJAC Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee (See Chapter 6,
Section 3.1, for a discussion of the model plan).
Naklera Clark, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
commented that the EPA may be able to access the
network established by the DOJ as part of its
community relations service. The speaker explained
that DOJ operates several field offices in which the
staff know key people in communities and in
industry. .
Ms. Ferris suggested that the subcommittee discuss
the proposed mechanics of developing the
enforcement roundtables. In addition, she stated
that because of feedback from committees
concerning EPA Region 4 and issues related to.
meeting community needs, a city located in that
region might be a good location in which to hold the
first roundtable meeting. Ms. Ferris requested that
OECA inform the subcommittee's new enforcement
roundtable task force about budget and other issues
that will affect the time frame for conducting the
meetings.
4.2 National Environmental Performance
Partnership System
Mr. Herman provided an update on the status of
EPA's efforts to implement performance partnership
agreements with state's. He stressed that EPA
Administrator Carol Browner has committed to
ensuring that public participation is a central part of
the performance partnership agreements. Mr.
Herman added that combined performance
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
2-7
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
partnership grants recently were approved to give
the states more flexibility in achieving the objectives
of the environmental performance agreements which
are to focus on results and create incentives for
improved performance. Mr. Ray suggested that EPA
should inform communities about the availability of
such grants. Mr. Ray requested copies of the state
performance partnership agreements. See Exhibit 2-
3 for a description of the national environmental
performance partnership system.
In response to Mr. Ray's question about the role to
be played by states in regional roundtable meetings,
Mr. Herman responded that EPA involvement in
state enforcement actions does not indicate that the
state is failing in its enforcement responsibilities.
Stating that EPA attempts to include state personnel
in enforcement activities, Mr. Herman provided two
examples where EPA worked with a state on
Exhibit 2-3
NATIONAL ENVmONMENTAL
PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIP
SYSTEM
EPA and the states have proposed the national
environmental performance partnership system,
the long-range goals of which are to "provide
strong public health and environmental protection
by .developing a system where the states and
USEPA can work together for continuous gams in
environmental quality and productivity."
Comprehensive regional/state agreements, called
environmental performance agreements, are used
as the principle mechanism to accomplish this
goal.
Concurrent with this effort to reform its approach
to oversight of its environmental programs, EPA
has entered into a series of agreements that allow
states to consolidate multiple grants from EPA
into combined Performance Partnership grants.
The goals of the combined grants is to focus on
environmental results, create incentives for
improved performance, allow flexibility for
achieving these objectives, and enhance
accountability to the public.
Currently EPA has signed performance
agreements with six states. Although the current
state performance partnership agreements are for
one year, EPA plans to extend the period to two
years to allow for better planning.
enforcement actions. Mr. Herman commented that
if the performance partnership process is conducted
correctly, it should deal with many of the problems
that arise when working with states. He added that
it is important to understand the reciprocal nature of
the partnerships.
Mr. Herman reported that, in response to requests
from the EPA regional offices, OECA had released a
paper that describes the federal role in enforcement.
(A copy of the paper was distributed to the members
of the subcommittee).
Mr. Herman also indicated that there should be
extensive comment from communities about the
strengths and weaknesses of the proposed
agreements. Ms. Ferris observed that it is essential
to have state enforcement people discuss with the
community and EPA what their priorities are for
enforcement.
4.3 Issues Related to the Importation of PCBs
Mr. McDermott presented information about a
recently issued rule concerning the importation of
PCB waste and PCB-contaminated items. He
explained that the new rule governs imports from
Canada and Mexico and other countries with which
the United States has signed a bilateral agreement.
He added that EPA expects to publish in the fall of
1996, a new rule that will establish new standards for
the management of PCBs. See Exhibit 2-4 for a
description of the rule .
Mr. McDermott described a situation involving PCB-
licensed facilities in Texas. Noting that only five
facilities in the country are licensed to receive and
dispose of PCB waste, he requested the
subcommittee's comment on the siting of one such
facility in Port Arthur, Texas. Mr. McDermott briefly
described the demographics of the area in the
vicinity of the facility and reported that he had been
told that the facility is an example of environmental
injustice. He requested that the group review the
information because, he said, he does not see how
that conclusion was reached. He indicated that Mr.
Hankins had described the siting of the facility as a
"racially charged situation.
Mr. McDermott reported he had prepared LandView
II maps of all of the PCB facilities in the country and
recommended that the group review and discuss the
maps at the next meeting of the NEJAC. Ms. Ferris
agreed that the subcommittee should discuss the
issue at the next meeting of the NEJAC.
2-8
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
Exhibit 2-4
FINAL RULE ON THE IMPORTATION
OF PCBS FOR DISPOSAL
On March 18, 1996, EPA published a final rule
governing the importation of PCBs that are
destined for disposal. The rule reverses an
important ban that was implemented 16 years
ago. Under the final rule, companies that
import PCB waste and PCB-contaminated items
must notify EPA's enforcement office 45 days
before the first shipment .enters the United
States. .
Because the United States is not a signatory to
the Basel Convention on the Control of
Transbbundary Movements of Hazardous
Wastes and Their Disposal, only.'those countries
with which the United States has signed a
bilateral agreement can ship PCB wastes to
disposal sights in the United States. The United
States has signed bilateral agreements with
Canada, Mexico, and the member countries of
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
5.0 PRESENTATIONS
This section summarizes the presentations that were
made to the Enforcement Subcommittee. The,
presentations included reports on EPA public
dialogues ori worker protection, efforts to target
enforcement, issues related to enforcement
guidance, and an update on EPA enforcement of
Title VI of the CivilRights Act.
5.1 Report on Public Dialogues on Worker
Protection
Members of the NEJAC International Subcommittee
joined the Enforcement Subcommittee for the
presentation (See Chapter 5, Section 1.0 for a list of
the members of the International Subcommittee.)
' ' ' \
Ms. Cathy Kronopolus, Chief of the Certification and
Occupational Safety Branch," EPA Office of Pesticide
Programs (OPP), provided a briefing on the public
dialogues on worker protection. Ms. Kronopolus
reported that her office is responsible for the
implementation of worker protection standards and
certification of pesticide applicators. Ms.
Kronopolus reported that EPA has scheduled; ten
public dialogue meetings on EPA's Worker
Protection Standard; three meetings have been held
to date, she stated. Ms. Kronopolus explained that
the purpose of the worker protection public dialogues
is for EPA to hear the general perceptions of the
people who are affected by the standard. She added
that EPA also wants to provide people who are
affected by the standard an opportunity to meet to
discuss the issues. Medical professionals, farm
workers or their representatives, and growers can
use the opportunity to reconcile differences of
opinion, she stated. Ms. Kronopolus said that EPA
also wants to identify the areas of worker protection
which are most in need of attention.
Ms. Kronopolus stressed that Ms. Lynn Goldman,
Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of
Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances
1 (OPPTS), had provided strong support for the public
dialogues. She said that either a deputy or associate
deputy of OPPTS will participate in all the efforts
related to worker protection issues and that OPP is
working within EPA and with Washington D.C, -
based organizations .that represent or have
representation from farm workers, chemical
manufacturers, and growers. Ms. Kronopolus
explained that biweekly conference calls are held
with the worker protection standard coordinators
located in each EPA regional office.
Ms. Kronopolus provided the Enforcement
Subcommittee with a schedule for the public
dialogues on worker protection. She indicated .that"
it has been difficult to involve large numbers of
people in the meetings, which were held in
Winterhaven, Florida; Stoheville, Mississippi; and
McAIIen, Texas. The meetings are held in the <
evening, Ms. Kronopolus explained, usually on a '
Wednesday or a Thursday, from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00
p.m. Registration begins at 5:00 p.m. The day after
each meeting, EPA wqrks with local organizations to
visit sites, including fields, offices, and other places
for which the community identified issues. She said
that Puerto Rico had been added to the meeting
schedule after a discussion with Mr. Richard Moore,
chair of the NEJAC, and Mr. Baldemar Velasquez,
chair of NEJAC's International Subcommittee and
Director of the Farm Labor Organizing Committee.
Ms. Kronopolus. stated that extensive outreach
materials were developed through public-private
partnerships, but that EPA does not know how
effective the putreach and communication efforts
were. She said that chemical, manufacturers had
donated $1 million for the costs of printing the
materials and that agricultural extension agents from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture also participated
in the effort. She indicated that the outreach
materials focused on basic pesticide training
information.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
2-9
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Ms. Kronopolus summarized several themes that
had emerged from the public dialogues. First, she
said that there is much misunderstanding about the
requirements established by the worker protection
standard. Farm workers think it can do more for
them than the regulations require, she stated. She
discussed, as an example, workers who said that
they were not provided personal protective
equipment (P.P.E.) before entering a field that had
been sprayed with fertilizer. She said that although
there are standards that specify when people can
enter fields after they have been sprayed with
pesticide, the provision of P.P.E. is not required.
She further explained that, workers in a field must be
supplied paper towels, soap, and water for 30 days
after a field has been treated or within a certain
period of time after a reentry interval - a
predetermined period of time during which workers
may not enter a field after the application of
pesticides. Growers continue to believe these
supplies must be available even when workers are
not present.
Ms. Kronopolus then discussed the need for
improved access to information. She indicated that
the American Medical Association had prepared a
resolution on the issue. In addition, she said, OPP is
updating the "Morgan Manual" that explains how to
recognize and treat pesticide poisonings.
According to Ms. Kronopolus, the third theme that
emerged from the public dialogues is the need for
updating incident monitoring systems by state
agencies.
Ms. Kronppolus then stated that EPA must work with
other federal agencies to simplify regulations that
affect workers. She explained that it is difficult for
the agricultural community to determine which
requirements fall under the jurisdiction of the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA), which fall under the Worker Protection
Standard, and which fall under other laws and
regulations.
Ms. Kronopolus reported that her office had funded
small organizations to conduct training. She
indicated that the typical funding amount had been
$25,000, although larger groups could obtain grants
as much as $100,000. Ms. Kronopolus stated that
Americorps had performed extensive training in
support of the rule. She stated that some grantees
conduct pre-test and post-test training to determine
the effectiveness of the training, adding "that the
training uses tools that are not biased. For example,
the training methods should take into account how
much education the individual being trained has had.
Ms. Kronopolus pointed out that the pre- and post-
testing does not determine how long the individual
retains the information.
) ' . "."''.-
Ms. Kronopolus indicated that OPP would like to
perform a quantitative analysis of the rule's
effectiveness; however, she said, EPA does not have
the authority to require reporting, so achieving that
purpose has been difficult.
Ms. Kronopolus stated that OPP also funds
workshops for growers in which the worker protection
standards are explained and the growers are
informed about how to comply with the standards.
She explained that OPP would like to fund another
initiative to help states improve incident monitoring
systems (surveillance systems) already have in
place. She also indicated that, because public
meetings do not provide the best opportunity for
interactive dialogue, OPP would like to establish
focus groups in response to the results of public
meetings.
Ms. Kronopolus concluded her presentation by
saying that the public dialogues have provided EPA
the opportunity to identify the interests that farm
workers, growers, and other interested parties have
in common.
Mr. Velasquez commented that organized farm
workers view the application of many chemicals as
unacceptable. He commented that the fact that EPA
licensed those chemicals does not mean that
workers and workers' groups approve. There is no
acceptable risk in terms of pesticide exposure, he
said. Mr. Velasquez said that enforcement is
necessary; however, training and oversight of
enforcement of regulations are inadequate, .he
stated. He said further that the training has been
ineffective because it does not empower the workers
to do something with th§ information provided them
or to do something about the injustices that are being
done to them. Mr. Velasquez said that the
information that is provided in the training is not crop-
specific and that levels of toxicity are not discussed.
He recommended that growers conduct the training
because of the peculiar nature of the relationship
between growers and farm workers. He stressed the
importance of "thinking creatively to deal with this
problem from an enforcement perspective."
Mr. Velasquez recommended that EPA enter into
partnerships to recruit adjunct inspectors so that they
are not full-time employees of the agency so that the
inspectors can act on abuses. He said that the
2-10
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
NEJAC would be a good avenue for creating a model
program to pursue this approach. He concluded his
comments with the statement that local social
service agencies and Washington-based advocacy
groups cannot act because they do not have the
authority to do so.
Mr. Rex Tingle, AFL-CIO, asked how the meetings
and training sessions are announced. He suggested
that the hazard communication standard issued by
OSHA could provide a communication vehicle. He
also suggested that the subcommittee contact
international unions and other organizations which
may represent this category of worker to see how
they addressed this issue.
\
Ms. Mildred McClain, member of the International
Subcommittee and Citizens for Environmental
Justice, said that the information, and training are
crucial. She asked that Ms. Kronopolus explain how
the training is designed, what role farm workers
played in its design, and how the information
obtained from the workers was used to improve the
training process. Ms. McClain stressed the
importance of ensuring that EPA evaluate the need
for, and the effectiveness of, the materials. Ms.
Kronopolous responded that a wonV group was
formed to assist in the design of the training and
materials and that focus groups met to complete final
versions of the materials.
Ms. Tau-Lee commented that the EPA training needs
to be more interactive; she described the existing
training as very disempowering. She recommended
that the individuals who conduct the training be
trained in appropriate and effective delivery methods.
For example, more opportunities are needed for
workers to ask questions. She suggested that
participants can become empowered, for example, if
the farm workers themselves identify, and are trained
on, the pesticide to which they are exposed. She
added that the training needs to be made site-
specific and examples of specific pesticides and
fertilizers should be used so that workers can
differentiate among them. In conclusion, Ms. Tau-
Lee said that communication between workers and
growers should be improved and that the medical
community and local agencies should be part of that
improved communication.
Ms. Benally asked whether any Indian tribes had
been contacted about the public dialogues. She
cited as an example an agriculture cooperative that
conducted training that was too technical in content
for the participants. She also stressed the
importance of involving tribes and grassroots Native
American organizations in the public dialogues. Ms.
Kronopolus responded that one tribe had developed
a videotape on worker protection and that
cooperative agreements are in place with tribes;
however, the agreements deal primarily with issues
related to certified applicators and do hot focus on
the workers issues, she added.
Mr. Tingle pointed out three issues related to worker
protection: 1) the need to train the trainer, 2) the
need to train workers, and 3) the need to educate
growers. He commented that the issues are similar
to issues that the AFL-CIO faced in responding to the
increase of cases involving auto-immune deficiency
syndrome (AIDS).
5.2 Targeting of Enforcement
Mr. Rick Duffy, Chief, Targeting and Evaluation
Branch, Office of Compliance (OC), OECA, briefed
the subcommittee on enforcement targeting. Mr.
Duffy began by saying that targeting,of enforcement
resources is crucial, particularly in light of limited
enforcement resources. He said that OC is using
targeting analysis to influence decisions about the
selection of long-term priorities at the national level
and to assist in short-term decision making at the
field level. He indicated that OC is gathering large*
amounts of data that will serve as the baseline for
measuring the office's success in compliance and
enforcement success. He explained that OC is
examining efforts in different industry sectors to
measure noncompliance within sectors over time.
Mr. Duffy explained that OECA is working to ensure
that EPA has a solid analytical footing for all
targeting analysis so that it can meet challenges to
its methodologies while they might be lodged by
industry groups or corporations. He reported that
industry groups have already approached OC to
better understand the -factors that/EPA, employs to
make priority selections. *. ' .
Mr. Duffy also explained that a key part of OECA's
reorganization involved directing compliance
assistance and enforcement activities by industrial
sector. He emphasized the importance of deciding
early which sectors will be examined, so that the
selection of those sectors complements the MOU
that sets priorities for the next two years:
Mr. Duffy reported that OG is developing a process
for screening candidate facilities under the Project
XL program. Adding that maps have been prepared
using the ArcView software, he displayed several
maps that illustrated the demographics (based on
data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census) of the
areas in which the facilities are located. Mr. Duffy
stressed that OC would like to focus its limited
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
2-11
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
resources on the facilities that are most deserving of
enforcement action.
In response to questions from Mr. Lazarus about
how non-compliance is determined, Mr. Duffy
explained that noncompliance is determined from
notices of violations, enforcement actions, violations
of compliance agreements, and other items listed in
the individual systems that make up EPA's
Integrated Data for Enforcement Actions (IDEA)
system. Mr. Duffy said that, using the data, OECA
will identify the industrial sectors on which
compliance and enforcement resources should be
focused. He said that OECA also is evaluating
several relative risk models, so that relative risk can
be assessed for each sector. Exhibit 2-5 presents a
detailed description of the system.
Mr. Ray asked whether the data can show patterns
of violations. Mr Duffy said that it was possible to
show patterns of violations, but doing so would
require some manual sorting of the data.
Exhibit 2-5
INTEGRATED DATA FOR
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS (IDEA)
SYSTEM
EPA's Office of Compliance developed the
Integrated Data for Enforcement Actions
(IDEA) system to link various environmental
databases for a variety of media programs.
IDEA provides a comprehensive record for
each facility, with both general and media-
specific information. In addition, Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) codes are listed.
A separate program produces ranked lists of
facilities and provides reports that show
noncompliance over a two-year time frame.
Such reporting enables EPA to see how a
particular industry is performing, compared
with its obligations under the various
environmental statutes. This information is
expected to help EPA establish specific
enforcement priorities for the various EPA
regions, as well as for its national program
priorities.
The IDEA system has been made accessible to
the public through the National Technical
Information Service (NTIS). NTIS is a
function of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Mr. Duffy reported that OC incorporated data from
IDEA into geographic information system technology
and that, in response to the President's call to
reinvent government, OC staff had been evaluating
the use of risk models in agency decision making.
He reported that evaluations had been performed on
160 risk models. Six models are undergoing
intensive testing and evaluation and some or all
eventually may be accessible through IDEA.
Mr. McDermott asked whether IDEA could identify
geographic locations at which there are high levels of
emissions, numerous violations, and other such
events that occur. Mr. Duffy responded that IDEA
does not attach a census block identifier to each
facility, but the program contains information about
latitude, longitude, zip codes, and other identifiers.
He indicated that the system can perform an analysis
at the facility level, in a particular area defined by
county or zip code, or at the state level.
Mr. Duffy also reported that OC is working with EPA
on a "one-stop reporting" initiative. The purpose of
that initiative is to provide, in one place, all available
information to the public.
Ms. Benally asked whether information pertinent to
locations of tribal land was available and whether the
system included information about violations from the
U.S. Department of Interior's Office of Surface
Mining (OSM). Mr. Duffy responded that the system
does contain some information about the locations of
tribal lands, but that he did not know whether OC
could obtain other information from OSM.
Mr. Duffy also reported that OECA is studying
federal, industrial, and municipal facilities that have
contributed to damaging human health and aquatic
life. He explained that, as part of that effort, OECA
is studying fish advisories and is using data collected
from the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit Compliance System (PCS)
and the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) to establish a
link between the permit and the fish consumption
advisories. Ms. Benally asked whether the fish
consumption study, and other efforts would include
information from Indian tribes. She also stated that
it is important to maintain tribal sovereignty
throughout efforts to target enforcement activities.
Ms. Ferris asked if the EPA regional offices and
states are using the information to target facilities for
inspections or compliance assistance. Mr. Duffy
responded that his office provides national and
regional data to the regional offices for their
2-12
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
consideration. He indicated that the use of the data
varies among the regions. Stating that OSHA is
expected to provide a report on inspections, Ms.
Tau-Lee suggested that such information should be
included in IDEA.
Mr. McDermott stated that there seems to be
significant overlap between the LandView II mapping
program and ArcView. He pointed out that both are
data-dependent. He urged Mr. Duffy to communicate
with LandView II staff whenever there are new
developments in the IDEA system. Mr. Ray
indicated that,'at the state level, significant resources
are being devoted to mapping efforts and that
coordination is needed among the groups that are
undertaking that work.
5.3 Guidance Issues
Ms. Linda Bpomazian, Director, Policy and Program
Evaluation Division, OSRE, discussed issues related
to guidance. - Ms. Boornazian explained that
Superfund currently is being reauthorized and that
OSRE soon would issue guidance related to
Superfund reform, including:
The establishment of ombudsmen in each
EPA region to serve as points of contact for,
the community about efforts to facilitate the
resolution of issues
New policy that doubles the number of cfe
micromis parties, or parties that have almost
no share of the responsibility - such parties
would be relieved of liability if they meet a
predetermined level and if the toxicity and
amount of waste is minimal, compared with
the total amount of waste at the site.
Decisions to classify a party as de micromis
must be published in the Federal Register
and a 30-day public comment period must be
provided, the classification of a party or
parties as de micromis can be accomplished
through a consent decree or an administrative
order.
» Interim policy on orphan share which
addresses one of the major criticisms of the
Superfund program - the goal of the policy is
to develop a system of assigning liability that
would not cause excessive litigation. Even
though Superfund has not been reauthorized,
OECA recognizes that many interested
parties believe that the Superfund trust fund
should pay a larger share of cleanup costs.
The interim policy was developed so that
cleanups would not be delayed by activities to
search for potentially responsible parties
(PRP).
Under the interim policy, if a group of parties
can show that there are insolvent companies
involved in the settlement, EPA would support
them by paying approximately 15 to 25
percent of the cost of cleaning up past
contamination. OECA has completed tests
through the pilot-study phase of conducting
PRP searches. OECA has shared
information with PRPs in order to complete
PRP search efforts. EPA expects to offer
over $50 million in compensation this year to
speed up cleanups by assuring that financially
insolvent polluters are no longer potential
obstacles to settlement agreements.
Guidance on reduced oversight for
cooperative parties which demonstrates that
EPA is willing to establish a nontraditional
relationship with parties that are cooperative.
A cooperative party is one that has technical
capability, is timely in completing activities,
submits high-quality technical products to
EPA, has performed well in laboratory and
field audits, is in compliance with the
- settlement document, and follows through on
1 verbal commitments to EPA. Ms. Han/ell
distributed copies of the oversight guidance
and requested that comments on it be
provided to her by June 7,1996.
> EPA anticipates that a certain percentage
reduction of .oversight will be put into effect;
some of the EPA regional offices already
have begun to practice reduced oversight.
However, reduced oversight may not be
appropriate at all sites - for example, at a.
technically complex site. EPA will work with
communities and PRPs in implementing the
new guidance. The guidance also suggests
: the type of reductions the EPA regional
offices should consider, such as reducing
reductions in the number of field visits or the
number of deliverables required.
Questions and comments that followed Ms.
Boornazian's presentations are outlined below.
Mr. Ray asked how EPA obtains the opinions of
communities about whether the project'or facility
should be considered for reduced oversight. He
stressed that the community should be involved in
any decision to reduce the level of oversight. Ms.
Boornazian commented that public meetings are
held on remedy selection and other cleanup issues.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
2-13
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
She said that companies want to be recognized in
some way for being cooperative and that reduced
oversight is one way of providing that recognition.
Ms. Boomazian asked for comment on the policy
from the subcommittee, with regard to language to
be added that addresses involvement. of the
community in such decisions. Ms. Ferris commented
that she objects to what she perceives to be the
philosophy of the policy, that is, giving credit to
companies that are cooperating with EPA as an
incentive. Ms. Ferris asked how, in the case of a
company that is "super cooperative" but continues to
"poison thousands or is in some other negative
situation," such behavior affects decisions about
reducing oversight.
Ms. McDermott suggested that these administrative
reforms are being initiated against the backdrop of a
Congress that has been unable to reauthorize the
statute. He said that he believes the purpose of the
reforms is to streamline cleanup, to better use scarce
resources, including feedstock taxes and Superfund
taxes. He suggested that much of what companies
are dealing with now is the result of the way wastes
were handled in this country from 1950-1980. Not all
companies, he said, deserve to be denigrated.
5.4 Update on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
Mr. Rodney Cash, Associate Director, Discrimination
Complaints and External Compliance Staff, Office of
Civil Rights (OCR), provided an update on compliant
processing activities under Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964.
Mr. Cash distributed a report summarizing the
complaints that have been received by OCR. He
noted that twelve complaints have been rejected for
a variety of reasons, including no financial
assistance provided by EPA to the alleged
discriminator; insufficient allegations to make out a
complaint; lack of timeliness; and no factual basis
with to respect of key facts put forth in support of the
allegations. Mr. Cash reported that eleven
complaints are under investigation; five complaints
are under review for acceptance for investigation or
rejection; and four investigations have been
completed with draft findings under review in OCR.
Ms. Ferris asked Mr. Cash how many attorneys in his
office focus specifically on Title VI claims and
requested that he describe the kind of experience
those attorneys have. Mr. Cash explained that the
Complaints Resolution and External Compliance Unit
has four full-time equivalent (FTE) employees
allocated to its External Compliance program, which
focuses almost exclusively on Title VI. Mr. Cash
stated that three of these positions are filled and one
is vacant. In fiscal year 1994, when EPA provided
four FTEs to OCR for conducting Title VI complaint
investigations, one attorney had prior Title VI
experience, and all four attorneys had prior
environmental program experience at EPA. He
responded that two years ago only one attorney had
previous Title VI experience. Ms. O'Lone added that
they have been working almost exclusively on Title
VI and environmental justice issues for the past two
years. Further, the environmental program
knowledge and experience they possess is valuable,
since Title VI is being applied to these programs.
Moreover, since Title VI, applied in the environmental
context is so new, the attorneys in OCR and OGC
are among the most experienced in the area, she
said.
Ms. Ferris asked Mr. Cash to describe the office's
relationship with OGC. Mr. Cash responded that his
office works closely with OGC's environmental
justice coordinator, Ms. O'Lone. Ms. Ferris asked
Ms. O'Lone how many people in OGC work on Title
VI issues and whether or not those individuals have
had training in that area of the law. Ms. O'Lone
responded that a majority of her time is spent on Title
VI issues and her environmental justice contacts in
other OGC divisions also work on Title VI issues that
arise in their program areas. She said that there had
been no official training for staff in OGC on Title VI
issues, although there have been informal training
sessions such as brownbag lunches.
Ms. Ferris asked Mr. Cash whether the agency had
issued guidance on Title VI. Ms. O'Lone stated that
no such guidance had been issued yet.
Mr. McDermott raised the issue of clarifying the
boundaries and interrelationship between
environmental statutes and Title VI. Mr. Cash
responded that Title VI is an independent statute.
He reported that OCR is working through a work
group to clarify how the Civil Rights Act applies
specifically to environmental statutes. He indicated
that his office believes that the act applies broadly to
environmental statutes.
When Mr. Ray asked if Title VI governs a, state's
allocation of enforcement resources, Mr. Cash said
that it does. Ms. O'Lone added that a complaint
about state and city enforcement currently is under
investigation.
2-14
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
Mr. McDermott asked about the application of Title VI
to the permitting of hazardous waste sites. Mr. Cash '
responded that the rationale applied is that because
it is a private applicant who is selecting the site,
siting is not covered by the act. However, permitting
is covered, he said, because the state makes the
decision whether to grant the permit.
Mr. Ray asked Mr. Cash if there are specific
elements that OCR looks for to determine if there is
a disproportionate impact of a state's administration
of the Title VI law and guidelines for selecting cases.
Mr. Cash responded by saying that such criteria,
based on case law and complaints that are being
processed, are under development. In response to
Mr. Ray's question about trends, Ms. O'Lone said
that the complaints deal mostly with allegations
about discriminatory effects of permitting decisions
and arise mainly in the RCRA arid air permitting
contexts. Many of the complaints are filed against
states that are in EPA Regions 4, 5, and 6.
Ms. Bennally added that communities need guidance
on filing a complaint. Ms. O'Lone responded that
there is a pamphlet available that provides
information about filing a complaint. Mr. Cash
agreed to provide the subcommittee copies of the
pamphlet. ,
Mr. Ray asked Mr. Cash whether anything could be
provided that would assist OCR in accomplishing its
job. Mr. Cash said that OCR needs the continued
cooperation of OGC and the program offices in
developing guidance for EPA financial recipients and
additional staffing resources to shoulder the growing
case load, provide guidance and training for
stakeholders, and continue program development.
Ms. Tau Lee commented that Title VI actions can
help to identify potential environmental problems in
prisons that are attempting to cut budgets. For
example, she said, the definition of the misuse of
pesticides and disinfectants as discriminatory
conduct might be a factor in such cases.
Mr. Ray asked Mr, Cash to describe OCR's
relationship with the EPA regional offices. Mr. Cash
responded that, when regional offices receive Title VI
or environmental justice complaints, they refer those
complaints to EPA Headquarters. For processing on
a case by case basis, the regional offices may assist
in collecting information and data, but > the
responsibility for investigating the complaints lies
with OCR. '
Ms. Benally asked whether the sovereign status of
tribes and human rights issues are addressed in
OCR's guidance to the states. Mr. Cash responded
that OCR currently does not have on file any
complaints on behalf of Indian tribes. Ms. O'Lone
reported that two complaints have been filed against
tribes by landholders. She said that Title VI applies
in cases in which there is discrimination based on
race, color, or national origin. Ms. O'Lone added-that
in certain circumstances, depending on the source of
funding EPA may investigate Title VI complaints
against tribes.
Ms. Ferris, asked about OCR's handling of other laws
related to civil rights. Mr. Cash responded that
OCR's external compliance encompasses Section
504 of trie Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of
the Americans With Disabilities Act (disability);
Section 13 of the 1972 Amendments to the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act and Title IX of the
Education --Amendments of 1972 (sex); the Age
Discrimination Act of 1975 (age); as well as Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (race, color, and
national origin). Except for t^ie Title VI and
environmental justice claims, the EPA regions have
responsibility for processing external compliance
complaints through the investigative stage. He
added that the regional Equal Employment
Opportunity (EEO) officer carries out these external
complaint responsibilities. Regarding Title VI and
regional coordination, Ms. O'Lone reported that OGC
holds monthly environmental justice conference calls
with attorneys in the regional offices, OECA, and
OCR. She added that the attorneys in the regional
offices sometimes identify situations that may result
in Title VI complaints before they are filed.
Mr. Patrick Markey, DOJ, asked Mr. Cash about the
intermediate steps and time requirements after a
complaint has been filed. Mr. Cash responded that
the intermediate steps include:
Acknowledging receipt of the complaint within
five days
Reviewing the complaint to determine
whether it contains the prima facie elements
of an acceptable complaint within twenty days
Conducting the investigation within 180 days
after the complaint has been accepted,
Mr. Markey asked what is the ultimate remedy. Mr.
Cash explained that, if after investigation of the
allegations it is determined that discrimination has
.occurred, OCR makes a preliminary finding of
noncompliance with recommendations and seeks to
bring the recipient into compliance voluntarily. If
negotiations fail, there ensues a lengthy adversarial
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
2-15
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
process that includes an administrative hearing
before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). If the
ALJ affirms the OCR determination, the recipient
may appeal the decision to the EPA Administrator.
The Administrator may deny, annul, terminate, or
suspend assistance to the recipient. Mr. Cash said
that the last step before withdrawing federal funding
from a recipient is to notify the appropriate
Congressional oversight committees of the
noncompliance finding. He added that funding very
rarely is withdrawn from a recipient.
Ms. Ferris suggested that attorneys should be
provided training on Title VI. Ms. O'Lone indicated
that she has provided training to her regional
contacts; will convene a new work group, the
members of which will receive training on Title VI;
and will conduct later this summer a training session
for regional and Headquarters attorneys on Title VI.
Also, EPA and DOJ sponsored a two-day
environmental justice conference focusing on Title VI
and NEPA last spring, she said.
Mr. Herman noted that an attorney from DOJ had
been detailed to OCR to conduct that type of training,
but added that a more formal arrangement is
needed.
Mr. Ray added that he worked part-time in OCR and
that he understands the constraints on resources.
Mr. Cash observed that the individuals working in
OCR are dedicated to their work. When Ms. Ferris
asked Mr. Cash for recommendations for helping
move forward with civil rights work, Mr. Cash
responded that there are many demands on the Title
VI staff in the form of meetings, conferences, and
telephone inquiries. He noted that their work
involves cases of first impression and that work has
just begun on developing guidance for applying Title
VI to environmental programs. Mr. Cash asked that
the subcommittee review that guidance when EPA
submits it to the NEJAC. Mr. McDermott ended the
discussion with the suggestion that OCR hire a
public information officer.
2-16
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
-------
I
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 29 and 30,1996
Detroit, Michigan
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Lawrence Martin
Designated Federal Official
Robert Bullard
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER THREE
MEETING OF THE
HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Health and Research Subcommittee of the
. National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) conducted a two-day meeting on
Wednesday and Thursday, May 29 and 30, 1996,
during a three-day meeting of the NEJAC in Detroit,
Michigan. Mr. Robert Bullard, Clark Atlanta
University Center for Environmental Justice,
continues to serve as phair of the subcommittee. Mr.
Lawrence Martin, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development
(ORD), continues to serve as the Designated Federal
Official (DFO) for the subcommittee.
Exhibit 3-1 presents a list of the members who
attended the meeting and identifies those members
who were unable to attend.
This chapter, which provides a detailed discussion of
the deliberations of the Health and Research
Subcommittee, is presented in six sections, including
this Introduction. Section 2.0, Activities of the
Subcommittee, summarizes the subcommittees's
discussions about its activities, such as progress on
action items, identification of future goals, and the
development of a national forum. Section 3.0,
Environmental Justice Issues Related to Health and
Research, summarizes the discussions about issues
related to the public health care system; the Institute
of Medicine's (IOM) national environmental justice
study; the Interagency Work Group on Environmental
Justice (IWG); and the domestic use of mercury.
Section 4.0, Presentations, contains summaries of
presentations on various topics and provides a
summary of questions and comments from
members of the subcommittee. Section 5.0,
Summary of Public Dialogue, summarizes
discussions offered during the public dialogue period ,
provided by the subcommittee. Section 6.0,
Resolutions, summarizes the resolutions forwarded
to the NEJAC Executive Council.
2.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
The members of the Health and Research
Subcommittee discussed the activities of the
subcommittee which included a review of action
items; discussions about the future goals of the
subcommittee; and development of a national forum
to address concerns related to health and research.
Exhibit 3-1
HEALTH AND RESEARCH
SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 29 and 30, 1996
Mr. Robert Bullard, Chan-
Mr. Lawrence Martin, DFO
Ms., Sherry Salway-Black
Ms. Mary English
- Ms. Paula Gomez'*
Ms. Hazel Johnson
Mr. Andrew McBride
List of Members
Who Were Unable To Attend
Mr. Kekuni Blaisdell
Mr. Michael Pierle
Mr. Bailus Walker
* attended May 30, 1996 only
2.1 Review of Action Items
Mr. Martin led a discussion of the status of action
.items formulated by the subcommittee at its meeting
in December 1995. The discussions about, and
updates to, the most significant action items are
summarized below.
Follow up on the status of the draft OPPE
report, entitled, "Cumulative Exposure and
Environmental Justice"
Mr. Martin informed the subcommittee that he had
attempted to communicate with the contact person at
EPA's Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation
(OPPE) on several occasions but had been
unsuccessful. He suggested follow-up with OPPE
staff during the presentation to the NEJAC on May
30, 1996. ,
NEJAC urges EPA to fully review dissenting
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
3-1
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
opinions on the report entitled, "Putting the
Pieces Together Controlling the Lead
Hazards in the Nation's Housing" (prepared
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Task Force on Lead-
Based Paint Hazard Reduction and
Financing) before implementing any of the
recommendations in the report.
Mr. Andrew McBride, Stamford, Connecticut, Health
Department, reported that a letter had been drafted
urging EPA to fully review dissenting opinions on the
report, but that he was unsure whether it had been
sent to the EPA. He added that, since the meeting
of the subcommittee in December 1995, efforts had
been underway to revise guidelines prepared by the
Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP)
for setting maximum levels of lead in blood.
Because the guidelines .affect enforcement
decisions,- he said, it is unclear how the revisions
might affect the value or usefulness of
recommendations made in the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) report. Mr.
McBride said that, as a follow-up on the issue, he
had invited Ms. Megan Charlop, Lead Poisoning
Prevention Project, to present an overview of the
proposed revisions of guidelines on lead levels (See
Section 4.1, for a summary of Ms. Charlop's
presentation).
Require that the EPA report to Congress on
mercury emissions be made available to the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee.
Mr. Martin reported that, as of May 1996, EPA had
not released the report. In response to questions
about why the report had not been released, he
indicated that EPA is reviewing the validity of
scientific protocols for estimating exposures to
mercury which had been used in the study. After
further discussion, members of the subcommittee
suggested that the action item be followed up by
determining whether the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee is tracking the status of the report.
Coordinate with the U.S. Conference of
Mayors, on an invitation for elected officials to
speak to the subcommittee on public health
concerns identified by municipalities.
Mr. Martin said he had followed up on the invitation
but no elected official had been available to speak to
the subcommittee during the May 1996 meeting. Ms.
Mary English, University of Tennessee, suggested
that the subcommittee pursue contact with the U. S.
Conference of Mayors through a collaborative effort.
She explained that the Conference planned to
conduct a series of discussions to investigate issues
related to the Brownfields Initiative. Ms. English
proposed that the Health and Research
Subcommittee, or individual members of that
subcommittee, contact the Conference to determine
whether it might participate in the subcommittee
discussions. Mr. McBride supported this proposed
action and agreed to work with Mr. Charles Lee,
United Church of Christ Commission for Racial
Justice and chair of the NEJAC Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee, to establish contact with
elected officials of the Mayors Conference. Mr.
Martin agreed to contact staff at the Conference on
behalf of the subcommittee to discuss collaboration
on its upcoming discussions of the Brownfields
Initiative.
Send updated database of environmental
justice contacts to Mr. Chen Wen, PPD.
. Provide information to Mr. Wen on how EPA
can better reach grassroots organizations,
particularly in implementing PPD's
Environmental Justice Through Pollution
Prevention grants programs.
Mr. Bullard explained that he had not sent a copy of
his revised database to Mr. Chen Wen, EPA's
Pollution Prevention Division (PPD), because it
contained very few new environmental justice
contacts'. He stressed the need to generate a
comprehensive list or database of environmental
justice contacts, particularly for grassroots
organizations. Mr. Bullard recommended that the
subcommittee: 1) urge EPA's Office of
Environmental Justice (OEJ) to serve as the focal
point for the development of a comprehensive
database of environmental justice contacts, and 2)
suggest that OEJ provide updated environmental
justice mailing lists to any EPA office that issues
grants or requests for proposals that deal with
environmental justice. He then suggested that the
recommendations be drafted as a formal resolution
to be proposed to the NEJAC. (See Section 6.0,
Resolutions, fora summary of the resolution).
Track development of OPPT project on TRI
Environmental Indicators and request the
earliest available copy of Indicators Model for
the subcommittee to investigate potential
environmental justice issues.
Mr. Martin explained that he had planned to discuss
during the current meeting the status of software
development with Mr. Loren Hall, EPA's Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT).
3-2
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
Unfortunately, he explained, Mr. Hall had ~ been
unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Martin agreed to
follow-up on this action item, in whatever way the
subcommittee wished. In response, Mr. Bullard
mentioned that the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee also might be following up on the
status of the OPPT model. Mr. Bullard then agreed
to coordinate the tracking activities of the two
subcommittees.
Respond to an invitation from Amena Wilkins,
National Center for Environmental
Assessment, to provide comments on fts
project entitled "Identifying and Quantifying
Susceptible Populations."
Mr. Martin reported that he had contacted the
National Center for Environmental Assessment, and
was told that copies of the report had been sent to
members of the Health and Research Subcommittee
for their review and comments. Because none of the
members of the subcommittee said they had
received a copy of the report, Mr. Martin said he
would determine how and when the documents had
been mailed.
Determine whether EPA's AIEO can serve as
a clearinghouse for federal Request for
Proposals (RFP) on environmental justice,
particularly those addressing indigenous
peoples '
Mr. Martin reported that staff of EPA's American
Indian Environmental Office (AIEO) had expressed
a willingness to act as such a clearinghouse.
Currently, efforts are underway within EPA to
implement that action, Mr. Martin said. He agreed to
track the development of the clearinghouse.
Request status updates on EPA's
Environmental Justice Community
Partnership Pilot Project being conducted in
Baltimore, Maryland. .
Members of the subcommittee expressed continued
interest in the Baltimore project and requested
updates on the progress of the project during
subsequent meetings.
2.2 Future Goals of the Subcommittee
; .
Much of the discussions of the meeting centered on
identifying target areas for the future activities of the
Health and Research Subcommittee. Members of
the subcommittee debated on goals and objectives
of the subcommittee, research agenda items, .and
next steps. AS part of these deliberations members
of the subcommittee, presented a list of possible
themes or topic areas that the members of the
subcommittee could consider when formulating the
future direction of the subcommittee. .The topics
suggested include:
Research methods on both multiple and
cumulative risks
Research methods on assessing impacts on
small populations
Community-based or participatory research
on health and environmental risks
Research about key health risks that would
involve identification of risks, populations
affected, and direct and indirect health effects
Tools for information gathering and integration
New environmental justice research needs
and initiatives
Opportunities and barriers for funding
environmental justice research
Community education about health and
science
New health care policies and their
implications for disadvantaged populations
Members of the subcommittee generally agreed to
expand their activities beyond simply reviewing EPA .
documents toward pursuing more "action-oriented"
initiatives. In the discussion about the type of
initiatives the subcommittee should sponsor, two
distinct positions regarding the future direction of the
subcommittee became evident research versus
, more direct health-based action.
Ms. English summarized the research position by
explaining that the subcommittee's responsibilities
are not limited to the area of health. She stated that
she sees other areas, such as the erosion of social
and economic systems, as more obscure but equally
important factors that can lead to adverse health
impacts within the community. These impacts, Ms.
English explained, are not captured in the study of
direct health effects. She believes that to fully
understand all these impacts requires a change in
the research methods that are used to collect and
interpret data. Ms. English said that she regards
efforts to promote changes in the dominant research
methods as the best long-term strategy because it
effects thinking and policies that inevitably affect
environmental justice communities. Mr. Bullard also
voiced strong concerns that the future work of the
subcommittee should focus on efforts to modify
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
3-3
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
research methods to accommodate environmental
justice needs.
Mr. McBride did not agreed that the subcommittee
can affect research protocols. He contended that
policies regarding environmental justice, are not just
based on getting the best information to decision-
makers. How the scientific information is framed or
perceived often has more to do with the policies that
are implemented, he said. As an example, he cited
lead poisoning as a health concern that is well
documented with regard to how to prevent exposure,
yet childhood lead poisoning continues to be a
pervasive health problem, particularly within
environmental justice communities. Mr. McBride
called for work by the subcommittee on more
pragmatic areas. He advocates more direct work on
issues, particularly public health issues. He
commented that he wants to know the status of
efforts by EPA and other federal agencies to address
these key environmental health issues. Ms. Hazel
Johnson, People for Community Recovery, also
endorsed more direct action on community
environmental health issues. She expressed
frustration with continued research but no action to
address adverse conditions that continue to plague
environmental justice communities.
Ms. Salway-Biack supported work by the
subcommittee in the area of research methodologies,
but favored a more community-based focus. There
is a critical need, particularly among indigenous
peoples, she said, to have more knowledge about
research tools available to document environmental
problems in communities. Fostering community-
based research also will serve to expand the current
scientific model for environmental research, she said.
Other members of the subcommittee supported the
idea of encouraging participatory research but as a
secondary objective.
Mr. McBride suggested that if the desire is to develop
community-based research, then one must arm the
community with fundamental technical knowledge.
He advocates community education and training as
a means to involve the public in solving
environmental problems in their communities. Ms.
English agreed that improving education within the
community is important, but she reiterated that until
standard research methods are expanded,
environmental justice issues will not receive
appropriate attention. Mr. Bullard commented that
the issue of community-based research is not always
the concern of communities performing the research.
He explained that environmental research often is
conducted by "industrial [research] factories" without
any focus on seeking solutions for the problem. If
the research is done by local organizations and
universities, for example, there is more incentive to
focus on prevention, he said.
