jnaoLdOQeJVIee^tmgj>£ the
•••BIlllSiiHI^BBmiHraillMHIiaBBHlEIBB
SEJSf:?S15i!K^SE^PaEsEaa?*ESri;?;
fottlS^ilaLTustice
(••••HHBBilBHHHHB
•••••••••••HBiB
Council
A Federal Advisory Committee
odge and Conference Center
limiiiBfejaM^
Sben
-------
-------
Summary of the Meeting of the
National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council
A Federal Advisory Committee
Indian Springs Lodge and Conference Center
Potawatorni Indian Reservation
Wabeno, Wisconsin
May 13-15,1997
-------
-------
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 36
individuals serve on the various subcommittees. To date, NEJAC has held nine meetings in the following
locations:
Washington, D.C., May 20, 1994
Albuquerque, New Mexico, August 3 through 5,1994
Herndon, Virginia, October 25 through 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
• Baltimore, Maryland, December 10 through 12,1996
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
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
• A designated federal official (DFO) must be present at all meetings of the NEJAC (and its
subcommittees)
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 to the 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
(1996-1997)
Designated Federal Official:
Ms. Clarice Gaylord
Director, EPA Office of Environmental Justice
General Members
Ms. Leslie Ann Beckhoff
Ms. Christine Benally
Mr. John Borum
Ms. Dollie Burwell
Mr. Luke Cole
Ms. Mary English
Ms. Deeohn Ferris
Ms. Rosa Franklin
Mr. Amoldo Garcia
Mr. Grover Hankins
Ms. Dolores Herrera
Mr. James Hill
Chair:
Mr. Richard Moore
Mr. Lawrence Hurst
Ms. Lillian Kawasaki
Mr. Richard Lazarus
Mr. Charles Lee
Mr. Gerald Prout
Ms. Rosa Hilda Ramos
Mr. Arthur Ray
Ms. Peggy Saika
Mr. Haywood Turrentine
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez
Ms. Margaret Williams
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:
environrnental-justice-epa@epamail.epa.gov.
Executive Summaries of the reports of the NEJAC meetings are available on the Internet at the NEJAC's World
Wide Web home page:
http:/www.ttemi.com/nejac.
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
PREFACE ;
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-1
CHAPTER ONE: MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 REMARKS 1-2
2.1 Remarks of the Tribal Representatives 1-2
2.2 Remarks of the Chair 1-3
2.3 Remarks of the Assistant Administrator of OECA 1-3
2.4 Remarks of the Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 5 1-5
3.0 REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 1-5
3.1 Panel Discussion on Issues of Concern to Native Americans 1-5
3.2 Update on Ward Valley, California 1-9
3.3 Report of EPA's AIEO 1-12
3.4 Report from the Tribal Operations Committee 1-13
4.0 REPORTS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES 1-14
4.1 Enforcement Subcommittee 1-14
4.2 Health and Research Subcommittee 1-14
4.3 Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee 1-15
4.4 International Subcommittee 1-15
4.5 Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee 1-16
4.6 Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee 1-16
5.0 ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES 1-16
5.1 NEJAC Guidance on Obtaining Approval of the Executive Council 1-17
5.2 Next Meeting of the NEJAC 1-17
5.3 Turnover and Succession of the NEJAC Members 1-17
5.4 Update on Environmental Education Grants Work Group 1-18
6.0 RESOLUTIONS 1-18
6.1 Resolutions from the Enforcement Subcommittee 1-18
6.2 Resolutions from the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee 1-24
6.3 Resolution from the International Subcommittee 1-27
6.4 Resolutions from the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee 1-28
-------
Section
CHAPTER TWO: SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 2-1
2.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS PRESENTED MAY 13,1997 2-1
2.1 John Wilmer, Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indian Tribe 2-1
2.2 Arnold Wendroff, Mercury Poisoning Project 2-3
2.3 Monique Harden, GreenPeace 2-3
2.4 Rose Ann Roussel, St. James Citizens for Jobs and the Environment 2-4
2.5 Emelda West, Resident, Convent, Louisiana 2-5
2.6 William Weahkee, Five Sandoval Indian Pueblos 2-5
2.7 Dennis Shupand, Forest County Potawatomi Tribe 2-6
2.8 Laura Marthe, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin 2-6
2.9 Debra Ramirez, Resident, Lake Charles, Louisiana 2-7
2.10 Apesanahkwat, Menominee Tribe 2-8
2.11 Hazel Johnson, Resident, Southeast Chicago, Illinois 2-8
2.12 Cheryl Johnson, People for Community Recovery 2-9
2.13 Abbas Hassain, Reduce Recidivism by Industrial Development, Inc 2-9
3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS PRESENTED MAY 15,1997 2-9
3.1 Abbas Hassain, Reduce Recidivism by Industrial Development, Inc 2-9
3.2 Richard Bad Moccasin, Mni-Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition, Inc 2-10
3.3 Citizens of Freetown, Freetown, Louisiana 2-10
3.4 Azania Heywood James, Citizens for Environmental Justice 2-11
3.5 Steven Lopez, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe 2-11
3.6 Claudette White, Quenchan Indian Tribe 2-12
3.7 Michael Vigil, Tesuque Pueblo Indian Tribe, New Mexico 2-12
3.8 Rose Gurnoe, Red Cliff Band Lake Superior Chippewa 2-13
3.9 Stephanie Daniels Barea, Forest County Potawatomi Tribe 2-13
3.10 Mr. Ned Daniels, Jr., Forest County Potawatomi Tribe 2-13
3.11 Billy Ray Daniels, III, Forest County Potawatomi Tribe 2-14
3.12 Damu Smith, GreenPeace 2-14
3.13 Sonny Wreczycki, Mining Impact Committee, Town of Ainsworth, Wisconsin 2-14
CHAPTER THREE: MEETING OF THE ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 3-1
2.0 UPDATE ON SUBCOMMITTEE WORK GROUPS 3-1
2.1 Worker Protection Work Group 3-1
2.2 Work Group on the Policy on Supplemental Environmental Projects 3-2
2.3 Work Group on the Open Market Trading of Air Emissions Credits 3-3
3.0 JOINT SESSION OF THE ENFORCEMENT AND INDIGENOUS
PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEES 3-4
IV
-------
Section Page
4.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS ; 3-5
4.1 Indoor Use of Methyl Parathion 3-5
4.2 Update on the Federal Facilities Environmental Justice initiative 3-6
4.3 Update on the Louisiana Energy Services Uranium Enrichment Facility 3-6
4.4 Enforcement Roundtable Meetings 3-7
5.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE 3-7
5.1 St. James Parish, Louisiana 3-7
5.2 Mossville, Louisiana 3-8
6.0 RESOLUTIONS 3-9
CHAPTER FOUR: MEETING OF THE HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 4-1
2.0 REMARKS 4-1
3.0 ACTIVITIES OFTHE SUBCOMMITTEE 4-1
3.1 Review of Outstanding Resolutions 4-1
3.2 Future Goals of the Subcommittee 4-2
3.2.1 Toxics Agenda 4-3
3.2.2 Children's Health Initiatives 4-3
3.2.3 Community-Based Risk Assessment Tools 4-4
4.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 4-4
4.1 Lead Mining in Tar Creek, Oklahoma 4-5
4.2 Uranium Mining on the Navajo Nation 4-5
4.3 Conference on Children's Environmental Health 4-6
5.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE 4-6
5.1 Clarence Lewis, EPA, National Program Chemicals Assistance Branch 4-6
6.0 SIGNIFICANT ACTION ITEMS 4-7
CHAPTER FIVE: MEETING OF THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 5-1
2.0 REMARKS 5-1
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE 5-1
3.1 Review of the Draft Mission Statement 5-1
3.2 Review of Outstanding Action Items and Resolutions 5-4
3.3 Joint Session of the Enforcement and Indigenous Peoples Subcommittees 5-5
v
-------
Section Page
4.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 5-5
4.1 Update on Ward Valley, California 5-6
4.2 Petroglyph National Monument, Albuquerque, New Mexico 5-10
4.3 Mattaponi Indian Tribe, Virginia 5-13
4.4 St. Regis Mohawk Indian Tribe, New York 5-14
4.5 Copper Range Company, White Pine, Michigan 5-14
4.6 Proposed Cluster Rule 5-15
5.0 Resolutions 5-16
CHAPTER SIX: MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 6-1
2.0 REMARKS 6-1
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE 6-1
3.1 Update on the South Africa Working Group 6-1
3.2 Review of Selected Action Items and Resolutions 6-2
4.0 ISSUES RELATED TO INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND WORKER PROTECTION 6-3
4.1 Environmental Justice and Worker Protection 6-3
4.2 Consideration of Executive Order 12898 on Environmental
Justice by Other Federal Agencies 6-4
5.0 RESOLUTIONS 6-4
CHAPTER SEVEN: MEETING OF THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
AND ACCOUNTABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 7-1
2.0 REMARKS 7-1
3.0 ACTIVITIES OFTHE SUBCOMMITTEE 7-1
3.1 Review of the Minutes of the Subcommittee Meeting, April 1997 7-2
