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
cross—cutting 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 pollution—and 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  this—the 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

-------

-------