Ms. Clarice Gaylord, Director of EPA's OEJ, pointed
out that the IWG will meet in June 1996 and this
meeting will provide a good opportunity to coordinate
on many of these issues. She explained that
selected members of the NEJAC will meet with the
IWG and discuss key issues that the NEJAC
subcommittees have identified.
Mr. Martin concluded the discussion on future work
of the subcommittee by listing upcoming
opportunities for the subcommittee to address areas
of interest that they had identified. Opportunities
identified were:
Organization of a national forum on concerns
related to health and research
Interaction with the IOM to contribute to its
national environmental justice study
2.3
Provision of comments to the IWG
Development of National Forum on
Health and Research
Mr. Martin asked the members of the subcommittee
to identify the goals to be accomplished by an EPA-
sponsored forum on health and research. Members
of the subcommittee discussed possible topic areas
for the forum which reflected the themes identified
earlier (see Section 2.2 of this chapter for a list of the
themes). Framing the forum discussions around key
health issues was one option, but the general
consensus of subcommittee members was that
health-related issues would have a direct connection
with the IOM national study on environmental justice.
Health-related issues also could be an agenda item
for upcoming discussions between NEJAC and the
IWG, the members suggested.
Ms. Salway-Black said that her preference for a
national forum .would be to discuss alternative
indicators of risk.
Ms. English recommended that research methods for
cumulative risks and small populations also could
serve as an effective theme for a roundtable. This
theme, she suggested, would foster interaction
between people involved in the dominant and
alternative research communities. Mr. Martin
commented that cumulative risk is a "worrisome
3-4
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
issue" for many federal agencies and he anticipated
that this theme would attract many participants.
Such a forum also would provide an opportunity for
OPPE to present its cumulative exposure project.
He added that assessing small populations brings in
the environmental justice issues. . . .
Mr. McBride said that he does not fully understand
how examining cumulative risks and small
populations specifically addresses the issues of
environmental justice. He asked why the forum
could not more directly focus on environmental
justice and explicitly address how environmental
injustice affects development of policy. Mr. Bullard
responded that disparate impacts, different
. exposures, and differential access to tools serves to
perpetuate environmental justice problems. He said
that the design of the forum, in terms of structure and
stakeholders, will ensure an open and frank
discussion of environmental justice issues. Ms.
English added that by avoiding a direct reference to
environmental justice some participants may be
attracted who otherwise might not attend. They will
come because the themes of the forum are important
in their work and in the course of the forum they will
hear different viewpoints, she explained.
After further discussions, the subcommittee agreed
that the forum should address research methods.
Key agenda items identified for the forum included:
Cumulative and multiple risks
Assessing risks to small populations
Community-directed research
Tools for information and integration
Cross-cutting themes such as how research
is initiated
Ms. English and Mr. Bullard volunteered to draft a
statement summarizing plans for the national forum.
They drafted a description of the proposed forum
which the subcommittee modified slightly and
unanimously adopted to present to the NEJAC for
their consideration (see Section 6.0, Resolutions, of
this chapter for a summary of the resolution).
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES
RELATED TO HEALTH AND RESEARCH
This section of the report summarizes the
discussions of the subcommittee about
environmental justice issues related to health and
research. The discussions focused on: challenges to
the public health care system; interaction with IOM
on the design and scope of its national study of
environmental justice research, education, and
environmental health policy needs; provision of
comments to the IWG; and domestic use of mercury.
3.1 Challenges to the Public Health Care
System
Mr. McBride raised concerns about the challenges
faced by physicians in the public health care system.
His comments focused on the effect of managed
care on health service systems as it relates to
environmental health issues. Mr. McBride
commented that when health problems are
correlated with environmental conditions, there is an
obligation, for managed care to be delivered within
the context of an understanding of environmental
conditions and implications. However, there is no
quality assurance for inclusion of environmental
health care within the managed care system, he
said, stating that the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) does not want to focus oh
envirpnmental health care issues. "Environmental
health," Mr. Bullard added, "has always b'een the
stepchild of the health care system."
Mr. McBride asked what is the incentivafor health
care providers to address environmental health
issues when there is no monetary incentive. For
example, when managed care groups conduct tests
to determine lead levels in the blood of children,
where is the incentive for primary prevention of this
environmental health problem, he asked. He
contended that costs.for failure to intervene on lead
exposure are not coming back to the health care
. system, instead these costs are passed on to society
in the form of the criminal justice system and other
systems. Mr. McBride recommended incorporating
training in environmental justice for, individual or
managed health care providers.
Mr. Martin responded that health care delivery is
outside of the province of EPA and the mission
statement of the subcommittee. He suggested that
collaboration with IOM on its environmental justice
study would afford a good opportunity to address
health care issues. Mr. Bullard agreed and added
that health care delivery fits within the policy aspect
of lOM's environmental justice study.
Mr, McBride responded that he was under the
impression that the issue of obligations of health care
providers was part of the mission of this group. He
reiterated that the debate on environmental health
within the managed care system is "nil," He said
there needs to be an avenue to start discussions oh
this issue, which has direct implications for .
environmental justice communities. Mr. McBride
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
3-5
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
suggested that possibly the National Association of
County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) would
provide the best forum for the health care debate.
Mr. Bullard added that the National Conference of
Black Mayors might also provide an avenue to
promote a discussion of health care issues.
Mr. McBride also commented that some of the most
important groups dealing with environmental health
concerns are the zoning and planning boards of
municipalities. By default, he said, they become the
de facto environmental health organization. He
asked whether the relationship between zoning and
planning boards and the formulation of local
environmental health policy was an appropriate issue
to be discussed by the NEJAC. Ms. English
responded that this issue could possibly fit within a
discussion of research methods for cumulative
effects, which are determined by land use policy at
the local level. She also recommended that in Mr.
McBride's presentation to the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee he explain the relationship of
local planning boards to the formulation of
environmental health policy. Although the LandView
II geographic mapping software does not have the
capability to overlay local planning zones, it possibly
could provide a valuable environmental justice tool to
examine health issues within the community, Ms.
English said.
3.2 Interaction with the Institute of Medicine
Mr. Martin reported in April 1996, he and Mr. Lee had
attended the first meeting of the lOM study
committee. Because Mr. Lee is a member of that
committee, NEJAC should have some input into the
study, he suggested. (See Section 4.3 of this
chapter for a summary of Mr. Lee's presentation on
the study, as well as additional recommendations
offered by the subcommittee members)
Mr. Martin encouraged members of the
subcommittee to share their ideas on the proposed
scope and design of the study. Members of the
subcommittee offered the following suggestions:
Mr. Bullard commented that the study should
focus on disease prevention, as well as
pollution prevention. He added that the IOM
study committee should have access to
examples and models of interagency
cooperation.
Ms. English recommended that NEJAC be
kept informed about agenda and topic areas
for the study.
Mr. McBride proposed expanding the
proposed topic area of environmental toxins
to include environmental and physical
hazards (for example, unsafe playground
equipment), as well as social and
infrastructure conditions that are linked to
increased health risks.
Mr. McBride recommended that the study
address the impacts of managed care on the
health service system as it relates to
environmental issues.
3.3 Provision of Comments to the Interagency
Working Group on Environmental Justice
Mr. Martin explained that in June 1996, selected
members of NEJAC would be meeting for the first
time with the IWG. This meeting, he said, arises
from a resolution adopted by the NEJAC several
years ago requesting more coordination between
NEJAC and the IWG. He called the meeting an
opportunity for the grassroots perspective on
environmental justice issues to be presented to the
federal working group. Mr. Martin then asked the
members of the subcommittee to identify issues to
be discussed at the meeting. Specific
recommendations included:
Mr. Martin proposed that NEJAC review the
report submitted to the President on IWG
efforts, successes, and weaknesses. The
weaknesses cited in the IWG report could
serve as topic areas during NEJAC's meeting
with IWG, he explained. Mr. Martin also
suggested a status report on specific IWG
actions to address provisions in Executive
Order 12898.
Mr. Bullard and Ms. English said there was a
need to: 1) understand the extent to which all
federal agencies have implemented their
environmental justice strategies and plans, 2)
evaluate the effectiveness of agency actions,,
and 3) track and catalog the extent of
interagency coordination on research and
environmental justice activities.
Mr. Martin recommended the creation of a
senior science managers meeting to
coordinate environmental justice research
agendas.
Mr. McBride urged examination of health-
related issues (for example, selective
3-6
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
screening for lead levels in blood and implications of
managed health care).
Ms. English suggested a second meeting with
IWG as a follow up to this first information
gathering meeting.
Mr. Martin urged discussions on the
appropriateness and validity bf combining
public health information collected by health
services with information from other
databases, such as Toxic Release Inventory
(TRI) data, for identifying populations at risk.
Mr. Bullard urged increasing the compatibility
of databases to address priorities for
environmental justice.
Ms. Johnson and Mr. Martin supported
establishing a national priority across all
government agencies to pool funds to study
cumulative health risks and synergistic
effects. Ms. Johnson said that the state of
Illinois had published a list of over 200
individual chemicals and their effects on
human health and she emphasized the need
for affected communities to have information
about cumulative health effects arising from
exposures to combinations of chemicals.
Mr. Dullard and Mr. Martin suggested
promoting initiatives that support, community
training on environmental justice issues. As
examples, they mentioned that the Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR) was involved in a training effort on
environmental justice issues and that EPA v
and several federal agency partners currently
were discussing the possibility of a
cooperative effort to provide health and
ecological risk assessment training to
communities and local governments.
Mr. McBride recommended incorporating
training in environmental justice for individual
or managed health care providers.
In response to the suggestion that discussions with
the IWG address public health issues, Ms. English
encouraged the subcommittee to generate a list of
key health risks or hazards, prioritize these risks, and
then ask the IWG to discuss federal activities to
address these health risks. All members of the
subcommittee identified a variety of health risks or
hazards (for example, lead exposure and household
pesticide use) and observed health effects (for
example, asthma, cancer clusters, and learning and
behavioral impairment). They also agreed that
cumulative and multiple pathway exposures and
synergistic effects of different toxins was a target
area that also deserved particular attention. They
also agreed that the subcommittee's
recommendations regarding discussion topics with
the IWG could be framed around key health risks.
Ms. Johnson, Ms. Salway-Black, and Mr: Martin took
on the responsibility of drafting a statement on'
proposed agenda items for NEJAC's meeting with
the IWG. This group drafted a statement of
recommendations that the subcommittee modified
and unanimously adopted to present to the NEJAC
for its consideration (see Section 6.0, Resolutions, of
this chapter for a summary of the resolution).
3.4 Domestic Use of Mercury
Mr. Martin began a discussion on domestic use of
quicksilver, more commonly known as mercury. He
directed the members to a letter from Mr. Arnold
Winddruff regarding the ability of citizens to buy
unlabeled vials of mercury from botanicas. The letter
explained that mercury is used in some cultures for
magico-religious and ethnbmedical use even though
it is a toxic metal with residual effects. Mr. Martin
characterized Mr. Winddruff as an active and vocal
campaigner against the sale of unlabeled mercury.
At a minimum Mr. Winddruffs letter recommends
labeling the mercury sold in vials in botanicas as a
toxic substance, Mr. Martin said. He asked the
members of the subcommittee to consider this issue
and to decide whether they want to address the
issue through the NEJAC.
Members of the subcommittee expressed concern
about the health implications for health practitioners
as well as others who could come in contact with
residual mercury. Mr. McBride called the issue.
"culturally sensitive," and expressed concern about
usjng enforced labeling of domestic mercury to
remedy the problem. He favored some sort of
education of the religious community regarding the
health risks associated with the domestic use of
mercury. Ms. Salway-Black said Ihe educational
approach was a 'reasonable option, but she also
thought that if mercury is toxic it should be labeled
accordingly. She asserted that this labeling process
should be part of the educational process. Although
the members of the subcommittee could not come to
any agreement on how to resolve the issue, they
unanimously adopted a motion to recommend the
NEJAC ask the EPA to look into the issue (see
(Section 6.0, Resolutions, of this chapter for a
summary of the resolution).
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
3-7
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
4.0 PRESENTATIONS
This section summarizes the presentations that were
made to the Health and Research Subcommittee.
4.1 Potential Weakening of Standards
Governing Lead Testing and Cleanup
Ms. Charlop, Lead Poisoning Prevention Project,
presented an overview of the status of regulations
that affect exposure of children to lead. Praising her
organization for its community-oriented lead
program, Mr. McBride introduced Ms. Charlop and
said he had invited her to speak to the subcommittee
about possible revisions to CDCP guidelines for lead
blood levels because those revisions could weaken
existing standards governing lead testing and
cleanup.
Ms. Charlop expressed concern that, at a time in
which there is an increasing awareness of the
environmental justice movement, the lead issue,
which is the environmental justice issue, she said, is
being "killed." Ms. .Charlop explained that in 1992,
Congress passed the Housing and Community
Development Act which established three standards
of care for lead hazard risk reduction for housing.
The standards, Ms. Charlop explained, were
established in response to the belief that, after lead
had been eliminated from gasoline formulas, the next
most significant source of lead exposure for children
is lead-based paint in their homes.
Unfortunately, Ms. Charlop said, the HUD Task
Force on Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction and
Financing that was convened in response to the
mandates of Title X did not support stringent
standards of care for housing but instead,
recommended the minimal standard of interim
control. The Task Force report also made
compromises in the subject of liability of landlords,
she said. Ms. Charlop contended that the
recommendations presented in the report had been
influenced heavily by the insurance and real estate
interests represented on the task force.
Ms. Charlop continued, explaining that in 1991,
CDCP issued policies that strengthened protection
for children against lead exposure. The agency
lowered limits on blood lead levels to 10 micrograms
per deciliter (Mg/dL), called for universal screening
for blood lead, and issued a comprehensive lead
abatement document. Recently, however, CDCP
has been considering cutbacks by recommending
"targeted screening" for blood lead, she reported.
Ms. Charlop said she finds the potential that lead
standards might be weakened inconsistent with the
findings on frequency and distribution of childhood
lead poisoning that were documented during the
early 1990s, when universal screening was being
practiced in some areas.
The findings, Ms. Charlop stated, illustrate that lead
exposure is not just an inner city problem, but rather
it is a national environmental health problem. For
example, in Iowa, a predominantly rural state, she
said, 40 percent of the children tested had blood lead
levels above the level of concern established by
.CDCP. In North Carolina and Vermont, the
percentage of children with elevated blood lead
levels was 30 and 25 percent, respectively, she
added, Ms. Charlop voiced strong support for
universal blood lead screening in children, stating
that, if universal screening were instituted today, we
would discover that many children have lead
problems."
Ms. Charlop then identified specific areas in which
EPA can take action to prevent the weakening of
existing lead guidelines and programs. She said
that, in accordance with Title X , EPA currently is
mandated to formulate regulations regarding
childhood lead poisoning. Briefly, she outlined those
regulations:
Under Section 406 of Title X, EPA must develop an
educational pamphlet for contractors to distribute
when "abatement" work is about to commence. Ms.
Charlop explained that the definition of abatement is
very narrow and does not include "renovations"
undertaken by contractors. As such, she said,
contractors are under no obligation to conduct
training about exposures to lead for renovations. Ms.
Charlop recommended that educational programs be
required to protect children under any circumstances
in which they are put at risk of exposure through
renovation, remodeling, or other maintenance work.
Under Section 402, EPA must develop standards
governing certification and wo'rk practices that states
are required to adopt. Ms. Charlop recommended
that all people who disturb lead paint should be
trained to do so safely, and she advocated
comprehensive licensing of the work force. She
suggested that other federal agencies, possibly the
U.S. Department of Commerce, should become
involved in the issue of worker training. Ms. Charlop
added that, like worker training, training of inspectors
should be comprehensive. She said the benefits to
the public would far exceed the cost of a more
comprehensive training program.
3-8
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
Under EPA's .Property Disclosure Rule, to
commence in late 1996, a disclosure is to be made
of any lead hazard present when a housing unit is
bought, sold, or rented. Ms. Charlop stated that,
under the rule, an owner is under no obligation to
disclose lead hazards when the lead inspection was
performed by someone else, such as a prospective
buyer. The definition of a "lead hazard" also is a
problem, she said, noting that if the definition is .
narrowly applied to include only the presence of
peeling paint, the rule would provide no requirement
for disclosure for housing units having substantial
amounts of lead but no peeling paint. Ms. Charlop
offered two recommendations: 1) lead inspection
reports should be filed in a central office or registry
that would be accessible to all interested parties, and
2) a lead hazard should be defined as any place,
even if intact, where there is lead on chewabie
surfaces, on friction surfaces, or on impact surfaces.
Under Section 403, EPA must define by September
1996 what constitutes a" lead hazard." Ms. Charlop
reported that in July 1994, EPA issued guidelines in
which the agency defined a lead hazard as "any
lead-based paint found on deteriorated surfaces or
on friction, impact, or chewabie surfaces." In
contrast both the American Society for Testing and '
Materials (ASTM) and the HUD Task Force, she
said, have set very low standards for dust; even
CDCP is "going backwards," she added. She said
EPA has an obligation to maintain the strength of
existing lead protection standards.
EPA currently is conducting efficacy studies of the
recommendations made in the report issued recently
by the HUD Task Force, reported Ms. Chariop. She
cautioned EPA to conduct a|l studies over at least six
years, a period that constitutes one child generation.
She called attention to a study conducted recently in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin that focused on dust
reduction, which is considered an interim control
method, to control lead exposure. The perception of
this study, she said, is that it provided fairly good
results. Although these only are very short-term
results, she contended that the study'already is
being cited as a model for lead control. Ms. Charlop
also stated that testing of blood levels in children in
Milwaukee in 1995 showed an extremely high
percentage of childhood lead exposure - more than
3,000 children in a city of 600,000 had blood lead
levels more than double the minimum established by
CDCP, she said. Interim controls like dust control or
painting, said Ms. Chariop, will have "glorious" short-
term effects, but such interim measures are not the
long-term answers to lead exposure.
Ms. Charlop stated that EPA is considering a
reduction in the number of samples that are collected
after lead abatement has been completed."
Currently, one dust sample is collected from each of
three surfaces the floor, a window sill, and a
window well. The cost of analyses of those samples
is minimal ($7 each), she said, yet each sample
provides different information about how a child
might be exposed to lead. Ms. Charlop urged that
EPA maintain that a minimum of three samples be
used as a clearance standard for lead abatement
jobs.
In response to a request from Mr. McBride, Ms.
Chariop then described some of the ways in which
her organization is combating the lead issue. Her
organization, she told the subcommittee, sponsors a
safe house where a family can be relocated
temporarily while a lead abatement job is underway.
The organization also sponsors a community
outreach program for parents who come to the clinic
or live in the safe house and who want to take a
leadership role in their community, she added. After
-participating in a 12-session training course, the
"lead busters," as they are called, return to the
community to educate their neighbors, she
explained. When the lead busters are performing
home inspections/Ms. Chariop.said, they are looking
primarily for lead exposure problems, but they also,
are looking for other hazards that could be threats to
health in the child's environment, such as the lack of
window guards or smoke detectors. The outreach
program provides an opportunity to establish a
rapport with families in the' community and to
successfully address environmental health in the ,
home, she said.
Mr. Bullard commented that he does not consider the
decline in lead abatement to be correlated with the
rise in environmental injustice. He said that some
people might interpret Ms. Charlop's opening.
statement to imply that the environmental justice
movement is taking attention away from the lead
issue. Both of these issues, he contended, are being
"pulled back." To go forward, he said, consolidation
is needed on all environmental justice forefronts. Mr.
Bullard recommended that the subcommittee support
recommendations by the NEJAC to EPA about lead
issue. He mentioned that the subcommittee also
might provide comments on the lead issue to the.
IWG during its meeting in June 1996.
Members of the subcommittee agreed that strong
and quick action on the lead issue was needed. Ms.
Charlop and Mr. McBride agreed to draft specific
recommendations and supporting background
information on the lead issue for the subcommittee to
review (see Section 6.0, Resolutions, of this chapter
for a summary of this resolution).
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
3-9
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
4.2 Report on the Mickey Leland National
Urban Air Toxics Research Center
Mr. Raymond Campion, President, Mickey Leland
National Urban Air Toxics Research Center
(NUATRC), presented an overview of his
organization and its environmental health research
program.
Mr. Campion began his presentation by describing
how NUATRC was established. The center, he
explained, was established under the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990. The act specifies the
composition of its board of directors and scientific
advisory panel, and indicates a specific charge for
the organization - to investigate the risks associated
with air toxics in urban atmospheres. In fall 1994,
the first appointments were made to the board of
directors, he said. The first task of the board of
directors was to appoint a scientific advisory panel.
Mr. Campion said that the current panel represents
various disciplines, including environmental health,
exposure assessment, epidemiology, and
toxicology.
The scientific advisory panel, which includes
representatives from academia as well as industry,
has met twice to begin planning the research
program for NUATRC, Mr. Campion explained. He
characterized the strategic research plan for
NUATRC as focused on "niche" areas of public
health and environmental health research. The
current strategy is to work specifically with individual
exposure to air toxics; couple exposure assessment
information with biomarkers; and to focus on acute,
rather than chronic, health effects. Mr. Campion told
the subcommittee that the main goal of NUATRC is
to create a database to support the preparation of
sound air toxics risk assessments.
Mr. Campion then discussed the experimental
program the organization has planned for 1997.
Several organizations are working with NUATRC to
develop plans for the national air toxics study, he
stated. The study will be designed to characterize
human exposures during a 24-hour period to
selected air toxics, probably volatile organic
compounds, he said. The experiment may require
participants in the study to use such personal
monitors as charcoal filter badges, but other
measurement alternatives will be considered. The.
research study will be carried out in high exposure
areas (such as Houston, Texas; Los Angeles,
California; and New York City, New York) selected
from various government and private sector
emissions and monitoring data, continued Mr.
Campion. Currently, NUATRC is drafting the scope
of work for the request for application (RFA) for the
study. National solicitation is planned for the fall of
1996, he added.
Mr. Campion commented that NUATRC is funded
jointly by an assistance grant from EPA and by the
private sector, which includes both states and
foundations. Funding for fiscal year 1996 has been
. delayed, but is anticipated shortly, he said. The
requested budget for fiscal year 1997 has been
expanded to $1.34 million to meet the expanded
research goal, he added.
Mr. Campion ended his presentation with a request
for assistance from the subcommittee on several
issues, including: 1) defining susceptible populations
for the study, 2) developing a statistically sound
experimental sampling design for the study, and 3)
identifying risk assessment information that would be
desirable for environmental justice purposes.
After the presentation, subcommittee members
asked questions and offered comments.
.I ' ."',"'
Mr. Martin asked how the community was involved in
developing the plans for the study. Mr. Campion
replied that public participation is anticipated through
a symposium on acute health effects which is being
planned for early 1997. Stating that all three cities
targeted for the study are nonattainment areas that
have disproportionately large populations of people
of color, Mr. Bullard asked to what extent the
NUATRC staff is diverse and what mechanisms are
available to support a successful community
outreach program. Mr. Campion responded that the
NUATRC staff currently is limited to three people -
himself, an administrative assistant, and a secretary.
He acknowledged that no specific community
representative currently was involved in the project.
Ms. English pursued the issue of diversity further in
a comment about the design of the RFA. She told
Mr. Campion that his staff currently does not reflect
the diversity that characterizes the environmental
justice movement. But because the research would
be performed by a contractor, the RFA can specify
guidelines for diversity, she added. She
recommended that those who carry out the research
could and should have a strong base within the area
being targeted for investigation. In response, Mr.
Campion acknowledged that the draft RFA contained
no information about community involvement, but
agreed that element could be added to the RFA.
3-10
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
Mr. Bullard asked who will be on the peer review
panel for the RFA. Mr. Campion responded that the
draft RFA will be sent to EPA's science advisory
panel for review and comment. Panelists will recuse
themselves from further involvement in the review
process if their organizations elect to bid on the
solicitation, he explained, adding that if panelists are
recused, there will be need to seek other reviewers
outside the panel. Mr. Bullard told Mr. Campion that
what he was describing was, in sociological terms,
"homosocial reproduction." Mr. Bulfard
recommended diversification of the review panel as
a means to prevent a predetermined outcome and as
a way to better integrate possible concerns about
.environmental justice. He said that members of the
subcommittee could provide names of people who
could broaden the perspective of the review panel
and who could provide information to support an
outreach component. Mr. Campion thanked Mr
Bullard for his suggestions and said he thought those
. ideas were constructive.
Ms. English commented that the scientific advisory
panel seems heavily weighted with academicians.
She suggested that a public health official could
provide a different perspective on the RFA and the
peer review process. Public health officials interact
daily with, and understand, affected communities,
she added. Mr. Campioh agreed, adding that he
would present her idea to the NUATRC board and
panel for consideration. Mr. Campion added,
however, that the number of panelists is set by law
and that all 13 positions already had been filled. In
response, Ms. English suggested that the NUATRC
could support an advisory group beyond the
mandated group. Such an ad hoc advisory group
could include public health officials as well as
members from the community, she said. Mr.
McBride commented that the chair of the board of
directors of NACCHO, who lives in Houston, Texas,
would be a perfect candidate to provide ajjommunity
health perspective to the study. He offered to
provide her. name to Mr. Campion. Mr. Campion
thanked Mr. McBride for his offer and said that the
establishment of a mechanism to add people to the
study, team in an ad hoc arrangement was an
excellent idea.
Ms. Salway-Black asked about the autonomy of
NUATRC. Since NUATRC is a federally mandated
program, she asked, is it able to distribute its own
studies freely? Mr. Campion replied that NUATRC is
an independent organization located at the University
of Texas. Studies, he said, 'are approved for
publication by the board of directors, adding that
NUATRC is required to provide research information
to EPA.
4.3 Opportunities for Collaboration on
National Academy of Sciences/IOM
Environmental Justice Study
Mr. Lee discussed opportunities for the NEJAC
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee, which he
chairs, to interact with the Health and Research
Subcommittee. The focus of his presentation was to
recommend the two subcommittees collaborate to
provide comment on the design and scope of the
National Academy of Sciences/IOM ongoing national
study of environmental justice issues. Mr. Lee also
.discussed draft resolutions on LandView II and
community mapping and on the role of public health
in" .urban revitalization and Brownfields
redevelopment.
Mr. Lee first presented a short description of the IOM
study on environmental justice. He said IOM
received a major grant from the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and 15
federal agencies, including EPA, to constitute a
Committee to undertake an 18-month study on
environmental justice research, education, and
environmental health policy -needs. Mr. Lee
explained that because the study will be conducted
under the aegis of IOM, the effort will have a
tremendous amount of credibility. Therefore quality
of the study, Mr. Lee stressed, therefore will become
important in determining the future direction of
environmental health policy. The study will become
an extraordinary and vibrant opportunity to advance
the case of environmental justice, or it could be a
"disaster," he observed. Mr. Lee contended that, in
his opinion, a good study of environmental justice
through this project is not necessarily assured. The
organizations conducting the study and members of
the study committee bring good experience and
invaluable insight into the study, Mr. Lee explained,
but they have no history in environmental justice.
Therefore, he said, it is critical to bring together the
resources of EPA and the NEJAC to assist IOM in
the conduct of the study. Mr. Lee said he had
lobbied for .members of lOM's study committee to
attend the current meeting of the NEJAC but
scheduling conflicts prevented them from doing so.
Describing the study process, Mr. Lee said that the
study is designed around a number of field visits and
workshops to be conducted throughout the country.
He stated that the first site Visit is scheduled for June
1996 in New Orleans, Louisiana. Additional study
areas that are being proposed include Tucson,
Arizona; Hanford, Washington; and Chicago, Illinois.
Mr. Lee said that, at the first meeting it had been
obvious that this process will require the integration
of community empowerment and urban
environmental health and planning. Education and
Detroit, Michigan, .May 29 and 30,1996
3-11
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
empowerment of the community were not part of the
study committee's agenda, he stated. Bringing the
view point of affected communities into the
discussions conducted by the study committee is
important to the success of the project, Mr. Lee
observed.
Subcommittee members asked a number of
questions and provided numerous comments about
the IOM study. Both Ms. English and Mr. McBride
recommended that the IOM committee should be
aware of other studies in the environmental justice
field which "can help bring the research out of the
laboratory and into an awareness of the importance
of social interaction." Ms. English also
recommended that Mr. Lee urge members of the
IOM study committee to invite representatives of the
NEJAC to speak with them.
Mr. McBride offered several comments about the
scope of the IOM study. He said that he considers
the study narrowly focused, and he recommended
that it be expanded to include assessment of
environmental health hazards, not merely
assessment of exposure to toxins. He also favored
examining the "bigger picture" of public health
services and environmental health, rather than
examining issues related to personal health. Mr.
McBride also strongly recommended that the issue
of managed health care be brought into the focus of
the study. In reply, Mr. Lee said that he, too, did not
agree completely with the statement of tasks for the
study. Mr. Lee said he thinks that there will be
opportunities to clarify study issues. He mentioned
that one member of the IOM study committee, Ms.
Heidi Kline, NACCHO, had shown interest in the
community issues that will be addressed in the
study.
Mr. Bullard asked Mr. Lee whether there was an
adequate plan in place to address in the IOM study
concerns related to environmental justice. Mr. Lee
responded that there was no detailed plan. Mr.
Bullard said that, in the absence of a detailed plan,
NEJAC should provide resources and information
that the IOM study committee may not be aware of,
or have access to, through traditional literature
searches. He suggested that mechanisms be put in
place for the preparation of a more formal design for
regional meetings that would make the best use of
local environmental justice contacts. He also
advocated the involvement of local researchers in
the planning process. NEJAC also can provide
information about topics for papers to be
commissioned, Mr. Bullard said. Mr. Lee responded
that it is incumbent upon IOM, the other agencies
sponsoring the study, and NEJAC to establish a
number of mechanisms that will educate members of
the study committee about issues related to
environmental justice. Mr. Lee agreed strongly with
Mr. Bullard's recommendation that community
representatives should be involved in the planning
process. He emphasized that the lack of knowledge
about issues in the local community became an
obstacle in planning the upcoming New Orleans field
visit.
Mr. Bullard also asked whether a director had been
chosen for the study. Mr. Lee replied that no director
had yet been selected. He expressed concern that
the current job description is insufficient, and
provides no indication of the need for experience
with environmental justice issues or work with
communities. He told the subcommittee that he also
is uneasy about completing the study without
adequate planning or meaningful involvement on the
part of the community. Mr. Lee stated again that the
quality of the IOM study remains in question. He
encouraged the active participation of the Health and
Research Subcommittee to achieve a successful
outcome.
Mr. Lee then presented a resolution on the IOM
study that the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee had drafted (see Chapter 7, Section
6.0, for a summary of this resolution). The key
element of the resolution, he said, is the
establishment of mechanisms in specific EPA
program offices to enable subcommittees of the
NEJAC to communicate matters of concern to the
IOM study committee. Mr. Lee urged the
concurrence of the Health and Research
Subcommittee on the important resolution. In
response, the members drafted a resolution
supporting the position of the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee on the IOM study. The
resolution was adopted unanimously by the
subcommittee (see Section 6.0, Resolutions, of this
chapter for a summary of the latter resolution).
After the discussion of the IOM study concluded, Mr.
Lee introduced his subcommittee's resolution on
LandView II and community mapping (see Chapter
7, Section 6.0, fora summary of this resolution). He
identified as key, the recommendation that NEJAC
and EPA co-sponsor a series of roundtables
meetings, both regional and national, on community
mapping tools and strategies. Mr. Lee said he views
the effort as an "effective step toward integrating
environmental justice into planning processes. Ms.
Salway-Black mentioned that the Intertribal
Geographic Information Systems Group meets
3-12
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National EnvironmentalJustice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
regularly and participates in the annual Indian land
conference sponsored by EPA. She said she would
provide the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
the name of a point of contact/or the group, in
preparation for the proposed roundtable discussions.
5.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE
The Health and Research Subcommittee provided an
opportunity for members of the audience to
participate in a public dialogue session.
5.1 Roberta Luce, Detroit City Forum Lead
Prevention Coalition '-
Ms. Roberta Luce, a member of the Detroit City
Forum Lead Prevention Coalition and a practicing
speech and language therapist, recounted some of
her experiences working with speech-impaired
children who had been exposed to lead at an early
age.
Ms. Luce explained that she has worked as a speech
and^language therapist for approximately 14 years.
For most of those years, she said, she had worked
with children in a poverty-stricken neighborhood on
the east side of Detroit, Michigan. There, the
children are at a moderate risk for lead poisoning,
she stated. During the past six years, said Ms. Luce,
she had become increasingly aware of specific types
of behavior in children exposed to lead. With the
cooperation of the local health department, she
undertook a three-year study to screen neighborhood
children for blbod lead levels. The results of that
local screening effort shown in .Exhibit 3-2 indicate
that the more children have elevated or high blood
lead levels.
Ms. Luce told.the subcommittee she had become
interested in investigating the incidence of elevated
blood lead levels and speech impairment when she .
encountered children attending a regular education
class who had behavioral problems that were
strikingly similar to those she first had observed
when working with trainable mentally impaired
children who had very high blood lead levels. The
children who had permanent brain damage from lead
poisoning exhibited various levels of language
impairment, she explained. Some of the children
could not retrieve vocabulary when needed; others
spoke in vowels, only; and one child was almost
mute.
Ms. Luce said that when she began investigating the
possibility of lead exposure in children in the regular
education system who had been labeled as behavior
problems, she found in many of those children a
history of early exposure to lead, sometimes at very
Exhibit 3-2
Study of Blood Lead Levels in Children in a Detroit,
Michigan Neighborhood .
Blood Lead
Level
Normal
(z 9 mg/dL) *
Elevated
(<:10 mg/dL)
Lead
poisoning
(^20 mg/dL)
Total children
tested
Percent of Children
tested
1993
55%
45%
5%
132
1994
22%
78%
18%
150
1995
16%
84%
25%
129
Percent
change
1993-1995
-29%
+187%
+500%
* mg/dL = micrograms per deciliter
,. low levels. Next, Ms. Luce spearheaded the effort to
screen local children for blood lead levels. She also
began studying the quality of language in some of
the children and testing their language development
skills. In one instance, she compared the speech
and language skills of four children from the same
neighborhood and the same socioeconomic status,
she explained. The only difference among them was
that three of these children had been exposed to
lead, she said, and showed "no quality of language."
They were unable to perceive, interpret, and store
linguistic symbols (aphasjcj, and they were unable to
voluntarily sequence the necessary motor actions for
connected speech (apraxia), she reported: Ms. Luce
stated that such children have unique educational
needs; they can improve their speech and language
skills with special training, particularly if they receive
early attention, she explained. By third grade,
however, such children are lost, she said. At an
early age, they need slower-paced and repeated
instruction that is amplified with an auditory device,
stated Ms. Luce. Srje added that such children also
can benefit from a training environment that
stimulates all senses. .
Ms. Luce expressed frustration that there are no
decent intervention programs in the Detroit area to
deal with such children. She said that the Detroit
school board was not addressing the issue. She told
the subcommittee that she had approached the city
council and had given television interviews. Now,
she said, she'was going directly to the parents. By
working through neighborhood workshops, Ms. Luce
said she hopes that she can provide parents with the
information needed to protect their children from the
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
3-13
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
devastating and permanent effects of lead exposure.
Ms. Luce asserted that politics are part of the reason
the children are not receiving appropriate training.
She said the children are perceived as "throw-
away-children" because they are poor and they are
black.
Following Ms. Luce's comments, subcommittee
members asked questions and offered comments.
Mr. McBride inquired whether classroom teachers
are helped by knowing that a child has been exposed
to lead. Ms. Luce replied that in her experience
some teachers will use the information as a rationale
to completely segregate the children, believing that
their condition is irreversible. She recommended
caution when discussing the condition of such
children, and advocated increasing awareness of
these issues for teachers. Mr. McBride added that
increased sensitivity to the needs of the children is
needed not only within the educational community,
but within the medical community, as well. He then
asked whether Ms. Luce had observed speech and
language impairment in children with blood lead
levels of 10 to 15 Mg/dL. She responded that she
had not, but she added that she had observed many
behavioral problems and inability to read in children
with blood lead levels of 14 to 16 Mg/dL.
An unidentified member of the audience asked Ms.
Luce to talk about the techniques she uses when
working with children who exhibit speech and
language impairments. Ms. Luce answered that the
most important technique is to give a lot of
reassurance to the child that the word will come, that
the child can retrieve the word. Phonetic "clues" and
associations are sometimes helpful, she added. She
told the subcommittee about a second grader who
made "miraculous" progress after one year of
specialized training. In the second grade, he spoke
without the use of articles (telegraphic speech), but
by the beginning of the third grade, 80 percent of his
speech was intelligible, she said. Ms. Luce added
that she thinks that, because of early and specialized
intervention, his brain was able to make
accommodation for his underlying disorder.
Ms. Salway-Black asked what Ms. Luce would
recommend to address the issue of speech
impairment in children exposed to lead. In response,
Ms. Luce offered the following recommendations: 1)
conduct more research on children with speech and
learning impairments, 2) initiate intervention at an
early age, and 3) test for blood lead levels, beginning
at age six months and then annually thereafter.
When the discussion ended, Mr. McBride asked the
subcommittee whether environmental educators are
represented on the IWG. An unidentified member of
the audience replied that although the U.S.
Department of Education was not represented on the
original list of agencies for the IWG, the White House
was considering asking that agency to join. Mr.
McBride then suggested that members of the
subcommittee recommend that the U.S. Department
of Education be included on the IWG and that the
Department of Education be charged with working
with health providers for early educational
intervention in cases involving environmental health
issues. Ms. Johnson, Ms. English, and Mr. Martin
agreed to include that recommendation in a
resolution they were drafting for the subcommittee's
review and approval.
6.0 RESOLUTIONS
This section lists the resolutions forwarded to the.
NEJAC by the Health and Research Subcommittee.
The subcommittee did not vote on Resolution No. 6.
Health Resolution No. 1:
In accordance with Title X of 1992, EPA is presently
mandated to formulate several critical regulations
regarding childhood lead poisoning. The NEJAC
resolves that the following tasks be addressed as
follows:
Under sections 406 and 402, EPA must
develop: a) an educational pamphlet for
contractors to distribute when "abatement"
work is about to commence, and b)
certification and work practice standards. This
committee urges EPA to create a
comprehensive program that would apply to
all workers whenever lead based paint is
disturbed. Both occupant education and
proper work procedures are required to
protect children any time they are put at risk
through renovation, remodeling, or other
maintenance work. To that end, the
committee urges the EPA to continue to seek
funding for worker abatement and trade
training.
Regarding the Property Disclosure Rule, this
committee recommends that: a) EPA reiterate
that a "lead hazard" constitutes all intact
friction, impact, and chewable surfaces, and
b) that lead inspection reports be filed in a
central office so that each tenant or buyer is
able to research previous inspection reports
3-14
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
which may have been conducted by
previous and potential buyers/renters.
The committee recommends that all studies
of the recent HUD guidelines be conducted
over a period of six years or longer. This
constitutes one child generation and posses
the true question regarding "interim" controls,
that is, how long do interim measures protect
children?
Regarding section 403, this committee
recommends that: a) the definition of a lead
hazard continue to included deteriorated,
friction, impact and chewable surfaces, b)
whenever a weight measurement is required,
the permissible level be 0.06% mg/dL, in
accordance with the Consumer Safety
Council's standard, arid c) that 3 dust wipe
tests' from different surfaces remain the
clearance standard for abatement jobs.
Measurements from floors, sills, and wells'all
indicate different lead sources/hazards,
Finally, this committee requests that the EPA
Administrator communicate the above NEJAC
principles and resolutions to the heads of
CDCP, HHS, and HUD.
Health Resolution No. 2:
The NEJAC resolves that a "National Forum on Risk
and Small Populations: Research Methods and
Applications " be conducted in the spring of 1997,
with support from EPA and other federal agencies.
The topics to be considered at the forum will include:
1) research methods on assessing cumulative,
multiple, and interactive exposure; 2) research
methods on assessing risks to small populations; 3)
community-based research as a complementary
opportunity; and 4) tools for information integration.
Cross-cutting issues will also be considered during
the forum, such as how research is initiated and
funded, and how local policies on land use and
economic development affect risks to communities.
Participants at the proposed forum will include
members of affected communities, members of
traditional and nontraditional research communities,
health officials, and representatives of the
sponsoring agencies. As proposed, the forum will be
a 2-day workshop (with plenary and breakout
sessions) to be held in Washington, D.C. in the
spring of 1997. Proposed sponsoring agencies
include EPA (ORD, OPPTS, OPPE, and QSWER)T
as well as ATSDR, NIEHS, CDCP, HUD, and DOT.
A planning committee is proposed, composed of
representatives of NEJAC's Health and Research
Subcommittee, as well as representatives of the
sponsoring agencies. The estimated total cost for
conducting the forum is $100,000^
Health Resolution No. 3:
The NEJAC advises the IWG that we desire to
include the following topics on the agenda at our
June meeting. ...
In advance of the meeting NEJAC should review the
IWG report to the President. Of greatest importance,
NEJAC would like to discuss making the health
affects resulting from cumulative exposure to toxics
and synergistic effects of toxics a national priority.
Among widespread conditions of concern are
asthma, learning impairment, behavioral
abnormalities and other neurological disorders,
reproduction disorders, cancer clusters, birth defects
and mortality, low birth weight, skin conditions, and
kidney problems.
Generally, the NEJAC would like the IWG to address
the extent to which the IWG has:
Provided guidance to federal agencies on
criteria for identifying disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority and low income
populations. v
Assisted in coordinating data collection to
address environmental justice priorities
Examined existing data and studies on
environmental justice to identity research
priorities and data gaps, and coordinated
environmental justice research and data
among federal agencies
Developed interagency model projects on
environmental justice that evidence
cooperation among federal agencies
More specifically, the NEJAC would like the IWG to:
Include the Department of Education on the
IWG to address lead toxicity in children and to
work with health care providers detect and
remediate affected children
Clarify the responsibility of
managed/corporate health care providers to
respond to environmental conditions
Coordinate efforts among agencies to
optimize public education on environmental
, Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
3-15
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
justice health issues with attention to
institutional and corporate health care
providers, federal grants, and centers
Health Resolution No. 4:
NEJAC requests that OPPTS and OECA examine
and report back at the next meeting the extent to
which mercury poisoning associated with domestic
use in cultural practices is a health problem, and
where the responsibility lies within the federal
agencies to address this issue.
Health Resolution No. 5:
The Health and Research Subcommittee supports
the recommendations made by the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee on the National
Academy of Sciences/Institute of Medicine
Environmental Justice Study.
Health Resolution No. 6:
NEJAC: 1) urges OEJ to serve as the focal point for
developing a comprehensive database of
environmental justice contacts, and 2) suggests that
OEJ provide updated environmental justice mailing
lists to any EPA office issuing requests for proposals
that deal with environmental justice concerns.
3-16
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 29 and 30,1996
Detroit, Michigan
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Bell
Desitaa'ted Federal Official
-------
'\
-------
CHAPTER FOUR
MEETING OF THE
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee of the
' National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) conducted a two-day meeting on
Wednesday and Thursday, May 29 and 30, 1996,
during a three-day meeting of the NEJAC in Detroit,
Michigan. Mr. Walter Bresette, Lake Superior
Chippewa, continues to serve as chair of the
subcommittee: Ms. Elizabeth Bell, American Indian
Environmental Office (AIEO), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) continues to serve as the
Designated Federal Official (DFO) for the
subcommittee.
This chapter, which provides a detailed discussion of
the deliberations of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, is presented in six sections, including
this Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks, summarizes
the opening remarks of the chair and the DFO,
Section 3.0, Activities of the Subcommittee,
summarizes the discussions,of the activities of the
' subcommittee, including a review of action items and
a description of the subcommittee's relationship and
coordination with other NEJAC subcommittees.