3.2 Review of Selected Action Items 7-2
3.3 Review of Selected Action Items from the Public
Comment Periods of Earlier Meetings of the NEJAC 7-4
3.4 Role of the Subcommittee 7-6
3.5 Turnover and Succession of NEJAC Members 7-6
3.6 Planning forthe Next Subcommittee Meeting 7-7
3.7 Planning of Site Tours 7-8
3.8 Development of a Public Participation Process 7-9
VI
-------
Section
4.0 ISSUES RELATED TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY 7-10
4.1 Participation of EPA Regional Administrators and Staff at NEJAC Meetings 7-10
4.2 Public Comment Periods 7-12
4.3 Need for Publications and Services in Spanish 7-12
4.4 NEJAC Meeting in Puerto Rico 7-13
5.0 SIGNIFICANT ACTION ITEMS 7-14
CHAPTER EIGHT: MEETING OF THE WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 8-1
2.0 REMARKS 8-1
3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 8-1
3.1 Activities of OSWER Related to Tribes 8-1
3.2 Proposed Crandon Mine 8-3
3.3 Copper Range Company, White Pine, Michigan 8-3
3.4 GM/Messina Superfund Site 8-5
3.5 Community Involvement Protocol of the American
Society of Testing and Materials 8-6
3.6 Superfund Sites in Puerto Rico 8-7
3.7 EPA Region 5 Community-Based Environmental Protection Activities 8-7
3.8 Proposed Shintech Polyvinylchloride Complex, St. James Parish, Louisiana 8-8
3.9 Status of OSWER's Siting Guidance 8-9
3.10 Status of National Brownfields Partnerships 8-10
3.11 Old Business of The Subcommittee 8-11
3.11.1 Minority Worker Training Program of the National
Institute of Environmental Health Services 8-11
3.11.2 Community Impact Statements 8-13
3.11.3 Superfund Relocation Policy 8-13
4.0 RESOLUTIONS 8-13
APPENDICES
List of Members of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
List of Participants
Handouts of the Public Comment Periods
vn
-------
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
This executive summary provides highlights of the
ninth meeting of the National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), held May 13
through 15,1997 at the Indian Springs Lodge and
Conference Center on the Potawatomi Indian
Reservation near Wabeno, Wisconsin. The
Executive Council of the NEJAC met on May 13
and 15, 1997. Each of the six NEJAC
subcommittees met for a full day on May 14,
1997. In addition, on May 13, members of the
NEJAC participated in a site tour of the
Menominee and Potawatomi Indian reservations.
The NEJAC also hosted public comment periods
on May 13 and 15, 1997. Approximately 160
persons attended the meetings and public
comment sessions.
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, Southwest Network for
Environmental and Economic Justice, serves as
the chair of the Executive Council. Ms. Clarice
Gaylord, Director of EPA Office of Environmental
Justice (OEJ), serves as the Designated Federal
Official (DFO) for the Executive Council. Exhibit
ES-1 lists the persons who chair the six
subcommittees of the NEJAC and the EPA staff
appointed to serve as DFOs for the
subcommittees as well as the chair and DFO for
the Executive Council.
To date, NEJAC has held nine meetings. EPA
OEJ maintains public transcripts and summary
reports of the proceedings of the meetings.
Those documents are available to the public upon
request. The public also can access the
executive summaries of reports of previous
meetings through the Internet at
http://www.tiemi.com/nejac.
OVERVIEW
The meeting of the Executive Council of the
NEJAC opened with a presentation of the colors
by representatives of local tribes, accompanied by
ceremonial drumming and singing. Exhibit ES-2
presents a photograph of the ceremonial
Exhibit ES-1
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
ADVISORY COUNCIL
CHAIRS AND DESIGNATED FEDERAL
OFFICIALS (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:
Ms. Mary English, Chair
Ms. Carol Christensen, co-DFO
Mr. Lawrence Martin, co-DFO
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee:
Mr. James Hill, Chair
Ms. Elizabeth Bell, DFO
International Subcommittee:
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez, Chair
Ms. Dona Canales, 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
drumming. In an opening statement that
followed, Mr. Gus Frank, Vice President of the
Potawatomi Indian Tribe, remarked that the
"presumed" government-to-government
relationship between states and tribes is
threatened by a lack of understanding on the part
of the states of both tribal needs and the concept
of tribal sovereignly. Apesanahkwat, Chair of the
Menominee Tribe, echoed Mr. Frank's sentiments
about the "presumed" government-to-government
relationships between tribes and states and
expressed hope that the meeting would be a
learning experience for all those who have a
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15, 1997
ES-1
-------
Executive Summary
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit ES-2: Members of the Potowatomi and Menominee tribes participate in a drumming session.
stake in the relations among states, EPA, and
tribes. Mr. Billy Daniels, Tribal Elder of the
Potawatomi Indian Tribe, offered a prayer in the
language of the Potawatomi. In that prayer, he
requested strength and health for the people, so
that all people can work together for the good of
Mother Earth.
Mr. Moore also expressed hope that the meeting
would be a very productive one. He reminded the
participants that, if it were not for environmental
injustices, there would be no need for the NEJAC.
Unfortunately, this is not an easy task that has
brought participants together, because it involves
illness and death, he said. Mr. Moore reminded
the members of the NEJAC that the meeting
represented an opportunity to focus on issues of
concerns to indigenous peoples. The intent of the
meeting, he explained, was not only to gain a
better understanding of what it means to live in a
"nation within a nation" but also to fulfill the
responsibility associated with a heightened
understanding of the issues.
Mr. Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator, EPA
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA), emphasized the commitment
of the EPA Administrator to ensuring
environmental justice. Exhibit ES-3 presents a
letter from the EPA Administrator to the members
of the NEJAC and the meeting participants. He
explained that the agency's approach to
environmental justice has four components: data
collection and risk assessment, community
education and empowerment, cooperation with
stakeholders, and enforcement. Mr. Herman
expressed satisfaction with EPA's programs to
date and noted that many of the efforts would not
have occurred had it not been for the NEJAC. He
hailed the NEJAC as an instrument for increasing
awareness and understanding of environmental
justice issues at EPA and fostering the application
of the principles of environmental justice in all of
EPA's regulatory decisions. Mr. Herman stated,
however, that, despite the progress made, it
remains clear that much work lies ahead, not only
ES-2
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Summary
Exhibit ES-3
4*****%
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.a 20480
May 13,1997
Dear Council Members and Meeting Participants,
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Welcome to the ninth meeting of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC), and its first meeting in Indian Country. I would like to extend my gratitude to
Richard Moore for his continued leadership as our Council Chair, the NEJAC Site Tour Steering
Committee, and the Potawatomi Tribe, Menominee Tribe, and Sokagons Chippewa Tribe for their
support in organizing this landmark event. I would also like to thank Steve Herman,
Clarice Gaylord, and other EPA staff for their hard work in planning this meeting.
I am pleased to see the progress that the Council has made in increasing awareness and
understanding of environmental justice issues at EPA. In May 1994, when the Council was first
established, my goal was to seek broad stakeholder input to ensure that consideration of
environmental justice is a part of everything we do. Over the past three years, the Council has
assisted EPA hi its efforts to make environmental justice a guiding principle: improving EPA's
outreach and education in all communities, providing opportunities for community participation in
decision-making, and partnering with affected communities that are working on local solutions to
environmental problems. EPA staffhave also made environmental justice an integral component
of major EPA initiatives, such as brownfields, community-based environmental protection, and
children's health protection.