Section 4.0, Environmental Justice issues Related to
Indigenous Peoples, summarizes the discussions
about issues related to the environmental justice
concerns of indigenous peoples. Presentations
made to the subcommittee are summarized in
Section 5.0, Presentations. Section 6.0, Resolutions,
presents the resolutions forwarded to the NEJAC
Executive Council.
Exhibit 4-1 lists members who attended the meeting
and identifies those members who were unable to
attend.
2.0 REMARKS
Mr. Bresette, chair of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, opened the subcommittee meeting
with a prayer and then welcomed the members
present and Ms. Bell, the DFO.
Ms. Bell described the role of the DFO as that of a
facilitator for the subcommittee. The chair of the
subcommittee, she said, should take the lead role in
moving the subcommittee in certain directions. Ms.
Bell also stated that the subcommittee has the
responsibility to make recommendations to the
Exhibit 4-1
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 29 and 30, 1996
Mr. Walter Bresette, Chair
Ms. Elizabeth Bell, DFO ,
Ms. Astel Cavanaugh.
Ms. Jean Gamache
Mr. Charles Stringer *
Ms. Velma Veloria
List of Members
Who Were Unable To Attend
Mr. Carl Anthony
Mr. Richard Monette
Ms. Janice Stevens
* Mr. Stringer substituted for Mr. Jewell James
who was unable to attend the meeting
NEJAC and to report to the NEJAC on its progress.
In addition, Ms. Bell noted that, to make
recommendations to the NEJAC, a quorum of
subcommittee members must have voted on the
recommendations^ She observed that a quorum was
present for the subcommittee meeting. Mr. Bresette
expressed his appreciation to the members in
attendance, because he said, at the December 1995
meeting the subcommittee did not have the quorum
necessary to forward recommendations to the
NEJAC. The members present then introduced
themselves.
The members of the subcommittee reviewed and
discusised the agenda. In addition, the
subcommittee was scheduled to conduct joint
sessions with the Enforcement and the Waste and
Facility Siting subcommittees. The members of the
subcommittee decided not to attend the joint session
with the Enforcement Subcommittee because of time
constraints. Ms. Jean Gamache, Tlingit and Haida
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
4-1
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National EnvironmentalJustice Advisory Council
Indian Tribes of Alaska, requested that the
subcommittee add to the agenda a presentation
about the Arctic Nuclear Waste Assessment Project.
The members present then approved the agenda
and the meeting proceeded.
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
This section of the report discusses the activities of
the subcommittee, which included a review of past
action items; the subcommittee's efforts to
strengthen the relationship with other subcommittees
of the NEJAC; and issues related to the Interagency
Work Group on Environmental Justice (IWG).
3.1 Review of Action Items
Mr. Bresette led a discussion of selected action
items that had been identified during the December
1995 meeting of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee. The members reviewed action items
at length. The discussions that took place during the
review of significant action items are summarized
below.
Request that EPA report to the subcommittee
on Agency activity to address issues that
were previously brought before the NEJAC:
California Indian Basketweavers Association,
Big Mountain, Fort Belknap, St. Regis
Mohawk, and Torres Martinez
Mr. Bresette noted that the case of the St. Regis
Mohawk Indian Tribe remained an outstanding action
item. Ms. Bell explained that the land of the St.
Regis Mohawk Indian Tribe is located on the St.
Lawrence River in the state of New York. She stated
that a former foundry owned by General Motors (GM)
Corporation also is located on the river; the foundry
is now a Superfund site, she added. Two years ago,
Ms. Sell continued, GM proposed to EPA Region 2
a new technology for cleaning up the site. EPA
Region 2 made a preliminary decision to open the
Record of Decision (ROD) signed in 1990, to change
the cleanup standard so that GM could use the new
technology, she concluded. EPA Headquarters is
opposed to reopening the ROD, Ms. Bell continued;
as such EPA Region 2 had not yet made a final
§ decision. She added that the tribe is content with the
standards established in the original ROD. Mr.
Charles Stringer, White Mountain Apache Indian
Tribe, asked if EPA Region 2 has a regional tribal
operations committee (TOG). Ms. Bell replied that
the region does not.
Ms. Bell stated that Cornell University, in partnership
with the Six Nations of the Iroquois, has conducted
health studies. Ms. Gamache asked whether
consumption rates are being examined and which
model is being used. Ms. Bell responded that St.
Regis has an applicable or relevant appropriate
standards (ARAR) for the tribe. She stated that GM
believes that it has cleaned up the river and that the
company does not want to clean the landfill site that
is located adjacent to the Mohawk tribal land.
Ms. Gamache requested an update on the status of
the California Basketweavers Association. Ms. Bell
answered that studies are being performed and the
association is working with the U.S. Forest Service to
identify the types of pesticides used in the forests.
Members of the subcommittee voted to request a
written summary report from the various EPA regions
in which the sites listed in the action item are
located.
Request that EPA Region 9 directly contact
Dine CARE about the uranium mines located
on lands of the Navajo Nation and conduct a
site visit of the area to investigate human
health and environmental effects from the
mining and milling operations (for example,
contamination of the soil and groundwater)
and to conduct radon studies of potentially
contaminated homes.
Ms. Christine Benally, member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee and executive director of Dine CARE,
explained that Mr. Phil Harrison, Victims of Uranium
Mining, met with Ms. Elizabeth Adams, EPA Region
9, to discuss the effects of mining operations on
human health. She stated that no action has been
taken to clean up the area. Mr. Bresette asked
whether more action is necessary on the part of the
subcommittee. Ms. Benally replied that, because
generations of Navajo continue to be exposed and
no efforts are being made to clean up sites that
corporations abandoned years ago, action is needed.
Ms. Bell asked whether Ms. Benally's organization
had any contact with EPA Region 9. Ms. Benally
answered that the Dine Alliance has had some
contact with representatives from that office.
Ms. Velma Veloria, State of Washington,
recommended that the subcommittee write a letter to
EPA Region 9, requesting information about the
uranium mine issue. The members of the NEJAC
agreed and passed a resolution presenting the
concerns of the subcommittee about EPA Region 9's
response to the Dine CARE case. (See Section 6.0
of this chapter for a summary of the resolution).
. f
4-2
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
Request that NEJAC recommend that EPA
broaden the scope of the Brownfields
Initiative to include those rural issues that are
particularly related to Native Americans.
Ms. Veloria began the discussion by asking whether
the action item was a resolution that required a vote
of the subcommittee. Mr. Bresette replied that it
was. Ms. Elisabeth Evans, EPA Region 8, explained
that the funds that EPA awards to Brownfields pilot
projects are intended as "seed money." She
explained further that this seed money should be
used for the initial activities of the pilot projects but
the funds are not intended to be used for cleaning up
the site. Ms. Gamache asked whether specific funds
had been set aside for sites in Alaska; she also
expressed concern that the state of Alaska is
continually excluded from such initiatives. Ms.
Evans was not able to answer the question. At Mr.
Bresette's request, Ms. Evans agreed to help write a
resolution related to the Brownfields Initiative. The
members of the subcommittee adopted the action
item as a resolution, with the language to be
provided by Ms. Evans. Ms. Gamache requested that
language used in the resolution include indigenous
peoples, not only Native Americans.
Request that NEJAC recommend that EPA
Regional offices appoint Native American
staff to serve in Agency tribal operations
programs and use intergovernmental personal
agreements (IPA) to increase participation by
Native Americans in EPA programs.
Members of the subcommittee voted to adopt the
action item as a resolution of the subcommittee.
Request that NEJAC recommend that EPA
develop criteria to be applied when awarding
environmental justice grants, including using
a community review process.
Mr. Bresette noted that the Executive Council of the
NEJAC also was involved in discussing issues
related to grants and was to hear a briefing on the
subject fronr EPA's Environmental Education
Division (EED). Ms. Gamache requested that the
action item be broadened to include tribes; she also
suggested incorporating language from the public
participation model developed by the NEJAC Public
Participation and Accountability Subcommittee. The
members agreed that the subcommittee would defer
the issue until the NEJAC had met with
representatives of the EED.
Request that NEJAC recommend that EPA
work with the tribal community on the Cahuilla
reservation (California) to conduct a study of
the contaminated soils from a waste disposal
site on the reservation.
Ms. Bell stated that representatives from EPA
Region 9 had contacted the members of both the
community and the tribal government. She
explained that at issue is an unregulated sludge
facility that is underlain by an aquifer. Ms. Gamache
recommended that the subcommittee request a
written report from the regional office before bringing
the case before the NEJAC; the members of the
subcommittee voted to adopt that recommendation.
Develop an inventory of federal environmental
and tribal program resource people.
Ms. Bell announced to the members of the
subcommittee that the action item was partially
completed and distributed the draft document to the
members. She promised to send the final version to
the members as soon as it was completed. Ms. Bell
also distributed a bibliography containing information
resources related to indigenous peoples and
announced that a media contact list also would be
available soon.
* Coordinate a meeting with EPA
representatives for the Pollution Prevention
Initiative, the Common Sense initiative, the
XL program, and similar programs to assist
the subcommittee in creating sustainable
^development programs tailored to the
particular needs in Indian Country.
Ms. Bell began the discussion by describing each of
the programs listed in the action item. She explained
that the pollution prevention program -integrates
environmental justice through pollution prevention
grants. The Common Sense Initiative examines
environmental issues affecting various industries in
an effort to increase flexibility in regulations, she
said. She stated that the EPA's Project XL program
identifies a corporation or company that has
demonstrated leadership in environmental
management and seeks that company's help in
developing flexible regulations.
Ms. Astel Cavanuagh, Sioux Manufacturing,
expressed concern about funding mechanisms within
these programs for tribes. She stated that, if
environmental justice is to be successful economic
justice must be in place as well. .
Ms. Veloria inquired how the subcommittee can
ensure that the Project XL program is sensitive to the
needs of indigenous peoples. Ms. Evans stated that
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
4-3
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Ms. Valeria's inquiry should be taken seriously and
that the community must be involved in the process.
Request that OEJ, in conjunction with AIEO,
develop a training video or program
describing the relationship between tribal
operations and environmental justice issues
related to Native Americans.
Ms. Bell stated that EPA had not yet acted on the
action item. Ms. Veloria asked who was the intended
audience - tribal community or grassroots
organizations. Mr. Danny Gogal, OEJ, suggested
that the video could be more inclusive, while Mr.
Bresette observed that the video would be an
opportunity to educate people on the issue of tribal
sovereignty. The members of the subcommittee
decided that guidance is needed on the issues
associated with tribal sovereignty. The action item
was modified to recommend the development of a
guidance rather than a video, leaving to EPA's
discretion the format of the guidance. The members
of the subcommittee also requested that EPA's TOC
and the subcommittee review the content of the
guidance.
Request that NEJAC approve the
coordination of a meeting between the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee and EPA's
Tribal Operations Committee (TOC) so they
can work together to avoid duplication of
effort and strengthen coordination.
Ms. Bell stated that there were several barriers that
had prevented a meeting between the subcommittee
and the TOC. She explained that the subcommittee
does not have any additional funds to support
meetings outside the scheduled meetings and that
the Executive Council of the NEJAC had expressed
concern about subcommittees meeting at times other
than the scheduled meetings. Ms. Gamache
suggested that the next meeting of the NEJAC and
the TOC overlap by several days so that the two
groups could meet. She recommended that the
NEJAC issue a formal invitation to the TOC to
participate in the December 1996 meeting of the
subcommittee.
Submit to OEJ comments on the Native
American section of EPA's environmental
justice implementation plan.
Ms. Bell announced that the action item has been
completed. Ms. Gamache asked whether EPA is
investigating additional mechanisms for examining
environmental justice activities throughbut the
Agency.. Mr. Gogal replied that EPA is identifying
mechanisms to be more prospective than
retrospective. He asked whether it would be
appropriate to recommend an annual report that
would include a discussion of EPA's next steps in the
area of environmental justice. Ms. Bell suggested
that the subcommittee consider issuing its own
report, which would contain advice about issues
related to environmental justice and indigenous
peoples.
Mr. Bresette noted that any report should focus on
environmental racism instead of environmental
justice, because racism has not yet been overcome.
Ms. Gamache suggested that the subcommittee
report provide an alternate implementation plan.
3.2 Coordination With
Subcommittees
Other NEJAC
The discussion to coordinate the efforts of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee with those of
other subcommittees of the NEJAC began with all
members expressing concern that environmental
justice issues related to indigenous peoples are not
communicated to the subcommittee. Ms. Gamache
noted that many of the other subcommittees are
issuing reports that contain issues related to
indigenous peoples. She expressed concern that
such issues be addressed by the appropriate
individuals. She recommended that the
subcommittee allow time to discuss how the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee should function
within the structure of the NEJAC. Mr. Bresette then
observed that every issue the subcommittee had
discussed was related to the work of other
subcommittees. He added that, in their comments
on policy, the other subcommittees must be aware of
the distinction of Native American sovereignty.
Ms. Veloria suggested that the NEJAC develop a
policy, that any issue related to indigenous peoples is
to be communicated to the subcommittee. Ms. Bell
recommended that Mr. Bresette raise the issue in a
Protocol Committee meeting and add that other
subcommittees should refer such issues to this
subcommittee. Ms. Clarice Gaylord, Director of
EPA's Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ),
recommended that the subcommittee ask to be
placed on the agenda of the Executive Council of the
NEJAC to communicate its issues and concerns.
Ms. Gamache stated that the subcommittee should
proceed through the Protocol Committee to arrange
to discuss the issue with the chair of the NEJAC.
Ms. Gaylord commented that all subcommittees
4-4
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National EnvironmentalJustice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
should work together to accomplish goals and that
Mr. Bresette meet with the other subcommittee
chairs to educate them on issues related to Native
American sovereignty. Mr. Bresette stressed the
importance of having representation of indigenous
people on all subcommittees to ensure that issues
related to indigenous peoples are understood and
addressed appropriately. He also emphasized that
a distinction must be made that Native Americans
are not only people of color but also possess rights
as a sovereign people. Ms. Gaylord repeated the
suggestion that time be requested during the
December 1996 meeting of the NEJAC for a
discussion with the NEJAC about those issues.
3.3 Update on the IWG
Ms. Gaylord updated the members on issues related
to the IWG. She described EPA's effort to arrange
meetings with the IWG in June 1996 in which several
members of the NEJAC are expected to participate.
Ms. Gamache asked whether all the strategies of the
participating federal agencies were final. After
stating that was the case, Ms. Gaylord agreed to
provide copies of the final strategies to the members
of the subcommittee. . -''
Mr. Tom Goldtaoth, Indigenous Environmental
Network (IEN) and a member of the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee, asked whether the IWG
had provided for the establishment of a work group
on issues related to indigenous peoples. Ms.
Gaylord stated that, originally, the IWG had several
task forces, including one on Native Americans. The
task forces had been disbanded and their activities
taken over by certain agencies, she said. Ms.
Gaylord stated that the activities of the Native
American task force had been transferred to the U.S.
Department of Interior (DOI).
Mr. Goldtooth also inquired about the relationship
between OEJ and AIEO. Ms. Gaylord stated that the
offices work closely together and are continuing to
improve the relationship between the environmental
justice coordinators and Indian coordinators. She
noted that OSWER had designated individuals in the
EPA regional offices to be responsible for
environmental justice issues and who report to the
: Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee. Mr.
Goldtooth also asked about the relationship between
OEJ and OSWER. Ms. Gaylord stated that she saw
no problem in the duplication of environmental justice
coordinators in the region. She explained that it is
OEJ's goal to integrate environmental justice into
EPA policies. '.''.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES
RELATED TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
This section of the report summarizes the
discussions of the subcommittee about funding
issues related to building tribal capacity, and
increasing accessibility to information. In addition,
updates are provided oh several site-specific
environmental justice cases.
4.1 Funding Issues Related to Indian Tribes
Mr. Goldtooth stated that he has observed that tribes
are not obtaining adequate funding to build their
environmental infrastructures. He described the
situation as a serious dilemma because tribes are
"lucky" if one person is appointed to work on
environmental issues. Mr. Goldtooth noted that such
persons often are Native American scientists who
focus only on performing field work. He stated that
,the issue "boils down to skills versus job description."
He urged the subcommittee to be more active in
requesting that more funds be placed into the l
general assistance fund to build tribal capacity
related to environmental infrastructure. Ms. Bell
added that EPA has data which illustrates that from
the 1970s to the present tribes have received "one
percent of a third of the budgef but that over the last
couple of years and into the next, EPA is increasing
funding to tribes.
Ms. Gamache disagreed with Mr. Goldtooth, stating
that funds should be appropriated to specific
programs that build tribal capacity, instead of to the
general assistance fund. The members of the
subcommittee drafted a resolution stating that EPA's
budget should build tribal capacity not only through
the general assistance fund but also through
investment in other appropriate programs. (See
Section 6.0 forthe summary of the resolution).
4.2 Accessability to Information
Members of the subcommittee also discussed the
issue of access to information and to databases. Ms.
Bell informed the subcommittee "that EPA is
compiling a database, called the Tribal
Environmental Atlas, which will track grants to tribes,
programs delegated to tribal authorities, and
environmental conditions. Ms. Bell also noted that
tribes are concerned about sharing information
because the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),
requires federal agencies to make the information
public.
Mr. Gogal discussed , a community-based
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
4-5
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
environmental project underway in EPA Region 8 in
which that office is working in partnership with state
and local agencies to bring stakeholders together to
share information. The project is called the Colorado
Plateau Ecosystem. He explained that the project is
still in the planning stages; however he said,
discussions are focused on not only sharing
information but also on ensuring that all stakeholders
are on an equal footing in the decision-making
processes.
Mr. Gogal also reported that EPA is attempting to
establish mechanisms to ensure that tribes have the
proper equipment to access information through the
internet One roadblock to such a project, he
explained, is the protection of access to sensitive
information. Mr. Bresette requested that Mr. Gogal
provide the members of the subcommittee with a list
of Internet addresses from which relevant information
is available. Mr. Gogal agreed to provide such a list.
Mr. Gogal also agreed to identify how tribes can be
supported in the initiative to provide access to the
Internet and the type of training that members of a
tribe would require. In addition, Ms. Bell agreed to
provide the members of the subcommittee with
copies of the brochure, Access to EPA.
4.3 Site-Specific Environmental Justice Cases
This section of the report summarizes the
discussions that the subcommittee participated in
related to site-specific environmental justice cases.
4.3.1 Yankton Sioux Indian Tribe
Mr. Jim Stone, Director, Environmental Protection
Program for the Yankton Sioux Tribe, discussed
issues related to the Lake Andes Landfill, located in
South Dakota. Mr. Stone stated that the Yankton
Sioux Tribe has been involved in a conflict over the
siting of a landfill on the reservation for
approximately the last five years. At the center of the
dispute, Mr. Stone explained, is a landfill that is
being constructed by the Southern Missouri
Recycling and Waste Management District (the
District) on a site to which the tribe is opposed. He
explained that the tribe is opposed to the siting of the
landfill because the landfill would be located
immediately adjacent to a culturally sacred site. In
addition, the tribe disagrees with the site selection
process that the District employed to reach the final
site, he said.
Mr. Stone stated that, initially, the District chose five
sites for consideration and all five were located within
the reservation boundaries. He added that the state
of South Dakota maintained that it had jurisdiction
over the selection of the site because the tribe
allegedly was disestablished by a treaty signed in
1892 which opened the reservation to settlement by
non-Indians. Because of the jurisdictional issue, Mr.
Stone explained that EPA did not become involved
even though ithe tribe is a "federally recognized
tribe." Unfortunately, construction of the landfill
began while the tribe pursued legal action to re-
establish the reservation, he stated.
A recent federal court ruling declared that the
Yankton Sioux Indian Tribe's reservation was intact;
but absent any delegation of authority to the tribe,
EPA retained jurisdiction over the site, Mr. Stone
continued. However, because EPA does not have
a permitting program for solid waste, it has no
authority to stop the construction of the landfill, he
said, adding that EPA informed the tribe that it can
only regulate the operation after the landfill is
operational. Mr. Stone explained that the tribe does
have the authority through tribal court to issue an
injunction against the landfill; however, he believes
this would lead to a violent confrontation that the
tribe wishes to avoid.
Mr. Stone continued, stating that in an attempt to
bring the District and the tribe together, EPA
established a series of negotiations to attempt to
reach a settlement to the problem. Mr. Stone stated
that the tribal members went into negotiations
optimistic and were ready to work on the issue to
consider .other options for the landfill. When the
suggestion was put forth that tribe own the landfill,
Mr. Stone explained that this alternative made the
members of the tribe uncomfortable but in good faith
proceeded along with the discussions, he said.
However, an article in a local newspaper stated that
the tribe had made an offer to buy the controversial
landfill to which it had been opposed to for so long.
Mr. Stone expressed the outrage the tribe
experienced at the distortion of the truth and the
violation of the ground rules established for the
negotiation. He stated that the tribe believes it had
been "set up" by EPA. Mr. Stone emphasized that
the only course of action the tribe wishes to pursue
is to relocate the landfill.
Mr. Stone stated that one of the concerns of the tribe
is that EPA should have taken a more active part in
the initial meeting once it was determined that a
landfill was to be built on the reservation because, in
some instances, a tribe will not know the extent of its
authority. He explained that if the District understood
4-6
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
the potential for the tribe to regulate its operations,
they would have built the landfill elsewhere; adding
that because no one informed them that the state did
not have jurisdiction they continued onward.
Ms. Veloria asked what EPA's role is in preventing
these types of activities from occurring and why did
progress on siting the landfill continue when the tribe
clearly voiced its opposition. Mr. Stone replied that
there exists gaps in the solid waste permitting
program because anyone can construct a landfill but,
EPA does not have the authority to intervene until
the landfill is operational. He also reported that there
is another operational landfill nearby which is not
operating to capacity. Mr. Goldtooth noted that EPA
does not have the statutory authority to become
involved in siting issues of solid waste landfills and
that the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee is
recommending that EPA issue a guidance to handle
these type's of siting issues.
Ms. Bell explained that under RCRA, EPA has a trust
responsibility and may be able to administer some
type of a federal solid waste program for tribes. She
added that EPA may have the authority to issue site-
specific regulations in situations such as the Lake
Andes Landfill. Mr. Stone requested that the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee forward to the
NEJAC a recommendation that EPA determine
whether it can assume permitting authority and issue
site-specific regulations for the landfill on the
Yankton Sioux reservation. If the Agency can do so,
it should, he said.
Ms. Evans stated that this is a complicated issue
because it goes beyond the assumption of permitting
authority to regulate landfills. Mr. Goldtooth
-. disagreed, stating that this is not a complicated
issue; this is Yankton Sioux land and a Federal court
judge ruled that the tribe has authority over its land.
He continued by stating that EPA Region 8 has failed
to communicate with the tribe. Mr. Stone added that
this issue does not apply only to EPA Region 8 but
that many tribes around the country do not have an
environmental infrastructure to fill the gaps In the
solid waste permitting program.' He urged the
subcommittee to review the actions to date on the
Lake Andes Landfill by EPA Region 8 and also to
review the agency's policies related to mediation and
negotiation involving tribes.' Mr. Stringer agreed and
stated that EPA, because of its trust responsibilities,
should be advocating the position of the tribe to the
fullest extent possible.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to draft a
resolution related to the issues Mr. Stone brought
before the subcommittee. In addition, the
subcommittee agreed to forward recommendations
to the NEJAC concerning EPA's mediation and
negotiation policy involving tribes and also that EPA
should draft a paper on how EPA can assume
permitting authority and issue site-specific
regulations in Indian Country under RCRA Subtitle D
for solid'Waste management facilities. (See Section
6.0 for a summary of ttie resolutions related to this
discussion.)
4.3.2 Copper Range Company, White Pine,
Michigan
Mr. Bresette requested that the subcommittee
address the environmental injustice that is occurring
in White Pine, Michigan. He explained that the
Copper Range Company has applied for a
groundwater discharge permit for solution mining at
its copper mine located in White Pine. The company
proposes to recover copper from mined out areas
using the solution mining process. Exhibit 4-2
describes the solution mining project.
Exhibit 4-2
COPPER RANGE SOLUTION
MINING PROCESS
The conventional copper mine at White Pine,
Michigan can no longer be mined with
conventional methods. However, five percent
of the ore body remains in the mine, in the
form of pillars left intact to support the mine
roof. The ore pillars are divided into discrete
units, called panels. To extract this ore, the
Copper Range Company plans to blast a limited
number of panels at one time, leaving piles of
ore. The company will then send a 7 percent
sulfuric acid solution into the mine through a
pipeline to saturate the ore, and leach out the
copper.
' /
The copper company states that the solution
would be regenerated and reused. The
company expects to recover about 1.5 billion
pounds of copper over the 24-year life of this
project. However, at the completion of the
project, 11 billion gallons of spent solution
would be left in the mine. , .
Mr. Bresette commented that mining, in general,
threatens to permanently alter or destroy habitats
that are, vital to the continued existence of the
indigenous way"of life. In particular, he said, the
Lake Superior ecosystem is threatened by the
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
4-7
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
eventual waste of one mining company. He
explained that Lake Superior is sacred to the Lake
Superior Chippewa tribe which is named for the lake.
In addition, the tribe possesses federally guaranteed
treaty rights to Lake Superior and the ceded territory
which includes parts of the states of Michigan,
Minnesota, and Wisconsin, he stated. Mr. Bresette
stated that despite the fact that the entire area was
ceded to the United States prior to the existence of
the three states, it appears that the federal
government's trust responsibility has been avoided
because the states were granted regulatory
authority. He contended that the states have
demonstrated little or no consideration to tribes or
their treaty rights when granting pollution permits. In
the case of the Copper Range Mine proposed permit
for solution mining, the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality was not even aware of the
tribe's rights, he stated.
Mr. Bresette went to explain that EPA Region 5 plans
to issue a rule that authorizes a permit for the pilot
period of the solution mining project. EPA stated that
this is its only way to approach the tribe's treaty
rights issues. Mr. Bresette stated that EPA Region
5 has not conducted an environmental justice
analysis of the project, which the tribe believes is its
obligation under the President's Indian Policy and the
Executive Order 12898 oh environmental justice.
Mr. Bresette outlined the specific concerns of the
tribes related to the mining solution project. He
stated that not only will the highly acidic solution be
hazardous, but the acids will leach out heavy metals
that will need to disposed. This potential pollution
will affect the tribal members who derive their living
through commercial fishing and supply food to their
families through subsistence fishing, he explained.
The final dumping ground for the waste from the
proposed project will be Lake Superior, he said.
Mr. Bresette requested that the subcommittee
forward a resolution to the NEJAC requesting that
EPA suspend a pending decision on an Underground
Injection Control permit for the proposed Copper
Range solution mining operation until a complete
environmental impact statement (EIS) has been
prepared, including an analysis of the environmental
justice implications and effects to treaty-reserved
rights and resources. The subcommittee voted to
adopt the resolution and forward the request to the
NEJAC. (See Section 6.0 for a summary of the
resolution).
4.4 Trust Responsibility and Environmental
Protection in Ceded Territory
Mr. James Cha, EPA Region 5, briefed the members
of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee on the
federal trust responsibility and environmental
protection in ceded territory. Mr. Cha first defined
trust responsibility, which, he said, includes two
components: general moral obligation (not
necessarily legal obligations) and a fiduciary duty or
a trustee-ward relationship. He explained that the
source of legal obligations to tribes resides in the
decision United States v. Mitchell, which stated that
fiduciary duty can arise when the federal government
extends control over a tribal activity and tribal land.
Mr. Cha added that a second source of legal
obligation arises from the Winters case, which
defined a tribe's right to water.
Mr. Cha explained that the tribes located in EPA
Region 5 have retained the right to hunt and gather
on lands that were ceded to the United States. Mr.
Cha stated that the federal government can be
ordered to take an enforcement action on behalf of
the tribe; often, he added, failure to issue an
enforcement action proves detrimental to the tribes.
Mr. Cha also discussed Pyramid Lake v. Norton, a
case in which the Secretary of Interior failed to
assume his fiduciary duty to protect a tribe's water
rights.
Mr. Cha also noted that, under RCRA, certain
mining wastes are exempt from regulation as
hazardous waste. He added that there has been a
movement to treat the tribes like states on the
.development of water quality standards; however,
the standards established were not broad enough to
cover waters located in ceded territory, he said.
Ms. Veloria expressed to Mr. Cha her concern about
the Yakima Tribe in the state of Washington. She
stated that the Department of Energy (DOE) stores
nuclear waste on lands ceded to the tribe. She
inquired whether EPA can convey to DOE that the
tribes living near that area must be involved in the
process of making decisions related to that issue.
Mr. Cha replied that DOE's actions are subject to the
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and that EPA, under the authority of the
Clean Air Act, can be a NEPA "watchdog." If DOE
decides to prepare an ElS, he stated, EPA also will
review it. Ms. Evans, added that, when consolidating
wastes at a site, EPA must consider ARARs. She
stated that EPA Region 10 should be contacted
about the issue. Ms. Veloria requested that the
subcommittee submit a resolution to the NEJAC that
4-8
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peop/es Subcommittee
EPA should require that tribal governments be
involved in the selection and siting of waste facilities
(see Section 6.0 of this chapter for the a summary of
the resolution). . .
Ms. Gamache suggested that the IWG might be an
avenue for ensuring that EPA and other agencies
meet the requirements of Executive Order 12898 and
fulfill their trust responsibilities. Mr. Stringer
requested that a recommendation be made that
encourages EPA tb reach out to other agencies to
ensure that trust responsibilities are-met. The
subcommittee adopted a resolution that EPA work
with other federal agencies to honor the federal trust
responsibilities and comply with the Executive Order
12898 on environmentaljustice (see Section 6.0 of
this chapter for a summary of the resolution).
Ms. Gamache concluded that the EPA has
experience with environmental justice and should be
passing that experience and lessons learned to other
agencies. She also stated that EPA should be the
advocate for full implementation of the environmental
justice strategies of the agencies. However, Ms.
Cavanaugh expressed discomfort with EPA as the
lead agency. .She said she believes that EPA
ignores certain information and that it does not
always honor its own trust responsibilities. Mr.
Bresette suggested that Ms. Cavanaugh's concerns
be incorporated into the resolution. Ms. Gamache
also requested that the resolution not be limited to
tribes that have treaties and reservations.
5.0 PRESENTATIONS
This section of the report summarizes the
presentations that were made ,to the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee.
5.1 Update on the National Tribal
Environmental Management Conference
Mr. Bresette asked Ms. Gamache to update the
subcommittee on the National Tribal Environmental
Management Conference, which was held May 20
through 23, 1996 in Flathead, Montana. Ms.
Gamache said the conference included panel
presentations on the environmental programs tribes
are conducting and pn tribal efforts to assume
authority over certain programs. Ms. Gamache
stated that, at the conference, concern was voiced
about the proposed Tribal Environmental Policy Acts
(TEPA). Ms. Gamache also reported that there had
been discussion at the conference about the
interaction between TOG and the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee. Ms. Bell commented that
only a model TEPA exists, a description of which had
been published in a law review journal. She agreed
to distribute copies of the law review article to the
members of the subcommittee.
Ms. Velpria inquired whether any goals had been
identified during the meeting. Ms. Bell replied that
individual program offices had discussed specific
activities and initiatives but did not formulate broad
goals. ' . -
5.2 Update on the World Council of Churches
Conference
Ms. Gamache provided an overview of the World
Council of Churches Conference that was held in
London, England on May 6 through 16, 1996. She
stated that the meeting had been "very powerful." Its
focus, she reported, had been on the effects of
mining operations on indigenous peoples. Ms.
Gamache stated that the conference had produced
a declaration describing how mining companies
should operate. Ms. Bell agreed to provide the
members of the subcommittee with copies of the.
declaration.
Mr. Bresette noted that reports on such international
activities should be provided to the appropriate,
subcommittees of the NEJAC, especially the
International Subcommittee. He expressed concern
that declarations such as that of the World Council of
Churches are not being passed on to the
International Subcommittee. Mr. Bresette
recommended that the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee meet with the /International
. Subcommittee during the current NEJAC meeting.
Ms. Gamache asked whether the International
Subcommittee is examining the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Ms. Bell replied that the
International Subcommittee is examining that issue!
and it might be an appropriate issue for the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee to investigate
because of the effects of NAFTA on tribes living in-
border states. EPA will sponsor a conference in the
fall of 1996 on NAFTA, particularly on trans-.
boundary environmental issues, she said.
Mr. Bresette asked whether there will any follow-up
activities to the World Council of Churches
conference! Ms. Gamache responded that follow-up
activities had been identified, but that funding for
such activities remains an Issue.
5.3 Update on EPA's Tribal Operations
Committee . .
Ms. Bell presented' background information on the
Tribal Operations Committee (TOC), which EPA
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
4-9
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
established in 1994.
description of the TOC.
Exhibit 4-3 presents a
Exhibit 4-3
EPA'S TRIBAL OPERATIONS
COMMITTEE
The mission of EPA's Tribal Operations
Committee (TOC) is to advance the protection
and improve the conditions of tribal health and
the environment in Indian Country. The
relationship between the TOC and EPA does
not substitute for the government-to-government
relationship between EPA and tribal
governments.
The TOC, comprised of EPA senior
management and representatives from various
tribes, provides input into EPA's "operational"
decision-making affecting Indian Country.
There are 19 tribal members from 9 of EPA's
10 regions. The tribes in each region determine
the method of selecting representatives and
alternatives.
Ms. Bell explained that the TOC meets
approximately four times a year and participates in
conference calls every two weeks, she said. Ms.
Bell announced that the TOC will meet soon in
Washington, D.C. to participate in EPA's annual
budget and planning meeting. Ten representatives
of the TOC participate in the budget meeting, at
which broad-picture priority and policy issues are
discussed, she said. Ms. Bell stated that this year's
meeting was to focus on community-based
environmental, protection and the Project XL
program. Ms. Bell agreed to distribute copies of the
TOC's charter to the members of the subcommittee.
Ms. Gamache added that the focus of the TOC is to
ensure that funds are increased across the board so
that Indian tribes can continue building an
environmental infrastructure. Ms. Bell discussed
EPA's tribal budget, which she said has seen a
significant increase in funding for the tribal programs.
Ms. Cavanaugh asked how the representatives to
(he TOC were selected. Ms. Bell replied that the
members were selected through the tribes in the
EPA Regions. Ms. Gamache noted that EPA Region
10 has created a regional TOC that has come
together to discuss issues specific to that region.
5.4 Update on the IEN Gathering
Mr. Goldtooth provided information about the
upcoming Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN)
Annual Gathering to be held on the Cherokee
Reservation in North Carolina on June 13 through
16,1996. The gathering is designed for members of
tribal communities, he said. Mr. Goldtooth explained
that every year the IEN hosts the gathering in a
different part of the country; this year's theme, he
said, is "Our Rivers are Life." In response to Mr.
Bresette's request for a list of issues to be discussed
at the gathering, Mr. Goldtooth identified such
issues as endangered species, ecotourism, water
protection, air quality, and mining and forestry
operations, conservation, and natural resources.
Mr. Bresette requested that a representative of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee attend the event
to offer the support of the subcommittee to
participants in the gathering. Mr. Bresette asked that
if a member of the subcommittee did attend the
gathering, could that person be placed on the
agenda. Mr. Goldtooth replied that the
representative could take part in the environmental
justice panel discussion to be conducted at the
gathering.
Mr. Bresette asked Ms. Gaylord whether OSWER
could appropriate funds to send a representative of
the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee to the IEN
gathering in June. She suggested that Mr. Bresette
discuss the issue with the Chair of the NEJAC.
i
5.5 Tribal Operations and Tribal Solid and
Hazardous Waste Issues
The Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee participated
in a joint session with the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee to hear a presentation from OSWER
on tribal operations and tribal solid and hazardous
waste issues (see Chapter 7, Section 5.0 for a
summary of the presentation and the discussion that
followed).
6.0 RESOLUTIONS
This section of the report presents the resolutions
submitted to NEJAC by the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee after the two, day subcommittee
meeting.
4-10
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 1:
EPA Region 9 should directly contact Dine CARE
about the uranium mines located on the Navajo
Nation and conduct a site visit of the area to
investigate human health and environmental effects
from the mining and milling operations (for example,
contamination of the soil and groundwater) and to
conduct radon studies of potentially contaminated
homes.
NEJAC should draft a letter to EPA Region 9
about uranium mining located on Navajo
Nation lands.
EPA Region 9 should submit a written report
to NEJAC and the subcommittee on past
agency actions regarding uranium mining and
radon on Navajo land, findings from these
requested investigations, and proposed
.actions.
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 2:
EPA Regional offices should appoint Native
American staff to serve in Agency tribal operations
programs and use intergovernmental .personnel
agreements (IPA) to increase participation by Native
Americans in EPA programs.
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 3:
EPA Region 9 should work with the tribal community
on the Cahuilla reservation to conduct a study of
potential contamination from a waste disposal site on
the reservation.
EPA Region 9 should submit a written report
to NEJAC and the subcommittee on past
, agency actions regarding the site, findings
from this requested study, and proposed
actions.
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No.4:
EPA AIEO, OEJ, Region 5, Region 8, and OSWER
should draft a paper on how EPA can assume
permitting authority and issue site-specific
regulations in Indian Country under RCRA Subtitle D
for solid waste management facilities.
Specifically, EPA Region 8 should propose
site-specific regulations for a federal solid
waste permitting process under the agency's
authority for the Lake Andes Landfill on the
Yankton Sioux reservation.
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 5:
EPA Region 8 should submit a written review of
Agency actions to date on the Lake Andes Landfill on
the Yankton Sioux reservation.
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 6:
In light of the agency's government-to-government
relationship with tribes and treaty and trust
obligations, EPA, should review its policies on
mediation and negotiation.
As a trustee, EPA should develop mediation
guidelines that would require the agency to
advocate to the fullest extent possible the
tribal position when that tribe is in conflict with
other entities, so as to ensure the protection
of treaty-reserved rights and trust assets.
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 7:
NEJAC should recommend that EPA strongly reach
out to other federal agencies (such as DOE) to
educate those agencies about Executive Order
12898 and also to educate them about and advocate
for fulfillment of- the federal government's trust
responsibilities under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA).
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 8:
NEJAC should strongly recommend that ^tribal
governments be involved, when appropriate, in the
selection of storage, transportation, disposal, and
treatment options; the siting of new and renovated
facilities; and the scheduling of treatment and long-
term monitoring in sites involving tribal rights and
Indian Country. '
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 9:
EPA should suspend a pending decision on an
underground injection control permit for the proposed
Copper Range solution mining operation until a full
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been
prepared. The EIS must include an analysis of the
environmental justice implications and impacts on
treaty-reserved rights and resources. All EPA
actions regarding this site must comply with the
agency's treaty and trust obligations, Executive
Order 12898, and EPA's Environmental Justice
Strategy.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
4-11
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 10:
Be it resolved by the NEJAC Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, that EPA's budget to build the
capacity of Indian tribes, including, but not limited to,
resources for General Assistance Program funds,
and funds for specific programs, be increased and
sustained until all tribes have available to them
sufficient resources and expertise to ensure
protection of human health and the environment on
Indian lands.
4-12
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 29 and 30,1996
Detroit, Michigan
Meeting Summary Accepted By
brraine FrTgepfo 0
Designated Federal Official
/Baldemar Velasquez
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER FIVE
MEETING OF THE
INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The International Subcommittee, of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
conducted a two-day meeting on Wednesday and
Thursday, May 29 and 30,1996, during a three-day
meeting of the NEJAC in Detroit, Michigan. Mr.
Baldemar Velasquez, Farm Labor Organizing
Committee, serves as chair of the subcommittee.
Ms. Lorraine Frigerio, Office of International Activities
(OIA), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
serves as the Designated Federal Official (DFO) for
the subcommittee.
Due to flight delays, Mr. Velasquez did not arrive
;until the meeting was in session. Exhibit 5-1
presents a list of the members who attended the
meeting and identifies those members who were
unable to attend.
This chapter, which provides a detailed discussion of
the deliberations of the International Subcommittee,
is organized into four sections, including this
Introduction. Section 2.0, Remands, summarizes the
remarks of the DFO. Section 3.0, Presentations,
presents an overview of each presentation, as well
as a summary of relevant questions and comments
from the members of the subcommittee. Section 4.0,
Activities of the Subcommittee, summarizes the
discussions about issues related to the
subcommittee, including the development of the
subcommittee's mission statement.
2.0 REMARKS
Ms. Frigerio, DFO, opened the meeting by
welcoming the members. Ms. Frigerio discussed
several administrative matters such as a
presentation on farm worker protection standards to
be made by EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides,
and Toxic Substances (OPPTS) to the Enforcement
Subcommittee.
Exhibit 5-1
3,0 PRESENTATIONS
This section provides summaries of
presentations provided during the meeting^
INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 29 and 30, 1996
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez, Chair
Ms. Lorraine Frigerio, DFO
Mr. Jose Bravo
Ms. Denise Ferguson-Southard
Ms. Mildred McClain
Mr. John O'Leary
Ms. Janet Phoenix
List of Members
Who Were Unable to Attend
Mr. John Borum
Mr. Bill Simmons
Ms. Patricia Williams
the
3.1 Overview of the Bolivia Hemispheric
Conference on Sustainable Development
Mr. John O'Leary, Pierce Atwood, presented an
overview of the Bolivia Hemispheric Conference on
Sustainable Development scheduled to be held in
Santa Cruz, Bolivia from December 3 through 8,
1996. He explained that the conference will convene
the presidents of the nations in the Americas. The
main focus of the conference will be on govemment-
to-govemment dialogue and interaction on a wide
range of issues, including housing, education, health,
the" environment, and sustainable development.
(See Exhibit 5-2 of this chapter for a description of
the conference.)
Mr. O'Leary noted he has played an early role in
inter-american environmental and sustainable
development issues, commenting that he had
participated in the development of Bolivia's Ministry
of Sustainable Development in 1992.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
5-1
-------
International Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Mr. O'Leary added that it is important that the
subcommittee discuss the conference because he
believes that there are definitely "points of
intersection" between sustainable development and
environmental justice. Because the United States is
the leader in exploring the ramifications of issues
related to environmental justice, he explained,
NEJAC should become involved in the conference to
help advance the environmental justice agenda and
to elevate it to an international level. He further
commented that, in this context, the issue of
environmental justice as it pertains to indigenous
peoples is extremely important.
Mr. O'Leary commented that the role of the U.S.
private sector in the conference is quite substantial.
He also mentioned that a conference on sustainable
development for non-governmental organizations
(NGO) recently had taken place in Washington, D.C.
He added that a follow-up meeting is scheduled to
take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in March
1997.
Ms. Cam Hill-Macon, OIA, also provided an update
Exhibit 5-2
BOLIVIA HEMISPHERIC CONFERENCE
The Bolivia Hemispheric Conference on
Sustainable Development is an international
conference designed to bring together the
presidents of the various nations in the Americas
to discuss sustainable development. The
conference is scheduled to be held in Santa Cruz,
Bolivia from December 6 through 8, 1996. In
addition to fostering a government-to-government
dialogue, conference planning will attempt to
engage NGOs of various backgrounds.
The Bolivia Hemispheric Conference is the result
of a discussion held approximately three years
ago between President Sanchez of Bolivia and
Vice President Albert Gore of the United States.
In response to President Sanchez's interest in
establishing a Ministry of Sustainable
Development, representatives from the U.S.
American Bar Association, the World Resources
Institute, and the Environmental Law Institute,
met with a transition team from Bolivia to create
a ministry that now focuses its work on the
utility, manufacturing, and mining sectors.
Currently, the Ministry is building a model for
sustainable development which includes an
emphasis on public participation.
on the role of EPA and other federal agencies in the
planning of the conference. Ms. Hill-Macon
participated in the meeting by telephone conference
call. She stated that, to the best of her knowledge,
EPA, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
currently have limited roles in conference planning.
EPA's efforts thus far have been limited to
implementation of the Partnership for Pollution
Prevention for which EPA believes the conference
presents significant opportunity. Ms. Hill-Macon
added that the U.S. State Department is the lead
agency in the United States and not EPA. She
identified Mr. Tim Wirth of the State Department as
the point of contact, who is engaging environmental
NGOs and industry associations. She also identified
Mr. Stan Myles, also from the State Department, as
an additional point of contact.
Ms. Hill-Macon reported that there is some concern
about the planning for the agenda of the conference.
She added that a meeting was held in Santa Cruz,
Bolivia, to discuss the recently-developed scoping
paper. Ms. Hill-Macon noted that the next version of
the draft paper is scheduled for release in June 1996
and may help to clarify some of the confusion about
the agenda-for the conference. Based on unofficial
information, Ms. Hill-Macon commented that a public
participation effort will take place from June through
September 1996 and will focus on establishing
relationships with the private or "civil" sector.
Thereafter, the consultation process will move to the
government sector. Ms. Hill-Macon also stated that
she understands that the document(s) will be made
widely available.
Ms. Hill-Macon stated that, according to available
information, the agenda may include opportunities for
discussion of the following topics:
Public participation
Access to information
Conduct of environmental impact
statements
Poverty and human health
She added that the section on public participation
may include discussions of topics related to
environmental justice.
In response to Ms. Frigerio's question about who is
taking responsibility for developing the sessions that
5-2
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
International Subcommittee
may relate to environmental justice issues, Ms. Hill-
Macon responded that that remains unclear.
Ms. Hill-Macon commented that the role of NGO's in
the conference also is unclear. However, she stated
that she is aware that an NGO from Ecuador
(Fundacion Future Latinoamericano) had been asked
to oversee the consultation process for NGOs. Mr.
O'Leary confirmed that the North-South Center had
been asked to lead an effort to examine the,
participation of NGOs from the United States.
Mr. O'Leary indicated that multinational banks, such
as the World Bank and the Inter-American
Development Bank, also are deeply involved in the
conference. Mr. Jose Bravo, Southwest Network for
Environmental and Economic Justice, voiced his
concern about the participation of the,multinational
banks in the conference and suggested that the
NEJAC should be careful about how it chooses to
participate in the planning process. He remarked
that his organization had prepared a paper on
sustainable development, which, he said, had yet to
be discussed. Further, some issues that NEJAC
may consider important may be "unspeakable" in the
eyes of the banks, he said. However, Mr. Bravo
agreed that a voice for environmental justice is
needed. Mr. O'Leary suggested that, for the
December 1996 meeting of the NEJAC, the
subcommittee may want to extend an invitation to a
representative of one of the banks or a participant in
the conference to brief the subcommittee about the
issues discussed in Bolivia.
I .'
Ms. Janet Phoenix, National Lead Information
Center, suggested that the subcommittee engage in
a "brain-storming session" on how to approach its
participation in the Bolivian conference,. while
keeping in mind that a "holistic framework" would
tackle those issues. The bottom line, she said, is
that the process will take time.
Ms. Mildred McClain, Citizens for Environmental
Justice, suggested that the role of the subcommittee
may be to impose a framework for increasing
awareness on environmental justice throughout the
on-going dialogue. Then, she said, the question of
resources available to the subcommittee to pursue
this effort and the need for a "focal point" on which to
concentrate people's efforts are no longer
paramount. The bottom line question, she summed
up is, "Can- the subcommittee influence the
dialogue?" Mr. O'Leary acknowledged that it is
probable that environmental justice will not be a
major focus of the conference, but that, he said, does
not mean that environmental justice should be left
out of the international agenda. He also agreed with
Ms. McClain, and suggested that the subcommittee
should focus on what it can do now and in the future.
Ms. Frigerio suggested that the subcommittee
consider identifying opportunities for information
exchange and identify potential roles for the
subcommittee in activities related to the conference.
Ms. Frigerio expressed her appreciation for the
information that Ms. Hill-Macon had shared with the
subcommittee and reemphasized the point that more
information is. needed. She asked whether the
subcommittee can approach the State Department
directly. Ms. Hill-Macon responded that the
subcommittee can contact Mr. Wirth directly.
3.2 Update on the Border XXI Program
Ms. Frigerio and Ms. Colleen Smith, EPA's San
> Diego Border Office, presented an overview of the
United States/Mexico Border XXI program. Ms.
Smith participated in the meeting by telephone
conference call.
Ms. Frigerio reported that the Border XXI program is
the next phase of binational environmental planning
that follows the Integrated Border Environmental
Plan (IBEP) for the Mexico/United States border,
covering 1992 -1994. The IBEP drew much criticism
from the public because it did not provide sufficient
opportunities for public participation and did not
focus on human health issues, she said. (See
Exhibit 3-3 for a description of the Border XXI
Program.)
Ms. Frigerio commented that under the program,
there are several mechanisms for < public
involvement; the U.S. Good Neighbor Environmental
Board (an advisory group to the U.S. Congress and.
the President of the United States); two border
liaison offices that have been in existence for
approximately one and one-half years; and Mexico's
Secretariat for Environment, Natural Resources, and
Fisheries (SEMARNAP), EPA's counterpart in
Mexico, which has established a number of
information centers open to the public, particularly in
border cities like Tijuana, Mexico. In addition, EPA ,
has established a series of information repositories
in United States communities located along the
border. ,
Ms. Frigerio announced that the EPA draft report on
the Framework for the Border XXI Program, recently
had been released for public comment She stated
that the public comment period was to be June 5,
1996 through July 29,1996. Ms. Ferguson-Southard
commented that, because of its size, the document
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
5-3
-------
International Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit 3-3
BORDER XXI PROGRAM
The Border XXI program is a bilateral
interagency agreement aimed at protecting and
improving the environment and human health
while fostering sustainable development in the
United States/Mexico border area. The
objectives of the program include public
involvement, decentralization of the decision-
making process, and increased cooperation
between the different government agencies
operating in the border region.
The key United States federal agencies involved
in developing and implementing the program
include EPA, the U.S. Department of Interior,
the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, and the International Boundary and
Water Commission. These agencies are
responsible for encouraging the participation of
states, tribal nations, local communities,
academia, and non-governmental organizations.
Some significant differences between the former
border program and the new Border XXI
program are the adoption of a regional approach;
the establishment of short- and long-term
objectives; and the addition of three new work
groups, bringing the total to nine.
The Border XXI program has the support of
several new institutions created under the North
America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), with
which its efforts will be coordinated. Those
institutions are the Border Environmental
Cooperation Commission (BECC), the Northern
American Development (NAD) Bank, and the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation.
"can be intimidating." Ms. Smith stated that because
the program represents an on-going process, this
public comment period, which is the second such
period for the report, was an attempt to obtain
additional information and comment. She stressed
the importance of reaching out to "nontraditional"
groups that traditionally have not, engaged in
dialogue with EPA. Ms. Smith expressed the desire
of program officials to seek assistance from the
NEJAC in reaching those groups.
Mr. Bravo asked whether the document covers
issues other than those related to waste water, such
as abandoned sites and infrastructure. In addition,
he expressed concern about whether the comments
generated during the public comment period would
be incorporated into the final version of the report. In
response to Mr. Bravo's first question, Ms. Smith
pointed out that the report does cover issues other
than waste water. Ms. Smith also stated that the
program has been issuing grants based on specific
community needs. The Border Environmental
Cooperation Commission (BECC), created under the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA),
has been involved primarily in the certification of
waste water projects, while the U.S./Mexico Border
Health Association is focusing on projects related to
international environmental health, she reported.
She added that there definitely had been observable
improvement in the degree of openness on the part
of the Mexican government to engaging members of
the public. Ms. Smith cited as an example a meeting
in Tijuana, Mexico, at which citizens of both the
United States and Mexico actively asked questions
and called upon officials of both governments for
answers.
Ms. Frigerio stated that EPA will pursue several
outreach efforts such as participating in border
events and providing briefings to various groups
such as NGOs. She added that a series of public
meetings had been scheduled in various locations in
EPA Regions 6 and 9. Ms. Frigerio distributed a
draft public meeting schedule. She stated further
that, as yet, she did not know the exact format the
meetings would take. Ms. McClain indicated that it
is very important that communities receiving grants
be present at the meetings. In addition, she added
it is crucial that those who are responsible for the
presentation of information understand the needs of
the community.
In response to Ms. Ferguson-Southard's inquiry
about the types of information provided by the
information centers, Ms. Smith indicated that,
typically, the centers have access to the Internet
through the World Wide Web (WWW), as well as a
library of environmental publications. She stressed
that the Border XXI program still is a work in
progress and that the current objective is to tailor
information to the needs of each specific geographic
region. Discussing compliance information, Ms.
Smith indicated that, although officials from both the
United States and Mexico have agreed to share
information, the two countries still have very different
points of view about the sharing of information. Ms.
Ferguson-Southard then observed that there appears
5-4
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
International Subcommittee
to be legal constraints that affect the issue, as well.
Ms. Smith acknowledged that apparently concerns
exist about the rules of each country governing
confidential business information. The rules of the
two countries should be compared, suggested Ms.
Smith. ,
Mr. Bravo asked whether the citizens of Mexico will
have access through its information centers to the
laws and regulations of the United States, such as
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA), the Toxic Substance and Control Act
(TSCA), the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Clean Water
Act (CWA), and the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA). He said he believes that it is important that
the Mexican public understands applicable
regulations of this country. Ms. Smith indicated that
Mexican government officials feel comfortable with
providing its citizens with access to information about
the laws and regulations, as well as other types of
information about the United States.
Ms. Smith added that the final outcome is to place
program objectives into the program framework, she
said. She added that the program will have long-
term objectives and a status report will be generated
to evaluate the progress of the program.
Mr. Velasquez inquired whether the Border XXI
program addresses issues related to agriculture,
stating that the basic premise of the program is to
improve human health while fostering development.
He said he believes that it is logical and important to
include agricultural issues, yet those very issues
have been ignored, he asserted. He also asked
what is the process for expanding the discussion to
other areas. Ms. Smith acknowledged an apparent
need to include agricultural themes, but cautioned
that it will take time to form a discussion group,
especially jn light of the complexity of agricultural
issues. Ms. Frigerio pointed out that under certain
topics (such as environmental health) of the Border ,
XXI report, issues related to agriculture are covered.
She suggested that the subcommitte may want to
provide comment to EPA on agricultural issues in the
draft report. ' , ,
On another note, Mr. Velasquez asked whether a
process can be "set up from ground zero," citing the
drawbacks and failures that he experiences with
work groups considering farm worker issues. He
specifically suggested that a model for action be
considered. Mr. Velasquez also inquired whether the
United States is funding the effort and discussion.
Ms. Smith responded that funding had been provided
primarily from the North American Development
(NAD) Bank and the BECC, with additional funding
coming from other sources in the United States. She
clarified that the role of the BECC is to certify
projects to be funded by the NAD Bank. Currently,
she added, seven projects have been certified and
are awaiting funding. Her understanding , she said,
is that EPA has plans to spend as much as $100
million in fiscal year 1996 on water and wastewater
infrastructure projects along the border.
Mr. Bravo raised the issue of an individual
community's ability to secure a loan, and asked
whether such loans serve as funding remedies for
the real issues. Mr. Velasquez alsp expressed
concern about the potential for the overriding of
enforcement actions should private entities or
polluters secure loans. Ms. Ferguson-Southard
added that there are no strong guarantees that the
loan grantee and polluter will not repeat what it had
done in the past.
Ms. Paula Gomez, Brownsville, Texas Community
Health Center and a member of the Health and
Research Subcommittee, added that, currently it is
difficult to ensure that Mexican authorities are
providing "sufficient" enforcement, especially when
the United States is not providing enough. She also
expressed concern that those individuals drafting
policy may have little or no experience in, and
knowledge about, issues related to border
economies.
Mr. Velasquez suggested that any comments from
the subcommittee be routed to the NEJAC,
suggesting that the subcommittee ask the NEJAC to
submit such comments to the Border XXI Program
Ms. King clarified that subcommittee comments must
be voted oh by the Executive Council. At the same
time, Ms. Frigerio reminded the members that,
beyond the NEJAC process, members can provide
comments as individuals as part of the formal
comment period announced in the Federal Register.
The members agreed that the major issues of
concern are: agricultural issues, access to
information (especially enforcement data), and
fostering of greater participation on the part of those
living in the areas of concern.
3.3
Public Participation and Accountability in
the Border Environmental Cooperation
Commission ,
Ms. Teresa Leal, a representative of the community
of Nogales, Mexico, discussed issues related to
public, participation and accountability under the
Border XXI Program. Ms. Leal, began her,
presentation with a sidenote about NAFTA,
mentioning that there are serious concerns about the
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
5-5
-------
International Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
agreement, as well as a tendency of border
communities to "fight" NAFTA because of the
requirement to "clean up before opening up."
Ms. Leal explained that the BECC and NAD Bank
have been offering low-interest loans to communities
located along the international border to fund
projects related to wastewater. Although seven
proposals have been approved by the BECC, she
continued, those projects have fallen short of public
demands and may not have gained the full approval
of the public. The primary concern she added, is that
the monies loaned for the projects are public funds.
She added that many of those projects are
controversial, and the public expects more in the
future. She also indicated that the BECC may not be
fully committed to the public participation process,
and cited the following examples from what she
characterized as a recent BECC public meeting:
\
The meeting location was difficult to reach
Little information was made available
Distribution of the information was inadequate
and was not completed in a timely manner
Funds for reimbursement for travel by
representatives of public groups were
insufficient
Ms. Leal indicated her suspicion, based on who
attended the meeting, that the BECC may be more
concerned with the interests of private corporations,
the academic community, and politicians than with
those of the public. She further questioned whether
the late arrival of pertinent information was indeed
intentional, and whether the public participation
process had been manipulated. She also stated
that, during the BECC public meeting, the public
comment period was closed abruptly, and the
officials of BECC did not offer any explanations for
their decision to terminate it.
Mr. Bravo suggested that the NEJAC should prepare
a letter to the EPA Administrator under the signature
of Mr. Richard Mooje, chair of NEJAC, expressing
the NEJAC's concern about the apparent lack of
public participation and accountability in the activities
of the BECC.
3.4 Overview of the Activities of the
President's Council on Sustainable
Development
Mr. O'Leary provided an overview of the President's
Council on Sustainable Development. He explained
that the council was established approximately three
years ago and its membership consists of 25
persons representing the private and public sectors.
Members of the council are appointed by President
Clinton, he added.
Mr. O'Leary reported that since its inception, the
Council had focused on such issues as economic
growth, environmental protection, and social justice.
He listed the nine policy recommendations generated
by the council and recently outlined in its published
report:
Focus on scientific research and data
collection
Support cooperation on biodiversity
Support bilateral and multilateral institutions
Encourage the participation of NGOs and
private-sector entities
Support the voluntary adoption of consistent
goals worldwide
Promote commitments and incentives for
resource efficiency
Foster consistency between federal
environmental policy and international trade
policy
Foster cooperation with the private sector to
promote transfer and export of technology
Support the United Nations Commission on
Sustainable Development
Mr. Velasquez suggested that the NEJAC may want
to formally commend the council's efforts in
preparing the report. He also suggested that the
subcommittee may want to invite a spokesperson
from the World Resources Institute to speak at the
December 1996 meeting of the subcommittee. Mr.
Velasquez further noted'that problems usually begin
to emerge in the implementation phase of action
items and often lead to a break down of the process,
he added. In addition, Mr. Velasquez identified
another problem - in which those individuals who
5-6
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Internationa} Subcommittee
hold power may recognize a need, but, in many
cases, fail to empower other people to implement
remedies.
3.5 Update on the Habitat II Conference
Ms. Frigerio provided an update on the Second
United Nations (UN) Conference on Human
Settlements Habitat II, to be held the first week of
June 1996 in Istanbul, Turkey. EPA is making efforts ,
to incorporate language related to environmental
justice into the action agenda or "platform" for the
conference.
Mr. Velasquez inquired about how the platform is to
be implemented and suggested that failure to
implement action plans is a common problem
affecting the efforts of the UN. In response, Ms.
Frigerio expressed her uncertainty about the issue,
but added that implementation appears to be the
responsibility of each individual government body.
She added that the UN may have no authority to
force governments to implement programs to which
they had agreed.
Mr. Bravo noted that it may( be inappropriate for
individual . government bodies to enforce
environmental justice; rather, he said, responsibility
for implementing and sustaining an environmental
justice movement Jies heavily with the public. He
also voiced his uncertainty about how the
subcommittee should deal with the platform of action
for the conference.
Mr. Velasquez' then asked how the UN platform of
action will affect U.S. laws and regulations. Ms.
Frigerio offered to inquire of the EPA staff who had
worked on the Women's Conference in Beijing,
China, to determine how similar issues Were worked
out. Mr. O'Leary suggested that the subcommittee
also look at the Conference held in Rio de Janero,
Brazil, in 1995:
Mr. Bravo expressed concern about the lack of
community involvement in such EPA activities as
negotiating environmental justice policy and drafting
policy language related to environmental justice in
the international arena. Mr. Bravo also expressed
concern about the fact that, in this case, EPA is
making decisions and choices for the people, but that
EPA's action may not be acceptable to the people.
He reminded Mr. Velasquez that, if OEJ is dealing
with environmental issues on the international front,
the International Subcommittee should be involved in
that effort.
Ms. Clarice Gaylord, Director of OEJ, explained that
the language proposed for the Habitat II Conference
is the. same language that was adopted and
.accepted for the Beijing conference. She also
indicated that the perceived lack of community
involvement may be a result of the following factors:
Short turnaround time for such efforts
Lack of authority on the part of OEJ in many
circumstances to seek the views of outside
entities
Mr., Bravo stated that he understands those
constraints, but maintained that, since such policy
decisions will affect the lives and habitats of
individuals, EPA should make time to seek the views
of community groups.
Ms. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, OIA, who
participated in the meeting through a telephone
conference call, explained that a more significant
problem than seeking comment is the challenge of
working with 118 countries and attempting to obtain
"buy-in" from as many of them as possible. Further,
Ms. Coleman-Adebayo indicated that, in the
international arena, EPA's activities are conducted
under the authority of the State Department.
Mr. Velasquez observed that, although the
subcommittee may be an excellent vehicle through
which information can be gathered and channeled to
the NEJAC, the organizations from which such
information is received may not be accountable to
the NEJAC. Ms. McClain suggested that, under
such circumstances, good follow-up is key,
especially when programs are in a state of flux.
3.6 Update on the Gore-Mbecki Report
Ms. Coleman-Adebayo provided an update on the
activities of the Gore-Mbecki working group on the
environment and natural resources. She explained
that the work group is assisting the government of
South Africa by developing a series of training
programs that are intended to build the internal
capacity of the new South African government to
address its environmental problems.
Ms. Coleman-Adebayo offered some insight into the
development of the project. She indicated that, with
the recent changes in the political climate in South
Africa, she believes that the new head of the
environmental agency of South Africa will be better
for the environment. The new environmental
agency, however, still is in need of institutional
enhancement, she said, adding that that fact inspired
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
5-7
-------
International Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
the study tour that was conducted recently, she said.
Ms. Coleman-Adebayo stated that EPA had
forwarded to the South African government the
names of individuals from various South African civil
organizations which had been provided by the
African National Congress. She said that those who
are participating in the tour are primarily former
activists who have become policy makers. The
decisions made about the mission are to be
approved by South African community groups
participating in the project.
Ms. Coleman-Adebayo stated that the first event of
the tour, conducted at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, was intended to establish relationships
to support future research needs. Activities related
to environmental justice were limited primarily to
visits to the sites of local cleanups in the area. The
second event of the study tour was to be conducted
in Washington, D.C.
Ms. McClain indicated that the training schedule did
not include time for the participation of community
groups. Ms. Coleman-Adebayo stated that she is
willing to address this issue in developing the
schedule for the Washington, D.C. visit. Ms.
Ferguson-Southard added her observation that
involvement on the part of state agencies seems to
be lacking. She offered to provide points of contact
as a follow-up. Mr. Velasquez then suggested that
Ms. McClain be the point of contact for the
subcommittee on environmental justice issues
related to Africa.
Ms. McClain expressed deep concern that, for the
Gore-Mbecki program, environmental justice had
been downgraded to the position of a "minor"
concern. She explained further that the
environmental justice -movement "is a grassroots
movement, and involvement must include grassroots
organizations." Ms. McClain stressed further that
communities must be and should be involved at the
core of the drafting of the report, but, apparently, she
observed, communities had been left out. She
expressed concern about EPA's dominant role in the
development and conduct of community-based
initiatives and training and the lack of involvement of
the NEJAC International Subcommittee. Mr. Bravo
also expressed concern is that EPA is not fully using
the knowledge and expertise of the members of the
International Subcommittee.
Ms. Gaylord responded that environmental justice
was, in fact, a predominant issue and a major theme
of the Gore-Mbecki program. One of the positive
outcomes of the project is that the South African
partners in the project are to undertake their own
training initiatives in community schools.
Mr. Velasquez then inquired whether any NGOs are
involved in the project. In response, Ms. Coleman-
Adebayo stated that NGOs based in South Africa are
represented, adding that NGOs based in U.S. also
are represented, although to a lesser extent.
4.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
Mr. Velasquez opened the discussion of the
development of a mission statement for the
subcommittee by soliciting the ideas of the members
about the future direction of the subcommittee. He
indicated that the bylaws of the NEJAC allow the
subcommittee to discuss "issues of interest." Ms.
King added that the four original subcommittees had
drafted their mission statements in 1995.
Ms. Phoenix questioned whether the role of the
subcommittee should be to provide advice to EPA or
whether the subcommittee should discuss issues
that may be related to other agencies. If so, she
asked, can that discussion cover other countries?
Ms. Ferguson-Southard responded that the focus
should be on a particular issue. Mr. Bravo
suggested that the subcommittee follow a particular
"work plan," from which the members could talk
about many issues.
Mr. Velasquez stated that the mission statement
should exemplify "participatory democracy," and
suggested it may be desirable that discussion take
into consideration trade and international policy. He
added that environmental justice issues have been
added as an item of discussion in United States
trade negotiations and that the effect of U.S. trade
policy on the environmental justice movement in
other countries can be very significant. Mr.
Velasquez added that the objective of the NEJAC
might be to help the United States formulate
appropriate trade policy in which environmental
justice considerations are included. He also raised
the question of whether the NEJAC can request that
the office of the United States Trade Representative
(USTR) respond to Executive Order 12898 on
environmental justice.
Mr. Velasquez stated, as an example, that citrus
growers in Florida are suffering because of imports
from Mexican growers. Because of the lowering of
barriers as a result of NAFTA, Mexican citrus
growers have been able to import goods at lower
prices that reflect Mexico's less stringent farmworker
standards, he explained. That circumstance, he
5-8
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Internationa] Subcommittee
observed, suggests that United States trade
negotiators are not taking environmental justice
, issues into consideration. Ms. Ferguson-Southard
observed that, in that case, the subcommittee's
challenge is to encourage the development of an
awareness of environmental justice issues in other
countries.
Mr. Bravo agreed that there is a "movement" in other
countries to emulate United States policy; but the
trend, he added, is to relax existing regulations
before new regulations are imposed. Any attempts
to protect workers therefore are hampered, he said.'
Mr. Bravo also suggested that United States
standards should apply to the operations of United
States corporations operating in other countries. He
stated, for example, that corporations operating
overseas are selling DDT and are buying land on
which to grow cheaper produce. Those, he declared,
are questionable practices.
Ms.. McClain concurred with Mr. Bravo's observation
about the tendency of American corporations to fail
to comply with the environmental standards of other
countries. She stated that such incidents also have
occurred in West Africa. An observer, Ms. Megan
Charlop, Lead Poisoning Prevention Project,
suggested that perhaps EPA should take a lead role
in preventing U.S. firms from exporting to other
countries items that are prohibited or outlawed, in the
United States. She inquired further whether the
United States can actually ban the production of
such items. Ms. Ferguson-Southard added that
, there .might be a fine line between the "use" and
"production1' of such items, noting' that EPA's
authority to take the action Ms. Charlop had
suggested is doubtful.
Mr. Velasquez suggested that the NEJAC could
establish a working group to examine the possibility
of creating a method by which to provide comment
on United States trade policy through EPA. Mr.
Bravo suggested that the NEJAC may want to go
even farther by creating a model for incorporating
environmental justice into United States trade policy.
Ms: Ferguson-Southard also stated that any model
for incorporating environmental justice must be
"user-friendly, yet specific." Ms. McClain cautioned
that, should a model or principles be developed,
special consideration should be given to the potential
lack of integration of policy and the failure to use the
model or principles. She pointed out that policies are
important to guide legislation that has been passed.
That is an important concern in the international
arena, she stated.
Ms. McClain asked whether EPA can provide
information about the agency's activities in the
international arena. Ms. Ferguson-Southard noted
that EPA currently holds no explicit leadership
position in relation to the international activities.
Ms. Phoenix raised the question of the need for the
International Subcommittee to interact with other
federal agencies to comprehensively address
international environmental justice issues. Members
of the subcommmittee agreed that there were many
agencies that play as great or greater role in
international environmental justice than EPA. The
subcommittee also agreed to work to establish direct
contact with other agencies who do international
work, such as the State Department, the U.S.
Department of Defense, and the U.S. Agency for
IntemationaJ Development. Members cited the
Interagency Working Group on Environmental
Justice as another vehicle that the subcommittee
could use to explore interagency contact.
Mr. O'Leary suggested that the subcommittee
convene three to four times a year to discuss what it
can "bring to the table," which, he said, potentially is
the ability to increase awareness of issues related to
environmental justice. He also suggested that a
potential role for the NEJAC is to help other agencies
focus on the concept of environmental justice. He
added that, although other countries may not have
organized environmental justice movements, the
NEJAC can continue to raise awareness through
cooperative efforts with related organizations in other
countries.
Mr. O'Leary also suggested that it may be worthwhile
for the NEJAC to review the environmental justice
plans submitted by federal agencies other than EPA
io determine whether they include any applicable
international aspects. He suggested further that, if
there are any international aspects, the NEJAC
should invite the authors of the plans to attend the
December 1996 meeting of the subcommittee. He
also sought clarification on whether the mission of
the NEJAC encompasses the identification of
international organizations that are engaged in work
related to environmental justice.
Ms. Ferguson-Southard shared her experience in
enforcement, stating that the creation of a forum to
involve other agencies is "fair game." The question,
she said, is whether direct contact between the
subcommittee and other agencies is permissible. On
that issue, Ms. King indicated that such direct
contact on an indivudal basis is permissible, but for
the subcommittee, formal contact must be made
through the Executive Council of the NEJAC.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
5-9
-------
International Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
In an attempt to clarify the discussion, Ms. Frigerio
stated that there appears to be three primary
purposes for the creation of a mission statement:
Create a self-imposed mission
Communicate to others what
subcommittee intends to achieve
the
Increase credibility when engaging in
cooperative efforts with other federal
agencies
Ms. Frigerio observed that the subcommittee may
want to invest more time in obtaining information on
which to base its decisions about the specific issues
in which it wishes to engage. Mr. Velasquez
suggested that, perhaps the objective of the
subcommittee is to ensure that it is called upon to
provide comment on issues related to environmental
justice, especially those pertaining to United States
policymaking. The subcommittee also should
encourage collaboration between people of color and
EPA, working with the highest levels of government,
he said.
Ms. Gaylord repeated that there is a definite
commitment in EPA to pursuing environmental
justice issues on an international level, as evidenced
by the formation of the International Subcommittee.
She explained, however, that members of the
subcommittee also must understand that the issues
discussed may be pertinent strictly to EPA and
therefore may not be appropriate for significant levels
of public comment. She1 also stressed that the
members should feel free to use OEJ to foster
partnerships with other offices of EPA and other
federal agencies. In addition, she agreed that the
subcommittee may be in need of a long-term
strategy.
Mr. Velasquez stated that the concept of
environmental justice is still evolving and is
championed by people of color. But he cautioned
that many academic institutions, when involved in
the evolution of the concept, tend to adapt the term
to their own use. He suggested further that the true
role of the subcommittee is to rally, and cooperate
with, environmental justice groups, both within and
outside the United States. Through empowerment,
the committee should create forums for
communicating and creating dialogue for decision
making, he explained, adding that the NEJAC is a
lifetime opportunity for EPA to create a meaningful
dialogue.
Ms. Ferguson-Southard commented that there
should be a connection between the NEJAC's
activities and EPA's efforts. She acknowledged that,
at times, there might be significant time constraints,
but that connection "must remain an underlying
thought." Ms. Gaylord responded that the
subcommittee can meet separately and hold other
meetings with EPA offices. The only prerequisite,
she stated, is that the Chair of the NEJAC Executive
Council, be informed of such meetings.
Ms. McClain stated that, in the activities to be
undertaken by the subcommittee, there should be a
balance between OIA activities and those of
community groups. If necessary, such a balance
should be created, she said, adding that the
subcommittee also should respond not only to OlA's
needs, but to pursue its own agenda.
Ms. Ferguson-Southard suggested that it may be
helpful to communicate to OIA that the subcommittee
is willing to offer its assistance and inform OIA about
the types of expertise that its members possess.
She suggested that specific points of contact be
identified and named the following individuals as
subject matter experts:
> Mr. Velasquez on international trade issues
Mr. Bravo on border issues
Ms. Ferguson-Southard
issues
on enforcement
Ms. McClain on issues related to Africa
The mission statement will be completed at the
December 1996 meeting and presented to the
Executive Council for comment and adoption.
5-10
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 29 and 30,1996
Detroit, Michigan
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Robert Kno)
Designated Federal Official
Chair
-------
-------
\ CHAPTERSIX
MEETING OF THE
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee of the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC) conducted a two-day
meeting on Wednesday and Thursday, May 29 and
30,1996, during a three-day meeting of the NEJAC
in Detroit, Michigan. Ms. Peggy Saika, Asian-Pacific
Environmental Network, continues to serve as chair
of the subcommittee. Mr. Robert Knox, Office of
Environmental Justice (OEJ), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), continues to serve as the
Designated Federal Official (DFO) for the
subcommittee.
This chapter, which provides a detailed overview of.
the deliberations of the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee, is organized in four
sections, including this Introduction. Section 2.0,
' Activities of the Subcommittee, summarizes the
dialogue about the activities of the subcommittee,
including a review of its action items and discussions
about the role of the subcommittee. Section 3.0,
Improving the Public Participation Process,
summarizes the discussions about issues related to
completing the NEJAC's model plan for public
participation, improving the NEJAC's interaction with
communities, enlisting support on the regional level,
fostering public participation in EPA's policy
development and decision making, and
disseminating information about environmental
justice. Section 4.0, Environmental Justice Issues
Related'-.to, Public Participation, summarizes the
subcommittee's discussions about the proposed rule
to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) on expanded public participation; the draft
guidance for addressing environmental justice under
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); public
participation efforts in Chile; and the EPA grant
process. ,
Exhibit 6-1 presents a list of the members who
attended the meeting and identifies those members
who were unable to attend..
2.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
The members of the NEJAC Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee discussed the activities
of the subcommittee, which included a review of the
action items agreed upon during its previous meeting
Exhibit 6-1
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND
ACCOUNTABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 29 and 30, 1996
Peggy Saika, Chan-
Robert Knox, DFO
Ms. Dolores Herrera
Mr. Lawrence Hurst
Mr. Dune Lankard
Mr. Haywood Turrentine
Ms. Beverly Wright
List of Members
Who Were Unable to Attend
Mr. Domingo Gonzales
Mr. Salomon Rondon-Tollens
in December 1995 and discussions of the role of the
subcommittee within NEJAC. Several members of
the subcommittee expressed concern about the
rescheduling of the NEJAC meeting several months.
after the original date had been communicated, citing
difficulties encountered in changing schedules.
Some members noted that they would not be able to
attend the entire NEJAC meeting because of the
schedule change.
2.1 Review of Action Items
Ms. Saika led a discussion of action items and
resolutions that had been identified at the previous .
meeting of the subcommittee in December 1995.
Selected action items are summarized below.
Identify the types of stakeholders to'include in
the model plan for public participation.
Mr. Lawrence Hurst, Motorola, Inc., recommended
that the list of stakeholders previously developed be
incorporated into the model plan for public
participation. The members of the subcommittee
agreed with his recommendation.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
6-1
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Identify innovative ways to distribute the
model plan for public participation.
Mr. Hurst reviewed suggestions (as discussed in
Section 3.1 of this chapter) for the distribution of the
model plan for public participation. Mr. Knox stated
that OEJ would prepare a list of the distribution
methods identified, based on the discussion of the
members of the subcommittee.
Develop pilot project to test the model plan for
public participation.
The members agreed that this ongoing activity would
be discussed further in a one-day meeting of the
subcommittee on September 9,1996 at the OEJ in
Washington, DC.
Contact the chair of the Waste and Facility
Siting to discuss providing information about
testing the model plan for public participation.
Ms. Saika stated that the action item should be
amended as follows: "Contact Mr. Charles Lee to
discuss integrating the model plan for public
participation with the activities of the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee."
Resolution No. 1: Recommend that NEJAC
adopt the draft model for public participation
as a living document that will be reviewed
annually and revised as necessary.
Ms. Saika reported that the resolution had been
passed at the December 1995 meeting of the
NEJAC. After some discussion the members
recommended additional changes to the model
plan. CSee Section 4.1 of this chapter for a detailed
discussion of this issue.)
Recommend that OEJ explore options to
develop an environmental justice resource
bank fora variety of public outreach efforts.
related to environmental justice; follow up with
Mr. Robert Bullard and Ms. Beverly Wright
about information repositories already
established.
The members of the subcommittee discussed
various options for disseminating information about
environmental justice (see Section 3.5 of this
chapter for a detailed summary of this issue). Mr.
Knox confirmed that OEJ will contact Mr. Robert
Bullard, Clark Atlanta University Center for
Environmental Justice and chair of the NEJAC
Health and Research Subcommittee, and Ms.
Beverly Wright, Xavier University Deep South
Center for Environmental Justice and member of
this subcommittees, about the information
repositories they have established at their
universities.
Resolution No. 2: Recommend that NEJAC
consider
- Continued use of satellite downlinks and other
innovative technologies and translating
capabilities to meet the needs of participating
audiences (for example, non-English
speaking and hearing-impaired audiences);
suggest that NEJAC recommend that future
EPA budgets include costs of using this
technology .
- Establishment of procedures for responding
to comments from the public which ensure
public accountability
Ms. Saika reported that the resolution had been
passed at the December 1995 meeting of the
NEJAC. The members then discussed (as detailed
in Section 3.2 of this chapter) alternative means for
improving the interaction of NEJAC with the
community
2.2 Role of the Subcommittee
Ms. Saika opened a discussion of the need to
strengthen the effectiveness of the subcommittee
and to better integrate the activities of its members
with those of other subcommittees of the NEJAC.
Referring to Ms. Wright's discussion of this issue at
the previous meeting of the subcommittee, Ms. Saika
repeated the notion that public participation is one
that affects all other issues of environmental justice.
Ms. Wright added that the subcommittee is "cross-
cutting" which, she observed, is both a "plus and
negative." The other subcommittees, she explained,
have a more clearly defined role and also are
working on their own public participation issues. The
NEJAC and the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee should develop a
formal structure, Ms. Wright suggested, that allows
the members of the subcommittee to work closely
with the other NEJAC subcommittees. She then
suggested that a member of the public participation
subcommittee be assigned to each of the other
subcommittees.
Suggesting that the subcommittee also should
identify its mission, Ms. Wright noted that,
traditionally, members have supported the public
participation activities of the other NEJAC
6-2
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
subcommittees. She emphasized that now the
public participation subcommittee should establish its
own identity. Public participation as a process, she
stated, is a recurring subject of the discussions of
this subcommittee. There is a role for public
participation, she stated, as a process that is
separate and apart from the identification of such
issues as enforcement and health and research.
She emphasized that it is in the advancement of that
process that the subcommittee can play a role. Ms.
Saika agreed, but also reiterated that the
membership of the subcommittee needs to be
increased to enable it to accomplish more.
Ms. Saika also suggested that the subcommittee
examine methods of making structural changes in
the membership of the subcommittee, considering
particularly how the subcommittee should deal with
the continued absence of Mr. Domingo Gonzales,
Texas Center for Policy Studies, and the Hon.
Salomon Rond6n-Tollens, Puerto Rico Natural
Resources and Environmental Quality. Mr. Hurst
also expressed his concern about the number of
members serving on the subcommittee, but added
that the members should do more work so that it
becomes clear that more members are needed.
Mr- Haywood Turrentine, Laborers-AGC Education
and Training Fund, inquired about the allocation of
fifteen individuals to the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee, while the public participation
subcommittee is assigned eight individuals. Ms.
Clarice Gaylord, Director of OEJ, responded that
EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER), which sponsors the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee, wanted it to include a
large number of members. She also confirmed that
the bylaws of NEJAC permit the replacement of
subcommittee members for failure to attend
meetings. The members of the subcommittee should
submit to the NEJAC nominations of individuals to
replace members who do not attend meetings, she
advised.
The members of the subcommittee discussed the
need to better integrate their activities with the
activities of the other NEJAC subcommittees. Ms.
Sajka and Mr. Hurst reemphasized the concerns
expressed earlier by other members about the need
to become more "proactive" in helping the other
subcommittees incorporate public participation into
the development of recommendations. Mr. Dune
Lankard, EYAK Rainforest Preservation Fund, cited
as an example, the invitation from Ms. Velma
Veloria, Washington State Legislature and member
of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, to
participate in the meetings of that subcommittee. He
emphasized his strong" interest in the public
participation process, but stated that he thinks he
also could help with the activities of the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee. Mr. Knox added that
working with the other subcommittees puts the
participants "in the middle of all public participation
activities." Referring to the responsibility of OEJ to
address environmental justice for the entire agency,
he remarked that the subcommittee could play a
similar role for the NEJAC, reviewing the public
participation activities of all subcommittees. The
subcommittee would not participate in everything the
other subcommittees do, Mr. Turrentine added, but
they would serve as "watch dogs" to ensure that
public participation is the center of their activities.
After further discussion, the members., of the
subcommittee agreed to participate in a one-day
meeting on September 9,1996 at the OEJ office in
Washington, D.C. The purpose of .this meeting will
beto:
Discuss reorganization of the process by
which the subcommittee interacts with the
other subcommittees
Clarify the roles of the members of the
subcommittee .
Review the final1 changes to the model plan
for public participation and the check list for
community organizations
Follow-up on use of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT) research project
as a case study for exploring the decision-
making process in the awarding of grants
Begin discussions on methods to ensure the.
participation of community organizations in
. the public comment periods sponsored by the
NEJAC.
Mr. Knox noted that the reorganization of the
subcommittee and the process of interaction should
be done formally to enable members of the
subcommittee to participate as official members of
the other subcommittees. New members of the
subcommittee also will be included in the,
reorganization, he added. Ms. Saika agreed to
request that the NEJAC consider increasing the size
of the subcommittee to 10 members.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
6-3
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
3.0 IMPROVING THE PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION PROCESS
This section of the chapter summarizes the
discussions of the subcommittee about issues
related to improving the public participation process,
including incorporating final changes to, and
suggesting methods for, distributing and evaluating
the model plan for public participation; improving the
NEJAC's interaction with communities; enlisting the
support of EPA on a regional level; integrating public
participation in EPA policies and decision making;
and disseminating information about environmental
justice.
3.1 Model Plan for Public Participation
Mr. Knox stated that the NEJAC Model Plan for
Public Participation is the most significant product
the subcommittee has developed and one of the
most significant documents produced by the NEJAC.
He explained that the model plan is used widely by
numerous federal and state agencies and has been
very well received and adopted by many people. Mr.
Knox recommended that the subcommittee
periodically reexamine the model plan to make
revisions and adjustments, as necessary. He also
noted that the Check List for Public Participation,
designed for use by federal agencies, expanded on
the model plan.
Echoing Mr. Knox's comments, Ms. Saika stated that
she believes that NEJAC's model plan is the most
concrete and useful work the NEJAC has
accomplished. Ms. Dolores Herrera, Albuquerque
and San Jose Community Awareness, agreed, citing
her use of the model plan for public participation in
meetings she has conducted. Sandia National
Laboratory in New Mexico also has expressed
interest in using the model, she added. However she
commented that because the model remains in draft
form, she does not feel comfortable to distribute it
freely. Mr. Turrentine added that he believes the
subcommittee had "fallen a bit short" because the
model plan had been in draft form for more than a
year. Once the model plan has been completed, he
said, it can be used in many ways, but it is the
responsibility of the subcommittee to complete a final
version.
Several members of the subcommittee expressed
concern about including the federal agency check list
in the model plan without including a similar check
list for community organizations. Ms. Herrera noted
that community groups may not consider using the
check list for federal agencies because of the use of
the word "agency." Ms. Wright recommended that a
second check list be developed specifically for
community organizations and distributed with the
model plan.
After further discussion, the members of the
subcommittee agreed to make the following changes
to the model plan for public participation:
Revise the title of the document to "The
Model Plan for Public Participation"
Remove all references to "draft" status
Include the list of stakeholders identified at
the December 1995 meeting of the
subcommittee
Enhance the "look of the document" through
changes in the format
Prepare a check list for community
organizations
Prepare a cover memo, to serve as a preface,
from Mr. Richard Moore, Chair of the NEJAC,
which addresses the model plan for public
participation and describes the check lists for
federal agencies and community
organizations.
Exhibit 6-2, on the following page, contains the
complete text of the NEJAC model plan for public
participation as revised at the Detroit meeting.
Ms. Saika also noted that it is very important to
determine how the model plan will be distributed.
Emphasizing the need to think strategically about the
distribution of the model plan, she suggested that the
members identify specifically what they want to
accomplish. Should the effort, she wondered, be
targeted on the way EPA does business or should it
be focused more broadly on the "ripple effect" of
influencing other federal agencies?
Mr. Hurst outlined several recommendations for
distributing the model plan for public participation:
Place a copy of the model plan for public
participation on EPA's Home Page on the
World Wide Web (WWW) site and post it to
selected Internet Usenet groups related to
environmental and civil rights' issues; include
a contact list of the members of the
subcommittee.
6-4
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
Identify other agencies (for example, the U.S.
Department of Energy) with active
environmental justice programs and
compile a list of key people and programs in
those agencies..
Distribute the plan and associated check lists
to business associations, accompanied by
specific examples of cases in which the plan
has worked successfully.
Send copies of the plan to EPA's regional
environmental justice coordinators.
*
Mr. Turrentine recommended further that the
distribution plan include various mayors and
.governors associations, churches, and religious
organizations.
Mr. Hurst also recommended exploring the possibility
of developing a half-day or full-day workshop on
public participation to be offered in conjunction with
regional training.
Citing the importance of establishing rules for public
participation, Mr. Lankard described a committee
established in Alaska by people interested in
watershed issues. The participants, he said, were .
faced with the, challenge of "getting everyone to talk
once they came to the table." He also pointed out
that groups in his Alaskan community have
requested that public oversight committees monitor
restoration and resettlement funds related to the
Exxon Valdez oil spill, but said that those requests
have been denied by the Clinton Administration and
representatives of the state of Alaska. Once the
model plan for public participation has been
distributed to the communities, he observed, it will
help them put public oversight committees in place.
He added that public oversight committees can
prevent restoration funds being used to purchase
land from native peoples.
The participants also discussed the need to evaluate
the model plan for public participation and the public
participation process itself. Ms. Wright inquired
about the need to develop an evaluation tool, asking
whether the evaluation tool should be used to
evaluate the model plan for public participation and
the process it supports or to evaluate how the
community views the effectiveness of the process.