Through our environmental justice activities, EPA has come to recognize that the
definition of "environment" includes where we work, where we live, and where we play, and that
environmental concerns can be influenced by social, cultural, and spiritual perspectives. This first
NEJAC meeting in Indian Country will raise awareness of the environmental problems facing
many Indigenous communities and how these problems broadly affect their ability to maintain
healthy environments and unique social, cultural, and spiritual traditions.
I look forward to continuing our work together as we take the necessary steps to achieve
public health and environmental protection in every community. Best wishes for a successful
meeting.
Sincerely,
Carol M. Brownerp
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
ES-3
-------
Executive Summary
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
for EPA but also for the NEJAC. He suggested
that the current meeting be viewed as an
opportunity for the members to rededicate
themselves to the cause of environmental justice.
Ms. Michelle Jordan, Deputy Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 5, echoed Mr.
Herman's comments about the commitment of the
EPA Administrator to environmental justice. She
stated that EPA Region 5 is responsible for
coordinating environmental justice efforts among
tribal, state, and local governments, in
accordance with federal guidelines. She then
stressed the importance of partnerships in
addressing environmental justice issues. Ms.
Jordan concluded her remarks by expressing a
desire to continue working with the NEJAC and
other stakeholders on environmental justice
issues.
The NEJAC hosted public comment periods on
May 13 and 15, 1997. More than 20 people
participated in the two public comment periods.
In addition, five individuals and organizations
submitted testimony that were read into the
record. Issues discussed during the two public
comment periods included concerns about EPA's
policy on Supplemental Environmental Projects
(SEP), identification of several environmental
Justice cases related to indigenous peoples,
identification of environmental justice cases
related to the siting of facilities in Louisiana, and
environmental justice issues related to EPA's
proposed Cluster Rule on paper and pulp mills.
The Executive Council also heard presentations
made by representatives of the state of California
on issues related to the siting of a low-level
radioactive waste facility near the Ward Valley
basin in southern California; EPA's American
Indian Environmental Office; and EPA's Tribal
Operations Committee (TOC).
ISSUES OF CONCERN
TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
The members of the Executive Council heard a
panel discussion on issues of concern to
Indigenous peoples. The facilitator for the panel
discussion commented that consideration of
Indigenous peoples' issues entails a certain
amount of tension and that such discussions are
rather complex because indigenous peoples face
political and legal barriers, in addition to the racial
and economic factors associated with
environmental justice issues. Specific concerns
raised by the members of the panel included:
• Improving the government-to-government
relationship between tribal governments and
the civil authorities of the United States, as
well as that between state governments and
tribes
• Assisting tribes in developing an
environmental regulatory process
Revising the environmental impact statement
(EIS) process under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to consider
unique cultures and address the concerns of
indigenous peoples
Clarify the definition of the trust responsibility
incumbent upon the U.S. government in its
relationship with indigenous peoples
Members of the panel expressed frustration about
the government-to-government relationships
between state governments and tribal
governments. They revealed that most state
processes do not require the involvement of
tribes, thereby forcing tribes to rely heavily on
states to voluntarily respect the government-to-
govemment relationship. In addition, members of
the panel explained that it is important that tribes
retain their status as semidomestic dependent
nations possessed of all the attributes of
sovereignty, with the exception of those attributes
Congress explicitly has taken away.
Members of the panel agreed that tribes need
assistance in developing an environmental
regulatory process. The members also agreed
that tribal environmental standards should be
compatible with state and federal environmental
standards. It was explained that tribes are
striving to build an environmental infrastructure
and expertise; however, because of a lack of
funding, many tribes find it difficult to achieve that
goal. Members of the panel stated that only when
an environmental infrastructure has been
developed can a tribe develop an environmental
policy that reflects the cultural values of the tribe.
Members of the panel also stressed that it is
important that the U.S. government issue
guidelines for incorporating into the NEPA
ES-4
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Summary
process considerations of environmental justice
related to the concerns of indigenous peoples.
Many problems that arise when the cultural and
spiritual concerns of indigenous peoples are not
considered in the preparation of EISs could be
avoided or mitigated, they commented. The
Crandon Mine proposed by the Exxon
Corporation in Crandon, Wisconsin was
presented to the NEJAC to illustrate this concern.
Members of the panel explained that many Native
Americans do not understand fully what the trust
responsibility is. The panelists agreed that
federal agencies should consider the effects of its
proposed actions on tribes and fulfill the
obligation to mitigate the effects on tribes, an
obligation that includes conduct of meaningful
consultation with tribes on a government-to-
government basis.
COMMON THEMES
During the meetings of the Executive Council and
the subcommittees, the members of the NEJAC
discussed a wide range of issues related to
environmental justice. Specific concerns raised
about non-indigenous issues included:
• Improving the participation of the EPA
regional administrator and staff of the EPA
regional office where the NEJAC meeting is
held
• Maintaining consistency and institutional
knowledge despite the turnover and
succession of members of the NEJAC
• Improving the response by EPA Region 6
staff to issues related to environmental
justice
Members of the NEJAC expressed concern about
the lack of participation by EPA regional
administrators and staff during meetings of the
NEJAC. In general, members expressed
frustration that questions raised during public
comment periods often go unanswered because
no one with authority from the EPA regional
offices is in attendance to answer questions or to
discuss issues presented during the public
comment periods. Members of the NEJAC
however, commented on the "good"
representation of EPA Headquarters staff and
regional environmental justice coordinators at the
NEJAC meetings.
Members of the NEJAC expressed concern about
the turnover of and succession among members
of the NEJAC, including their concern that the
term of the chair of the Executive Council had
expired and that the director of OEJ soon would
be leaving her position. Members stressed the
need to maintain 'continuity, noting that
institutional knowledge must be preserved from
meeting to meeting. Members of the Executive
Council agreed that retiring members can
continue to play a role in supporting the efforts of
the NEJAC, particularly in terms of maintaining
institutional knowledge and continuing to advance
the work of federal agencies in the area of
environmental justice. The members also agreed
to provide recommendations to the EPA
Administrator about criteria for the selection of a
new director for OEJ.
Members of the NEJAC also expressed concern
that, during every public comment period that the
NEJAC had held, testimony had been presented
about environmental justice issues in EPA Region
6. Members acknowledged that EPA Region 6
has made much progress in addressing
community concerns; however, the members
recommended that a meeting be held with the
administrator of EPA Region 6 to discuss the
regional office's lack of commitment to
environmental justice. Members suggested that
representatives of grassroots organizations and
members of the Executive Council meet with the
staff of EPA Region 6 to discuss such concerns.
Members of the NEJAC also noted that staff of
EPA Region 6 other than environmental justice
staff also should be included in the meeting.
SUMMARIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
MEETINGS
Summarized below are the deliberations of the
members during the meetings of the six
subcommittees of the NEJAC.
Enforcement Subcommittee
The Enforcement Subcommittee discussed the
activities of its work groups and reviewed
selected action items and resolutions. The
subcommittee conducted a joint session with the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, during which
issues related to tribal enforcement capacity,
tribal sovereignty, and enforcement of
environmental regulations on tribal lands were
discussed.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
ES-5
-------
Executive Summary
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
The status of each work group was reported as
follows:
• The Worker Protection Work Group would
like the NEJAC to focus more attention on
worker protection issues. The work group
drafted two resolutions that address the
training of farm workers. The subcommittee
approved both resolutions for consideration
by the Executive Council of the NEJAC.
• The Work Group on the Policy on SEPs
reported on a draft memorandum to EPA
prepared by a member of the work group that
suggests revisions to the proposed policy to
increase its effectiveness. The work group
presented a resolution about SEPs that the
subcommittee approved and forwarded to the
Executive Council for consideration.
• The Work Group on the Open Market Trading
of Air Emissions Credits presented a
resolution about environmental justice issues
related to the trading of air emissions credits
that the subcommittee approved. The
members also discussed the timeliness of
responses to resolutions submitted by the
subcommittee and a proposed resolution
addressing the effects of spatial averaging of
air pollution levels on neighborhoods affected
by environmental justice issues.
The members of the subcommittee heard reports
on the following issues: the indoor use of the
agricultural pesticide methyl parathion, the
Federal Facilities Environmental Justice Initiative,
the proposed uranium enrichment facility of the
Louisiana Energy Services, and past and future
enforcement roundtable meetings. The
subcommittee also received comment from
members of the public on environmental justice
issues affecting the Louisiana communities of St.
James Parish and Mossville.