Emphasizing the accountability responsibility of the
subcommittee, Mr. Turrentine responded that,
although an evaluation tool is needed, the members
of the subcommittee should not take any action that
would delay distribution of the model plan. It then
was agreed that the members of the subcommittee
will develop methods to evaluate both the model plan
and the public participation process.
3.2 NEJAC's Interaction with the Communities
Mr. Knox raised several questions about the bus tour
of Detroit conducted on May 28, 1996, the public
comment periods, and the satellite downlink with
Puerto Rico at the December 1995 meeting of the
NEJAC. Mr. Knox stated that efforts to bring the
NEJAC to the communities through activities like the
bus tour, can serve as alternatives to using satellite
downlinks. He noted that such events help the
NEJAC become familiar with issues that are
important to communities. Mr. Knox pointed out that
the rescheduling of the NEJAC meeting, although an
inconvenience for many of the participants, did allow'
the subcommittee an opportunity to get more
involved in the community aspects of the meeting,
including the decision to hold the meeting in Detroit
and to conduct a bus tour of areas of the city
severely affected by contamination. The
subcommittee should play a more assertive role in
determining where the NEJAC should meet and how
its members should interact with the community, he
stated. Referring to the next meeting of the NEJAC,
tentatively scheduled to be held in Baltimore,
Maryland in December 1996, he added that the
subcommittee should plan to meet with members of
the community and involve them in the development
of the meeting.
Ms. Herrera, commenting about her role in setting up
the tour of Detroit, cited the successful partnerships
developed with several local community groups.
Reaffirming her satisfaction at investing in the
community, she noted that the participants in the bus
tour saw many things in the community they would
not otherwise have seen. She added that it was.
good to see where the people live, work, and play in
the community. Their struggle is "awesome," she
observed. She added that she found the bus tour of
Detroit personally rewarding and enriching.
Mr. Knox added that he thinks the bus tour was more.
successful than the satellite downlink with Puerto
Rico held on December 13, 1995. Agreeing, Ms.
Saika said the success of the bus tour reaffirms the
need for the members of the subcommittee to think
about community outreach activities that can be
planned for the next meeting of the NEJAC in
Baltimore. She also expressed her concern that few
local groups from Detroit participated in the public
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
6-5
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit-6-2
I
o
s
I
o
Isl
" .i S I
1 -US
eg
E s §
o o -o
o o ca
as -
6-6
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
comment period. Suggesting that the late hour of the
public comment period affected the number of
speakers, Mr. Turrentine recommended that the
sessions be scheduled earlier in the evening. He
added that it was his impression that "nothing goes
on in downtown Detroit after dark."
Mr. Knox, echoing those concerns, also
acknowledged that "something went wrong in
Detroit." He suggested that the low turnout could
have been a result of the perception that the NEJAC
meeting is not open to public participation. Perhaps,
he explained, the community views the meetings as
focused on such subjects as enforcement and waste
and facility siting, for example, instead of the broader
focus on public participation. Ms. Saika agreed,
citing the need to transform the perception.
3.3 Enlisting Support on a Regional Level
Several participants indicated a need to enlist more
support on a regional basis for meetings and
activities of the NEJAC. Inquiring whether there is
an extension of the subcommittee in Alaska, Mr.
Lankard said that the people in his community do not
know anything about the NEJAC and what it does.
Citing a meeting at which many NEJAC members
had attended last fall in Arizona, he said he was both
, moved by, arid envious of, the participation of local
communities because communities in Alaska "do not
have anyone to turn to." He added that there is no
individual or organization to which he and the
indigenous peoples he represents can contact for
assistance. He emphasized that if what he
characterized as the "gap of understanding" between
EPA and the indigenous peoples of Alaska is going
to be bridged, organizations like NEJAC must
establish a greater presence. Mr. Lankard
suggested that if EPA were tp conduct meetings
every three or six months that the indigenous
peoples could attend, those meetings would serve as
an outlet for the frustrations of the communities and
provide an opportunity for indigenous peoples to
pass on their wisdom, he stated.
Referring to a NEJAC proposal to establish a
"NEJAC-like" organization for EPA Region 2, which
includes Puerto Rico, Mr. Knox responded that,
perhaps, a similar organization could be established
for EPA Region 10, thereby including Alaska. Ms.
Saika expressed concern about the proposal to
establish a "NEJAC-like" organization in Puerto Rico.
Her concern, she said, is that the NEJAC tends to
gravitate to areas in which the most activity occurs,
for example, Puerto Rico. Noting that problems exist
in all of the regions, she suggested that the NEJAC
instead develop a national strategy, rather than focus
only on regional issues affecting Puerto Rico or other
sections of the country. She also acknowledged that
while it is difficult for national groups like the NEJAC
to reach "every nook and cranny" of the country,
EPA's structure is amenable to reflecting more
connection with the "folks on the ground." Noting
again that every region has its unique problems,
issues, and concerns, she suggested that a way
must exist to use EPA's regional structure more
effectively. She stated that the members should
think about institutionalizing a method of including
the people from the regions in the planning of
NEJAC meetings. '
Ms. Wright agreed, stating that regional meetings
would foster the development of a national
perspective with a focus on a particular region. Ms.
Wright also discussed the idea of convening a public
participation roundtable group that would address
environmental justice issues at the regional level.
that group, she stated, could serve as an "umbrella"
under which broad issues that affect all regions (such
as issues related to relocation) would be discussed.
She added that the establishment of such a group
could provide an opportunity to examine how the
regions are, or are not, incorporating processes for
public participation into their activities. Participation
could be an appropriate role for the subcommittee to
evaluate the public participation process, she added.
Ms. Saika inquired about how to broaden the scope
of activities even further. For example, she
suggested that for each meeting of the NEJAC the
"EPA Regional Administrators could welcome the
NEJAC members to their region. Such a step, she
stated, wbuid help build a partnership that could work
to institutionalize a process to involve people from
the regional level. Mr. Lankard agreed, stating that,
although he is glad to participate in the meetings of
the national group, he is much more effective at the
regional level. He added that he has-a responsibility
to bring the information he gains at the national
meeting back to the region. Referring to the Exxon
Valdez oil spill, he emphasized the need for
increased public participation to safeguard the
interests of native peoples. He is convinced, he
'said, that a coalition of members of the community
and representatives of government and industry can
establish regional groups to serve as watchdogs for
industry.
Mr. Knox recommended that Ms. Saika discuss with
the NEJAC the need for establishing "NEJAC-like"
councils at the regional level. The members of the
subcommittee also strongly recommended that
EPA's regional offices be invited to participate in the
planning and development of NEJAC meetings.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
6-7
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
3.4 Integrating Public Participation into EPA
Policies and Decision Making
Ms. Saika stressed that public participation be
integrated into EPA programs and activities at both
the national and regional level. The role of the
subcommittee, she stated, is to assist the efforts of
communities to hold entities like EPA accountable for
Involving the public in their decision-making
processes. It is very important, she stated, to link
public participation tools, such as the model plan for
public participation to the function within EPA that
will have the most strategic effect on decision
making. In addition to the need to proactively affect
decisions that will correct existing mistakes, she
said, the subcommittee also must try to influence
decisions in a way that prevents mistakes in the
future. She also wondered in what areas EPA js
required to provide for public comment periods?
Referring to EPA's Common Sense Initiative (CSI),
Mr. Hurst noted that the development of a public
participation model is "still on the table." He
suggested that this could be an opportunity to put the
model plan to use in a public participation process
that the CSI still is developing. If the CSI uses the
model plan for public participation, he added, it could
provide another good example of the model plan in
use. Mr. Turrentine cited the need to "get in front of
the process, not behind it."
The members of the subcommittee discussed
several opportunities to integrate the model plan for
public participation into ongoing public outreach
activities. Mr. Knox discussed previous
conversations with Mr. Charles Lee, Chair of the
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee, about
integrating the model plan for public participation into
the activities of the subcommittee. Referring to the
outreach activities of the Relocation Roundtable as
significant, Mr. Knox confirmed that much effort is
being expended to solicit comment from the
community before significant money is spent. Citing
the plans of Mr. Steve Herman, EPA Assistant
Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance (OECA) to establish ah
Enforcement Roundtable, he also stressed Mr.
Herman's effort and commitment to involve the
community in the activities of the roundtable.
Ms. Saika discussed what she identified as "the
challenge of who becomes involved in the
roundtables." The selection of participants is always
political, she observed, as is the selection of
communities. In response, Mr. Knox stressed that
the subcommittee can have a strong influence on the
process by which people and communities are
invited to participate. Ms. Gaylord added that the
Enforcement Roundtable presents an excellent
opportunity for the subcommittee to become involved
early in the formation of the roundtable, as well as to
"map out" the process of implementing the model
plan.
3.5 Disseminating Information Related to
Environmental Justice
Mr. Hurst noted that many communities want more
information about environmental justice; many
communities, he explained, do not know what
environmental justice is. He emphasized that
although the NEJAC cannot teach all communities
what they need to know about environmental justice
and public participation, the NEJAC can develop the
necessary tools to assist communities in this
process. He also cited high schools in his area
which are teaching students about public
participation.
Mr. Turrentine, endorsing Mr. Hurst's observation,
added that the model plan for public participation is
"a good start." Citing a recent meeting he attended
with the Coalition of Minority Trade Unionists, he
stated that there is little understanding and
knowledge about what the NEJAC does. He
stressed that the subcommittee must do a better job
of "getting the message out." As an example of
communities in need of the assistance Mr. Hurst had
described, Mr. Turrentine pointed to the building of
the Olympic Village in Atlanta, Georgia for which
public housing had been torn down to clear the way
for the Olympic Village. He noted that the jobs of
building the village went to construction workers from
South Carolina, Florida, and Alabama, not to the
people who lost both their homes and their jobs.
Ms. Herrera agreed that tools should be developed
to assist in the development of a public participation
process. Pointing to the Directory of People of Color
Environmental Groups developed by Mr. Bullard, she
spoke about putting together a package that all
communities would find useful, including a synopsis
of the bus tour, a copy of the model plan for public
participation, and a list of available speakers
representing various federal, state and community
organizations. She also wondered whether an
"Environmental Justice Day," similar to Earth Day,
could be instituted; such an event she stated, would
be a good way to gain the attention of the public. Mr.
Knox responded that, perhaps, an Environmental
Justice Day could be incorporated into Earth Week.
6-8
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
The participants discussed existing information
repositories and how to make them more accessible
to people interested in obtaining information about
environmental justice. Ms. Delta Periera, OEJ,
discussed the information about environmental
justice currently available on the WWW. She
explained that OECA, of which OEJ is a part,
maintains a Home Page on the WWW which
includes information related to environmental justice,
including a statement of OEJ's mission and strategy.
The model plan for public participation also is
included, she added. OECA's plan for 1996 and
1997 includes the development of links via the
Internet with other organizations, universities, and
non-governmental organizations (NGO), and
preparing a calendar of events and activities related
to environmental justice which will be accessible on
the WWW, she stated. .
Mr. Turrentine inquired whether Ms. Wright or Mr.
Bullard were interested in taking responsibility for the
information repositories on environmental justice
already established at the Deep South Center for
Environmental Justice at Xavier University arid the
Center for Environmental Justice located at Clark
Atlanta University. Mr. Knox agreed to contact them
about the information they have compiled.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES
RELATED TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
This section of the chapter summarizes the
discussion of the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee about environmental
justice issues related to public participation.
4.1 Revisit of RCRA Final Rule
Mr. Knox confirmed that the RCRA rule on expanded
public participation was expected to be made final on
June 11, 1996. Referring to the discussion of the
final rule at the previous meeting of the
subcommittee, he strongly urged the subcommittee
to endorse the final rule or, as appropriate, reserve
comment. He stated that the subcommittee cannot
allow a major document that addresses public
participation to be issued by EPA without review by
NEJAC,, he stated. He recommended that the
NEJAC give it the praise it is due and encourage the
final rule to be used as a model for the development
of additional rules to expand public participation in
EPA programs and activities.
Noting that he is willing to state for the record his
approval of EPA's efforts to respond to public
comments, Mr. Turrentine seconded Mr. Knox's
suggestion that the subcommittee endorse the
proposed final rule. If EPA is going to enhance
public participation, he said, the subcommittee can
use that effort as a tool to further disseminate
information about public participation.
Before voting on Mr. Knox's suggestion, the
members of the subcommittee discussed definitions
of various terms used in the rule, such as "interested
persons" and references to "advertisements" and
"broadcasts." Mr. Turrentine stressed the
importance of including "impacted neighborhoods" in
advertisements and broadcast strategies. After
some discussion, the subcommittee agreed to
recommend that the NEJAC send a letter of
acknowledgment to OSWER commending EPA's
efforts to expand public access to information under
the RCRA final rule on expanded public participation.
4.2 Review of Draft CEQ Guidance for NEPA
The members of the subcommittee reviewed the
draft guidance prepared by the CEQ for addressing
environmental justice under NEPA. Their discussion
focused specifically on aspects of the guidance
related to public participation. Several members of
the subcommittee expressed satisfaction that the
draft guidance specifically addresses communication
strategies to reach communities affected by issues of
environmental justice. Ms. Saika suggested that a
list be included in the guidance that defines the
acronyms used in the document. The participants
generally agreed that no specific information should.
be removed from the document, but that additional
items may need to be added. Exhibit 6-3 provides a
brief discussion of the document.
4.3 Overview of Public Participation Efforts in
Chile
Mr. Juan Fernandez, director of training and
education for the National Environmental
Commission of Chile, provided an overview of public
participation efforts in Chile., Ms. Periera translated
his presentation and the comments and questions it
generated among the members.
Mr. Fernandez first expressed his appreciation for
being invited to the meeting and for the opportunity
to observe how the public participation process
works in the United States. He added that he hoped
to determine how the NEJAC can help similar
organizations in Chile. Mr. Fernandez said that in
1994 Chile instituted a basic law for the protection of
the environment that includes provisions for
research, education and investigation, His office, he
said, works with the community, educational
organizations, and various government agencies,
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
6-9
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit 6-3
DRAFT CEQ GUIDANCE FOR
ADDRESSING ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE UNDER NEPA
On May 25, 1996, the Executive Office of the
President's Council on Environmental Quality
formally requested the members of the NEJAC
review and comment on the draft guidance for
addressing environmental justice under NEPA.
The document was prepared by CEQ in
cooperation with other federal agencies.
The purpose of the guidance is to advance the
goals of Executive Order 12898 on environmental
justice and to provide "much-needed" direction to
federal agencies so that concerns related to
environmental justice are effectively identified
and addressed. The draft guidance identifies
methods to address the needs of affected
communities, including communication strategies
to develop effective public involvement processes
and to ensure effective communication with
diverse groups.
and is involved in all aspects of community outreach.
For the first time, he said, his office is involving
representatives of industry, academe, and NGOs. In
addition, he added, the government of Chile is
preparing formal training for people in environmental
fields. Approximately $2,500 has been set aside for
eight small grants to the community to provide
training on environmental education, he said, adding
that more grants would be funded in the future.
Stating that sensitivity to environmental issues had
increased, Mr. Fernandez commented that the
government sees results arising from the
implementation of environmental education.
Noting that he is very touched by, and impressed
with, how the NEJAC deals with issues related to
public participation, Mr. Fernandez stated that the
government of Chile is using the model plan for
public participation to develop a process to
incorporate public participation. He acknowledged,
however, that there is friction in the unit he directs
because the focus on public participation creates
conflicts for the people who must deal with
representatives of industry. A council similar to the
NEJAC has been established, he stated, that
provides counseling to representatives of private
industry, academe, and NGOs.
Mr. Fernandez pointed out that industry and the
private sector very quickly began to cooperate with
the new environmental laws. Not because of their
conscience, he explained, but because they
recognize that they cannot compete with other
companies if they do not comply.
Thanking Mr. Fernandez for his presentation, Ms.
Wright observed that it was good to hear another
success story. It is amazing, she noted, that Chile
had done so much work in such a short period of
time. Ms. Saika agreed, then inquired about whether
the political changes in Chile contributed to the new
approaches. Mr. Fernandez responded that the end
of military dictatorship brought a new focus on
problems associated with the environment.
In. response to Ms. Saika's question about the
problems related to relocating residents living in
houses containing asbestos to new homes they
perceive as "small and cramped," Mr. Fernandez
stated that a shortage of housing is still a problem.
He added that the government is attempting to
address and resolve the people's awareness of the
dangers of asbestos.
Ms. Saika noted that Mr. Fernandez's statements
reaffirm that issues of environmental justice are
global. Mr. Fernandez agreed, citing as an example
the construction of a gas pipeline from Chile to
Argentina that was to be built through a wealthy
neighborhood of eight families. The members of the
community protested, he said, and suggested that
the pipeline be built instead through a lower-income
neighborhood of 300 families. Ms. Wright also
commented on the tendency in the United States to
build highways through minority neighborhoods.
Mr. Fernandez distributed several brochures
developed by Chile to train communities about the
environment, focusing particularly on how to protect
air, water, and land resources.
4.4 Review of the fEPA Grant Process
Ms. Saika suggested that the members of the
subcommittee decide whether the subcommittee
should follow up on the issues related to inequities in
the award of grants which were discussed at the
previous meeting of the subcommittee. If not, she
added, the subcommittee should come to closure on
the issue. She recommended that the subcommittee
undertake a review of the MIT project as part of an
overall initiative to determine how decisions about
grant funding are made. The subcommittee, she
6-10
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
reminded the members, should be proactive in its
efforts to affect other funding decisions.
Citing his displeasure with what he characterized as
another funding inequity, Mr. Turrentine wondered
why EPA is funding MIT to develop criteria for public
participation. He never saw the request for proposal,
he stated, and does not know what the project is
supposed to accomplish. What are the objectives of
the program, he asked. He also asked whether
copies of the progress reports are available. Ms.
Herrera agreed, and stated that MIT has contacted
her community. "We should have more say," she
stated, "in where the funding money goes."
At Ms. Saika's suggestion to focus on what the
subcommittee can do to proactively affect future
decisions about grant funding, the subcommittee
agreed that Mr. Knox would take the lead in using
the MIT research project as a case study to explore
the decision-making process for the awarding of
grants, as well as to identify how affected
communities can be brought into the process. The
members also agreed that the subcommittee, with
Mr. Knox serving as the lead, will identify the
objectives of the project conducted under the MIT
grant and establish dialogue with the appropriate
agencies.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
6-11
-------
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 29 and 30,1996
Detroit, Michigan
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Kent Benjamin
Designated Federal Official
* Mr. Benjamin replaces Ms. Jan Young
Charles Lee
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER SEVEN
MEETING OF THE
WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee of the
, National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) conducted a two-day meeting on
Wednesday and Thursday, May 29 and 30, 1996,
during a three-day meeting of the NEJAC in Detroit,
Michigan. Mr. Charles Lee, United Church of Christ
Commission for Racial. Justice, continues to serve as
the chair of the subcommittee. Ms. Jan Young, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER),
served as the Designated Federal Official (DFO) for
the subcommittee. Mr. Kent Benjamin, OSWER,
now serves as the DFO.
This chapter, which provides a detailed discussion of
the deliberations of the Waste and Facility Siting
subcommittee, is organized in six sections, including
this Introduction. Section 2.0, Opening Remarks,
presents a summary of the opening remarks.
Section 3.0; Activities of' the Subcommittee,
summarizes the discussions of the subcommittee
about progress on action items, including the status
of the report of the Public Dialogues on Urban
Revitalization and Brownfields. Section 4.0, Issues
Related to Waste and Facility Siting, summarizes
discussions of environmental justice issues related
to waste and facility siting, including transportation
and public health. Section 5.0, Presentations,
presents summaries of presentations made by
various individuals during the meeting. Section 6.0,
Resolutions, summarizes the resolutions forwarded
to the Executive Council of the NEJAC.
Exhibit 7-1 presents a list of the members of the
subcommittee who attended the meeting and
identifies those who were unable to attend.
2.0 OPENING REMARKS
Mr. Lee welcomed members and the subcommittee's
DFO. Members of the subcommittee and other
individuals briefly introduced themselves.
Mr. Lee provided a brief overview of the agenda for
the subcommittee meeting. Mr. Lee noted that he
had prepared for discussion a list of draft proposed
resolutions and action items which were a result of
the discussions during the December 1995 meeting
of the subcommittee. Mr. Lee added that a final draft
Exhibit 7-1
WASTE AND FACILITY SITING
SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 29 and 30, 1996
Mr. Charles Lee, Chair
Ms. Jan Young, DFO
Ms. Dollie Burwell
Ms. Sue Briggum
Ms. Teresa Cordova
Mr. Donald Elisburg
Mr. Tom Goldtooth
Mr. David Hahn-Baker
Ms. Lillian Kawasaki
Mr. Tom Kennedy
Mr. Jon Sesso
Mr. Lenny Siegel
Ms. Connie Tucker
List of Members
Who Were Unable to Attend
Mr. Michael Guererro
Mr. Scott Morrison
Ms. Nathalie Walker
of the report on the Public Dialogues on Urban
Revitalization and Brownfields would be discussed
later in the subcommittee meeting. Mr. Lee
acknowledged that OSWER, the first EPA program
office to prepare an environmental justice strategy,
played a major role in organizing the public
dialogues.
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
' " \
The members of the subcommittee reviewed the
action items that resulted from the December 1995
meeting of the subcommittee and received an update
on the Report of the Public Dialogues on Urban
Revitalization and-Brownfields.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
7-1
-------
Waste Facility and Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
3.1 Review of Action Items
Mr, Lee led a discussion of action items, as
summarized below:
Develop a recommendation that EPA pursue
opportunities for to increase public awareness
of and access to LandView II; address such
issues as ensuring that data remains in the
public domain
Mr. Lee stated that during the December 1995
meeting of the subcommittee, EPA had -agreed to
provide a copy of LandView II to each NEJAC
subcommittee. He announced that copies of the
software would be distributed during the current
meeting to the chair of each subcommittee. Mr. Lee
proposed to incorporate the action item into a
resolution related to LandView II and community
mapping. (See Section 6.0, Resolutions, for a
summary of the proposed resolution.)
Develop a recommendation for a community
roundtable and conduct a meeting to discuss
issues related to LandView II and other
geographic mapping systems.
The subcommittee agreed to incorporate the action
item into a resolution related to LandView II and
community mapping. (See Section 6.0, Resolutions,
for a summary of the proposed resolution.)
Identify interagency activities concerning
Brownfields redevelopment and federal
facilities environmental restoration.
A member of the subcommittee reported that several
members of the subcommittee participated in a joint
meeting among representatives of federal agencies,
NEJAC, and the Federal Facility Environmental
Restoration Dialogue Committee (FFERDC), which
was held as part of the Brownfields Pilots National
Workshop in Washington, D.C., on February 14,
1996. Mr. Lee reported that a follow-up meeting,
titled Transferring Federal Facilities Experience to
the Brownfields Program," was held in Vienna,
Virginia, on May 21, 1996. Mr. Lee proposed the
subcommittee applaud these efforts to link cleanup
and restoration activities at federal facilities with
urban revitalization and the Brownfields Initiative.
The statement called for the identification of other
models of interagency cooperation. The
subcommittee unanimously adopted the statement.
Recommend NEJAC provide comment
concerning the promulgation of regulations
that govern the effects of the. operations of
munitions facilities on communities concerned
with environmental justice issues
Mr. Lee reported that the resolution was approved by
the NEJAC at the December 1995 meeting. He
added that comments were submitted to the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
docket on February 15,1996.
3.2 Report of the Public Dialogues on Urban
Revitalization and Brownfields
Mr. Lee proposed that the subcommittee endorse
"Environmental Justice, Urban Revitalization, and
Brownfields: The Search for Authentic Signs of
Hope," the report on the public dialogues on urban
revitalization and Brownfields conducted in 1995. He
also recommended that the subcommittee request
that the Executive Council of the NEJAC adopt the
report. Members of the subcommittee expressed
concern that the report did not discuss explicitly how
urban development can lead to community
displacement. Members also expressed concern
that issues specific to Indian tribes were not included
in the report. Ms. Connie Tucker, Southern
Organizing Committee, expressed gratitude to Mr.
Lee and others who, she said, played an integral role
in drastically changing the way that EPA and others
view Brownfields sites.
Subcommittee members voted to adopt the report
and to recommend that the Executive Council of the
NEJAC adopt the report, with the understanding that
an attachment to the report will be created and will
discuss displacement issues associated with urban
redevelopment and issues associated with urban
sprawl which are specific to Indian tribes. (See
Section 6.0 for a summary of the proposed
resolution.)
The subcommittee adopted a motion to request that
NEJAC ask EPA to provide support for the
distribution of the report to members of the
President's Cabinet; members of Congress, as
appropriate; and other stakeholders. The
subcommittee also requested that EPA support the
conduct of a series of workshops throughout the
country to discuss the report; make the report
available for distribution on EPA's Internet home
page; and conduct an annual review of progress
toward meeting the goals set forth in the report.
Members also discussed the importance of preparing
a transmittal letter for the report that would state that
the report is a "living document" and emphasize
7-2
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
those issues that NEJAC considers to be the major
themes and recommendations.
Mr. Lee thanked the members of the subcommittee
who had participated in the public dialogues. He
also expressed gratitude to EPA personnel Ms.
Katharine Dawes and Ms. Jan Young, as well as Ms.
Victoria Robinson of PRC Environmental"
Management, Inc., for their assistance in planning
and coordinating the public dialogues and preparing
the report. He requested that personal thank-you
letters be sent to those who assisted in the effort.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES
RELATED TO WASTE AND FACILITY SITING
This section summarizes the discussion of the
subcommittee about issues related to waste and
facility siting. Presented below are the discussions
about of transportation and public health related to
urban revitalization and Brownfields; environmental
justice guidance related to RCRA; and the National
Academy of Science and Institute of Medicine (IOM)
environmental justice study.
4.1 Transportation, Urban Revitalization, and
Brownfields
The subcommittee discussed a proposed resolution
related to the importance of EPA and the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) -coordinating
their efforts to address overlapping issues related to
transportation, regional land use, and urban
revitalization and Brownfields. The resolution
specifically emphasized the importance of including
discussions about Brownfields redevelopment and
urban revitalization into a series of regional
workshops coordinated by DOT. The workshops on
Liveable Community Partnerships are scheduled to
be held in Los Angeles, California; Austin, Texas;
Denver, Colorado; and Boston, Massachusetts.
4.2 Public Health, Urban Revitalization, and
Brownfields
Mr. Andrew McBride, Health Director for the City of
Stamford, Connecticut, provided comments to the «
draft report on the NEJAC Public Dialogues on
Urban Revitalization 'and Brownfields. in his
comments, Mr. McBride noted the links among urban
revitalization, public health, and land use planning.
Mr. Lee noted that the comments represent one of
the first "cogent statements" that provides a public
health perspective on issues related to urban
revitalization and Brownfields redevelopment.
Mr. Lee proposed a resolution requesting that
OSWER seek advice from Mr. McBride about
implementing the suggestions that were contained in
his comments on the report. In addition, the
resolution requested that EPA incorporate public
health elements into ongoing Brownfields projects,
including training EPA personnel in public health
issues and their relationship to Brownfields
redevelopment,': coordinating an interagency-
sponsored series of public meetings to discuss
public health and sustainable redevelopment, and
ensuring that community organizations and national
health groups are involved in efforts to plan the
requested activities.
The subcommittee members .discussed the
similarities between this resolution and the resolution
on pollution prevention. Members also noted that
this resolution specifically provided a means of
addressing local coordination issues. (See Section
6,0 for a summary of the proposed resolution.)
4.3 Environmental Justice Guidance on
Facility Siting under RCRA
The subcommittee discussed a proposed resolution
requesting that OSWER develop guidance for
incorporating environmental justice considerations
into the process for siting hazardous waste facilities.
Mr. Lee commented that the issue of facility siting
should be viewed in a "holistic, big-picture manner."
Members of the subcommittee agreed and raised
other points for consideration. Mr. Tom Goldtooth,
Indigenous Environmental Network, commented that
nobody wants such facilities in their communities.
Siting is a serious issue because many people,
including the constituents of the subcommittee
membersj do not want such facilities in their
backyards, he added. Mr. David Hahn-Baker, Inside-
Out Political Consultants; stated that under the
current law, adequate provisions do not exist to allow
EPA to protect human health and the environment in
a fair and equitable manner. Ms. Tucker responded
'that pollution prevention and waste minimization
efforts are crucial in encouraging communities to
take care of their own waste. The notion of "paying
communities to kill themselves" is not what
environmental justice is about, she pointed out.
Members of the subcommittee discussed the
importance of acknowledging states that are making
successful progress in terms of ensuring
accountability for the consideration of
disproportionate and cumulative health effects during
the facility siting process. Ms. Lillian Kawasaki, City
of Los Angeles, noted that the issue of accountability
takes on increasing importance iri the case of
delegated state programs. She added that facility
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
7-3
-------
Waste Facility and Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
siting issues related to the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
also must be addressed.
Members agreed that OSWER can make substantive
contributions to environmental justice in the area of
facility siting (particularly with respect to Title VI,
NEPA, and state authorization), and that the
principles of environmental justice need to be
incorporated into the process of siting hazardous
waste facilities. The subcommittee adopted the
resolutiqn unanimously. (See Section 6.0,
Resolutions, for a summary of the proposed
resolution.)
4.4 National Academy of Sciences/Institute of
Medicine Environmental Justice Study
Mr. Lee led a discussion about a study to be
conducted by the National Academy of Sciences and
Institute of Medicine (IOM). He stated that the 14-
month study will cover many issues, including urban
health, subsistence consumption, reproductive
health, issues related to the United States'
international border, and issues related to the
manufacture of chemicals. Mr. Lee explained that
the National Academy of Sciences is chartered by
the U.S. Congress; therefore, its reports have
significant credibility, he stated. He added that the
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
(NIEHS) and 14 other federal agencies have
provided support for the study.
Mr. Lee stressed that the NEJAC should be
concerned about this study because EPA is one of
the agencies funding the study. In addition, he
added, it is important that NEJAC establish a
relationship with iOM because the study has
important implications for the environmental justice
movement and ideally will include the views of
affected communities. However, he pointed out, he
personally does not think that the study is adequate.
Ms. Kawasaki expressed an interest in whether the
NEJAC might influence lOM's approach to
community involvement, particularly with respect to
hearings. Mr. Lee noted that IOM had formed a
committee to work on the study, and he mentioned
that the IOM committee members are listed in a
handout. He then encouraged subcommittee
members to contact them personally. He added that,
as a collective body, NEJAC could not exert
influence on the IOM study. Rather, it would be
necessary that the NEJAC approve a motion to
request that EPA make recommendations to IOM, for
two reasons, namely: (1) NEJAC is an advisory
board to EPA arid (2) the National Academy of
Sciences is theoretically an independent,
nongovernment body. Members of the
subcommittee expressed concern that a narrow
definition of environmental justice would be used in
the study. They recommended that NEJAC request
that EPA urge that a comprehensive view of
environmental justice be adopted, and that the
interests of low-income communities, access to
health care, issues related to education, and similar
issues be considered. (See Section 6.0 for a
summary of the proposed resolution.)
5.0 PRESENTATIONS
This section provides a summary of the
presentations to the subcommittee on a variety of
topics.
5.1 Status of OSWER Environmental Justice
Implementation Activities
Mr. Timothy Fields, Deputy Assistant Administrator,
OSWER, and Mr. Kent Benjamin, OSWER,
presented information about OSWER's
environmental justice activities. Mr. Fields
summarized OSWER's environmental justice action
agenda and pointed out that OSWER is compiling a
report on its environmental justice activities which
will be ready for distribution soon: He then
acknowledged the subcommittee for its work on the
public dialogues, commending its members for their
efforts.
Mr. Fields discussed a number of environmental
justice activities that OSWER is undertaking,
including:
Developing a comprehensive environmental
justice strategy for EPA waste programs
Working on relocation issues, including the
recent roundtable meeting held at the
Superfund relocation pilot site in Pensacola,
Florida
Implementing environmental justice in waste
programs in the EPA regional offices
Working for better coordination of activities
with tribal and Native American communities
Mr. Fields stated that OSWER is taking
environmental justice seriously and is working with
and monitoring the EPA regional offices. In
conclusion, he stated that successes have occurred,
7-4
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
although the progress has been slower than the
ideal. ;
Mr. Benjamin added that EPA's Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response (OERR) will be working
with the EPA's Office of Research and Development
and NIEHS to identify minority and high-risk
populations, in an effort to address issues related to
cumulative risk. He also reported that OSWER is
working to address environmental justice issues
related to federal facilities. The Office of .
Underground Storage Tanks has issued revised
grant guidance to encourage states to consider
environmental justice when prioritizing sites, he
added. Mr. Benjamin also summarized activities
being undertaken by several EPA regional offices,
including the award of an environmental literacy
grant and relocation efforts in EPA Region 4, an
environmental justice forum in EPA Region 7, the
consideration of environmental justice issues at
closing military installations in EPA Region 9, and
the development of a guide book for dealing with
issues of concern to Native American tribes in EPA
Region 10.
Mr. Benjamin then highlighted geographical
information systems (GIS) activities that have been
undertaken as a result of suggestions made by the
subcommittee. He reported that: .
EPA Region 2 had constructed GIS models,
in an effort to use LandView II as a model for
interagency coordination
LandView II had been placed on the Internet
and to date had been downloaded more than
1,000 times; new updates will be placed on
the Internet to increase public awareness of
GIS
Fact sheets on the use of LandView II had
been provided to recipients of grants for pilot
sites under the Brownfields initiative, and
training is being conducted for EPA regional
staff and will be conducted for communities
LandView II is to remain in the public domain,
and a new release is scheduled for late 1996
in response to requests that it remain in the
public domain
Mr. Benjamin added that OSWER had completed
demographic studies that are expected to aid in
evaluating the effects of proposed rulemakings on
communities affected by environmental injustice. In
conclusion, Mr. Benjamin mentioned that OSWER's
report on its accomplishments will be placed on
EPA's home page.
After the presentation, subcommittee members
asked questions and offered remarks.
Ms. Tucker and Mr. Goldtooth inquired about
regional compliance with OSWER's environmental
justice action agenda and the role of regional
environmental justice coordinators. Mr. Fields
replied that no specific effort has been undertaken to
assess regional compliance with the action agenda;
however, Mr. Benjamin added, there is at least one
pilot site for environmental justice in each region. In
addition, OSWER is urging the development of
community advisory groups for each major
Superfund site, he said, noting that last year, there
were 14 community advisory groups in each region.
Mr. Fields added that not all environmental justice
coordinator positions are full time positions, and
"environmental justice coordinators:in the regional
waste divisions report to the respective division
directors. In most regional offices, he added, there
are two environmental justice coordinator positions-
one for waste programs and one for RCRA
programs.
Mr. Goldtooth requested a list that identifies which
regional environmental justice coordinator positions
are full time and which are part time. He then
requested clarification about the level of coordination
between the regional environmental justice
coordinators and the regional tribal coordinators. Mr.
Fields replied that this area "still needs work." Ms.
Linda Garczynski, OSWER, interjected that a
conference call had been held recently among
environmental justice and tribal coordinators, but
issues related to coordination of their efforts remain
to be addressed.
Ms. Tucker stated that some personnel from EPA
Region 4 are "ignorant about environmental justice
and should be educated." She asked how EPA was
conducting its environmental justice forums. She
added that regional waste ombudsmen should be
trained in environmental justice and required to
interact with the Office of Environmental Justice
(OEJ). Ms. Garczynski replied that EPA Region 6
had held forums; EPA Region 7 had coordinated
forums among various EPA programs; EPA Region
5 had conducted extensive education; and-EPA
Region 2 had conducted small forums on
environmental justice and Brownfields
redevelopment. Ms. Garczynski also mentioned that
each regional office has assigned environmental
justice coordinators and OSWER has an
environmental justice coordinator for each program.
Mr. Fields added that a meeting has been scheduled
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
7-5
-------
Waste Facility and Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
for regional managers at which issues of
coordination and training brought up by Ms. Tucker
will be discussed. He also mentioned that, by
October 1,1996, each regional office will delegate an
ombudsman who reports to the regional
administrator. Training for all ombudsmen is planned
for summer 1996, he added, and coordination issues
will be addressed as part of that training.
Mr. Donald Elisburg, Elisburg Law Offices, stated
that the existence of various "layers" within EPA
presents a problem .because there are no
environmental justice requirements for EPA
programs at every level. He added that only the
Brownfields Initiative contains program-specific
requirements at every level.
Ms. Kawasaki inquired about the role OSWER plays
in the development of memoranda of understanding
(MOU). She stated that in many cases,
environmental justice is not incorporated into these
agreements. Mr. Fields responded that MOUs are a
means of documenting interagency work and are
useful for documenting activities on joint ventures by
multiple agencies. OSWER has tn>d to foster greater
emphasis on environmental justice in the area of
MOUs, he said, but support from other federal
agencies is needed. NEJAC and the Interagency
Work Group on Environmental Justice (IWG) can
help OSWER in the effort, he added. Mr. Lee
commented that the MOU process should undergo a
thorough review.
5.2 Status of OSWER Brownfields Activities
Ms. Garczynski, presented information about the
status of OSWER activities and coordination with the
FFERDC. She stated that, at EPA Headquarters,
five staff persons are working on Brownfields issues.
One person in each EPA regional office is assigned
to work on Brownfields issues, she added.
Ms. Garczynski reported that 14 pieces of legislation
related to the Brownfields Initiative have been
introduced to Congress; however, none have
incorporated environmental justice and only a few
have incorporated community involvement. She
pointed out that Title 3 of the Superfund
reauthorization bill sponsored by the U.S. House of
Representatives addresses Brownfields
redevelopment. She stressed that Congress is not
"on the same page" as the subcommittee with
respect to the Brownfields issue; in addition, she
"said, Congress has not focused on issues related to
environmental justice.
Ms. Garczynski highlighted some of the activities
being undertaken at Brownfields pilot sites, making
specific mention of the Cleveland, Ohio; Detroit,
Michigan; Knoxville, Tennessee; Louisville,
Kentucky; and St. Louis, Missouri areas. Many
issues are involved in the redevelopment of
Brownfields sites, she added, including lending
practices, redlining, and other issues related to
transportation and infrastructure. She noted that
EPA has been criticized by developers for being "too
community-driven." While reviewing the proposals
for Brownfields grants, EPA made telephone calls to
verify that the proposals included community
involvement elements, she explained. As a result,
some proposals lost eligibility, she stated. Ms.
Garczynski pointed out that the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS) has agreed to
target its community grants to Brownfields pilot
communities; that decision, she stated, will foster
interagency co-sponsorship.
Ms. Tucker expressed concern that the
environmental justice community has not "bought
into" the concept of the Brownfields Initiative. She
also expressed concern about the lack of attention to
EPA's Brownfields Initiative and environmental
justice on the part of Congress, emphasizing that
Brownfields is the only initiative that draws a high
level of energy and attention at the regional level.
Mr. Lenny Siegel, Pacific Studies Center, inquired
about tax incentives to encourage redevelopment of
Brownfields sites. Ms. Garczynski responded that
EPA Administrator Carol Browner had announced on
May 13,1996, that she will propose legislation on tax
incentives to encourage redevelopment of
Brownfields sites.
Mr. Elisburg remarked that communities are not "tied
into" the legislative process in a way that allows them
to bring important issues to bear on the process. Mr.
Siegel commented that there is strong bipartisan
support for the concept of soliciting community
advice on legislative processes; he urged the
members of the subcommittee not to be pessimistic
about enlisting the support of both political parties.
Mr. David Hahn-Baker, Inside-Out, noted that a
check list of community involvement activities,
summarized by Brownfieids pilot projects, had been
distributed to mayors.
Subcommittee members expressed a need for a
common check list of terms related to Brownfields
issues. They noted that the list of actions
undertaken by EPA appear to be inconsistent with
the issues raised in the NEJAC public dialogue
7-6
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
~
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
report. One member observed that EPA "is merrily
going on its way" without tracking its actions.
Ms. Young pointed out that the "List of EPA Action
Items" to which the members were referring, was
actually a summary of some of the key activities the
Agency has undertaken. She explained that the list
was by no means complete, nor did it represent the
actions EPA had intended to take in response to the
report.
5.3 Status of OSWER Siting Surveys, Policies,
and Activities
Mr. Vem Myers and Ms. Virginia Philips, EPA Office
of Solid Waste (OSW), presented information about
the siting of hazardous waste facilities under the
RCRA program. Ms. Philips stated that not only is
she the environmental justice coordinator for OSW,
she serves as the team leader for the OSW siting
work group. She also noted that she has worked on
Native American issues.
Ms. Philips provided a brief history of OSWs siting
work group, noting that the group was formed in
1994 in response to concerns about the adequacy of
federal regulations with respect to facility siting. She
explained that the work group initially was directed to
draft a regulation for technical location standards;
however, she added the decision to move forward on
that project was reversed because of the projected
small number of new RCRA facilities to be sited over
the next ten years. Instead, Ms. Philips said, the
work group prepared a guidance document on siting
which emphasized the socioeconomic effects of
releases of hazardous substances.
Ms. Philips then summarized some of the work
group's projects. She described a brochure on the
siting of RCRA hazardous waste management
facilities which describes the siting process and
outlines "good siting procedures," as well as social
factors that should be considered during the siting
process. She also spoke about a siting study that
was conducted to assess siting, public involvement,
and permitting procedures at the state level. She
added that completion of an updated RCRA Public
Participation Manual is expected by June 1996. The
manual, she said, will reflect recent changes in the
RCRA public participation process.
Ms. Philips explained that OSW reviews the siting
and permitting regulations and procedures used by
the states. During those reviews, she said, a
determination is made whether those regulations and
procedures incorporate concerns related to
environmental justice. She explained that the term
"siting" refers,to the process involved in selecting a
location, while "permitting" refers to those points at
which EPA becomes involved, in accordance with
statutes. ,
Ms. Tucker asked whether EPA has the authority to
decide where facilities will be located or to affect that
decision-making process. Ms. Philips responded
that EPA currently does not have such authority. Mr.
Myers added that the federal government historically
has avoided involvement in land use issues and that
communities rightfully are concerned about the lack
of federal influence on the issue. !
Mr. Hahn-Baker pointed out that communities would
prefer that siting issues be approached as civil rights
issues, rather than land use issues. Mr. Myers'
responded that the EPA Office of Civil Rights (OCR)
handles Title VI issues and that efforts are underway
to coordinate the actions of that office with those of
OEJ. He added that a Title VI work group will be
created to develop program-specific guidance for the
EPA regional offices. Mr. Fields added that
stakeholder involvement must be addressed,
suggesting that perhaps members of the
subcommittee could provide information to the work
group. - He then pointed out, however, that persons
from outside EPA could not be members of the work
group.
Ms. Tucker asked whether the OCR will investigate
siting issues on a state-by-state basis, as well as by
region. She asked whether the environmental justice
guidance for RCRA would address multiple effects,
social effects, access to medical care, and other
issues related to environmental justice. Ms. Philips
responded that issues related to income and race
currently are not being addressed.
Ms. Kawasaki raised the point that the federal
government increasingly is delegating authority to
the states, and states are delegating it to local
governments. What is needed, she said, s is
consultation with cities and communities, that need,,
she stated, should be incorporated expressly into the
MOUs because it is not appropriate to delegate the
authority and attempt to involve ail stakeholders after
the fact, she added. Other subcommittee members
expressed .concern about confusion over the roles of
federal and state governments. Some members
stated that the federal government should establish
baseline standards with which states must comply;
particularly in the area of interstate transport of
hazardous waste. ~
Issues related to the siting of facilities on Indian
lands also were discussed. Mr. Goldtooth and other
members emphasized that neither EPA nor tribal
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
7-7
-------
Waste Facility and Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
governments issue permits on those lands. He
stated that Native Americans want regulations, not
guidance. Mr. Fields responded that EPA is
attempting to develop guidance that will incorporate
issues related to stakeholder involvement, Title VI,
coordination of actions, and permitting. He added
that, under the current law, EPA does not have
authority to mandate the denial of permits on the
basis solely of ecological concerns.
Ms. Sue Briggum, WMX Technology, Inc., added that
the creation of the LandView II geographic mapping
software was a dramatic effort on EPA's part to help
stakeholders identify sites and determine when
cumulative risk might be an issue. She emphasized
that LandView II should be used in any effort to
address issues related to facility siting and location.
LandView II is particularly helpful to industry, she
added.
5.4 Waste Minimization and Pollution
Prevention
Ms. Angela Cracchiolo, EPA Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic Substances (OPPTS),
presented information about the connection between
pollution prevention and Brownfields activities. She
emphasized that one way to ensure that Brownfields
sites do not become hazards in the future is to
incorporate waste minimization and pollution
prevention into the beginning of the redevelopment
process. She pointed out that community members,
government officials, developers, and all other
Brownfields stakeholders must understand the
connection between pollution prevention, waste
minimization, and Brownfields redevelopment.
Ms. Cracchiolo described various tools that can be
used to communicate the connection between
pollution prevention and Brownfields redevelopment,
including the use of fact sheets and handbooks that
explain:
How pollution prevention can be integrated
into the earliest stages of community planning
for redevelopment efforts
Financing and insurance options, as well as
state and local government program options,
which encourage and support pollution
prevention and waste minimization
Technical aspects, or "how-to's", of
incorporating pollution prevention and waste
, minimization into facility practices
Such material could feature case studies of actual
businesses that successfully have adopted pollution
prevention and waste minimization practices into
their operations.
Mr. Lee added that the report on urban revitalization
and Brownfields points out that pollution prevention
should be incorporated into redevelopment efforts as
a basic, fundamental issue.
5.5 NIEHS Report on the Minority Worker
Training Program
Ms. Sharon Beard, NIEHS, reported that the NIEHS
minority worker training program has established a
series of national pilot programs to test strategies for
recruiting and training youth who live near hazardous
waste sites for work in the environmental field. She
explained that the programs include preemployment
training, literacy training, courses related to
environmental construction, training in asbestos
removal and lead abatement, and health and safety
training. She noted that NIEHS' program includes an
evaluation of the national effect of the program.
Grant recipients are required to submit annual
reports, she added.
Ms. Beard explained that partnerships with
universities and other academic institutions are an
integral part of the minority worker training program,
emphasizing the program's particular focus on
historically black colleges and universities. She
described the training programs being undertaken by
various universities under grants provided under the
minority worker training program. Those universities
include Jackson State University, the New York-New
Jersey Consortium of the University of Medicine and
Dentistry of New Jersey, DePaul University, and
Clark Atlanta University. Ms. Beard added that
particular focus is placed on the establishment of
mentoring programs. She noted that some training
programs include components for apprenticeship
training.
Mr. Elisburg commented that the relevance of the
Worker Training Program to the activities of the
subcommittee is the program's efforts that actually
put people to work. The program was funded for
fiscal year 1996 at $3 million, but is in need of
additional funding to complete projects that are
currently underway, he added.
Members of the subcommittee discussed a proposed
resolution related to the possible termination of the
NIEHS Minority Worker Training Program because of
a lack of funding. Members of the subcommittee
7-8
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
pointed out that the program is a crucial component
of the Brownfields Initiative because of its emphasis
on training community members in a way that
prepares them for actual jobs and the overall
improvement in economic conditions in areas where
the program is implemented.
The proposed resolution recommended that NEJAC
request that EPA (1) continue to fund the program at
$3 million through the end of fiscal year 1996, (2)
provide an additional $2 million for fiscal year 1996,
(3) request additional funding for fiscal year 1997"
and beyond, and (4) recommend that the IWG
identify better ways to coordinate job training
programs. Some members of the subcommittee
expressed concern that EPA's funding is limited and
that EPA may not be able to find additional funding
for fiscal year 1996. Mr. Fields replied that EPA's
1996 budget has capacity; however, he added,
before the program can be added to EPA's operating
plan, Congress must approve it. Any funding of
more than $500,000 requires the approval of
Congress, he explained. EPA's budget for fiscal year
1997 includes sufficient dollars to fund the program,
he pointed out.
Mr. Fields added that he had spoken with
Administrator Browner, and he assured the
subcommittee that she' personally supports the
program.
A member voiced concern that the issue is not
funding alone, but program continuity as well,
because of the innovative nature of the program and
the partnerships that have been formed. Another
member expressed concern that dislocated and
disadvantaged workers need to be included in the
program.
The subcommittee voted to bring the issue before
the Executive Council of the NEJAC. ;Mr. Siegel
abstained from voting because of a potential conflict
of interest arising from his'position as a recipient of
a Minority Worker Training Program grant. (See
Section 6.6 for a summary of the resolution.)
5.6 Report on the Relocation Roundtable
Meeting
Mr. Lee reminded members that the NEJAC began
addressing the issue of relocation in January 1995
and, thereafter, the subcommittee had resolved that
relocation is an important issue that should be
pursued. Mr. Lee added that EPA Region 4 is the
only EPA regional office that has identified a
relocation pilot site. He noted that the efforts of
those who organized the Relocation Roundtable
should be recognized. Mr. Lee then made special
mention of a letter from a Florida Congressman, in
which the congressman stated that the site located
in Pensacola, Florida, was selected as a national
pilot project site in an effort to assist EPA in
developing a national Superfund relocation, program.
Mr. Lee also cited a letter from the mayor of
Pensacola welcoming the relocation roundtable
committee to the city.
Ms. Suzanne Wells, OERR, presented information
about the Relocation Roundtable meeting held in
Pensacola, Florida in May 1996. She pointed out
that the purpose of the meeting was to obtain citizen
input on the criteria that EPA should consider when
making decisions about relocation issues. More than
90 participants attended the meeting, she said, of
which more than half were community members.
She reported that participants identified several
"triggers" or "flags" that indicate that relocation
issues are pertinent at a particular site. Participants
also discussed past relocations and the effects of
those relocations on communities, she added.
Ms. Wells then discussed planned follow-up
activities. She noted that Mr. Fields had made some
commitments in response to issues raised at the
roundtable meeting, namely that OSWER will work
with the committee that planned the roundtable
meeting to compile proceedings of the meeting and
a videotape will be made to highlight key
recommendations, with five-minute segments of
community members sharing their experiences with
relocation. She pointed out that the immediate next
steps include an evaluation of whether the Superfund
welfare authority can be applied at the Escambia
Superfund site in Pensacola, Florida. The evaluation
could include an assessment of the roles other
agencies can play in addressing relocation issues
associated with that site, she added. EPA also will
respond to recommendations of the NEJAC related
to the issue and will develop a national relocation
policy by the end of 1996. Mr. Fields stated that EPA
has the authority to take public welfare into account
when developing cleanup plans. That, authority,
however, generally has not been exercised, he
acknowledged. ,
Ms. Tucker stated that risk.assessment "drives" the
relocation decision. She urged that multiple,
cumulative, and synergistic risks must be
considered. She commented that the roundtable
meeting had been put together well, noting that it
would not have been as successful as it was had it
not been for the help of Mr. Lee and EPA. Mr. Fields
thanked Ms. Young, Mr. Lee, Ms. Tucker, and others
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
7-9
-------
Waste Facility and Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
who, he said, put forth "tremendous effort" to
organize the roundtable meeting.
Mr. Lee commented that several subcommittee
members and other individuals had participated in a
bus tour of certain areas of Detroit the day before the
subcommittee met. He stated that conditions in
many of the areas visited caused many of the
participants to ask, "how did things get like this?" He
stressed that the social context has everything to do
with racism in our society, noting that patterns of land
use and housing issues also play a role in the
relocation issue. He pointed out that the decision
process at the Pensacola site was not one of
consensus; rather, individual recommendations were
made. He added that relocation is a difficult issue
and that EPA Region 4 should be commended for its
efforts to establish the first national relocation pilot.
Participants at the roundtable meeting agreed that
relocation is an issue that should be raised to the
1WG, Mr. Lee added.
Ms. Tucker stated that relocation is another example
of an area in which OSWER has taken the concerns
of the NEJAC seriously. The establishment of the
pilot site in Florida was a result of the NEJAC
expressing concerns to OSWER, she said. She
added that many common-sense recommendations
resulted from the roundtable meeting, such as "If it is
not safe to fish there, move people" or "If it is not
safe to play outdoors, move people."
Ms. Tucker then introduced Ms. Margaret Williams of
Citizens Against Toxic Exposure (GATE), who spoke
specifically about relocation issues affecting the
communities near the Pensacola, Florida site. Ms.
Williams said that she attended the roundtable
meeting and had the opportunity to meet many
people from EPA. She stated that she will no longer
make general negative statements about EPA
because some EPA staff are helpful. She then
presented a historical overview of issues related to
relocation that affect the subject site in Pensacola,
Florida.
Ms. Williams explained that several predominantly
African-American neighborhoods were "clustered" in
a particular area of Pensacola, Florida, where a
number of Superfund sites are located. She spoke
about the artificial barriers (such as railroad tracks)
that allegedly separate site communities from each
other, for purposes of making regulatory decisions
about the sites. She mentioned that, years before,
an emergency response cleanup action involving the
excavation of soil was conducted in the area
because of groundwater contamination. She added
that the event frightened many community members.
For the next nine years, the site remained
untouched, and then excavation work began again;
the groundwater contamination problem still had not
been remedied, she added, even though $7 million
had been spent on cleanup work at the site. She
stated that community members requested the
involvement of an Emergency Response Oversight
Review Team because of their distrust of
representatives from EPA Region 4. The results of
the oversight review team's study indicated that the
"entire area," not just "the site," was contaminated,
and that it would be necessary to move residents.
Ms. Williams noted that the major contaminants
include dioxin, benzopyrene, arsenic, and many
others, at levels far above federal standards.
Community members in the area are concerned
because they have been.given the impression by
EPA staff that the "barriers" (such as fences and
railroad tracks) around the sites will limit exposure,
Ms. Williams stated. She added that EPA personnel
should be trained in communicating with the public.
Ms. Williams asked why the burden of proof always
lies with communities to prove that they are being
harmed. She added that health assessments had
been conducted under the jurisdiction of the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR), and that many warning signs had been
posted; however, before the review team's study, the
collective conclusion was that the various
communities were not at risk. Ms. Williams asked
why her predominantly African-American community
had to "jump over hurdles" simply to be considered
for relocation.
Ms. Williams stated that EPA considers three primary
factors when making relocation decisions: public
health, public welfare, and cost-effective solutions to
environmental problems. Communities may be
relocated because of any one of those three factors,
she added. She questioned why the overwhelming
majority of relocations have occurred in Caucasian
communities and not in African-American
communities, even when those communities meet all
three criteria. She pointed out that, for example, in
Pensacola, the costs of permanently relocating
community members is estimated at $20 million,
while the cost of temporary relocation and cleanup
combined is estimated at $32 million.
Ms. Selena Mendy, Lawyers Comrnittee, added that
the communities living in the vicinity of the sites in
Pensacola are overwhelmingly African-American and
low-income; yet, disproportionate impacts were not
7-10
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30, 1996
-------
National EnvironmentalJusfioe Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
considered in the proposed relocation plan. She *
added that the plan provided no discussion of health
effects other than cancer; no mention was made of
birth defects, infant deaths, or other potential health
effects, she said. Community members still are
asking EPA to investigate those issues, she added.
Mr. Lee and Ms. Williams then examined how such
"clusters" of predominantly African-American
communities came to be. Ms. Williams explained
that there was a time in American history when
African-Americans' could not live wherever they
wanted; therefore, they moved wherever,they could.
Those areas are now being found to be heavily
contaminated, although, at one point, they provided
"dream homes" for many people. She added that,
usually, people living in the communities do not know
about proposed sitings because many of them are
poor and many do not read newspapers. Even if
they do. read the papers, she said, notices of
proposed sitings often are printed in obscure
sections of the newspaper that ordinary citizens
usually do not read.
Mr. Elisjaurg commented that Ms. Williams' testimony
indicated that EPA acted incorrectly; he asked '
whether, in theory, the relocation decision would
have been different had EPA acted correctly. He
added that EPA seems to be facing a problem in
handling the expense of moving people. Another
issue, he said, is whether people are makingfacially
motivated decisions; if that is the case, it should be'
out in the open, he added.
Ms. Teresa Cordova, University of New Mexico,
stated that "flight" also is an issue. Mr. Lee stated
that in general, when people move out of such areas,
no one moves back in. He added that such issues
should be addressed in their totality, pointing out that
the Pensacola communities have requested
permanent relocation for all, rather than some, of the
peopfe.
The subcommittee discussed the importance of
involving communities at the beginning of the
relocation process, citing cases in which evidence
suggests that such involvement has not occurred.
The subcommittee also discussed issues raised
during a presentation to the subcommittee about
relocation issues. Mr. Lee proposed a resolution on
issues related to the relocation pilot project located
in Pensacola, Florida. (See .Section 6.0 for a
summary of the proposed resolution.)
5.7 Status of EPA's Military Munitions Rule
Mr. Myers discussed the status of EPA's military
munitions rule. He.explained that the rule deals with
communities with environmental justice concerns
who also are affected by former munitions testing
sites. Mr. Myers added that the U.S. Department of
Defense (DoD) and EPA have discussed ways to
regulate those sites.
Mr. Myers distributed a handout that stated that 7 of
122 comments on the proposed rule mentioned
environmental justice. . He noted that public
comments on environmental justice issues have
focused primarily on Indian reservations on which
unexploded ordnance (UXO) is present.
Mr. Tom Kennedy, Association of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials,
mentioned that DoD is drafting a follow-up rule that
presumably will replace the EPA rule. "It is actually
worse than the EPA rule," he said. Mr. Kennedy
added that the DoD draft of the rule is available on
the Internet. Mr. Fields commented that a new
version of the rule is being drafted in response to
concerns related to environmental justice.
Mr. Siegel stated that EPA should conduct its own
research on the effects of the rule, rather than rely on
comments from .the NEJAC and other members of
the public. He also questioned whether DoD is
convinced that environmental justice is an issue. Mr.
Siegel said that he would like to request that EPA
determine whether there are cost effective ways to
examine how the presence of UXO affects
communities of color living near by;
5.8 Tribal and Native American Issues
Members of the Waste and Facility Siting and
Indigenous Peoples subcommittees participated in
joint discussions about environmental justice issues
related to Native Americans. The following
presentations feature comments from NEJAC and
OSWER.
5.8.1
Overview of Issues
Mr. Goldtooth and Mr. Walter Bresette, Lake
Superior Chippewa and chair of the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee, presented information and
led discussions on environmental justice issues
related to tribes and Native Americans. Other Native
American members of NEJAC also provided
comment.
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
7-11
-------
Waste Facility and Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Mr. Goldtooth thanked Mr. Lee for the opportunity to
make a presentation and expressed his concern that
the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee begin to
address the issues facing tribes. He explained that
Brownfields redevelopment and associated issues
are not a priority for native people. Mr. Goldtooth
questioned whether OSWER understands the issues
facing native people. He noted that some members
of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee do not
represent native persons; that circumstance, he
acknowledged, is a function of the requirements for
diversity under the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA) under which NEJAC is governed.
Mr. Goldtooth stated that more than 500 distinct
native communities exist, with an additional 200 in
Alaska, each with its own population, governing
structure, and socioeconomic structure. He added
that misconceptions remain about who native people
are and where they fit in the context of "people of
color." They do fit within that context, but they also
are separate, because they are "of many nations and
many sovereigns," he said. He stressed that
environmental laws apply to tribes and tribes expect
the same environmental protections as everyone
else and that they demand environmental equity.
Mr. Goldtooth explained that, in the early 1970s,
when federal environmental laws first were passed,
tribes were not included in the legislative language;
therefore, tribes were unable to obtain grants or
technical assistance. He pointed out that the
Northern Cheyenne tribe was one of the first to
challenge environmental regulations in a dispute
Involving the use of the Clean Air Act to resolve
mining issues affecting the tribe. In 1984, he
continued, EPA developed an Indian Policy that was,
in theory, "a good thing;' however, the policy never
was implemented. Activism in the late 1980s on the
part of individuals at EPA, as well as on the part of
tribes, led to a focus on tribal environmental
protection by the 1990s, he added. He noted,
however, that "bringing tribal leaders on board" has
been a difficult task.
Mr. Goldtooth then spoke about OSWER programs
that affect tribes, including the solid waste disposal
programs and other land programs, and the
Superfund, RCRA, underground storage tank (UST),
and Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) Title III programs. He pointed out that
issues related to solid waste disposal are the most
crucial issues for tribes because of the vast,
undetermined number of open dumps on tribal lands.
He stressed that, although EPA grants for solid
waste disposal are available, the funding is
insufficient. Mr. Goldtooth said funding often is not
available to conduct studies to determine what
environmental hazards exist; that situation, he said,
is particularly crucial given the strong tradition of
fishing and hunting that is prevalent in tribal
communities.
Mr. Goldtooth added that other issues, including
racism, are present, pointing out that some people
"still think that Indians should be killed off" and have
a "the war .is over, so what's the problem?" mentality.
He also mentioned that tribes do not want to
jeopardize the sovereignty of tribal governments, an
issue particularly important in the area of liability and
litigation. He emphasized that, in Indian country,
three categories of issues are paramount: regulatory
issues, enforcement issues, and funding issues.
Mr. Bresette added that treaties are now being
upheld in court, affirming "Native peoples' right to
exist." He observed that treaties are ultimately
devices to ensure environmental protection for
everyone; however, they were written by government
bureaucrats and not by tribal people. He then said
that the United States is obligated, both morally and
legally, to uphold its treaties with Native people;
however, it is not doing so, he said. Mr. Bresette
stressed that the issue is not one of trust, but of
fiduciary principles established by the courts. Mr.
Bresette pointed out that "we need to better
understand each other so that we can stand
together." Mr. Bresette noted his desire that NEJAC
adopt a resolution by December 1996 to address
issues of concern to indigenous peoples.
Other members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee offered comments: Ms. Astel
Cavanaugh, Sioux Manufacturing Corporation, spoke
about the Spirit Lake Tribes in the Upper Midwest
and their problems related to worker protection. She
pointed out that DoD and the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA) have "taken a
back seat" on the issue, while EPA, she said, has
been somewhat responsive to the concerns of the
tribes.
Ms. Jean Gemache, Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes
of Alaska, stated that issues of importance to Native
Alaskans parallel those described by Mr. Goldtooth.
She stressed that issues of subsistence consumption
are somewhat more significant to Native Alaskans
than they are to other indigenous peoples, noting
that subsistence is "at the heart of who indigenous
people are." Making the link between contaminants
and subsistence consumption is crucial, she added.
Other issues pertinent to Native Alaskans include the
7-12
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
, Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
long-range transport of heavy metals and
semivolatile organic compounds; sewage problems,
because-of the remoteness of many areas; and a
lack of education in dealing with solid waste. Ms.
Velma Veloria, Washington State Legislature, added
that issues related to the transportation of waste are
of strong importance, and pointed to concerns about
effects on fish and crops that many Native
Americans rely on for subsistence.
An individual in the audience commented that
"environmental justice does not exist; otherwise, we
would not be here." He stated further that EPA
historically has failed to help tribes build the capacity
necessary to manage and regulate Indian lands.
5.8.2
Review of OSWER Activities
Ms. Chariene Dunn, OSWER, described OSWER
activities related to tribal and Native American
issues. She discussed the UST program, Superfund
activities, the Environmental Protection and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), and the
National Tribal Conference held recently in Montana.
Ms. Dunn stated that Subtitle I of RCRA addresses
compliance issues related to USTs, noting that tribes
are defined as "municipalities" under RCRA. That
definition she said, has restricted EPA's ability to
provide funding to the extent that Mr. Goldtooth
requested during his presentation. She added that
funding under the leaking UST (LUST) program is a
major source of resources for addressing tribal
issues; however, Congress reduced that budget
drastically, she said. Ms. Dunn pointed out that the
reduction in funding has had a significant effect on
tribal communities because of the amount of funding
required for cleanup of LUSTs. EPA's 1997 budget
request includes a sizable increase for the LUST and
UST programs, she said. She added, however, that,
even if the requested budget is approved, difficulties
will remain because the problems with storage tanks
on tribal lands are extensive.
Ms. Dunn then stated that tribal leaders were to be
invited to participate in a Superfund management
team, to provide advice about tribal concerns that
EPA should consider during the Superfund
reauthorization process. She stated that until
recently, tribes have not had sufficient opportunity to
become involved in the Superfund program.
Regional Superfund tribal coordinators have been
established, and more than ten National Priorities
List sites are on tribal lands, she added. She said
that the regional offices are discussing priorities with
the tribes, as well as identifying the best ways to
address priority issues. She spoke about other
Superfund activities, noting that OSWER provides
hands-on assistance to tribes that apply for
Brownfields grants.
Ms. Dunn identified options available to tribes under
EPCRA:
Tribes can form independent emergency
response commissions
Several tribes can join together to develop
cooperative agreements
Individual tribes can enter into cooperative
agreements with states through which the
tribes can be involved in planning emergency
response actions conducted by the states or
under state oversight ,
5.8.3
Follow-Up Activities
The subcommittee meeting concluded with
discussions about coordination of efforts to address
issues of concern to indigenous peoples.
Several members commented that state
governments pose the greatest environmental justice
thre;at to tribes, particularly in EPA Region 5, in
general and in the states of Wisconsin and Michigan,
in particular. Subcommittee members suggested
that the Executive Council of the NEJAC be briefed
about the information that was presented at the joint
meeting of the subcommittees because many issues
were raised that they believe all members of the
NEJAC should be aware. The members identified
potential recommendations for consideration by the
NEJAC. These recommendations were related to
regulatory loopholes and mining wastes, building the
capacity of communities to participate effectively,
employment and training, and federal facilities.
Subcommittee members agreed that the Waste and
Facility Siting and the Indigenous Peoples
subcommittees should engage in a conference call
before the next NEJAC meeting to discuss the
issues. Mr. Lee recommended that, before the
conference call, members of the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee state their interest in serving on
an indigenous peoples work group. Ms. Tucker, Mr.
Siegel, and Mr. Kennedy volunteered to participate
on the work group, to be sponsored jointly by the two
subcommittees. Ms. Tucker stated that members of
the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee should be
included in the work group. Mr. Lee noted that the
efforts of NEJAC subcommittees should be
coordinated with those, of EPA's American Indian
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
7-13
-------
Waste Facility and Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Environmental Office and the Tribal Operations
Committee (TOG),
Ms. Dunn commented that most of the issues being
addressed by the f OC involve national policy. She
stated that the TOG plans to discuss ways to
address multimedia issues. EPA is committed to
making sure that tribal issues do not "fall into a black
hole," she said. Mr. Fields added that OSWER is
willing to work with the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee to address those issues that currently
are not being addressed sufficiently.
6.0 RESOLUTIONS
The subcommittee agreed to the following
resolutions to be presented to the NEJAC Executive
Council.
Waste Resolution No. 1 (Community Mapping):
NEJAC should applaud the efforts of OSWER in
developing LandView II as a model of federal
fnteragency cooperation and should request that
EPA:
Increase public awareness of the availability
and usefulness of LandView II, which includes
the development of methods of providing
LandView II to community organizations,
historically black colleges and universities,
and other institutions that serve communities
concerned with environmental justice issues
» Support community efforts to conduct training
on the use of LandView II and other mapping
tools
Develop coordinated protocols for updating
LandView II and other mapping systems and
for developing such systems in the future
Sponsor a series of community roundtable
meetings to discuss mapping tools and
strategies, including a meeting on mapping
issues specific to indigenous people
Waste Resolution No.
Dialogues):
2 (Report on Public
NEJAC endorses "Environmental Justice, Urban
Revitalization, and Brownfields: The Search for
Authentic Signs of Hope," the report of the Public
Dialogues on Urban Revitalization and Brownfields:
Envisioning Healthy and Sustainable Communities,
conducted by the NEJAC Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee and EPA in 1995. The subcommittee
recommends this report for adoption by NEJAC.
Waste Resolution No. 3 (Minority Worker Training):
NEJAC should request EPA to:
Continue to fund Minority Worker Training
Program at the current level of $3 million in
fiscal year 1996
Provide; an additional $2 million for the
Minority -Worker Training Program in fiscal
year 1996
Restore the Hazardous Materials Worker
Training Program to its former level of $20.5
million from present level of $18.5 in fiscal
year 1996
Ensure the necessary level of appropriations
for the program for fiscal year 1997 and
beyond
Recommend that the IWG examine ways to
better coordinate and integrate related and
job training programs (for example, Youth
Build) to get maximum benefits from and
ensure greatest continuity of worthy projects
Waste Resolution No.
Pilot):
4 (Superfund Relocation
NEJAC should request that the EPA Administrator:
Visit Pensacola, Florida to underscore the
pivotal significance of the Pensacola
relocation pilot for the development of a
national relocation policy and to ensure that
the development of national policy be done in
a "living" manner
Direct that the proposed plan for Pensacola
apply current Superfund law to implement a
broader relocation strategy
Urge the IWG and all relevant federal
agencies to work with EPA on developing a
relocation plan for the Pensacola Relocation
Pilot
Provide leadership in getting the nation to
understand that the issue of relocation
represents a critical national challenge
7-14
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
The resolution also outlined historical activities
related to 'relocation issues, including (1) public
testimony about relocation issues submitted during
the January 1995 meeting of the NEJAC in Atlanta,
Georgia; (2) OSWER's May 1995 memorandum
directing that EPA regional offices develop a
nationally consistent relocation policy, including .the
designation of pilot sites through which to thoroughly
explore issues related to relocation; (3) a briefing
between OSWER and members of the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee during which relocation
issues were discussed; and (4) a May 1996
Superfund Relocation Roundtable meeting held in
Pensacola, Florida, to bring community concerns to
the surface, clarify policy issues, and develop policy
recommendations.
Waste Resolution No. 5 (IOM Environmental Justice
Study): -
NEJAC should request that EPA:
Conduct a series of dialogues with the staff
and members of the National Academy of
Sciences and IOM joint Committee on
Environmental Justice to ascertain how EPA
resources, personnel, and experience in the
area of environmental justice can be most
helpful in conducting its study on research,
education, and health policy needs.
Formally invite IOM to make a presentation to
the NEJAC about the study
Establish mechanisms in a relevant program
office to enable the NEJAC to transmit
matters of concern to the IOM committee
Make available to the IOM committee relevant
resources and materials
.Encourage IOM to include grassroots
community groups as part of the planning and
/ implementation of the study
Waste Resolution No. 6 (EPA nd DOT Coordination):
EPA should coordinate efforts with DOT to address
cross-cutting issues related to sustainable
development. DOT'S initiative, titled, "Liveable
Communities Partnerships," overlaps with urban
revitalization and Brownfields redevelopment and is
an example of the need for interagency coordination.
The resolution requests that:
EPA initiate a series of public dialogue
meetings, using the process used to conduct
the Brownfields public dialogues, to discuss
issues related to transportation and regional
land use issues and their relationship to
, Brownfields issues
EPA and DOT co-author a report that explains
how related initiatives can be integrated
better, and co-sponsor a seminar to discuss
issues related to transportation, land use, and
Brownfields redevelopment
DOT incorporate Brownfields sessions into its
upcoming workshops on Livable Community
Partnerships
EPA Administrator and DOT Secretary
Frederico Pefia issue a joint statement
explaining the interrelated issues of concern
to EPA and DOT and the joint activities to be
undertaken by the two agencies.
Waste Resolution No. 7 (Pollution Prevention and
Brownfields): .
NEJAC should request that EPA integrate pollution
prevention into the Brownfields Initiative as an
overarching principle. Specifically, NEJAC should
requestthat: ,
OSWER issue a memorandum that calls
attention to pollution prevention as a crucial
> and fundamental issue in addressing
Brownfields redevelopment issues; the
memorandum also should emphasize the
need to involve communities in designing and
implementing pollution prevention plans
EPA review current Brownfields projects to
determine whether pollution prevention has
been included in those projects
EPA require the involvement of affected
communities in the development of pollution
prevention plans, particularly when regulatory
flexibility is proposed or when amnesty is
offered for past violations
EPA sponsor a series of public dialogues with
Brownfields stakeholders to determine how
pollution prevention cari be integrated into
,Brownfields projects
EPA support training and technical assistance
for community groups to increase their
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
7-15
-------
Waste Facility and Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
participation in pollution prevention activities
EPA include information about pollution
prevention on its Brownfields home page on
the Internet
Waste Resolution No.
Brownfields):
- 8 (Public Health and
NEJAC should request EPA to:
Correspond with Mr. Andrew McBride,
Director of the City of Stamford, Connecticut
Department of Health, about ways to include
the public health community in urban
revitalization and Brownfields initiatives
Train personnel in the area of public health
and its relation to Brownfields redevelopment
activities
Enlist appropriate federal agencies' in
developing a plan to ensure that public health
be integrated into all urban revitalization and
Brownfields initiatives
Begin a series of dialogues on how to
integrate public health into planning for
sustainable Brownfields redevelopment
Enlist community based organizations and
national health groups in the above efforts
7-16
Detroit, Michigan, May 29 and 30,1996
-------
APPENDICES
-------
-------
LIST OF NEJAC MEMBERS
-------
_
-------
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
1995-96 List (25 Members)
Designated Federal Officer
Clarice Gaylord, Director
Office of Environmental Justice (3103A)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401M Street S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
(202)564-2515
- Chairperson
Mr. Richard Moore
(505) 242-0416
ACADEMIA-4
Dr. Robert Bollard -1 year
Environmental Justice Resource Center
Clark Atlanta University
223 Brawley Drive, SW
Atlanta, GA 30314
Dr. Mary R. English - 2 years
Associate Director '
Waste Management Research and Education Institute
327 South Stadium Hall
University of Tennessee
Knoxvffle,TN 37996
Dr. Richard Lazarus - 2 years
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001 .
Dr. Beverly Wright -1 year
Deep South Center for Environmental Justice
Xavier University .
8131 Aberdeen Road
New Orleans, LA 70126
INDUSTRY-4
Mr. John C. Borum - 2 years
Vice President, Environment and Safety Engineering
AT&T
131 Morristown Road
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Mr. Charles McDermott - 1 year
Director of Governmental Affairs
Waste Management Inc.
1155 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20036
Mr. Lawrence G. Hurst - 2 years
Director, Communications
Motorola, Inc. .
Mail Drop R 3125
8220 East Roosevelt
Scottsdale, AZ 85257
Mr. Michael Pierle 1 year
Monsanto
800 North Lindburgh St.
St Louis, MO 63167
COMMUNITY GROUPS - 3
Ms., Dolores Herrera - 2 years
Executive Director
San Jose Community Awareness Council Inc.
2401 Broadway Blvd. SE
Albuquerque, MM 87102-5009
Ms. Hazel Johnson -1 year
Executive Director
People for Community Recovery
13116 South Ellis Avenue
Chicago, EL 60627
Ms. Dollie B. Burwell - 2 years
Warren County Concerned Citizens
AgainstPCB
P.O. Box 254
Warrenton,NC 27589 :
NON-GOVERNMENT - 4
Mr. Charles Lee - 2 years
Director of Research
United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice
475 Riverside Dr., 16th Floor
New York, NY 10015
Mr. John O'Leary, Esq. -1 year
Pierce, Atwood & Scribner
1 Monument Square
Portland, ME 04468
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez, Director -1 year
Farm Labor Organizing Committee
3352 Plaimiew Dr.
Toledo, OH 43615
Mr. Hay wood Turrentine - 2 years
Laborers-AGC Education and Training Fund
4221 Chace Lake Fairway
Hoover, Al 35244 '
-------
STATE/LOCAL-3
Honorable Salomon Rondon-Tollens - 2 years
President of the Natural Resources and
Environmental Quality Commission
Capitolio San Juan, PR 00901
Ms. Velma Veloria -1 year
House of Representatives
Washington State Legislature
403 John L. O'Brien Bldg.
P.O. Box 40622
Olympia, WA 98504-0622
OR 1511 S. Ferdinand St.
Seattle, WA 98108
Mr. Arthur Ray, Esq. - 2 years
Deputy Director
Maryland Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
TRBAL-3
Ms. Christine Benally - 2 years
Executive Director
Dine CARE
P. O. Box 1992
SMprock, NM 87420
Ms. Jean Gamache, Esq. - 2 years
Tlignit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska
125 Christensen Dr.
P. O. Box 104432
Anchorage, AK 99510
Mr. Walter Bresette - 2 years
Lake Superior Cbippewa
P. O. Box 1350
20 South Broad St.
Bayfield,WI 54814
ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS - 4
Mr. Richard Moore -1 year
Southwest Network for
Environmental and Economic Justice
21110th Street, SW
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Ms. Peggy Saika - 2 years
Asian Pacific Environment Network
3126 California Street
Oakland, CA 94602
Ms. Nathalie Walker -1 year
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund
400 Magazine Street, Suite 401
New Orleans, LA 70130
Ms. Deeohn Ferris -1 year
Washington Office for Environmental Justice
1511 K St. NW, Suite 1147
Washington, D.C. 20005
-------
H
II
o
S3
§
I
§* g
eb ...
|8
-.&3
M -B -S
&
6
60
n o
a
^1J"£
Oi,2 >* «-i
gearS-a-SO
S,S fJ* | § ;|
cop
n
tu
Manufactu
nd Fox Trib
Sioux
Sac
L
2)
s-s-^
I s s^-
Jf!I
alii?*?
I -i 1 1 | '5 ^
£ cj £ 2 £ 3 £
11 !!=
sSSIl
s e S S
Q« a I1M J
B a-^'&g'li 1
|SI:3j££l
-211 n'S
S-BS(§
on
nt
1.63 °
* >>. w 'S
c .o S
|pt| s -i
7lia|^sts
a-Sg^col'g^"
S ^PH!-3<^ S
2)
«
well* (2)
el (2)
asaki
dy 2
^ -g, g « | i S "g "S
C^BO>W«B
fli IS _O 3 5 *S ^ rX
iJ Hoo Q 2 O O
Doll
Len
O j O .
!&)ZZZZw&l-^ '
ement Subcommittee --
g
£
1
* J-L, SSc^ts c?-o ^
>» * Jli o * ' S * '
1*2 §«'§. lf-,5
GQ ' « - o O I-- *<
«|SN S?l^ i
o*** ^^^K-^E-1
e-o'>-.-a B'^T-'^'co
115111111
SS^2(Soo££
QS>jO>H,OOCJ
H:C3co<;«S
-------
HANDOUTS DISTRIBUTED
DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS
-------
-------
Public Comment (Sections 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 6.2.3)
Michael Dorsey, Yale University
Max Weintraub, National Safety Council
Running Grass, Three Circles Center for Multi-Cultural Environmental Education
Various charts related to activities of the Environmental Education and Training Partnership (EETAP)
program.
_
-------
-------
LJJ
LU
0
_c
o
OJ
0)
a:
o
o
O
Z3
T3
1 1
JJ
i_
CD
Q_
4-J
r\
O
o
0
O
CM
0
O
O
o o
o o
CO CO
<&
-------
PUBLIC COMMENT (Section 6.2.4)
John Simmons
Kennedy Heights Civic Association
Various articles about the Kennedy Heights neighborhood in Houston, Texas.
-------
Kennedy Heights residents
take Chevron to court for
a legal toxic showdown
Thousands of home
owners from southeast
Houston's mostly Afti-
on Amman Kennedy
Heights are taking one
of the world's Urgeit energy com-
panies to court this fall to finally
take Chevron to task for attracting
in the 1960s Black families se«le
on the site of a dangerous toxic
dump,
"Kennedy Heights is
bounded by Cullen. Selinsky and
not far from MLK. What we are
talking about is a I*) acre waste
slle for oil chemical hy products
such as highly explosive methane
gas and other Mill to this day le-
Ihally dangerous contaminants."
said plaintiff's aitornex Carl D
Shaw.
Sbaw work* for the na-
tionally famous downtown law
firm of John O'Quinn which
made its mark recently in win-
ning the S24 million breast implant
judgment against Dow Chemical.
Today Shaw and his sta flare work-
ing to represent more than 2.000
Kennedy Height* plaintiffs from
326 properties Physicians screen-
ing Kennedy Heights home own-
ers have already found TO cancers,,
three brain tumors. 12 case* of
lupu<. l2kidwyproblenK.remov.
aK and transplant, dangerously
enlarged brains and many cases of
children ihni were horn with de-
fects i«r developmental problems.
Contaminants have also
been found on the site that could
came skin rashes, dcrmams and
breathing rtirficulti«.Aeeneraiion
if residents grew tip on the prop-
cny u.iih ailments that nn one
Incw the reason fin
Gulf Oil (Chcvroni docu-
ments from atmoM \» yean; afa
itncumem. wiih detail how race
BY BURT LEVINE
clearly was a factor in the devel-
opment of the property. The prop-
erty was first purchased by Gulf
Production in 1921. After that it
was mostly as an earthen tank farm
for not only the gas and oil chemi-
cal garbage but also to dump old
batteries and tires until the 1 960s
when Gulf tried for more than six
years to sell the property.
In 1966 real estate special-
ist Earl A. Wyatt. while on Gulf
Oil's pay roll, reported fin a memo
Shaw carries with him to court as
evidence) the property "would best
be used for low. to medium-pnced
biracial housing
"It is felt that eventually this
would be the highest and best use
of this property because ii would
then serve as a buffer between the
White residential area in
Crestmont Park and the heavily
colored developments to the mirth
and wesi." Wyait wn«e.
In 1967 an iniem.il Gulf Oil
memo outlines negotiations for
swapping some of the laml fur a
Richmond at Miimrnse comer loi
that later became a Chevron Ser-
vice Station The noie specified
detail nhout the wan with John R.
tester, "who was interested in ac-
quiring this acreage for a Negro
residential development."
Shaw presented these state-
ments last week to State District
Judge William Bell, whose court
will decide the suit's fate this fall.
Bell said "I'm finding all
this so difficult to swallow. I am
very offended by those exhibits.
Kennedy Heights community
leader John Simmons is listed on
court documents as the lead plain-
tiff in Simmons vs. Chevron. USA.
Ire. Simmons said the racial ref-
erences are critical.
About five years ago City
of Houston contractors were at-
tempting to drill holes to lay the
pipe on what would become the
publicly funded American Dream
Homes when a series of con-
tractors kept coming back with
complaints about pockets of
Methane vapors that were threat-
ening the health of their construc-
tion crews.
Geologist Dr. Patrick N.
Agostino was hired hy Shaw to test
the ground at Kennedy Heights.
Agostino told Bell's court it's pos-
sible for Methane vapors to enter
homes and garage foundations and
spark major explosions if built up
to a level greater than 50.000 pans
per million. He said already up to
93.000 pans per million are in
some of the heights' grassy areas.
Simmons said "it's obvious
they wanted Black people on top
of those oil and gas pits to buffer a
While area and In gel federal funds
that would attract people that
would he loo poor to get off the
land or to do anything about it if
they ever found out about what
they were living on lop of."
Pleasantville residents seek legal rep-
resentation for recent toxic fires
The 1'lcasantvillc Ovic
Keagiic this week. scK-tcil legal
represwi.nlinn in «e?I lecal irdres<.
apainst all responsible pnnits fur
ihe wneiof ifevaMaimj: and harm-
lul tojic fire* thni ha\e occured m
Ihe Plovimville area
The Legal Committee of
the group unanimously voted to
nave nationally known attorney
Willie E. Gary and the law firm of
Gary. Williams. Parenti. Finne.
Lewis ft MeManut »f Stuart.
Honda to reprewrm them. Joining
them as co-counsel are noted
Houston attorneys II. Lawrence
Bor< of U. Lawrence Bn/e & As-
sociates and Pmfessui CJrover G
Hawkins. Professol Lav. ai TSt!'\
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Since the firs! fire, which
began on June 24. the Pleasamville
community has experienced mas-
sive and frightening explosions
with spontaneously erupting toxic
fires. As a direct result, many resi-
itrnts have suffered serious, life
threatening and painful health
Gary
problems and medical condition
directly related to the fires. Resi-
dents have expressed major con-
cern for the safely and well-being
of their families, neighbors and
property.
Trial
DaDocd from p. 9
getting Heard to leave the sate
and lie to investigators.
Reynold!' attorneys ad-
mit he likes telephone sex taut
cay the Heard relationship went
no further. He says he is the vic-
tim of racial bias on the pan of
a politically motivated White
prosecutor.
While few if any defense
witnesses may be called. Rey-
nolds' attorneys are expected to
deliver dosing arguments with
a simple message: He doesn't
deserve to goto jail on the word
of an unreliable witness tinder
pressure from that prosecutor.
One problem: neither
side is allowed to tell the jury
about the mandatory four-year
sentence. But legal observers
say defense attorneys may be
able to get the message across
! all the same.
! "There is lurking in here
a significant question about
prosecuiorial discretion in go-
ing through with the sex
charges once it became clear
the witness wasn't enthusias-
tic." says Tom Scorza. a Chi-
cago defense anomey.
Reynolds attorneys al-
ready have weakened the
prosecution's case.
They have shown that
Heard lied on a number of oc-
casions. And Heard, herself.
answered "Yes sir" to defense
suggestions that she left the
state to avoid prosecutors and
signed false affidavits on her
own initiative without being
forced by Reynolds.
Defense attorneys are
hoping that by planting those
seeds of doubt, the jurors will
be bothered enough about the
way prosecutors have pursued
the case to let Reynolds off.
"A lot of people." said
Scorza."... liberal and conser-
vative, academic and non-aca-
demic. Whites and Blacks ...
after expressing disgust wiih
the man. Mel Reynolds, are
saying essentially, 'But how do
you send this guy to jail for his
consensual sex life?"
p. 21 Houston NewsPaot* August 17 - 23.1995
-------
Houston, TX
CHRONICLE
Hiuiton-Brzisrlt
WilAru
Wednesday
COURTHOUSE ODOR
Judge's recusalsmells bad; neither side's coming clean
" Harris County state District Judge William
Bell recused himself from a high-profile toxic
contamination case recently under what he
said was "duress" and "undue and extreme
pressure" from other judges.
. It is hard to know exactly what happened in
this case because neither Bell nor state
District Judge David West, who appears to
have had a hand in Bell's removing himself,
will talk about the case. Nevertheless the
situation gives off a distinctly foul odor.
Before he walked away, Bell had been
presiding for a year over a case in which 2,500
Kennedy Heights residents are suing
Chevron for allegedly allowing their subdivi-
sion to be built on its old waste pits. It will
surprise no one if the new presiding judge
Tony Lindsay, must delay the June trial date
to bring herself up to speed.
Even beyond the inconvenience and ex-
pense of having to drag out the litigation,
West s apparent actions are very troubling
Although he has not talked specifically about
the Chevron case, West, who has no connec-
tion whatsoever to the lawsuit, said he sees
no problem with senior judges "mentoring"
junior judges, as long as it is done in private.
Judge West is way off base if he believes
pressing another independently elected
judge to step down from a case properly can
be called mentoring. The correct course, if a
party to a lawsuit believes there is a problem
with a particular judge, is for one side or the
other to reguest a judge's recusal. Harris
County residents should not accept that
random judges can interfere in cases that do
not directly involve them.
There is already a public perception among
ordinary citizens that cronyism and corrup-
tion matter more down at the courthouse
than facts and fairness. The circumstances
surrounding this case, from what we know so
far, seem to do much more to encourage that
perception than to diminish it
-------
l!l!!f!