The subcommittee forwarded several resolutions
to the Executive Council for approval. The
resolutions addressed issues related to SEPs,
pesticide use, farm worker protection activities,
EPA's CUP grant program, the trading of air
pollution credits, and the environmental justice
issues related to a polyvinyl chloride facility
proposed by the Shintech Corporation for
construction in St. James Parish, Louisiana.
Health and Research Subcommittee
The members of the Health and Research
Subcommittee spent much of their time
discussing future goals of the subcommittee. To
better focus their efforts, the members agreed to
concentrate on the following areas: pursue
projects based on measurable objectives; ensure
that projects have themes in common with those
developed by EPA; identify areas that other
subcommittees of the NEJAC should address;
and host joint activities with other subcommittees
of the NEJAC. The members also discussed
concentrating their efforts on issues related to
lead poison and air pollution.
The members of the subcommittee reviewed
resolutions, selected action items, and several
topics that had been identified during the
December 1996 meeting. The topics discussed
included EPA's toxics agenda, recent children's
health initiatives, and community-based risk
assessment tools. The members agreed upon
several recommendations about how EPA should
address the issues.
The subcommittee heard presentations and
reports on lead mining in Tar Creek, Oklahoma;
uranium mining on the lands of the Navajo
Nation; and the National Research Conference on
Pediatric Environmental Health. During the public
dialogue portion of the subcommittee meeting,
the members heard a presentation by EPA staff
on the agency's position on targeted lead
screening for children.
The members of the subcommittee forwarded to
the Executive Council several resolutions
addressing lead screening, children's health
initiatives, and coordinated efforts between EPA
and the National Institute of Environmental Health
Science (NIEHS).
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
The deliberations of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee focused on a number of
environmental justice cases related to indigenous
peoples. The members of the subcommittee also
reviewed selected action items and resolutions
and the draft mission statement for the
subcommittee. In addition, the subcommittee met
jointly with the Enforcement Subcommittee to
discuss issues related to tribal enforcement
ES-6
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Summary
capacity, tribal sovereignty, and enforcement of
environmental regulations on tribal land.
The environmental justice cases discussed by the
subcommittee were:
• The opposition of the Fort Mojave Indian
Tribe to the construction of a low-level
radioactive waste facility proposed by the
state of California for the Ward Valley Basin
• The opposition of the Five Sandoval Indian
Pueblos to the proposed construction of
commuter highways through the Petroglyph
National Monument in Albuquerque, New
Mexico
• The opposition of the Mattaponi Indian Tribe
to the construction of a water pumping station
and reservoir in Virginia
• The concerns of the St. Regis Mohawk Indian
Tribe about the General Motors/Messina
Superfund site located on the St. Lawrence
River in New York
• The opposition of the Bad River Band of Lake
Superior Chippewa to a proposed solution
mining project in White Pine, Michigan
• The concerns of the Oneida Nation of
Wisconsin about the options being
considered under the proposed Cluster Rule
for pulp and paper mills
The subcommittee forwarded to the Executive
Council resolutions addressing the proposed
Cluster Rule for pulp and paper mills, the
treatment of tribes as states with respect to
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA), and the involvement of indigenous
communities in the decision-making phase of
activities that may have significant cultural or
environmental impacts on those communities.
International Subcommittee
The International Subcommittee began its
deliberations with a discussion of ways to ease
the transition between retiring and newly
appointed members of the subcommittee and the
NEJAC. The members heard an update from the
South Africa Working Group and reviewed
selected action items identified and resolutions
recommended during the December 1996
meeting. Discussion of several resolutions and
action items was deferred until the next meeting
of the subcommittee because several members of
the subcommittee were absent. The members
present also were provided an update on the
activities of the Worker Protection Work Group of
the Enforcement Subcommittee.
The subcommittee focused its discussion on
issues related to international activities and
worker protection. The members discussed
enforcement of Executive Order 12898 on
environmental justice by the Department of Labor
and noncompliance with the order by other
federal agencies.
The subcommittee discussed the communication
issues that had occurred between the South
Africa Working Group and EPA's Office of
International Activities (OIA). The members
agreed that communications between the
subcommittee and OIA should be improved. An
update on the status of the nomination of
candidates to the South Africa Working Group
also was provided.
The subcommittee forwarded to the Executive
Council a resolution regarding the involvement of
the South Africa Working Group in EPA's South
African Initiative.
Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee
The Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee reviewed selected action items
from earlier public comment periods of the
NEJAC and subcommittee meetings, as well as
minutes from the April 1997 meeting of the
subcommittee. The subcommittee also discussed
several administrative issues related to the role of
the subcommittee, turnover and succession of
members of the NEJAC, procedures for public
comment periods of the NEJAC, the need for
publications in English and Spanish, the
possibility of holding a future meeting of the
NEJAC in Puerto Rico, and plans for the next
meeting of the subcommittee.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15, 1997
ES-7
-------
Executive Summary
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Much of the deliberations of the subcommittee
focused on ways to improve public participation.
Topics discussed included the planning process
for site tours, participation of EPA regional
administrators and regional staff at meetings of
the NEJAC, and development of a process for
public participation in decision making by EPA.
The subcommittee discussed several action items
and agreed to take further action on several
issues, including preparation of a check list for
planning site tours and development of a process
for inviting EPA regional staff to meetings of the
NEJAC. The members agreed to develop
recommendations that all EPA documents be
translated into Spanish and that a Spanish-
speaking staff member be identified to respond to
inquiries received in Spanish.
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
The Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
heard presentations and status reports on the
following issues:
• Activities of EPA's Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER) related to
tribes
• Proposed Exxon mine in Crandon, Wisconsin
Proposed solution mining at the Copper
Range mine in White Pine, Michigan
• General Motors/Messina Superfund site
located on the St. Lawrence River in New
York
• Proposed community involvement protocol
under development by the American Society
of Testing and Materials
• Superfund sites in Puerto Rico
• Community-based environmental protection
activities in EPA Region 5
• Polyvinylchloride complex proposed by
Shintech Corporation for construction in St.
James Parish, Louisiana
• OSWER's guidance on facility siting
• Brownfields National Partnership
The subcommittee also discussed issues
originally brought before the subcommittee during
its December 1996 meeting. Topics discussed
include the Minority Worker Training Program of
NIEHS, the role and development of community
impact statements, and the status of EPA's
Superfund relocation policy.
The subcommittee forwarded to the Executive
Council two resolutions related to the proposed
Crandon mine and EPA's Community-Based
Environmental Protection Initiative.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the NEJAC is tentatively
scheduled to be held December 9 through 11,
1997. Planned activities will include a site tour of
the local community and two opportunities for the
public to offer comment.
SUMMARY OF RESOLUTIONS
This section summarizes the resolutions
discussed by the subcommittees and were
approved by the Executive Council of the NEJAC.
Resolutions from
Subcommittee
the Enforcement
This section presents a summary of the
resolutions forwarded by the Enforcement
Subcommittee and approved by the Executive
Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the Enforcement Subcommittee
discussed a resolution in which the subcommittee
recommended that the NEJAC advise EPA to
modify its draft SEP policy to include affirmative
endorsements of the maximum use of SEPs to
promote environmental justice objectives, such
as, integrating public participation models; stating
that community organizations may serve as
contractors or consultants of the defendants; and
striving to create means to involve the community
organizations at every stage of the enforcement
ES-8
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Summary
process. This resolution was approved by the
Executive Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the Enforcement Subcommittee
discussed a resolution in which the subcommittee
recommended that the NEJAC advise EPA to
develop a matrix of pesticides based on toxicity,
occupational exposure history, occurrence in
groundwater, and commonality of food residues,
which will be used by EPA to focus multi-media
enforcement actions, targeting production,
application, export, and disposal of pesticides.
This resolution was approved by the Executive
Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the Enforcement Subcommittee
discussed a resolution in which the subcommittee
recommended that the NEJAC advise EPA to
focus farmworker protection enforcement efforts
in one or two states, such as North Carolina and
Texas and that EPA should implement a licensing
procedure for trainers under the Worker
Protection Standard; results of this training
program should be evaluated during pilot studies.
This resolution was approved by the Executive
Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the Enforcement Subcommittee
discussed a resolution in which the subcommittee
recommended that the NEJAC advise EPA to
actively monitor and participate in Community-
University Partnership (CUP) grant awards to
ensure that community-based organizations are
accurately represented in proposals, and are
active participants in the CUP grant process. This
resolution was approved by the Executive Council
of the NEJAC.