§ -gO fa ills-Si
*$*l"i*S*;S!S
=s s-S J.g>.g §«» i « !§
-------
PUBLIC COMMENT (Section 6.2.13)
Alex Varela
Private Citizen
Letter and various articles about the environmental justice movement
-------
-------
Written Submission
Arthur A. Varela
Before the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
May28, 1996
I could not leave EPA without attending one last NEJAC meeting and saying farewell to its
members, my friends. I am here as a private citizen (after 16 years in EPA and 30 years in
environmental justice) to transmit my thoughts, best wishes, and recommendations on environmental
justice to the NEJAC, as I pursue other career and personal options. One thing I think I have learned
along the long and never ending road to environmental justice is that environmental justice cannot
be measured in court victories or regulations amended or settlement agreements. The measures of
environmental justice lie within the people and communities who were touched and empowered
through the environmental justice movement.
'< . ' - .
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTTCF. WTTH1N EPA AND THE GOVERNMENT
It is difficult to convey to community leaders, who suffer through daily and life-long trials,
the peculiar type of courage it takes to try to give birth to a movement from inside the government,
from inside the belly of the beast. The risks we take pale by comparison to the risks taken by
community, labor, and American Indian leaders. However, the risks we take and the punishments we
endure are not physical, but rather emotional. My colleague, Arthur Ray, frequently refers to us as
"environmental dilettantes" because we have (fairly) safe government jobs, access to information,
tools, and authority: but we are not on the front line. To the contrary, many of the people I have
worked with would risk everything for what they believe in.
Historically, EPA encountered what is now environmental justice in the 1970's in a battle with
Sierra Club and others over whether civil rights laws applied to environmental implementation. EPA
developed the theory that environmental laws were merely technical in nature and implementation
merely ministerial, therefore uniform standards would protect everyone. In the early 1980's, an
employee underground developed in response to the Gorsuch/Burford administration, which was later
forced out of office largely on the basis of employee leaks. The underground included staff who were
interested in environmental justice issues including lead in gasoline; farmworker protection; the
Warren County landfill case; the Olin (Triana) case; Dixie Smelter; and numerous other issues. EPA
had another direct encounter with environmental justice in the Warren County landfill case when the
NAACP, UCC and others sued EPA for discrimination. Although EPA "won" the case, it would later
become evident that EPA had lost the war to keep the movement from growing (as Lew Crampton
putit). ' '
Although environmental protection improved under Ruckelshaus/Thomas, the Agency still.
declined to recognize the concept of environmental justice, despite the GAO Report, the UCC
Report, and overtures from Rev. Ben Chavis. The Agency issued an Indian Policy in 1994, but
-------
largely deferred to the states and did not develop the resources to implement an adequate program.
Some ethnic employee organizations were becoming more vocal, and scheduled meetings with and
wrote letters to the Administrator. In the late 1980's, environmental justice was coalescing with
meetings at Michigan, which drew some interested staff from EPA, but most offices would not allow
employees to attend environmental justice meetings. A coalition of environmental justice groups
wrote a letter to the mainstream environmental groups, accusing them of racism in hiring and policy.
EPA employees suggested that the coalition send a similar letter to EPA.
For "Earth Day" 1990, EPA scheduled a national conference for minority students at Howard
University, which included an environmental justice discussion, but not EPA's record. The Howard
newspaper carried an editorial (by EPA attorneys Art Ray and Alex Varela) outlining EPA's dismal
environmental justice failures. Following the Howard conference, environmental justice leaders
approached Administrator Reilly about meeting, which was strongly supported by certain employee
groups. During a series of these meetings, Reilly directed EPA to develop an Environmental Equity
Report. Appointment to the Equity Workgroup was strongly censored to exclude employees with
experience in environmental justice. At the time these meetings were going on, the coalition of
environmental justice groups was getting larger and more organized, culminating in the "Summit" in
Washington. EPA Administrator Reilly declined to speak (through a mix-up), and EPA did not allow
employees to attend. Organized by Charles Lee (he was up to 5 cigarettes/minute) and the UCC, the
Summit was a transcending event for the movement. I have always wanted to have a NET AC meeting
at the Washington Court, in honor of the Summit.
When the Equity Report was released, it was controversial and was heavily edited (references
to state responsibilities or farmworker protection were constantly removed), and was the subject of
a congressional hearing featuring the infamous Lew Crampton Memo. In the summer of 1992, the
farmworker protection regulations were issued after pressure from environmental justice groups. The
National Law Journal published an award-winning 15-page environmental justice issue entitled
"Unequal Protection" which had a profound effect on the movement and on EPA. Following the
Clinton election, EPA staff helped arrange a meeting in the Senate between Katie McGinty and
environmental justice leaders. As a result of this meeting, environmental justice was a major part of
the transition team, and EPA staff helped the Lawyer's Committee developed a Transition Team.
Paper based on recommendations from environmental justice groups.
Pursuing environmental justice under the current administration continues to have its
challenges. Mid-level managers are not committed to a "new" (new since the Civil War) theme which
has no statutory mandate or deadlines. Mid-level political appointees are second guessing and
protecting the President from any controversy which might occur on their watch. An excellent
example is the development of the Environmental Justice Strategy under E.O. 12898. The concepts
of "cultural diversity" and "spiritual use of natural resources" were central concepts endorsed by
NEJAC (and consistent with the President's policies) but were "too controversial" to include in a
written strategy. If Elizabeth Bell and I had a nickel for every time we put those concepts back in the
strategy or argued with some bureaucrat, or even got thrown out of an office.
-------
While the "type" of courage is different, I am proud of the amount of courage that I have seen
from my colleagues. I am also lucky to have witnessed the birth of a movement both from within
EPA and from within the movement. . -
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AS A MOVEMENT
There really is nothing like the multi-cultural experience found in environmental justice
meetings such as the Southwest Network "Gathering" the "Summit" in Washington, the Health
Symposium (during the worst ice storm in Washington history), or any number of conferences such
as the recent meeting in New Jersey. Although there are clear parallels to the civil Rights movement,
anyone who has been to a Gathering knows why the environmental justice movement deserves to be
called a true multi-cultural movement. Just look at the picture of the ad-hoc "New River" strategy
group at Phoenix.
, . - ' ' / , .
The Brookings Institution recently published an article which questioned the foundations of
environmental justice (Spring 1996, Christopher Foreman). The author criticizes the movement's
suspicion of the notion of "acceptable risk", and suggests that "any person of color voicing any
environmental-related anxiety... represents a genuine environmental justice problem." Acceptable
risk, for example, could easily be that accepted by the people of Chevy Chase and the majority of
Americans not disproportionately exposed to pollution. Although the risks may be relatively
undefrnable, the people of Chevy Chase clearly would not accept the environmental risk of
farmworkers, Native American Indians, public housing residents living on top 0f Superfund sites, or
Pacific Islanders involved in radiation experiments. The environmental justice "movement"
affirmatively decided not to have a centralized "gatekeeper" to set priorities, rather, it exists loosely
to ensure that "any person" can bring an issue to the table. Government agencies are paid to analyze
acceptable risk and relative risk priorities.
Mr. Foreman writes that "the foil universe of empirical studies offers mixed support for the
movement's claim of racial disparities." This narrow-sighted view ignores overwhelming evidence
of government action racially disparate on its face, such as farmworker protection, Native American
Indian and Alaska Native village environmental resources, Pacific island nuclear bomb testing and
cleanup,' human radiation experimentation, lead-in-gasoline policy, etc. It is precisely because of the
breadth and extent of disparate impact that environmental justice is a moral issue for our government
and society, rather than a purely economic issue as Mr. Foreman would have us believe. Because
some studies show that some pollution sources are located in some white middle-class areas does not
relieve state and federal agencies from following the Constitution. Whereas a market economy may
be expected to provide more benefits for some than for others, environmental laws were not intended
to sanction one class enjoying all of the economic benefits while another class endures all of the
environmental burdens. For example, environmental justice organizations have questioned whether
market-based environmental approaches, such as emissions credits and trading, may have a
disproportionate impact. ("The clean air goes to Westchester, the money goes to Wall Street, and the
dirty air goes to East St. Louis"). .
-------
The article is correct when it questions the role of the federal government in siting issues.
Environmental justice is an issue because environmental laws are federal (with delegation to the states
for implementation), whereas land use planning involves private and local government action, creating
an inherent separation of powers conflict. However, this is analogous to the Civil Rights movement
of the 50's and 60's where minority communities applied to the federal government and the courts for
protection from state and local government action. Now, courts are less inclined to hear civil rights
claims, and both the Administration and Congress are moving to grant more flexibility to state and
local governments.
Many of the conclusions in the article are unsupportable, such as the statement that minorities
"now" effectively marshal outrage as well as white communities. When the author says that "Native
Americans breathe cleaner air than urban yuppies" [p. 24] he neglects to mention that many tribes
have no adequate water, sewer, or solid waste facilities. Environmental justice involves access to a
holistic clean environment: not some arbitrary average between clean air and duty water. The article
goes on to outline the "relative risk" and coslTbenefit priorities argument [p. 25] raised by the
American Enterprise Institute: i.e., "smoking, alcohol, violence, etc. are more serious risks, shouldn't
we address them first?" The argument extends so far as congressional testimony that "inner-city kids
have more of a problem with lead bullets than lead pollution." The idea that certain portions of our
population are not entitled to clean air or clean water or a clean environment because some people
in that population smoke or drink is not consistent with our Constitution, our civil rights laws, or our
environmental laws.
The current congressional agenda is more concerned with the "injustice" of regulatory property
"takings," which can also cut both ways. For example when a government body grants a permit to
a pollution source it devalues the other adjacent properties and restricts future uses and quality of life
of those around the site of the government decision. Shouldn't the government reimburse these other
constitutionally protected life, liberty, and property interests it has just "taken"?
Although the Administration and the current Congress are considering actions which may
conflict with environmental justice goals, not all such "reinvention" approaches are incompatible. For
example, "multi-media" or one-stop permitting may result in permits which are more protective of
the community in the long run. Both the Administration and especially the Republican House face
credibility problems on environmental issues. (Note that 3 of the 17 "riders" on the EPA Bill involved
environmental justice). To the extent that environmental justice advocates show that either the
administration or congress pursues environmental policies which are perceived as manefestly unfair,
credibility will suffer.
Rather than "a decade or two hence, the very mention of environmental justice [will] evoke[s]
a wince, a sigh, or a quiet shake of the head [p. 25]," I have every confidence that environmental
justice will be alive and well in the streets, reservations, and communities of America long after the
last issue of the Brookings Review is rotting away in a landfill. Unless, of course, we have achieved
environmental justice by then.
-------
ENVmONMENTAL JUSTICE MYTHS
1.
Environmental Justice doesn't exist
2. Environmental justice is simply a siting issue; Environmental justice is solely an economic
issue, without any racial component
'''.''
3 . Environmental justice is a zero sum game of jobs vs. the environment
4. There is, no connection between "cultural diversity" and environmental justice
5. Environmental justice is a preference or affirmative environmental action issue seeking only
to place more toxic facilities in white areas
6. Environmental statute implementation by EPA involves implementation of purely "technical"
standards, and therefore national standards will protect all equally
7. On a comparative risk basis, environmental justice problems rank far below inner-city
violence, etc.; therefore minority and low-income populations don't deserve clean air, clean water,
etc. until they splve all of their other problems such as violence, smoking, etc.
8. Market-based environmental approaches will automatically help everyone
9. The key to solving environmental justice issues is to do more epidemiological and other
research. And the contrary: environmental justice does not need academic support.
1.0. We need more lawsuits, because lawsuits will solve the environmental justice problem.
11., Superfund sites are the cause of the most serious environmental justice problems.
12. Environmental justice problems related to bureaucratic action are intentional, and not caused
by bureaucratic ineptitude, (this is important, because the approach is different) N
13. The key to resolving environmental justice issues with government agencies is to intimidate
mid-level bureaucrats rather than convert them into helping; and to get the Administrator to visit
every city (community) in the Country
14. Delegating more flexibility and authority to state and local governments will help
environmental justice because power will be closer to the people
1 5 . The only successful environmental justice solution is to stop or remove a facility; industry and
environmental justice have no goals in common
-------
ENVmONMENTAL JUSTICE TOOLS
1. Alternative Dispute Resolution, CAPs, Environmental Auditing
2. Americans with Disabilities Act
3. Citizen Suit / Petitions / Intervention in proceedings
4. TRI/EPCRA
5. Title 8 of the Civil Rights Act; analogy to remedies under other sections of the CRA
6. Use of State and local ordinances such as nuisance
7. NEPA
8. SEPs
9. New creative alliances (such as NCAMP; farm labor organizations; traditional environmental
groups; natural food advocates)
10. New and creative uses of electronic tools [such as Landview. An example would be the
computer cross-referencing of: the 25 most toxic pesticides; FIFRA 6(a) (2) reports; registration -
use comparisons (such as the DuPont/Rhone Polenc case); Pesticide food residue analysis for the 25
chemicals; groundwater, wellwater, and clean water analysis for the 25 chemicals; appropriate
government and public action. Such an initiative would link the public, farmworkers, consumers, and
environmentalists]
11.. Multi-media initiatives such as the EPA lead initiative
12. First amendment challenges and defenses (e.g., the SNEEJ Region 6 Dallas demonstration;
the Unequal Protection Bullard/Moqre SLAP suit)
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE DISAPPOINTMENTS FAILURES
1. Lack of coordination, communication and networking between EPA and other organizations
and other federal agencies
2. Lack of good models for environmental justice ~ lack of networking of successes/failures
" ,i V '',.',' ' '
3. Farmworker Protection Regulations the watering down of protection under constant
pressure from outside forces
-------
4. EPA Cabinet Bill and other legislation
5. EPA lack of guidance on state responsibilities
6. Failure of alliances, with mainstream environmental organizations and other organizations
7. Failure to maintain fociis on core environmental justice issues (the argument keeps devolving
to methodology of GIS studies, definitions of "minority," and the economics of land use planning).
8. Failure to develop an environmental justice infrastructure or "rapid response" capability to
deal with and influence national issues (such as changes in the farmworker protection regulations;
CWA and other legislation; EPA appropriations; congressional hearings; and articles and reports).
9. Failure to adequately integrate environmental justice with other agency projects, priorities,
and themes (such as Community Based Environmental Protection; Permit Improvement Project;
Combined Sense Initiative, etc.). '
i . , r
10. EPA fear or refusal to link environmental justice and cultural diversity, even though it is
consistent with the President's policy.
11. Failure to develop an adequate environmental resource system for Indian Country.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE SUCCESSES
1. Environmental justice has changed environmentalism and the environmental movement
2. Environmental justice is recognized by EPA, state and federal government agencies, industry,
civil rights organizations, environmental organizations, "the press, and academia
3. Development of the American Indian Environmental Office, the Tribal Operations Committee,
Indian environmental policies, and a start of a system to identify the environmental resource needs
in Indian Country
4. Farmworker Protection Regulations. Finally issuing and implementing more protective
regulations
5. Development of the Office of Environmental Justice, and setting environmental justice as a
priority (now subsumed by CBEP?) ,
6. Development of the NEJAC
7. Development of environmental justice networks and the Washington Office
-------
8. Development of the Executive Order
9. The 1994 Health Symposium and the Atlanta National Meeting
10. The people...
, '',-<., '
CONCLUSION
Environmental justice has always depended upon partnerships, and I have had the opportunity
to work with and "partner" with great people and groups. There are many left out as I rush to get
this to Detroit, but I would like to recognize Alan Loeb, Rich Ostrov, Mary Douglas Dick, Dick
Emory, Terrell Hunt, Rob Wolcott (an unsung hero), Linda Smith (another unsung hero), Marva
King, Rafael DeLeon, Warren Banks, Chuck McDermott, Mary McDonnell, David Batson, Mike
Walker, Carrie Dann, Leigh Price, Jose Bravo & Paula Forbis & all the EHC people (just because
Tm leaving doesnt mean Tm not going to get you back, Jose), Charles Lee, Luke Cole, Rich Albores,
Rich Barber, Grover Hankins, Mary O'Lone, Sherry Milan, Eduardo Quintana, Kathy Aterno (yes,
this is not a typo), Cathy Schaefor, Reina Milligan, Rev. Ben Chavis, Pat Bryant, Gail Small, Tom
Goldtooth, terry Williams, Maryanne LaVelle, Vicky Reath, Ron Grandon, Sherry Milan, Bik,
Clarice and all of the OEJ crew - especially the "P & R Team" (Elizabeth Bell, Pam Font, Angela
Chung, Lily Lee, and Kevin Parikh), Janice Whitney, Bob Smith, Richard & Jeanne & everybody at
SWOP/SNEEJ, Pam'Tau Lee, Bob Bullard, George Coling, Bob Faithful, Bob Alvarez, Barbara
Grimm-Crawford, Katie McGinty, Frank Clemente, Steve Viederman, Nathan & Shoshanna, Janice
Bryant (our prayers be with you), Deeohn Ferris, Lily Lee, Arthur Ray, and Elizabeth Bell.
The conclusion to these comments is not any different than the introduction. It is the people
who matter...
Attached are two documents which EPA, over the years, was inclined to ignore. I am submitting
them for the record so that EPA will now have them as part of the record. Howard University
Hilltop, April ("Earthday") 1990; The Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Transition Team Paper,
December 1992. Also included is the Spring 1996 Brookinss Review. "A Winning Hand?"
Christopher Foreman. '
i, " ' ','"',',
NOTE: To make OGC happy: "These remarks reflect the personal views of the author and are not
the views of the Environmental Protection Agency."
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS TO ZEE PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION
TEAM FOR TEE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES
SUBMITTED BY TEE ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE TRANSITION GROUP
Transmitted By:
The Environmental Justice Project
TEE LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL
RIGHTS UNDER LAW
Suite 400
1400 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 371-1212
December 21, 1992
-------
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION TEAM
FOR THE
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES
. SUBMITTED- BY ,
. THE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TRANSITION GROUP
Introduction
These comments are submitted by the Environmental Justice
Transition Group, including the following organizations (in
alphabetical order); ' Earth Island Institute; Gulf Coast Tenants
Organization; Indigenous Environmental Network; Lawyers' Committee for
Civil Rights Under Law; Native Action; Southern Organizing Committee
for Economic and Social Justice; Southwest Network for Environmental
and Economic Justice; Southwest Organizing Project; and the United
Church of Christ.-
Contributors to concepts in this paper represent environmental
justice groups, civil rights organizations and scholars active in the
First People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit and o£her
grassroots conferences and activities around the nation.
The environmental justice movement is the confluence of three of
America's greatest challenges: the struggle against racism and poverty;
the effort to preserve and improve the environment; and the compelling
need to shift social institutions from class division and environmental
depletion to social unity and global sustainability. ~ ,
This movement has established and documented environmental racism
and challenges the existing environmental protection paradigm that
results in disparate impact. Race is -the most significant predictor of
the location of pollution sources ranging from environmental
contamination caused by landfills and incinerators, to radiation,
pesticide poisoning and deleterious air quality. Furthermore,
occupational exposures and indoor air pollution exacerbate ambient
environmental risks.
Environmental justice is not anchored in a debate about whether or
not decision-makers should tinker at the edges of risk-based
management. The tenets of environmental justice demand implementation
of strategies to eliminate unjust and inequitable effects caused by!
existing environmental policies. .
The mission of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency must be
redefined to address environmental laws, regulations and Agency
practices that result in discriminatory outcomes. An environmental
-------
iustice model must be imposed incorporating a framework of equal
justice and equal protection principles to ensure every citizen's right
to be free from pollution.
The need for a comprehensive approach to environmental issues is
paramount. Protection of the environment must encompass economic
development opportunities that incorporate creation of clean industries
and safe jobs.
The Environmental Justice Transition Group supports the efforts of
people of color in this nation to speak for themselves. This
Transition Paper on Environmental Justice Issues is not intended to
supersede the activism of community-based groups and Native American
governments. Instead, this Paper is a conceptual document highlighting
crosscutting concerns.
The Transition. Paper outlines recommendations to the Presidential
Transition Team for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
centering on three key areas: (A) the Agency's institutional focus;
(B) targeting regulatory programs, compliance and enforcement
activities; and (C) new policy.
RECOMMENDATION: A SHIFT TO PROTECTING ADVERSELY AFFECTED COMMUNITIES
MUST OCCUR IN SPA'S INSTITUTIONAI. FOCUS.
'i, , , !
With regard to fulfilling its mission to protect human health and
the environment, EPA must incorporate into its decision-making process
factors necessary to safeguard communities facing disproportional
pollution exposures. In this regard, there are three initiatives that
can immediately be undertaken to address under-protected populations.
(l) the new Administration should issue an
Executive Order and EPA's Office of General
Counsel should issue a Formal Opinion establishing
the applicability of civil -rights laws and
regulations to environmental programs;
(2) EPA should reassess governmental relationships
with indigenous, peoples, adequately fund and
streamline programs and facilitate self-
determination; and
(3) EPA should be elevated to Cabinet status.
(1) EPA's Office of General Counsel, In Conjunction With the
Department of Justice and the Department's Civil Rights Division,
Should Issue a Formal Opinion Establishing the Applicability of Civil
Riahts Laws and Regulations to Environmental Programs, and the New
Administration Should Issue an Executive Order Implementing This
Policy.
Soon after its creation, EPA issued an Office .of General Counsel
(OGC) opinion which states 'that, due to the technical nature of
environmental statutes (e.g., setting discharge limits, regulating
-------
chemicals), .civil rights laws are inapplicable to the Agency's
programs. .
In testimony presented in 1971 to the United States Commission on
Civil Rights, Administrator William Ruckelshaus contended that the
Agency's role in setting environmental standards precluded the
application of this nation's civil rights policies to environmental
programs. -
This testimony and the OGC opinion are inconsistent with the
Agency's mandate to protect human health .and the environment. EPA's
overarching mission is to ensure equal protection from pollution.
Instead, to the detriment of communities of color and low-income
communities, program implementation and enforcement results in
discriminatory results. Based on the evidence, ostensibly neutral
technical standards developed by the Agency are implemented in a
disparate manner. .
.'. ' ! ; ' .-''.' '<''"
It must be made clear at the outset by the new Administration that
EPA is not exempt from the tenets of equal protection. EPA should
immediately rescind the OGC opinion and issue a new opinion
establishing that civil rights laws apply to environmental programs.
To reinforce that the principles of equal protection pertain to
the entire scope environmental issues, the President should issue an
Executive Order" providing for the equitable implementation of
environmental programs. The Executive Order should,:
, establish a Federal Coordinating Council on
environmental justice, including agencies and
departments such as EPA, Interior, Agriculture,
Labor, Health & Human Services, Housing &, Urban
Development, Energy, Defense, Transportation, the-
Centers for Disease Control, the Agency for Toxic
Substances & Disease Registry, and the National
Institutes for Environmental Health Sciences;
The principal purpose of the Council is to review
federal research and research systems, report on
gaps and other deficiencies in environmental data,
research priorities and compatibility of federal
research systems;
The Federal Coordinating Council should institute
a framework for technology assessment and examine
related issues in the context of social, cultural:
and political impact;
direct the White House Council on Environmental
Quality to include in, its annual report
information pertaining to communities in this
nation that are experiencing disproportionate
pollution risks;
-------
mandate inclusion of an equity impact statement
that incorporates a presumption equally protecting
all people from pollution. The statement would be
required for all major federal regulations, grants
and projects;
create a Federal Advisory Committee Act board
to advise EPA 'and the Federal Council, the
membership of which would include indigenous
peoples and representatives of community-based
groups experiencing disproportionate impact; and
direct federal agencies to develop and
institute environmentally beneficial procurement
practices emphasizing pollution prevention and
environmentally friendly products.
(2) EPA Should Reassess Governmental Relationships With Indigenous
P«opl«s, Adequately Fund and Streamline Programs and Facilitate Self-
Determination
EPA must reevaluate its programmatic relationships with indigenous
peoples. With regard to Native Americans, EPA should confirm the 1984
EPA Indian Policy and ensure its immediate implementation. Further,
EPA should develop formal policies that determine federal governmental
relationships with indigenous Hawaiians and Pacific-Islanders.
Currently, EPA employs several conflicting approaches vis a vis
indigenous peoples and their lands. To remedy these conflicts,
Pacific-Islanders, indigenous Hawaiians and Native American Tribes must
be included at all levels in development of federal environmental
policy, including regulations, compliance and enforcement activities.
The concerns of and problems experienced by Native Americans,
Pacific-Islanders, and indigenous Hawaiians are distinct and solutions
must be specially tailored. However, federal approaches on indigenous
lands must promote self-determination in implementation of regulatory,
compliance and enforcement programs.
To enhance efficiency and effective use of targeted resources, EPA
should streamline and consolidate national Indian Program activities
into a central office. Currently, Indian Program responsibilities are
fragmented into three distinct offices: the Office of Federal
Activities; the Office of Regional Operations and State arid^ Local
Relations; and the Office of the Deputy Administrator. In addition, in
conjunction with Native Americans, EPA should consider creating a
Tribal Operations Committee to commence the process of
institutionalizing Tribal needs into the Agency's budget, planning and
implementation processes.
To facilitate sovereign governance and the ability of Native
Americans to protect themselves and their sacred sites from pollution
exposures, EPA must ensure availability of adequate funding and.
-------
training opportunities, as well as Tribal access to EPA program
managers and upper level administrators.,
, The new Administration should support adjustments , in basic
Congressional funding formulas so .that environmental programs
instituted by Tribal governments can be equitably funded at levels
sufficient to manage and enforce those programs. Furthermore,
resources should be directed to both large and small Tribal
communities.
In targeting resources and increasing.funding for Indian Programs,
particular attention must be given to enhancing the development of
Tribal infrastructure. Tribal lands encompass fifty-six million acres
and over 500 tribal jurisdictions. However, out of 18,000 full-time
EPA employees, only 100 are dedicated to the Indian Program.
EPA must reevaluate federal approaches to regulating the
environment of indigenous Hawaiians and Pacific-Islanders. These
indigenous people must be integrated into federal decision-making
processes concerning their unique lands and those lands sacred to them
must be afforded special protection, including protection from
pollution.
EPA should institute reporting mechanisms related to the
environment of indigenous people. EPA should regularly update the 1990
Indian Resources" Task Force Report and, annually, EPA should issue
separate reports to Congress on the status of the environment on Tribal
lands, in the Hawaiian Islands, and in the Pacific Islands.
(3) EPA Should Put Priority Attention On Developing Countries
Consistent with the Agency's policy of setting risk-based
priorities, EPA should prioritize African, South American and Asian
programs in the Office of International Activities. In constructing
international treaties and United States foreign policy the new
Administration must recognize and promote self-determination.
The Administration must reevaluate policy, conflicts illustrated in
the approaches pursued by the United States in eastern Europe and
developing countries concerning environment and energy. 'Currently, the
United States is attempting to encourage and reinvigorate the (albeit
more environmentally friendly) use of energy arid natural resources by
eastern European countries in order to rebuild the economy and improve
living standards. , ,
However, in developing countries, the United States is using
economic and financial aid leverage to discourage (albeit more
environmentally unfriendly) use of energy and natural resources; energy
and resources upon which many developing nations depend to elevate
their standard of living. This is inequitable foreign policy and these
approaches must be revised. ,
In view of the relationship between environmental and economic
policy in developing countries, the new Administration should converge
-------
international strategies to preserve the environment and foster
economic development in developing nations with an omnibus policy to
eliminate drug exports into the United States.
Increasingly in developing countries, ecosystems are _being
destroyed and replanted with crops that are processed into illegal
druS United States foreign policy must promote quality economic
Kvlfopment as an alternative to drug exports that destroy the lives
and minds of our citizenry.
4 EPA Should Be Elevated to Cabinet Status and the Hev Administration
Should Support Other Key Legislative Initiatives
During Ihe 102d Congress, Representative John Conyers (D-MI) and
Senator John Glenn (D-OH) spearheaded a bipartisan campaign to elevate
Se Igenby to Cabinet status. Subject to issuance of an Executive
Sder^?OGC opinion and an opinion by the Department of Justice
eltSlishlng the applicability of civil rights laws to environmental
program!,^he President should work with Congress to accomplish this
goal.
A Department-level EPA reorganized to promote overall
ZZ&FSZZS s^n^f
SlparSent and a major.area of responsibility for the Secretary who
shou!r!nnuaTly report to Congress on the Department's progress.
in addition to Cabinet status legislation, the new Administration
should support legislative initiatives to remedy disproportionate
Solution risks 1993 will be an unprecedented year for Congressional
castration If environmental statuses, including the Clean Water Act
tne' comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Set /Superfund), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the
federal SsSticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, and the Safe
Drinking water Act.
Furthermore, the new Administration should work with Congress to
develop and enact laws creating jobs training and economic development
opportunities, which would be established and implemented as Programs
by community-based organizations. Environmental 3°bs' ^f1. "
insoectors and cleanup technicians, would provide an employment base
^workers of color in such areas as revitalized industrial sectors
and federal facilities.
In the legislative context, the new Administration has a unique
opportunity to redress joblessness, lack of access to health care and
r££eT such tracric and unjust circumstances as elevated health risks and
higS mortalitygratesa caused by disproportional environmental exposures
in this nation.
';.'! ,'!> ill.''if '!,!B'ii, , L
-------
RECOMMENDATION: EPA SHOULD SUBSTANTIALLY
COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM PRIORITIES.
REORIENT REGULATORY,
To redress environmental problems in under-protected communities,
EPA should substantially .reorient regulatory, compliance and
enforcement program priorities. EPA has an obligation to remedy
disparate . environmental effects by immediately targeting and
establishing as a high priority development and implementation of
solutions to alleviate discriminatory pollution exposures in
communities of color and sensitive populations. .
In this regard, EPA should undertake four initiatives to redress
disproportionate pollution risks. EPA should:
(1) prioritize eleven program areas affecting
people of color and sensitive populations;
; . (
(2) target research & development efforts,,
including restructuring the focus to reporting and
data collection on affected populations;
(3) target compliance inspections and enforcement ,
to protect communities of color .exposed to
disproportionate environmental risks; and
(4) revise worker protection regulations to ensure
workplace and employee safety
(1) EPA Should Prioritize Environmental Programs to Redress Disparate
Pollution Impact
Due to federal and .state resource limitations, EPA, the states and
Congress have initiated a dialogue, on planning sequential or
prioritized implementation of environmental programs (e.g., safe
drinking water, .clean water, clean air). To the'greatest possible
extent, sequencing and prioritizing must be based on protecting those
most severely exposed considering factors such as synergistic effects,
multiple sources and sensitive population.
The Agency' s work on prioritizing environmental program areas to
protect human health should first commence in eleven specific areas:
(i) indigenous peoples; (ii) farmworkers; (iii) radiation exposure;
(ivj waste facility siting and cleanup; (v) clean air; (vi) clean
water; (vii) drinking water; (viii) urban areas; (ix) free trade and
border issues; (x) EPA strategic planning and budget; and (xi) state
program implementation.
(i) indigenous peoples
Access and input into the federal process by indigenous people is
paramount. Major issues include the ensuring basic rights and access
to natural resources; groundwater and drinking water protection;
expediting cleanup of federal facilities affecting indigenous lands;
-------
restoring Office of Management & Budget cuts to the Bureau of Indian
Affairs and infrastructure resources; ameliorating the impact of
uranium mining and energy production activities on indigenous lands;
and cessation of nuclear testing and radioactive waste disposal
affecting Tribes and Pacific-Islanders.
(ii) farmworkers
On August 13, 1992, after delaying nearly 9 years, EPA issued the
Farmworker Protection Standard ( 40 C.F.R. Parts 156 and 170) revising
a prior set of regulations that were widely known to ' be woefully
inadequate. Though deficient, the current set of regulations need
substantial work in interpretation, implementation and enforcement to
improve protections for farmworkers and their families ((95 percent
African-American, Asian-American, Native American and Latino) from
exposure to agricultural pesticides.
In con junction "with efforts on the Farmworker Standard, EPA should
vigorously implement and enforce the risk reporting requirements set
forth in Section 6 (a) (2) of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act. EPA should increase the database on farmworker
exposure to pesticides and target programs in research & development.
The new Administrator should acknowledge the priority designation
accorded farmworker protection by the Science Advisory Board.
(iii) radiation exposures
Historically, EPA is weak on regulating radiation exposures
experienced by Native Americans, Chicanes, and Pacific-Islanders. For
example, a notorious uranium mining operation breach in the mill
tailings dam released thousands of gallons of radioactive water and
mill tailings cascaded down the Rio Puerco river contaminating a nearby
Navaho reservation and its inhabitants. EPA has not taken enforcement
action in this case or in other cases due to confusion over federal
agency jurisdiction among EPA, the Department of Energy and the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
The new Administration should establish EPA as the primary
enforcement authority over radioactive pollution, as well as clarify
EPA's oversight responsibility under the Federal Facilities Compliance
Act. EPA authority should encompass integrating environmental justice
concerns into remediations conducted at federal facilities, including
assessing resource needs.
, /
The new Administration should reexamine federal preemption under
the Atomic Energy Act and evaluate whether preemption should be
eliminated and state and local governments authorized to control
radiation exposures.
(iv) waste facility siting and cleanup
Several studies and reports demonstrate that peop'le of color face
significantly higher risks due to disproportional siting of waste
facilities. The litany of data is extensive. Three out of five
, . . ' 8'
-------
African-Americans live in communities with abandoned toxic waste sites.
Sixty-percent or fifteen million African-Americans live in communities
with one or more abandoned sites.
Three of the five largest commercial hazardous waste- facilities
are located in predominantly African-American or Latino communities
accounting for forty percent of this nation's total estimated landfill
capacity. Communities with hazardous waste incinerators generally have
large populations of color eighty-seven percent higher than the
national average.
Communities where incinerators are proposed have populations of
color sixty percent higher than the national average. Property values
in communities that host.incinerators are thirty-eight percent lower
than the national average and, where incinerators are proposed,
property values are thirty-five percent lower than the national
average. Based on.this data alone, the conclusions are clear. The
impact is discriminatory.
EPA is obligated to correct these inequities. On an expedited
basis, the Agency should institute a moratorium on siting in
communities already experiencing disproportionate impact; reevaluate
implementation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act based on
the tenets of equal protection; and ensure that future siting of
treatment, storage and disposal facilities (see 40 C.F.R. Part 358)
does not exacerbate extant risks in communities of color.
EPA should establish regional procedures and guidelines which
ensure contact with and input from affected communities at the outset
of federal facility site evaluation and government investigations
regarding remediation of toxic and hazardous waste sites. Furthermore,
it is essential for EPA to expedite Super fund cleanups in communities
of color and reassess discriminatory, Agency buyout policies.
(v) clean air ;
Research on the impact of poor air quality on people of color is
incontrovertible. Air quality is the most extensively studied issue
associated with disproportionate exposure. If aggressively
implemented, the Clean Air Act is potentially, one of the most
environmentally beneficial pieces of legislation for .'communities of
color in this nation.
If effectively implemented, the Act would address" the
disproportionate impact of degraded air quality. The Section 173 (a)
program is critical because it mandates EPA review of "social costs."
Many of the. provisions contained in the clean air law provide
communities with access to information regarding siting factors and the
permit process for facilities that emit air toxics.
In implementing the public participation requirements of this Act,
the Agency must ensure that all available information is translated in
a form that is easily understandable to citizens. Immediately, the new
Administration must rescind the giant loophole in the Clean Air Act
-------
created by the Bush Administration allowing 35,000 refineries, chemical
and pharmaceutical plants utilities and other environmentally
burdensome companies that already pump billions of pollutants into the
air to pump more emissions without subjecting the increases,to public
review. ' ' ,
EPA should identify and ameliorate (or report to congress on) the
regressive impacts of both environmental and economic policies such as
the gas tax, green taxes and Clean Air Act permit trading. EPA must
reassess the new clean air permit trading system and ensure that it
precludes shifting the burden of air pollution onto communities of
color. Trading that results in disproportionate impact (including
reduction in property values) should be prohibited.
(vi) clean water
EPA should assess whether sewage treatment facilities and combined
sewer overflows are more often located in communities of color. The
Agency should determine what infrastructure improvements are needed to
enhance these facilities to state-of-the-art through construction
grants so that residents are not plagued by noxious fumes and other
deleterious exposures.
EPA should set water quality standards that schedule phase-down
and, where appropriate, ban the discharge of contaminants of concern to
people of color who fish and consume those fish. In the interim, EPA
should intervene in the state fish consumption advisory process to
guarantee that advisories are issued to citizens on a regular basis and
that they are uniform and understandable.
' " ,' ' ' . ' " . ' . ' '',,-, ..!"? ."'i'
(vii) safe drinking water
Many communities of color have insufficient resources to construct
and/or maintain public drinking water systems and to implement EPA
regulations controlling drinking water contaminants. EPA should
evaluate ways to set regulatory priorities for these communities,
provide technical assistance and infrastructure improvements, including
appropriate resources. ,
(viii) urban areas
EPA should focus on urban areas' to develop pollution prevention
initiatives, recycling and hazard abatement programs. Asbestos and
lead abatement and removal, and cleanup of industrial and formerly
industrial areas with high amounts of waste should further the goals of
creating jobs and community-based economic development.
(ix) free trade and border issues
I. . , ','"'-
Industrial dumping on the 2000 mile Mexico-United States border is
causing birth defects, illnesses and death. EPA should immediately
enforce provisions in the Toxic Substances Control Act and _ other
statutory administrative subpoena and data gathering authorities to
10
-------
collect information from multinational corporations operating on the
Mexico-United States border.
The new Administration should delay implementation of the North
American Free Trade Agreement until a federal study is completed on
information associated with chemicals and exposures, and study
conclusions can be factored into treaty considerations.
EPA should expand the Rio Grande initiative to include both the
upper and lower Rio Grande River, including geographic considerations,
watershed implications and exposed communities.
(x) strategic planning and budget
EPA must integrate environmental justice policy into Operating
Year Guidance, the Agency's strategic plans, regional workplans, annual
Agency Themes and State-EPA Agreements. , . " -.-
(xi) state program implementation
EPA should develop and publish in the Federal Register,
requirements which mandate that states equitably implement delegated
environmental programs, including grant conditions, permits, compliance
and enforcement activities.
(2) EPA Should Target Research & Development Efforts, Including
Restructuring the Focus to Reporting and Data Collection On Affected
Populations. . - .
EPA should reconcile federal reporting and data reference systems
among agencies and departments to emphasize collecting and analyzing
data on populations most exposed to environmental contamination,
including synergistic effects, multiple sources and sensitive
populations. EPA should target research & development, data collection
and analysis ,to support development of the rules to protect over-
exposed populations
(3) EPA Should Target Compliance Inspections And Enforcement to Protect
Communities of Color Exposed to Disproportionate Environmental Risks.
EPA should target enforcement initiatives in communities of color
inundated with pollution risks. This initiative should be implemented
in areas such as Cancer Alley, Richmond, California, South Chicago and
high-tech industries in the Southwest. In addition, targeting high
risk populations or areas can be combined with other environmental
programs; for example, a farmworker protection initiative could be
combined with a pesticides and groundwater pollution initiative and a
pesticide farm runoff initiative.
EPA monitoring systems must be revised to encompass communities of
color1. Even well-recognized toxics, such as lead, are not well-
monitored. Nor is data well-correlated with actual exposures.
11
-------
EPA must amend the .Supplemental Environmental Projects policy and
to enable Agency attorneys to credit penalties against environmentally-
bene'ficial projects in high exposure areas.
RECOMMENDATION: NEW POLICY INITIATIVES MUST BE IMPLEMENTED TO REDRESS
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT
> ' !. . . ', ,. , , ,.,... . (. ,i :,,'.'..' . ' ,' i : - *! ':' ''
EPA must develop new policy initiatives in seyeral critical areas
in order to redress disproportionate impact of environmental
contamination on communities of color. These new initiatives are as
follows: .
rf _ t
Consistent" with the Presidential Campaign theme
that coupled environmental protection with
economic growth, EPA and related departments need.
to support investment in sustainable development
and infrastructure; .
initiate an
investment in
sustainable
policy, with
should shift
conservation,
commitment to
The new Administration should
environmental/ industrial policy of
sustainable development,, i.e.,
industries and technologies. The
balanced citizen and industry input,
investment and tax incentives toward
pollution prevention and a long-term
protecting communities;
Available public funds should be directed
toward economic development opportunities in
affected areas (for example, the new Chrysler Jeep
plant in Detroit). These programs must encourage
geographic stability, so that investments
revitalize existing infrastructure instead of
creating yet more disposable communities, either
foreign or domestic;
As a means to rebuild infrastructure in
communities and around federal facilities, In
conjunction with other agencies, states, and
educational institutions, EPA should support
creation of environmental jobs, training, and
education in environmental remediation;
!-'',: The Administration and EPA must revise cost-
benefit analysis guidelines to include intangible
costs related to quality of life, health, safety
and environmental justice;
During the Reagan-Bush era, the Administration
developed twin cross-cutting regulatory relief
policies, cost-benefit analysis and a presumption
for federalism in health and environmental
standards, which can adversely affect highly
polluted communities by resulting in racial
12
-------
inequities. EPA should be the lead agency in
reviewing these cost-benefit policies;
EPA, should work with civil rights groups to
ensure that pollution prevention initiatives are
equitably implemented. As presently conceived by
the Agency, pollution prevention initiatives will
achieve mixed results (e.g., exposure to more
concentrated toxic and hazardous chemicals) for
workers of color and nearby residents;
EPA and the Occupational Health and Safety
Administration (OSHA) have issued a limited number
of environmental health and safety regulations
associated with high-tech industry. EPA should
work with OSHA to review and strengthen the EPA-
OSHA Memorandum of Understanding to address the
problems of workers of color and their families
who experience high exposure;
" EPA is scheduled to propose in the Federal
Register. an ill-considered Environmental
Excellence Program, based on the OSHA 'VPP Program.
An innovative environmental excellence program
would be more appropriate, including economic
incentives such as long-term capital commitment to
an area; environmental protection arid long-term
planning; jobs, job training and economic
development; multi-media and/or one-stop
permitting and long-term permitting. The critical
point is to avoid rewarding inequitable past
actions;
EPA must support and fund community-based
delivery of environmental services (e.g.,
communiversities that link academic institutions
with communities in need of research, health
assessments, data analysis) by combining the
resources of federal, state, and local
environmental protection agencies, local colleges
and universities; .
These entities should combine to focus a
significant portion of their service delivery
efforts on environmental and health concerns at
the community level;
To establish credibility in EPA programs, the
Agency must reverse its historical resistance to
cultural diversity and integration in the
workforce. EPA should put employees of color in
substantive decision-making positions and heed
input;
13
-------
EPA regulations and programs should generally
shift the burden of proof to polluters seeking
permits in areas which affect highly exposed or
multiple-exposure communities;
In conjunction with other agencies, EPA should
set conditions for the World Bank, the Agency for
International Development, and the International
Monetary Fund on exports of pesticides and wastes.
" Furthermore, EPA should be granted oversight
responsibility to ensure compliance with these .
conditions. As mentioned above, such actions
should be coordinated with an international policy
to eliminate drug exports into the United States;
EPA should expand the community right-to-know
initiative to include opportunities for
communities to be involved in inspections and
negotiation or public review of governmental
environmental actions involving siting of
industrial facilities; and
Enhancing community access to information and
improved data collection and input is key.
Without these tools, informed consent is
nonexistent and decision-making concerning
environmental management in this nation will
continue to be hamstrung by community distrust and
opposition.
Conclusion
~' ' ' ' , '
Environmental justice is cross-cutting affecting every media area
(i.e., air, land, water), as well as regulatory programs, compliance
programs and enforcement. What is ultimately at stake in the
environmental justice debate is everyone's quality of life. The goal
is equal justice and equal protection from pollution. To combat
environmental racism, the new Administration and EPA should Immediately
adopt the recommendations outlined above.