Resolutions from the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee
This section presents a summary of the
resolutions forwarded by the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee and approved by the Executive
Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee requests that EPA support, in the
proposed Cluster Rule for pulp and paper mills,
an additional option that uses a chlorine-free
bleaching process and advises the EPA
Administrator to respect the EPA policy on
environmental justice by refraining from making a
decision on the Cluster Rule until EPA has
completed an environmental justice analysis. The
resolution was approved by the Executive Council
of the NEJAC.
The members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee requests that EPA's Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) treat
Indian tribes in substantially the same way states
are treated with respect to all provisions of RCRA,
implement policy under which tribes receive early
notification of the development of policies and
initiatives related to tribes, and reestablish a
commitment to the national memorandum of
agreement. The resolution was approved by the
Executive Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee recommends that the NEJAC
request that:
EPA adopt procedures that ensure that
indigenous communities are involved in all
phases of decision making when activities
affect or might affect areas of cultural
significance to such communities
• The EPA Administrator request a meeting
among appropriate leaders of the executive
branch and the five Colorado River Tribes to
discuss the tribes' concerns about the siting
of a low-level radioactive waste disposal
facility in Ward Valley, California
• EPA conduct an environmental justice
analysis of the decision to site the facility in
Ward Valley
• EPA develop guidance for states related to
environmental justice concerns of Indigenous
communities
The resolution was approved by the Executive
Council of the NEJAC.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
ES-9
-------
Executive Summary
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Resolutions from
Subcommittee
the International
This section presents a summary of the
resolutions forwarded by the International
Subcommittee and approved by the Executive
Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the International Subcommittee
revised a resolution through which the
subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC
urge and advise the EPA Administrator to
recommend, encourage, and facilitate OlA's
consultation with the International
Subcommittee's South Africa Working Group on
all programmatic issues associated with the South
African Initiative, including the implementation of
the South African Grants Program. That
resolution was approved by the Executive Council
of the NEJAC.
The members of the International Subcommittee
also forwarded a request to the Executive Council
of ttie NEJAC to establish a formal work group on
issues related to South Africa. The request was
approved by the Executive Council.
Resolutions from the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee
This section presents a summary of the
resolutions forwarded by the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee and approved by the
Executive Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee discussed a resolution that
requested that EPA analyze the potential
environmental justice and cultural effects of the
proposed Crandon mine to be operated by the
Exxon Corporation on land adjacent to the tribal
lands of the Forest County Potawatomi, the Mole
Lake Chippewa, and the Menominee Indian
tribes, as well as review the EIS prepared for the
proposed mine. The resolution was approved by
the Executive Council of the NEJAC.
The members of the Waste and Facility
Subcommittee discussed a resolution that
requested that EPA define the term "community"
within the context of the CBEP initiative, develop
a mechanism for evaluating CBEP activities to
ensure their conformance with the Government
Performance and Results Act, establish a
community ombudsman office to address
community complaints, provide technical
assistance to community-based organizations,
and establish a clearinghouse for dissemination
of information to communities. The resolution
was approved by the Executive Council of the
NEJAC.
The members of the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee discussed a resolution that
requested that EPA support the development of
pilot CISs; disseminate the results of testing of the
pilots; and, if the pilots prove effective, consider
ways to fund CISs in all communities facing
environmental injustices. This resolution was
approved by the Executive Council of the NEJAC.
ES-10
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15,1997
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 13 and 15,1997
Potawatomi Indian Reservation
Wabeno, Wisconsin
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Clarice Gaylord
Designated Federal Official
O ^ 1YV-
. _« « « — — ^^L *
Richard Moore
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER ONE
MEETING OF THE
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The ninth meeting of the Executive Council of the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) took place on May 13 and 15, 1997 at
the Indian Springs Lodge and Conference Center
on the Potawatomi Indian Reservation near
Wabeno, Wisconsin. Mr. Richard Moore,
Southwest Network for Economic and
Environmental Justice, continues to serve as the
chair of the Executive Council. Ms. Clarice
Gaylord, Director, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Office of Environmental Justice
(OEJ), continues to serve as the Designated
Federal Official (DFO) for the Executive Council.
Exhibit 1-1 presents a list of members who were
present and identifies those who were unable to
attend the meeting. Approximately 150 people
attended the meeting.
On May 13, members of the NEJAC participated
in a site tour of the Menominee and Potawatomi
Indian reservations. The tour provided an
opportunity for the participants to view the pristine
areas where the members of these tribes live.
Members of the tribes served as tour guides and
provided background and historical information
about the area. Exhibit 1-2 provides a
photograph of the Wolf River, one of the stops on
the site tour.
On May 14, each member of the Executive
Council participated in the deliberations of one of
the six subcommittees of the NEJAC. In addition,
the Executive Council hosted public comment
periods on May 13 and 15,1997. Approximately
26 people participated in the public comment
sessions. Chapter Two presents a summary of
the public comments.
This chapter, which presents a detailed
discussion of the deliberations of the Executive
Council, contains" six sections, including this
Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks, presents
summaries of the remarks offered by various
speakers, including representatives of two local
tribes. Section 3.0, Reports and Presentations,
provides summaries of presentations made to the
Executive Council on various topics. In addition,
Section 4.0, Reports of the Subcommittees,
summarizes reports submitted about the
deliberations on May 14, 1997 of the
Exhibit 1-1
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL OF THE
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
ADVISORY COUNCIL
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 13 and 15,1997
Mr. Richard Moore, Chair
Ms. Clarice Gaylord, DFO
Ms. Leslie Beckhoff
Mr. Luke Cole
Ms. Deeohn Ferris
Mr. Arnoldo Garcia
Mr. Grover Hankins
Ms. Dolores Herrera
Mr. James Hill
Mr. Richard Lazarus
Mr. Charles Lee
Mr. Gerald Prout*
Ms. Rosa Hilda Ramos
Mr. Arthur Ray
Mr. Haywood Turrentine
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez
Ms. Margaret Williams*
List of Members
Who Were Unable to Attend
Ms. Christine Benally
Mr. John Borum
Ms. Dollie Burwell
Ms. Mary English
Ms. Rosa Franklin
Mr. Lawrence Hurst
Ms. Lillian Kawasaki
Ms. Peggy Saika
* Attended May 15,1997 only
subcommittees of the NEJAC. Section 5.0,
Administrative Issues, focuses on several topics
related to administrative tasks of the Executive
Council. Section 6.0, Resolutions, presents the
full text of the resolutions approved by the
Executive Council.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-1
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit 1-2: A historic site on the Wolf River where the Menominee Tribe signed many treaties with the
Federal government
2.0 REMARKS
This section summarizes the remarks of
representatives of the Potawatomi and
Menominee tribes, the chair of the NEJAC
Executive Council, the Assistant Administrator of
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA), and the Deputy Regional
Administrator for EPA Region 5.
2.1 Remarks of the Tribal Representatives
Mr. Gus Frank, Vice President of the Potawatomi
Tribe, remarked that the presumed government-
to-government relationship between states and
tribes is threatened by a lack of understanding of
both tribal needs and the concept of tribal
sovereignty on the part of states. Mr. Frank
stated that, in the past, the state of Wisconsin has
never had the "tribes' interests at heart," although
he said ft appears that the state has undergone a
change in its approach to its responsibilities
toward tribes. He added that the Governor of
Wisconsin had appointed a Director of Natural
Resources (DNR) to ensure the protection of air
and water on tribal lands. However, he
expressed concern that the DNR would comply
only with the wishes of the Governor without
taking into consideration the issues the tribes
wished to have addressed. Mr. Frank stated that
the people are not willing to compromise their
land. He concluded his remarks by expressing
his pleasure that the NEJAC had chosen the
Potawatomi Indian Springs Lodge for the
conference.
Apesanahkwat, Chair of the Menominee Tribe,
stated that he admired what the Potawatomi had
done to strengthen their community, in light of the
challenges they face. He reiterated Mr. Frank's
concerns that neither the Governor of Wisconsin
nor the state legislature understands that Indian
people view themselves as caretakers of the land.
He stated that the state of Wisconsin perceives
the notion of air and water quality standards
established and enforced by the tribes as an
encroachment on government domain. The state
has acted accordingly, he said. Adding that 4 of"
the 11 tribes in Wisconsin had filed petitions for
treatment as a state frAS), he noted that the
Menominee tribe has withdrawn its TAS petition,
citing the need for more supporting data.
Apesanahkwat reported that the state had
1-2
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Councff
promised to challenge initiatives the tribes
undertake as "semi-domestic dependent nations."
It is crucial that tribes throughly document their
actions and conduct risk analyses of the effects of
such actions as long as the possibility exists that
states may jeopardize the ability of the tribe or
other nations to undertake such actions, he
continued. The tribes must champion test cases
that will contribute to the advancement of tribal
nations as a whole, he said. Apesanahkwat
stated that the goal is to survive such challenges
to tribal sovereignty until the state tires of bringing
"frivolous" lawsuits against Indian nations simply
to thwart Indian rights.
Apesanahkwat expressed hope that the meeting
would be a learning experience for all those who
have a stake in the relations among states, EPA,
and tribes. He cautioned participants against
seeking TAS status, rather than enforcing the
government-to-government relationship that
reflects a tribe's inherent sovereign rights, as
opposed to vested rights that can be removed.
Pointing to the recent Backcountry Against
Dumps v. EPA (Campo Decision) case,
Apesanahkwat warned that efforts to seek TAS
status could pave the way for legislative debate
about granting rather than recognizing tribal
rights. (See Chapter 5, Section 3.2 of this
document for a discussion of that case). He
explained that the Campo decision had set a
dangerous precedent; similar court decisions
could prove detrimental to the fight for tribal
rights. Apesanahkwat cited as an example the
Olafont decision, which denied tribes the right to
exercise jurisdiction over matters of concern. The
assistance of the NEJAC is crucial to the tribes in
gaining the opportunity to regulate their
environment, he concluded.
Mr. Billy Daniels, Tribal Elder of the Potawatomi
Tribe, offered a prayer in the language of the
Potawatomi. In that prayer, he requested strength
and health for the people, so that all people can
work together for the good of Mother Earth.
2.2 Remarks of the Chair
Mr. Moore expressed the hope that the meeting
would be a very productive one. He reminded the
participants that if it were not for environmental
injustices, the NEJAC would not exist.
Unfortunately, what brings us together is not an
easy task because it involves illness and death,
he commented.
Mr. Moore reminded members of the NEJAC that
the meeting represented an opportunity to focus
on issues of concerns to indigenous peoples.
The intent of the meeting, he explained, is not
only to gain a better understanding of what it
means to live in a "nation within a nation" but also
to fulfill the responsibility associated with a
heightened understanding of the issues. He
asked the members to make a commitment to
working side by side to make progress on issues
brought to light during the meeting.
Mr. Moore stated that the road often had been
difficult. NEJAC members have made a
commitment not to EPA but to the "brothers and
sisters" struggling for environmental justice in this
country and throughout the world, he said. Mr.
Moore explained that the NEJAC meetings are
much more than simply coming together to hear
stories. Rather, the meetings demonstrate the
members' willingness to work together to effect
change that, in some cases, should have taken
place many years before, he continued. Mr.
Moore also expressed his frustration that
members often give advice that is not taken.
However, inherent in the commitment to work
together; he stated, is the understanding that,
when the NEJAC is no longer effective in moving
issues forward, that will be the day when "we will
step down." He added that the commitment to the
struggle still stands.
2.3 Remarks of the Assistant Administrator
of OECA
Mr. Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator,
OECA, opened his remarks by thanking the
members of the NEJAC whose terms will expire
in July 1997 for their service. Those members
guided issues in a way that has helped to
"elucidate and sharpen" the issues for the public
and EPA, he stated.
Mr. Herman emphasized the commitment of the
EPA Administrator to ensuring environmental
justice. He explained that the Agency's approach
to environmental justice has four components:
data collection and risk assessment, community
education and empowerment, cooperation with
stakeholders, and enforcement. For data
collection and analysis, EPA has been using
geographic information systems (GIS) and risk-
based targeting to gather and analyze data to be
used in identifying areas in which people of color
and low income populations are affected
disproportionately by environmental pollution, Mr.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-3
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Herman explained. He cited the Posted Streams
Project as an example of risk-based targeting,
explaining that it screens federal, industrial,
commercial, and municipal facilities that
contribute chemicals to bodies of water located in
communities affected by issues of environmental
justice. He added that the results of the project
will be used in developing enforcement and
compliance strategies to reduce the quantities of
pollutants entering such bodies of water and
reduce effects on human health and aquatic life.
EPA also has begun to alter its approach to risk
assessment to better address concerns about
environmental justice, Mr. Herman continued. He
said that historically, EPA's risk assessments
were narrow in scope, focusing on a single
pollutant, source, and medium. Mr. Herman
explained that EPA has recognized that such an
approach did not recognize that people often are
exposed to many pollutants through numerous
pathways and from many sources. He stated that
the National Cumulative Exposure Baseline
Project was created to develop estimates of
cumulative exposures that consider distributions
of exposure across communities and
demographic groups.
In pursuing its community education and
empowerment effort, EPA has realized that one of
the most effective ways to promote environmental
justice is to involve the community and give
members of the community the tools and
information necessary to protect themselves, Mr.
Herman said. He noted that the first step in
empowerment is to provide communities access
to information. To achieve that purpose, further
development of existing tools and the creation of
additional tools were necessary, he said. Mr.
Herman then highlighted several tools used by
the Agency, including LandView II and EPA's
Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA)
data retrieval and information system. Mr.
Herman acknowledged that merely providing
information to communities is not sufficient. EPA
also has developed several mechanisms for
providing financial assistance to communities, he
explained, pointing to the Environmental Justice
Small Grants Program and the creation in 1995 of
the Community/University Partnership (CUP)
Grants Program.
The purpose of the effort to increase cooperation
with stakeholders is to recognize the need to
involve communities, industry, and other
stakeholders in dialogue, Mr. Herman stated. He
cited as an example the Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance Roundtable meeting held
in San Antonio, Texas, in October 1996, which
was co-sponsored by the Enforcement
Subcommittee of the NEJAC. The purpose of the
meeting was to bring a variety of stakeholders
together to initiate dialogue and exchange ideas
on how to use enforcement and compliance
efforts more effectively to benefit communities
affected by issues related to environmental
justice, he said.
Mr. Herman reported that EPA also uses the
Common-Sense Initiative (CSI) to bring
stakeholders together. He explained that CSI
brings together representatives of federal, state,
and local governments; community-based and
national environmental groups; environmental
justice groups; labor; and industry to examine the
full range of environmental requirements that
affect six key industries: auto manufacturing,
computers and electronics, iron and steel, metal
finishing, petroleum refining, and printing. Mr.
Herman stated that through the initiative,
stakeholders work together to find efficient
approaches to environmental protection.
EPA's enforcement efforts focus on enforcement
actions and settlements, Mr. Herman continued.
He added that EPA has established 38 field
offices of its Criminal Investigation Division,
through which the Agency investigates
environmental crimes that often affect
environmental justice communities and that the
Office of Criminal Enforcement also has been
working to foster community-based policing
programs.
Mr. Herman expressed satisfaction with EPA's
programs to date and noted that many of the
efforts would not have occurred had it not been
for the NEJAC. He hailed the NEJAC as an
instrument for increasing awareness and
understanding of environmental justice issues at
EPA and fostering the application of the principles
of environmental justice in all of EPA's regulatory
decisions. Mr Herman stated, however, that,
despite the progress made, it remains clear that
much work lies ahead not only for EPA but also
for the NEJAC. He suggested the current
meeting be viewed as an opportunity for the
members to rededicate themselves to the cause
of environmental justice.
1-4
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
2.4 Remarks of the Deputy Regional
Administrator, Region 5
Ms. Michelle Jordan, Deputy Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 5, echoed Mr.
Herman's comments about the commitment of the
EPA Administrator to environmental justice. She
stated that EPA Region 5 is responsible for
coordinating environmental justice efforts among
tribal, state, and local governments, in
accordance with federal guidelines. Ms. Jordan
then cited a landmark case in which a consent
decree was reached with a resin and paint
manufacturing facility owned by the Sherwin
Williams Company located in southeast Chicago,
as evidence of the struggle for environmental
justice in EPA Region 5. The agreement included
a $4.7 million fine; $1.1 million in restoration
projects for Brownfields and wetland sites; full
compliance with all statutory and regulatory
requirements; closure of hazardous waste
management units at the site; and cleanup of the
facility, including cleanup of old landfills, she
explained.