14
-------
.s*
?u
:<
o,
w
1 i*m]*i-it
H »S5^2 «£s -»-
s 1|Q
= -g-S
i
i?
^ v-z
ili
i1*
22 Is
&
?i
o.S
S
< «» s 5 o
6, g « c M
Ihk MM 4L) ^3 *
LM^^V u .S <-T «> a > _
^ *QT3TleiO.S
I*"*'!
|1 111
" 11*
u ti a
15 a
-1
0_«
cg^
8ffl
>,"3-5-_
-s ,s
5<
:.C «
i e «
u
-B =
--- |«
55-a* 2 &
Slit!
£5^M
0->
3i-S-o-2=-=?rsg-'S.s^
5<§Hl~oi:5-sgSH§
w-? 2su.sp£ SSS. 5'
VW
<»«> I
2a£
-------
I JinmMfc
AWirmin
Hand?
The Uncertain
Future of
Environmental
Justice
CHRI
FOREMAN
uring its halcyon legislative days in the
19~0s. the public face of environment
caiism was overwhelmingly whice and
middle class. Minority politicians pro-
vided reliable voces for environmental
statutes but were often acutely suspicious of mainstream.
environmentalism. believing the urban poor a more'
endangered species :han spotted owls. Whitney Young.
executive director of the National Urban League,-
biunriy advised postponing the war on pollution until-
"after the war on poverty is won."
Today, however, a national environmental justice
movement dominated by people of color is aggres-
sively demanding attention to pollutionand to race,
poverty, and apparent links between them. Sustained
by a combination of research findings and widespread
outrage among communities in coxic terror, the
movement claims that a lack of power.among poor
and minority communities has saddled them with dis-
proportionate burdens both in pollution and in envi-
ronmental policy implementation.
In tits and stares' scate governments are beginning to
grapple with the issue. So is the Clinton administra-
tion, which in February 1994 issued executive order
12X9S charging each cabinet department to "make
achieving environmencal justice part of its mission."
with the Environmental Protection Agency to lead the
way. Having mherired .in orrice of environmencal eq-
1 x i N c: s «. s v i E w
-------
icy from -he Bush administration,-EPA administrator
iarol Browner renamed ic the office of environmental
istice, appointed a national environmental justice ad-
isory council stocked heavily with advocates, and
romoted strategic planning. Under assistant adminis-
ator Elliott ?. Laws. EPA'S office of solid waste and
nergency response (OSWER.) has made environmental
istice a top priority.
All thisthe energizing of the movement, the
ommunity activism, the state and federal response
junds prorhising and is certainly well-intended. Buf
ic environmentally just society is not just around the,
omer. Many hurdles lie between the status quo and a
loughtfuily reformed regime of environmental policy,
ne that confers significant additional'benefits on tra-
irionally disadvantaged groups.
he Movement Problem
ronically, one nroblem is the movement itself. An an-
ally nurtured ''big tent" embracing black. Latino,
^sian, and Native American grassroots organizations
nd their allies, the environmental justice movement
egan in earnest with a now legendary 1982 Warren
bounty. North Carolina, protest against a proposed
CB landfill. Demonstrations failed to stop, the landfill,
ut hundreds of protesters were arrested. A subsequent
tudy of hazardous waste landfills in die southeast by
he General Accounting Office found that blacks were
majority of the population in three of die four ''off-
ite", (that is. not associated with an industrial facility)
andfills in the region. As time went on, other commu-
lities, in tandem,with scholar-activists like sociologist
Robert Builard. would coalesce into a movement chal-.
enging what they saw as an unmistakable and insidious
endency co make communities' of color society's
dumping ground.
The problem the movement faces is crucial, and
probably unavoidable. The movement has grown,
and.maintained internal harmony, through a blend of
inclusivcness and ideological appeals' that derails dis-
'cussibn of priorities and trade-offs. It tends therefore
co avoid di~cult but necessary decisions. For exam-
ple, the notion of acceptable risk, basic to any. real-
istic approach to health and safety, is suspect within
the move;:-._-.-:: as an excuse for victimizing people ot
color. A "bottom-up" coalition for which all grievances
are created equal is especially hard pressed to think in
terms of the relative risks and costs of such environmen-
tal hazards as childhood lead and farmworker pesticide
exposures, Superfund cleanups, incinerator sitings, or
even nonenvirotimental health hazards. The movement
presumes that any person of color voicing any environ-
mental-related anxiety or aspiration represents a gen-
uine environmental justice problem. Indeed, a broader
rediscributive and cultural agenda, as well as a pro-
found discomfort with industrial capitalism generally,
lurks just behind the concerns over unequal pollution
impacts. To some extent this isn't really surprising.
The same ethnic and neighborhood empowerment
yearnings visible in "community action" a generation
ago have remained with us all along, to resurface with
an environmental spin.
Causal Problems
Through a blend of skillful grassroots mobilization, ad-
vocacy research, and well-crafted.rhetoric, die envi-
ronmental justice movement has placed its concerns on
the national policy agenda. Although die full universe
of empirical studies offers mixed support for the move-
ment's claim of racial disparities in die distribution of
pollution, a 1994 National Wildlife Federation review
of 64 highly diverse studies concluded that all but one .
"found environmental disparities eidier by race or in-.
come, regardless of the kind of environmental concern
or the level of geographic specificity examined." In
1987 the United Church of Christ's Commission for
Racial Justice, headed by Benjamin F. Chavis, ]r.'. re-
leased its report on Toxic Wastes and Race in die United
Scares, finding that "communities with the greatest
number of commercial hazardous waste facilities had
the hishest composition of racial and ethnic residents."
But advocacy and research have not put to rest,,
some tricky causal issues. If people of color indeed bear
disproportionate environmental burdens, what role has
.government policy played in creating this state of
affairs? "What concrete health impacts follow from such
burdens? And what ameliorative role can government
policy plausibly play?
One complication lies in how one defines a burden.
Proximity to an existing or potential site or facility may
stimulate grassroots-outrage but by itself says litde about
the degree of actual exposure or hazard posed. Because
1 of variables such as groundwater dynamics and the
duality of site construction or facility management, not
all sites or facilities are equally dangerous. Experts agree
that many of the 35.0f)0 locations on EPA'S inventory of
hazardous waste sites probably pose little risk.
Besides being unhelpful regarding the distribution
of actual risk, the Commission for Racial Justice study
is also unreliable as a guide to the distribution of the
waste itself. By confining its focus to otf-site hazardous
waste facilities, it overlooks the vast majority (up to 96
percent) of hazardous waste processed on-site by the
entity that 'generates it. . 1
A 1994 update of the commission study touches on
another problem. The proximity of people of color to.
commercial hazardous waste facilities (or, for that mat-
ter, anv other kind of noxious site) may be due to
Christopher H. 75-7
Foreman, Jr., is a
scttiorfellow in the
Brooking* Cot'crnmen-
cal Studies program.
He is the author of
Plagues. Products,
and Politics:
Emergent Public
Health Hazards and
National PoUcymak-
ing (Breakings, 1994).
-------
forces over which government, particularly the federal
government, has litde influence. The update notes that
"between 1980 and 1993, the concentration of people
' of color living in ZIP codes with commercial hazardous
waSke &ciliries increased from 25 percent to almosc_.?l
percent of die average population around the facili-
ties " The study offers several possible explanations,
"including the migration, birth, or death of individu-
als, and the relocation, start-up, or closure oc toxic
wastf&cilides."" To the extent that_poor peope repro-
duce more rapidly than wealthier ones, or that low land
values attract bock poor people and industrial facilities,
as is clearly the case, federal polio-' will be hard pressed
>. to addresi die resulting inequities. It is particularly
telling that this apparent increase has taken place m the
post-Love Canal era, as all communities, including
those of color, became both_more willing and more
able to block proposed facilities.
The health risks posed by environmental toxins are
freighted with as much uncertainty as any public pol-
icv problem we face. On some matters (asbestos, say)
we arguably have both abundant knowledge and
- something approaching expert consensus On others
our understanding is extremely limited and wul proo-
ablv never be definitive..EPA officials and environmen-
' , ' cal justice advocates often speak about grappling with
die "multiple, cumulative, and synergisac risks espe-
THE HEALTH RISKS POSED BY
ENVIRONMENTAL TOXINS ARE FREIGHTED
WITH AS MUCH UNCERTAINTY AS
ANY PUBLIC POLICY PROBLEM WE FACE.
ciallv relevant to communities of color facing a variety
of potential environmental and other health stresses at .
once and'over time. For purposes of practical (and
himlv politicized) policymaking on a communicy-by-
community basis, though, the kind of knowledge en-
visioned may weK amount to litde more than a oot ot
-------
Developments empowerment zones and enterprise
ommuniries program for directing community devel-
>pmenc funds to distressed areas.
There is also now tough talk from EPA about mak-
ng enforcement more equitable. Current Supreme
urt equal protection doctrine holds that plaintiffs
iusc prove intentional discrimination, but intent is of-
:n impossible to demonstrate successfully. As a oocen-
ial avenue of redress for communities of color. EPA
nd the Department of Justice are showing consider-
ale interest in Tide VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act,
hich provides chat "No person in the United States
lall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin,
e excluded from participation in,, be denied the
enefics of, or be subjected to discrimination under
iv program or activity receiving federal financial as-
stance." As Washington. University Law Professor
ichard Lazarus notes, "The principal advantage of
'ide VI over equal protection is chat courts have not
squired a showing of discriminatory intent..., Dis-
arace impact: has'been enough." By last summer EPA
as reviewing some cwo dozen oetitions for redress
nderTideVI. , * .
Pollution prevention is perhaps where environ-
lencal justice advocates, find che easiest common
nd with traditional environmentalists. Both see'
green" technologies as a crucial weapon since pre- -
snring pollution obviates the need for distributing it
juicably. And environmentalists have ofcen viewed
assroots NIMBY activity that constrains treatment,
orage, and disposal capacity as a weapon in che long-
rm war co tbrce prevention. For these reasons, and.
:cause of signincanc successes in source reduction,' it
is been easy co recast ongoing prevention efforts as
rving che cause of environmencal justice.
unt and Fragile Instruments .
3 the excenc cha'c risk abacemenc and health improve- .
erits remain major environmental justice goals,
nerging policies will prove blunt, or even irrelevant,
scrumencs for cheir achievement. Brownfields rede-
slopmenc has little immediately co do with healch.
he director of environmencal qualicy for che National '
sociation of Manufacturers notes gamely chat eco-
mic developmenc will help improve health, because
le worse ching healchwise is to be poor." But the
ownfields sices themselves pose mostly minor health
reacs. Indeed. HPA's ability co make che brownfields
ogram work hinges on che relatively mild concami-
tion ac many sices and che relative ease vvich which
e agency can lower, or ac lease clarify, future liability^.
And while participation and oucreach address che
ed for'locally accepcable policies^ chey do noc auco-
tically assure chac che mosc serious community health
cs are given highest priority. What they may accually
ure in some inscances is chac che loudesc voices, che
ewdesc or most diligent organizers, and che mosc ob-
us cargec.s of local oucrage will be elevated.
Nor is ic by any means clear chac environmencal
cs are always the'most serious healch risks chat com-
nicies of color face. Hypertension, obesicy, low
chweighcs. inadequace prenacal care, subscance
use, and violence are only some of che forces chac ar-
guably deserve pries of place in che scruggle to im-
prove che lives and health of communities of color.
That such forces are more intractable and harder co
mobilize around than a Superfund sice or a proposed
landfill must noc decer communities'from asking (and
being vigorously encouraged.by governmenc policy-
makers and ochers to ask) hard questions about overall
healch priorities. ' '
Federal environmental justice policy also remains ex- '
cremeiy fragile in "VS'ashingcon. Even when Democracs
controlled Congress during che firsc cwo years of che .
Clincon adminiscrarion. environmental justice made.Iit-
cie headway on Capicol Hill. In fashioning ics largely
doomed snvironrriencal agenda for che Democratic-
concrbflec 103rd Congress, che administration left aside
a cough b!U proposed earlier by chen.SenacorAl Gore.
Gore's bill ordered EPA co scrutinize human healch in
che 100 counties containing che highesc cocsl weighc of'
toxic chemicals and, if advene healch areas were
found, cc impose a moracorium, on future siring chac
compounded che problem. Analytic difficulties aside,
such hard-edged federal restrictions were coo politi- '
cally explosive even among congressionaTDeaaocracs,
and che Glincon administration opced for a aonlegisla-
tive approach co environmencal justice.
The ?.epublicaris who control Capicol Hill today
rally around environmencal justice of a diffsreac sort.
NOR IS IT BY ANY MEANS CLEAR THAT
ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS ARE
ALWAYS THE MOST SERIOUS HEALTH RISKS
THAT COMMUNITIES OF COLOR FACE.
In che cc .iservarive lexicon, environmencal injustice
means e:: :essive regulatory encroachmenc on privace
property^ tghcs. Even chriying EPA programs can never .
bear che :1ill weighc of che rediscrifautive expectations
of che en ironmeriiai justice advocaces, buc in che cur-
rent clim.-.ce of acracks on EPA's resources and auchor-
ity, che v. ;ibn of environmental justice favored by en-
vironmer.calists and the grassroocs Lefc faces a dire
predicarr.-nt indeed. ..Reassurances-co che concrary '
noc\vichsc.inding, it will be hard for agency leaders co
pay rnuch.suscained attention co environmencal justice
when chey have more fundamencal bacdes co fight. ' .
An ob'/ious confluence of business and community
incerescs suggescs chac bro'wnfields redeveiopmenc ' , .
could remain che. high-profile pillar of federal environ-
mencal justice policr--over che long run. Enterprise-
minded conservatives, in alliance with Democrats anx-
ious to help cities, might be'able to rally behind ic, . ,.
especially if crafted to minimize ics pork-barrel aspects
(or, alcernacively, co make che pork so cascy as co be ir-
resistible co boeh parries).. Buc no -one familiar with che
array of pitfalls chac can bedevil che implementation of
complex, well-incenced policies should be shocked if, .
a decade or cwo hence, che very mention of ''environ-
mencal justice" evokes a wince, a sigh, or a quiet shake '
of che head. . . ,
K i N c:
2 S
-------
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
-------
-------
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
List of Participants
May 29-31,1996
Elizabeth Adams
Region IX
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
75 Hawthorne Street (MCH-6-5)
San Fransisco, CA 94105
Phone: 415-744-2235
FAX: 415-744-2180
Internet E-mail:
' ,l '" , ' *
,1 I !l' ,
Kristen Agnow
Midwest Organizer
Campus Ecology
National Wildlife Federation
506 East Liberty
Ann Arbor, Ml 48104-2210
Phone: 313-769-1449
FAX: 313-769-1449
Internet E-mail:
^ '
Maria G. Alfaro-Lopez
Principal Attorney
Wayne County Corporation Counsel
415 Clifford
Detroit, Ml 48226
Phone: 313-224-8285
FAX: 313-224-7650
Internet E-mail;
Shirley Augurson
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Region VI
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, fX 75202
Phone: 214-665-7401
FAX: 214-665-6660
Internet E^rnail:
Daniel Axelrad
Regulatory Impact Analyst
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2126)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-9363
FAX: 202-260-0512
Internet EHnail:
axelrad.danlal@epamaa.epa.gov
C. Michael Baker
Acting Director
Environmental Education Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 1707)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-4958
FAX: 202-260-4095
Internet E-mail:
'I; L
Hussein Bakri
ECO-ACCESS
2651 Saulino Court
Dearborn, Ml 48170
Phone: 313-842-7010
FAX: 313-842-5150
Internet E-mail:
Robert Banks
Program Analyst
Office of Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2572
FAX: 202-501-0982
Internet E-mail:
banks.robert@epamail.epa.gov
Sharon Beard
Industrial Hygienist
National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences
U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services
PiO. Box12233
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2233
Phone: 919-541-1863
FAX: 919-541-0462
Internet E-mail: beard1@niehs.nih.gov
Elizabeth Bell
American Indian Environmental Office
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-8106
FAX: 202-260-0852
Internet E-mail:
bell.elizabeth@epamail.epa.gov
Christine Benally
Executive Director
Dine CARE
Box 1992
Shiprock, NM 87420
Phone: 505-860-7214
FAX: 505-860-7314
Internet E-mail:
Kent Benjamin
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 5101)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-2822
FAX: 202-260-6606
Internet E-mail:
benjamin.kent@epamail.epa.gov
Marvin Benton
Chief, Legal Enforcement Branch
Region VI
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214-665-2128
FAX: 214-665-3177
Internet E-mail:
Linda Boornazian
Director, Policy and Program Evaluation Div
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Sstreet, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-603-8900
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
John C. Borum
Vice President
AT&T
Environmental and Safety Engineering
131 Mom'stown Road
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Phone: 908-204-8600
FAX: 908-204-8212
Internet E-mail:
Jose T. Bravo
Southwest Network for Environmental &
Economic Justice
16717 Kettner Boulevard
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: 619-239-8030
FAX: 619-239-8505
Internet E-mail:
Walter Bresette
Lake Superior Chippewa
Route 1, Box 117
Bayfield, Wl 54814
Phone: 715-779-5071
FAX: 715-779-4010
Internet E-mail:
Dana Brewington
Special Assistant
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 5101)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-4610
FAX: 202-260-3527
Internet E-mail:
Sue Briggum
WMX Technology, Inc.
601Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: 202-628-3500
FAX: 202-628-0400
Internet E-mail:
Peggy Britt
Associate*Director
University of Michigan
National Consortium for Environmental
Education and Training
430 East University
Ann Arbor, Ml 48104
Phone: 313-998-6582 .
FAX: 313-998-6580
Internet E-mail: peggy@eelink.umich.edu
Final Draft: May 31, 1996
-------
NEJAC List of Participants
May 29-31.'1996
Page 2
Akua Budu-Watkins
Executive Assistant to the Mayor
Detroit Mayor's Office
P.O. Box 1886
Detroit, Ml 48231 -'
Phone: 313-224-6855 ,
FAX: 313-224-4128
Internet E-mail:
Robert Bullard
Environmental Justice Resource Center
Clark Atlanta University
223 Brawley Drive, SW
Atlanta, GA 30314
Phone: 404-880-6920 ,
FAX: 404-880-6909
Internet E-mail: rbullard@cau.edu
Dollie Burwell
Warren County Concerned Citizens Against
PCB
P.O. Box 254
Warrenton, NC 27589
Phone: 919-257-3265
FAX: 919-257-1524
Internet E-mail: w.bur@aol.com
Kevin Cahill
Manager
Government Affairs
Monsanto Company
800 North Lindbergh Boulevard
St. Louis, MO 63167
Phone: 314-694-7519
FAX: 314-694-3678
Internet E-mail:
Raymond J. Campion
President
Mickey Leland National
Urban Air Toxics Research Center
Houston, TX
Phone: 713-500-9457
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
rcampion@utsph.sph.uth.tmc.edu
Rodney J. Cash
Associate Director
Office of Civil Rights
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 1205)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-4582
FAX: 202-260-4580
Internet E-mail:
Astel Cavanaugh
Sioux Manufacturing Corporation
P.O. Box 222
St. Michael, ND 58370
Phone: 701-766-4803
FAX: 701-766-4253
nternet E-mail:
James Cha
Assistant Regional Counsel
, Region V
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: 312-886-7153
FAX: 312-886-0747
Internet E-mail:
Mary Chapman
Michigan Correspondent
The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
400 River Place, Suite 4210
Detroit, MK48207 '
Phone: 313-3930-3922
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Megan Charlop
Director .
Lead Poisoning Prevention Project
Montefiore Medical Center
111 East 210th Street
Bronx, NY 10467
Phone: 718-547-2789
FAX: 718-547-2881
Internet E-mail:
Nadira Clarke
Special Assistant to the Assistant Attorney
General , .
Environmental & Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20530
Phone: 202-514-8046
FAX: 202-514-0557
Internet E-mail:
Teresa Cordova
Professor, School of Architecture and Planning
Community and Regional 'Planning Program ,
University of New Mexico
2414 Central Avenue, SE
Albuquerque, NM 87131
Phone: 505-277-7535
FAX: 505-277-0267
Internet E-mail: fcoratova@unm.edu
Tabia Coulibaly
Detroit Health Department
Lead Poisoning Prevention and Control
Program ,
1151" Taylor Street, Room 19C
'Detroit, Ml 48202
Phone: 313-876-4200
FAX: 313-876-0309
Internet E-mail:
Angela Cracchiola
Environmental Protection Specialist
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 5302)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-308-7877
FAX: 703-308-8433
Internet E-mail:
cracchiola.angela@epamail.epa.gov
Michael Dorsey
Ph D candidate
Johns Hopkins University/Yale University
205 Prospect Street
New Haven, CT 06511
Phone: 203-777-2279
FAX: 203-432-5942
Internet E-mail: mkdorsey@ais.org
Rick Duffy
Chief, Targeting & Evaluation Board
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. EnvironmentaLProtection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-5014
FAX: 202-564-0031
Internet E-mail:
duffy.richard@epamail.epa.gov '
Charlene Dunn
State and Tribal Coordinator
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 5101)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-9466
FAX: Not Provided
Internet E-mail: '
dunn.chariene@epamail.epa.gov
Donald Elisburg
Donald Elisburg Law Offices
11713 Rosalinda Drive
Potomac, MD 20854-3531
Phone: 301-299-2950
FAX: 301-299-8752
Internet E-mail:
72135.1524@compuserve.com
Mary R. English
Associate Director
Energy Environmental Resources Center
University of Tennesee
600 Henley Street, Suite 311
Knoxville, TN.,37996-0434
Phone: 423-974-3825
FAX: 423-974-1838
Internet E-mail: menglish@utk.edu
Final Draft: May 31, 1996
-------
NEJAC List of Participants
May 29-31, 1996
Elisabeth Evans
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Region VIII
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
99918th Street
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: 303-312-6053
FAX;
Internet E-mail:
evens.eltsabstii@epamaH.epa.gov
Denlse Ferguson-Southard
State of Maryland
Office of Attorney General
2500 Broenlng Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
Phone: 410-631-3053
FAX: 410-631-3943
Internet E-mail:
Juan Fernandez
Director of Education
Chile National Environmental Commission
(CONAMA)
OBISPO DONOSO No. 6
Provtdoncia - Chile,
Phone: 240-5611
FAX: 244-1262
Internet E-mail:
Deeohn Ferris
Washington Office on Environmental Justice
1511 K Street, NW, Suite 1026
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202-637-2467
FAX: 202-637-9435
Internet E-mail:
Artie Fields
Island View Village Corporation
Eaststde Grassroots Coalition
206 East Grand Boulevard
Detroit, Ml 48207
Phone: 313-822-8272
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Timothy Fields
Deputy Assistant Administrator
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
40\ M Street, SW(MC 5101)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-4610
FAX: 202-260-3527
Internet E-mail:
ffelds.timothy@epamatt.epa.gov
Chris Foreman,
Senior Fellow
Brookings Institute
1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-797-6087
FAX: 202-797-6144
Internet E-mail: cforeman@brook.edu
Anna M. Frazier
Community Organizer
Dine CARE
HCR-63, P.O. Bdx 263
Winslow.AZ 86047
Phone: 520-607-1073
FAX: 520-657-3217 '"
Internet E-mail:
Kalyn Cherie Free
Senior Counsel, Indian Resources
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 44378
Washington, DC 20026-4378
Phone: 202-514-2912
FAX: 202-305-0271
Internet E-mail:
Lorraine Frigerio
International Activities Specialist
Office of International Activities
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2621)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-6623
FAX: 202-401-0140
Internet E-mail: frigerio.lorry@epamail.epa.gov
Jean Gamache
Tlingit and Haida Indian tribes of Alaska
125 Christensen Drive, P.O. Box 104432
Anchorage, AK 99510
Phone: 907-277-8234
FAX: 907-272-6519
Internet E-mail:
Avi Garbow
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-0003
FAX:
Internet E-mail: garbow.avi@epamail.epa.gov
Linda Garczynski
Director Outreach and Special Projects Staff
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 5101)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-1223
FAX: 202-260-6606
Internet E-rnail:
garczynski.linda@epamail.epa.gov
Clarice Gay lord
Director
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 3103A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2515
FAX: 202-501-0740
Internet E-mail:
gaylord.clarice@epamail.epa.gov
Danny Gogal
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201 A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2576
FAX: 202-501-0740
Internet E-mail: gogal.daniel@epamail.epa.gov
Renee Coins
Environmental Protection Specialist
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201 A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2598
FAX: 202-501-0740
Internet.E-mail: goins.renee@epamail.epa.gov
Tom Goldtooth
Indigenous Environmental Network
P.O. Box 485
Bemjidi, MN 56601
Phone: 218-751-4967
FAX: 218-751-0561
Internet E-mail: ien@apc.ipc.org
Paula Gomez
Brownsville, TX, Community Health Center
2137 East 22nd Street
Brownsville, TX 78521
Phone: 210-548-7473
FAX: 210-546-2056
Internet E-mail: ' .'.
Sarah Gramlich
Project Coordinator
Washtenaw County DEIS
110 North Fourth Avenue, Suite 200
Ann Arbor, Ml 48107
Phone: 313-994-6361
FAX: 313-994-2459
Internet E-mail: ^
t
Running Grass
Three Circles Center
P.O. Box 1946
Sausalito, CA 94965
Phone: 415-331-4540
FAX: 415-331-4540
Internet E-mail: circlecenter@apc.igc.org.
final Draft: May 31, 1996
-------
NEJAC List of Participants
2.9-3-v ,
Page 4
Ellen Greeney ' ,
Public Affairs Specialist
Region VI
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1445 Ross Avenue ,
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214-665-2200
FAX: 214-665-2118
Internet E-mail:
June Gmbe Robinson .
Program Director
Midwest Migrant Health Information Office
502 West Elm Avenue
Monroe, Ml 48162
Phone: 313-243-0711
FAX: 313-243-0435
Internet E-mail:
David Hahn-Baker
President , ,
Inside-Out Political Consultants, Inc.
440 Lincoln Parkway
Buffalo, NY 14216
Phone: 716-877-2004
FAX: 716-877-2004
Internet E-mail:
Hope Angela Hart
Coordinator
Community Outreach
110 North 4th Avenue, Suite 200
Ann Arbor, Ml 48107-8645
Phone: 313-994-6361
FAX: 313-994-2459
Internet E-mail:
Rose Marvel!
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2273G)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-6056
FAX: 202-564-0074
Internet E-mail: harvell.rose@epamail.epa.gov
Melva Hayden
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Region II
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
290 Broadway, 26th Floor
New York, NY 10007
Phone: 212-637-5027
FAX: 212-637-5024
Internet E-mail: . ,
Rebecca Head
Director
Washtenaw County DEIS
P.O. Box 8645 ',
Ann Arbor, Ml 48107-8645
Phone: 313-994-6361
FAX: 313-994-2459
Internet E-mail: rhead@ccs.ltd.umich.edu
Steve Herman
Assistant Administrator
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2419
FAX: , .
Internet E-mail:
hermah.steven@epamail.epa.gov
Dolores Herrera
Albuquerque San Jose Community Awareness
Council, Inc.
P.O. Box 12297 .
Albuquerque, NM 87195-2297
Phone: 505-243-4837
FAX: 505-243-3085
Internet E-mail:
Cam Hill-Macon
Office of international Activities
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2620)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-3826
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Jamilah Humphrey ,
Director, Youth Young Adult Outreach
Detroit Chapter
National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People
2990 East Grand Boulevard
Detroit, Ml 48202
Phone: 313-871-2087 ext.21
FAX: 313-871-7745
Internet E-mail:
Lawrence G. Hurst
Director, Strategic Issues and Communications
Motorola, Inc.
8220 East Roosevelt (Mail Drop R3125)
.Scottsdale, AZ 85257
Phone: 602-441-3210
FAX: 602-441-3965
Internet E-mail: p26227@email.mot.com
Jennifer Jamison Lofton
Project Director
Ypsilanti, Willow Run i
National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People
117 North Division Street
Ann Arbor, Ml 48104
Phone: 313-761-3186
FAX: 313-663-2414
Internet E-mail:
Ivan Joe
Dine CARE
HCR-63, P.O. Box 272
Winslow.AZ 86047
Phone: 520-607-1048
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
, Hazel Johnson
Executive Director
People for Community Recovery
13116 South Ellis Avenue
Chicago, IL 60627
Phone: 312-468-1645
FAX: 312-468-8105
Internet E-mail:
Karla Johnson
Environmental Justice Coordinator ,
Region V
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Chicago, IL
Phone: 312-886-5993
FAX: 312-886-2737
Internet E-mail:
johnson.katia@epamail.epa.gov
Stephen Johnson
Assistant Professor
School of Law
Mercer University
1021 Georgia Avenue
Macon, GA 31210
Phone: 912-752-2192
FAX: 912-752-2259
Internet E-mail: "johnson.s@mercer.edu '
Mark Jones
Director, Southeast Offices
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
32898 Seven Mile Road
Livonia, Ml
Phone: 313-432-1298
FAX: 313-953-0243
Internet E-mail:
, Valerie Jones
Air and Radiation Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
V
77 West Jackson
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: 312-353-2446
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Rh'ona Julien
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Region I
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
Phone: 617-565-9454
FAX: 617-565-3415
Internet E-mail:
Final Draft: May 31, 1996
-------
NEJAC List of Participants
May 29-31, 1996
Lillian Kawasaki
Los Angeles Environmental Affairs Department
201 North Figueroa, Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone: 213-580-1045
FAX: 213-580-1084
Internet E-mail:
Tom Kennedy
Assoc, of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Mgmt. Officials
444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 315
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202-624-5828
FAX: 202-624-7875
Internet E-mail: swmtjk@sso.org
Andrea KIdd Taylor
Health and Safety Department
United Auto Workers
8000 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, Ml 48214
Phone: 313-926-5563
FAX: 313-824-4473
Internet E-mail:
Marva King
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2599
FAX: 202-501-0740
Internet E-mail: klng.marva@epamail.epa.gov
Molly Kirchner
Community Affairs Research Assistant
Molten Metal Technology
51 Sawyer Road
Waltham, MA 02154
Phone: 617-768-4527
FAX: 617-487-7870
Internet E-mail: mto'rchner@mmtcom
Robert Knox
Deputy Director
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-8195
FAX: 202-260-0852
Internet E-mail:
Cathy Kronopolous
Chief, Sertifjcation/Safety Branch
Office of Pesticide Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
40f M Street, SW (MC 7506C)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-305-7410
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Robin P. Lancaster
Attorney-Advisor
Office of Regulatory Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, NW (MC 2245A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-4172
FAX: 202-564-0035
Internet E-mail:
Dune Lankard
Spokesperson
EYAK Rainforest Preservation Fund
P.O. Box 460
Cordova, AK 99574
Phone: 907-424-5890
FAX: 907-424-5891
Internet E-mail: dune@redzone.org
Richard Lazarus
Visiting Professor
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202-662-9129
FAX: 202-662-9408
Internet E-mail: lazarusr@iaw.georgetown.edu
Teresa Leal
Anthropologist
Southwest Network
Rodriguez 227
Nogalis, AZ
Phone: 011-526-31-37838
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Charles Lee
Director of Research
Commission for Racial Justice
United Church of Christ
475 Riverside Drive, 16th Floor
New York, NY 10015
Phone: 212-870-2077
FAX: 212-870-2162
Internet E-mail:
103001.2273@compuserve.com
Lily Lee
Special Assistant
Office of the Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 1101)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-26O4724
FAX: 202-260-4852
Internet E-mail: lee.lilv@epamail.epa.gov
Pamela Tau Lee
University of California
Center for Occupational and Environmental
Health
2515ChanningWay
Berkeley, CA 94720
Phone: 510-643-7594
FAX: 510-643-5698
Internet E-mail: ptlee@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Lori Lewis
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Region IX
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
San Fransisco, CA
Phone: 415-744-1561
FAX: 415-744-1605
Internet E-mail: lewis.lon@epamail.epa.gov
Sarah Lile
Director
Department of Environmental Affairs
City of Detroit
1650 First National Building
Detroit, Ml 48221
Phone: 313-234-3092
FAX: 313-224-5505
Internet E-mail:
Sylvia Lowrance
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201 A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2419
FAX:
Internet E-mail: !
Seth Lubega
Director UNCF/PEJER Grant
Department of Biological Sciences
Oakwood College
Huntsville, AL 35896
Phone: 205-726-7059
FAX: 205-726-7056
Internet E-mail:
Roberta Luce
Detroit City Forum Lead Prevention Coalition
Detroit, Ml
Phone: 313-883-7744
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Kathleen MacKinnon
Environmental Education Specialist
. Environmental Education Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 1707)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-4951
FAX: 202-260-4095 .
Internet E-mail:
Final Draft: May 31, 1936
-------
NE1AC List of Participants
May 29-31,1996 ' :
Page 6
Patrick Markey
Trial Attorney
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
10th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20035-5998
Phone: 202-514-6140
FAX: 202-514-1116
Internet E-mail:
Lawrence Martin
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 8105)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-0673
FAX: 202-260-0507
Internet E-mail:'
martin.lawrence@epamail.epa.gov
Andrew McBride
Director
Stamford Health Department
888 Washington Boulevard
Stamford, CT 06904-2Q52
Phone: , 203,977-4396
FAX: 203-977-5882
Internet E-mail:
Mildred McClain
Citizens for Environmental Justice
P.O. Box 1841
Savannah, GA 31402
Phone: 912-233-0907
FAX: 912-233-5105
Internet E-mail:
Charles McDermott
Vice President of Government Affairs
Waste Management, Inc.
601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20004
Phone: 202-628-3500
FAX: 202-628-0400
Internet E-mail:
Augusto Medina
Project Manager , ' ,
North American Association for Environmental
Education
1255 23rd Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC
Phone: 202-884-8788
FAX: 202-884-8701
Internet E-mail: amedina@web.apc.org
Selena Mendy
Staff Attorney, Environmental Justice
Lawyer's Committee For Civil Rights Under the
Law
1450 G Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202-662-8600
FAX: 202-783-5113
Internet E-mail:
Eder L. Moore
Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice
11335Mettetac
Detroit, Ml 48227
Phone: 313-272-6149
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Gregory A. Moore
Council Member/Student
ECO
1608 Estates
Detroit, Ml 48206
Phone: 313-872-8225
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Susan Morales
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Region X '
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Seattle, WA
Phone: 206-553-8580
FAX: 206-553-8338
Internet E-mail:
morales.susan@epamail.epa.gov
Vernon Myers "
Permits
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (5305W)
.Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-308-8660
FAX: 703-308-8609
Internet E-mail:
myers.vernon@epamail.epa.gov
JohnO'Leary
Pierce.Atwood
One Monument Square
Portland, ME 04101
Phone: 207-773-6411
FAX: 207-773-3419
Internet E-mail: joleary@pierceatwood.com
Mary O'Lone
Office of General Counsel
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2322)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-1487
FAX: 202-260-8393
Internet E-mail:
Linda V. Parker
Executive Assistant to the U.S. Attorney
General
Eastern District of Michigan
Office of the U.S. Attorney General
211 West Fort Street, Suite 2300
Detroit, Ml 48226 .
Phone: 313-226-9507
FAX: 313-226-4609
Internet E-mail:
Delta Pereira
Analyst
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW(MC 2201A) ,
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-565-2596
FAX: 202-501-0740
Internet E-mail:
pereira.delta@epamail.epa.gpv
Virginia Phillips
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-308-8761
FAX: 703-308-8638
Internet E-mail:
phillips.virginia@epamail.epa.gov
Janet Phoenix
Director
Public Health Programs
National Lead information Center
1019 19th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036-5105
Phone: 202-293-2270 ext.746
FAX: 202-659-1192
Internet E-mail: ehc.@cais.com
Wendy Pierce
Youth Representative
Dine CARE
P.O. Box 186
Bloomfield, NM 87413
Phone: 505-324-0907
FAX:
Internet E-mail: wendyp@crystal.ncc.nm.us
Lynn Pinder
Executive Director
Youth Warriors
2710 West Lanvale Street
Baltimore, MD 21216
Phone: 410-347-1440
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
D. Carole Powell
Confidential Assistant to the Adminstrator
Office of Civil Rights
U.S. Department of Agriculture
14th & Independence Streets, SW
Washington, DC 20250
Phone: 202-690-2907
FAX: 202-205-2891
Internet E-mail:
Final Draft: May 31, 1996
-------
NEJAC List of Participants
May 29-31, 1996
'
Ross Powers
BrownfieWs Coordinator
CKy of Detroit
2300 Cadillac Tower
Detroit, Ml 48226
Phone: 313-224-6380
FAX: 313-224-1629
Internet E-mail:
Terry Prultt
Manager, State Public Affairs
Dow Coming Corporation
2200 Salzburg Road (CO2400)
Midland, Ml 48686-0994
Phone: 517-496-8827
FAX: 517-496-1657
Internet E-mail:
Arthur Ray
Deputy Director
Maryland Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MO 21224
Phone: 410-631-3086
FAX: 410-631-3888
Internet E-mail:
Lonore F. Raybom
Water Division
Region V
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: 312-886-6465
FAX: 312-886-0168
Internet E-mail:
Dorotta Reaves
Office of Communication, Education & Public
Affairs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC1702)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-3534
FAX: 202-260-0130
Internet E-mail:
Milton Robinson
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Strejst. SW (MC 2232A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2538
FAX: 202-501-0579
Internet E-mail:
roblnson.mliton@epatiiail.epa.gov
Juan E. Rosario
Mision Industrial de Puerto Rico
P.O. Box363728
San Juan, PR 00936-3728
Phone: 787-765-4304
FAX: 787-754-6462
Internet E-mail:
Peggy Saika
Asian Pacific Environmental Network
1221 Preservation Parkway
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: 510-834-8920
FAX: 510-834-8926
Internet E-mail: apen@igc.org
Lee Salamone
Manager
Chemical Manufacturers Association
1300 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22209
Phone: 703-741-5212
FAX: 703-741-6212
Internet E-mail:
lee.salamone@mail.cmahq.com
Sherry Salway-Black
First Nations Development Institute
Oglala Lakota Tribe
11917 Main Street
Brownsville, TX 78521
Phone: 210-548-7400
FAX: 210-544-7859
Internet E-mail: ssblack@interserf.net
Shruti N. Sanghavi
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Office of Compliance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2225A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-4158
FAX: 202-564-0028
Internet E-mail:
sanghavi.shruti@epamail.epa.gov
William Sanjour
Policy Analyst
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC5304)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-603-9931 "
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
sahjour.wilHam@epamail.epa.gov
Kathryn Savoie
Environmental Program Director
ACCESS
2651 Saulino Court
Dearborn, Ml 48120
Phone: 313-842-7010
FAX: 313-842-5150
Internet E-mail:
Darryl Segars
Staff Attorney
Office of Representative John Conyers, Jr.
231 West Lafayette
Detroit, Ml 48226
Phone: 313-961-5670
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Jon Sesso
Planning Director
Butte-Silverbow Planning Board
155 West Granite Street
Butte, MT 59701
Phone: 406-723-8262 x274
FAX: 406-782-6637
Internet E-mail:
Peggy M. Shepard
Executive Director
West Harlem Environmental Action, Inc.
271 West 125th Street, Suite 211
New York, NY 10027
Phone: 212-961-1000
FAX: 212-961-1015
Internet E-mail:
Lenny Siegel
Director
Pacific Studies Center
222-B View Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
Phone: 415-961-8918
FAX: 415-968-1126
Internet E-mail: lsiegel@igc.org
John Simmons
President
Kennedy Heights Civic Association
11323Lockgate
Houston, TX
Phone: 713-738-7843
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Colleen Smith
Office of International Activities
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2620)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-3826
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Linda Smith
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2602
FAX: 202-501-0740
Internet E-mail: smith.linda@epamail.epa.gov
Carl Soderberg
Director
Caribbean Field Office
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Edif. Centra Europa
Sonturce, PR 00907
Phone: 787-729-6733
FAX: 787-729-7747
Internet E-mail:
Final Draft: May 31, 1996
-------
fiejAC List of Participants
may 2S-3T. 1936
Page 8
James L. Stone
Director
Environmental Protection Program
Yankton Sioux Tribe
Box 248
Marty, SD 57361
Phone: 605-384-3541
FAX: 605-384-5687
Internet E-mail:
Charles Stringer
Assistant Tribal Attorney
White Mountain Apache Tribe
P.O. Box 700
Whiteriver, AZ 85941
Phone: 520-338-4346 ext.415
FAX: 520-338-4147
Internet E-mail: ,
Yolanda Ting
Environmental Scientist
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-603-8835
FAX: 703-603-9100
Internet E-mail: ting.yolanda@epamail.epa.gov
Rex L. Tingle
Department of Occupational Safety and Health
AFL-CIO
815 16th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: 202-637-5003
FAX: 202-508-6978
Internet E-mail:
Connie Tucker
Southern Organizing Committee
P.O. Box 10518
Atlanta, GA 30310
Phone: ' 404-755-2855
FAX: 404-755-0575
Internet E-mail:
Haywood Turrentine
Laborers International Union of North America
4221 Chace Lake Fairway
Hoover, AL 35244'
Phone: 205-985-9579
FAX: 205-988-4359
nternet E-mail:
I/like Tydings
Exxon Company, USA
800 Bell Street . '
Houston, TX 77002-7426
Phone: 713-656-5582
FAX: 713-656-6594
nternet E-mail:
Baldemar Velasquez
President
Farm Labor Organizing Committee
507 South St. Clair Street
Toledo, OH 43602
Phone: 419-243-3456
FAX: 419-243-5655
Internet E-mail:
Velma Veloria
State Representative
House of Representatives
Washington State Legislature
1511 South Ferdinand
Seattle, WA 98108
Phone: 206-720-3049
FAX: 206-720-3053
Internet E-mail:
MaxWeintraub
Information Specialist
National Lead Information Center
1019 19th Street, NW, Suite 401
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-293-2270 ext.934
FAX: 202-659-1192
Internet E-mail:
i ' .
Suzanne Wells
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 5201G)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-603-8960
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
wells,suzanne@epamail.epa.gov
Michelle Whitehead
Environmental Protection Specialist
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2272A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-4287
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
whitehead.michelle@epamail.epa.gov
Donele Wilkins
Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice
18248 Marlowe
Detroit, Ml 48235
Phone: ,
FAX:-
Internet E-mail:
Guy Williams
Pollution Prevention Specialist
National Wildlife Federation
506 East Liberty, 2nd Floor -
Ann Arbor, Ml 48104
.Phone: 313-769-3351
FAX: 313-769-1449
Internet E-mail: guy@nwf.org
Kevin T. Williams
Executive Director ,
1 21st Century Economic Development
Corporation
19416 Livernois Avenue . ,
Detroit, Ml 48221
Phone: 313-341-2100
FAX:
Internet E-mail:
Margaret Williams
President
Citizens Against Toxic Exposure
6400 Marianna Drive
Pensacola, FL 32504
Phone: 904-494-2601
FAX: 904-479-2044
lnteme_t E-mail:
Pat Williams
National Wildlife Federation
1400 16th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-797-6887
FAX: 202-797-6646
Internet E-mail:,
Tracey Woodruff
Staff Scientist
Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2126)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-6669
FAX: 202-260-0512
Internet E-mail:
woodruff.tracey@epamail.epa.gov
Wendy A. Woods
Solid Waste Commissioner
University of Michigan
City of Ann Arbor ,
1035 Newport Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48103
Phone: 313-764-0332
FAX: 313-764-2772
Internet E-mail: wwoods@umich.edu
Beverly Wright
Xavier University
Deep South Centerfor.Environmental Justice
7325 Palmetto Street
New Orleans, LA 70125
Phone: 504-483-7340
FAX: 504-488-7977
Internet E-mail:
Jan Young
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response >
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 5101)
Washington, DC 20460
PHo.ne: 202-260-1691
FAX: 202-260-6606
Internet E-mail: '
Final Draft: May 31, 1996
-------
------- |