Ms. Jordan told the members of the Executive
Council that continuing efforts by EPA Region 5
include establishing a work group with the
Chicago Legal Clinic on behalf of 11
environmental organizations in the Chicago area;
providing financial assistance to community
groups and tribal governments to carry out
projects with environmental justice issues;
implementing new regulations for ensuring
protection of farm workers and assigning bilingual
staff to that effort; conducting pilot projects at
Brownfields sites; and implementing various
targeting projects. She stressed the importance
of partnerships in addressing environmental
justice issues. Ms. Jordan concluded her remarks
by expressing a desire to continue working with
the NEJAC and other stakeholders on
environmental justice issues.
3.0 REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
This section summarizes a panel discussion of
issues of concern to indigenous people, and
presentations on issues related to the siting of a
facility near Ward Valley, California; EPA's Tribal
Operations Committee (TOC); and EPA's
American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO).
3.1 Panel Discussion on Issues of Concern
to Native Americans
Mr. Richard Monette, University of Wisconsin Law
School and member of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, facilitated a discussion about
issues of concern to indigenous peoples. Panel
members included Apesanahkwat; Mr. Joe
Young, attorney and Ms. Christine Hanson,
Director, Potawatomi Tribe Environmental
Program; and Mr. Jim Havard, EPA Office of
General Counsel (OGC).
Mr. Monette commented that discussion of
indigenous peoples' issues entails a certain
amount of tension and that such discussions are
rather complex because indigenous people face
political and legal barriers, in addition to the racial
and economic factors associated with
environmental justice issues.
Apesanahkwat stated that he had become active
in the environmental justice movement to work for
adoption of a policy that recognizes the
government-to-government relationship between
civil authorities of the United States and tribal
governments. He stated that it is important that
tribes retain their status as semi-domestic
dependent nations "possessed of all the attributes
of sovereignty, with the exception of what
Congress has explicitly taken away." He
commented that the international community is
not aware of how Indian nations are treated in a
country regarded as "the role model of democracy
for the world." He labeled the relationships that
have evolved between states and tribes as "state-
sponsored racism" because, he said, that phrase
accurately describes the intrusion of state
governments into tribal affairs. Apesanahkwat
applauded the EPA's efforts against
environmental injustice, but noted that the effort to
ensure environmental justice had not included
Indian nations. He explained that, because Indian
nations never relinquished "eminent domain,"
Indian leaders must become conversant with such
terms and concepts so that they will be able to
interact with mainstream America, he urged. It is
necessary, as the 21st century nears, to have
organizations such as the NEJAC to bring EPA
and tribes together to ensure that the benefits of
environmental protection are extended to all
segments of American society.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-5
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Apesanahkwat asked the Executive Councilto
assist tribes in developing a regulatory process.
He stated that industry poses the greatest
opposition to tribes because, historically, tribal
leaders are difficult to dissuade from viewpoints
that industry opposes. Every effort to establish
enforceable environmental policy meets
tremendous resistance from industry, he
continued. He expressed his hope that more
stringent regulations would force industry to
Implement mechanisms for a cleaner, safer
environment. For that reason, he explained,
Indian environmental regulatory policy begins with
zero tolerance.
Apesanahkwat concluded his remarks by stating
that both he and his staff looked forward to finding
new ways of approaching the difficulties facing
Indian nations as they attempt to establish
environmental regulations for their communities.
Ms. Hanson stated that she had worked with the
Potawatomi tribe for more than four years.
Although she stated that she had enjoyed her
work, she expressed frustration with the political
considerations the state of Wisconsin had
introduced into the debate over tribal
environmental issues. Ms. Hanson then
relinquished the floor to Mr. Young, who reported
that EPA had just released the advance notice of
proposed rulemaking for the prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD) permit process.
He added that the governors of Wisconsin and
Michigan had made commitments that no action
would be taken on the redesignation of the air
quality on the Potawatomi Indian Reservation to
Class I status before that rule had been proposed.
Mr. Young focused the remainder of his
presentation on the mine proposed by the Exxon
Corporation in Crandon, Wisconsin and the
implications for the trust responsibility (the trust
responsibility is discussed further below). He
explained that, when Exxon filed its notice of
intent to seek permits for the proposed mine, that
action forced the Potawatomi Tribe to examine its
options for protecting the environment.
Unfortunately, the tribe realized it had few
choices, he said. After reviewing the Clean Air
Act (CAA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA), the
tribe turned to the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA), as a possible mechanism through
which it could exert influence, Mr. Young
continued. He explained that the tribe's research
revealed that, under NEPA, the notice of intent
must be accompanied by high-quality data.
However, he added, the tribe's review of the
application process revealed that the process of
preparing the environmental impact statement
(EIS) had provided the only opportunity for
outside review of the data or the application. That
circumstance, he said, troubled the tribe greatly.
Mr. Young explained that further research on the
roles of the state and EPA revealed that the state
process did not allow the involvement of the tribe,
thereby forcing the tribe to rely heavily on the
state to respect the government-to-government
relationship.
In their efforts to clarify the role of federal
agencies in decisions related to the permit for the
proposed Crandon mine, many local Wisconsin
tribes collectively began to push EPA and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) to
examine other options for reviewing the possible
environmental effects of the mine, he said.
Consequently, USAGE had agreed to prepare a
federal EIS, he said. Mr. Young added, however,
that the initial outline of the USAGE'S EIS left no
room for consideration of the tribes' concerns.
Although the revised outline includes a chapter
that addresses those concerns, it does not
address the trust responsibility, he added. He
stressed that the Executive Council must
understand that NEPA does not consider unique
cultures nor does it address the concerns of
native peoples during its EIS process.
Mr. Young then briefly described the trust
responsibility. He explained that many Native
Americans do not fully understand what the trust
responsibility is. Various court rulings have
declared that there is a distinct obligation of trust
incumbent upon the U.S. government in its
relationship with Native Americans. That
responsibility dates from a court case from the
1830s, under which it was declared that Indian
nations were to be regarded as dependent
nations under the guardianship of the U.S.
government, he continued. Therefore, he added,
the land and affairs of tribes were subject to the
control and management of the federal
government. Mr. Young stated that the courts
also have ruled that guardianship is not absolute.
Rather, he explained, the U.S. government is to
be held to the highest standards of moral
obligation and trust, must employ the most
exacting fiduciary standards, and is bound by
"every moral and equitable consideration to
discharge its trust with fairness and in good faith."
1-6
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive CouneiJ
Mr. Young added that the trust responsibility is
only one aspect of the issue. Referring to the
Dawes Allotment Act that provides for the
allotment of lands in severally to Indians ori
various reservations, he explained that the U.S.
government, citing the best interests of Native
Americans, "took the whole entire country." He
stated that it is important to understand that the
call to honor the trust responsibility evolved from
accusations that tribes oppose sites such as the
mine because of a "not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY)
mentality." Rather, the tribes' efforts are an
attempt to preserve what is left of Indian country,
he said.
Moving to a discussion of the relationship
between the Potawatomi Tribe and EPA, Mr.
Young reported that financial and technical
assistance from EPA had enabled the
Potawatomi Tribe to establish the infrastructure of
an environmental protection program. He urged
that the Executive Council and its subcommittees
serve as watchdogs to ensure that EPA monitors
USAGE as it performs its EIS. He remarked that
the trust responsibility requires that agencies
solicit the views of the tribes and incorporate into
the EIS study quality data the tribe provides. The
tribes are observing the development of the EIS
to determine whether they are regarded as parties
to a government-to-government relationship.
Mr. Young concluded his presentation with a
statement about the resistance the tribes face
from the state of Wisconsin as they attempt to set
water quality standards and to obtain designation
of their lands as Class I areas. He noted that the
state has announced it will challenge any
redesignation of the tribes' regulatory authority.
The conflict is part of a long struggle to preserve
tribal culture and a deeply held set of values, he
stated. The scope of the mining project and
similar projects could do irreparable harm to the
cultural integrity of Indian nations, he said, adding
that Indian people are unwilling and unable to pay
the price.
Mr. Havard stated his agreement with Mr. Young's
interpretation of the federal trust responsibility and
EPA's role under the provisions of NEPA and
section 309 of the CAA. Mr. Havard then focused
his presentation on the need that federal agencies
consider the effects of proposed actions on tribes,
and fulfill the obligation to mitigate the effects on
tribes and hold meaningful consultation with the
tribes on a govemment-to-government basis. He
pointed to several tools available to tribes to aid
them in protecting their environment:
• NEPA requires that federal agencies consider
the environmental effects of actions they take
and involve the public, seeking citizens'
views, as well as providing information. This
approach, he observed, does not include
Indian tribes because they are sovereign
nations
Executive Order 12898 on environmental
justice explicitly states that the Order applies
to Native American programs
• Presidential Memorandum of April 29, 1994
on the government-to-government
relationship states that all federal agencies,
when taking actions that may affect tribes,
must analyze the effects on tribes, as well as
consult fully with tribes about those effects
• Section 309 of the CAA requires review of
and comment on all actions of federal
agencies that are subject to the EIS
requirement under NEPA and requires that
any actions that are considered unsatisfactory
from the standpoint of human health and the
environment, be referred to the White House
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
Mr. Havard stated that each federal agency
should commit to upholding the trust responsibility
to tribes according to its mission. For example,
when EPA reviews actions under NEPA, it should
advise agencies of the ways in which their actions
will affect tribes, tribal resources, and treaty rights,
he said. Mr. Havard remarked that Congress had
made it clear that EPA is to function as a
watchdog for environmental issues. He added
that OGC was asked to evaluate treaties with
Indian tribes to determine the rights and
obligations of the federal government under those
treaties. He said that OGC's findings included:
• Treaties are binding on all federal agencies
• Treaties are the equivalent of statutes
• The Supreme Court has ruled that the federal
government is to be held to the highest
standard of moral obligation and trust
• Treaties reserve to the tribes rights not
granted by the federal government
Mr. Havard added that the review revealed that a
number of treaties set forth explicit rights to
environmental protection, such as rights related to
fishing, hunting, and gathering. Implicit rights
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-7
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
associated with treaties designed to reserve a
homeland for indigenous peoples in perpetuity
include the right to a sustainable environment, he
continued.
Mr. Havard concluded his presentation by
describing a proposal under which tribes
dissatisfied with the mitigation of an action could
invoke the dispute resolution process. The tribe
and representatives of EPA would sit down as
parties to a government-to-government
relationship and work out their differences.
Mr. Richard Lazarus, Georgetown University Law
Center and member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, asked whether OGC planned to
issue a formal written opinion on the implicit rights
associated with treaties. He commented that a
formal written opinion tends to be more durable
than other actions, Mr. Havard responded that
OGC had not issued formal opinions for many
years and added that EPA handles each case
individually.
Mr. Arthur Ray, Maryland Department of the
Environment and member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, asked what action EPA was
taking to improve relationships between tribes
and states. Mr. Havard responded that, in 1996,
EPA's AIEO sponsored a forum at which
representatives of states and Indian tribes
discussed issues related to state and tribal
relations. At the conclusion of the meeting, the
participants "agreed to disagree" on questions
related to jurisdiction. In addition, Mr. Havard
noted, EPA is working actively to develop a
dispute resolution process to be employed by the
states and tribes when the actions of one party
affect the other party. Unfortunately, the process
had not yet been resolved.
Mr. James Hill, Klamath Tribe and chair of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, noted that the
discussion had focused on rights protected under
treaties, but had not addressed the significant
interests of tribes in lands that had been ceded or
otherwise relinquished. Such interests include
cultural resources, burial sites, gathering sites, or
places of prayer, he explained. He cited a dispute
between the Klamath Tribe and USAGE about the
construction of a dam on land that contained the
remains of "recent ancestors." Noting that the
case Involves lands in ceded territory, Mr. Hill
asked how OGC would respond to the issue. Mr.
Havard responded that there are several
mechanisms available to the tribe. The first step
would be to examine the treaty to determine
whether it included rights to the ceded land, he
advised. He added that, even if the treaty does
not provide access to the land, both the
presidential memorandum on government-to-
govemment relations and NEPA require that
agencies consult with' tribes about the cultural
impacts of their actions. The Native American
Graves Repatriation Act (NAGRA) also requires
some review, even in the absence of treaty rights,
he said. Mr. Monette added that the complexity of
the question reflects the cultural and spiritual
autonomy outlined in the treaties, as well as the
political autonomy that sustains it.
Ms. Deeohn Ferris, Washington Office on
Environmental Justice and chair of the
Enforcement Subcommittee, requested a copy of
Mr. Havard's analysis of treaty rights. Mr. Havard
responded that the document had not been
written formally and that he would consult with his
office to determine whether the information could
be released to the public.
Ms. Ferris also asked whether EPA is seeking
comments from the Native American community
on CEQ's guidance on incorporating
environmental justice into the NEPA EIS process.
Ms. Ferris inquired whether EPA had established
an internal response process or whether a
program external to the Agency had been
established to facilitate comments. Mr. Havard
responded that AIEO had commented
aggressively on the document. He stated that he
was uncertain what measures had been taken
outside the agency to solicit comments from
tribes. However, he did agree to consult with
EPA's Office of Federal Activities and AIEO to
identify other actions that can be taken.
Ms. Rosa Hilda Ramos, Community of Catano
Against Pollution and member of the Public
Participation and Accountability Subcommittee,
commented that public participation must take
place before decisions are made. The public
must be involved early in the process, not as an
afterthought, she stated. Ms. Ramos invited a
representative of OGC to participate in a work
group of the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee that is engaged in
an effort to redefine public participation. She
asked what action EPA takes when it identifies an
agency that is not complying with the provisions
of the Executive order on environmental justice.
1-8
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
Can EPA force someone to comply with the
Executive order, she asked. Mr. Havard
responded that, under both section 309 of the
CAA and Executive Order 12898 on
environmental justice, EPA serves as a watchdog
on environmental issues. Under authority of
section 309, EPA has placed reviewers in each
EPA region to review the actions of federal
agencies and to comment on them. He stated
that the response to noncompliance differs
according to the circumstances of each case. In
addition, EPA is making final a guidance that will
help reviewers identify issues related to
environmental justice. Ms. Ramos asked where
a complaint could be filed against an agency that
is not complying with Executive Order 12898. Ms.
Gaylord responded that there currently are no
formal mechanisms for reporting such cases, but
that CEQ does monitor compliance.
3.2 Update on Ward Valley, California
Mr. Carl Lischeske, Department of Health
Services (DHS), state of California, opened his
presentation on issues in Ward Valley, California
with an overview of the history of the interaction
between the state of California and the Colorado
River Indian Tribes. Exhibit 1-3 presents a
summary of the state's overview of the process by
which Ward Valley was selected as the site of a
low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) facility.
Mr. Lischeske then concluded his presentation,
remarking that a concerted and early effort had
been made to involve tribes in the process and an
attempt had been made to mitigate tribal
concerns. However, the state had determined
that it is unlikely that a "completely
unobjectionable site" exists, he stated. Mr.
Lischeske explained that the state's primary
objective had been to locate a site at which waste
would be isolated for an extended period of time.
Ward Valley met that objective, he said.
Mr. Lischeske then introduced Mr. Peter
Baldridge, attorney for DHS, to assist in
responding to questions.
Mr. Hill inquired about the standards for tribal
participation when cultural and religious resources
are affected. Mr. Baldridge responded that the
standards applied by the California courts were
drawn from the regulations issued by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. The state of California
had adopted those regulations by reference, he
explained. The regulations require that tribes be
given participatory status, he continued.
Referring to the Ward Valley case, Mr. Baldridge
stated that the records of tribal participation in the
process had been reviewed by the court. He
noted that most of the procedures referred to by
Mr. Lischeske in his presentation were "above
and beyond what the court required."
Ms. Ramos asked about the vote of the citizens
advisory committee. Mr. Lischeske replied that
the committee, whose members represented
various stakeholder groups, had been involved in
the selection of three candidate sites and had
voted to support the selection of Ward Valley.
However, the representative of the Native
American Heritage Foundation, did vote against
all three candidate sites, deeming them all
unacceptable, Mr. Lischeske noted. After the
three sites had been selected, local advisory
committees were formed that represented the
communities that were to be affected, he
continued. Meetings of the local advisory
committees were held in the communities and
were well attended, he said. Mr. Lischeske stated
that those meetings had included walking tours of
the candidate sites, during which representatives
of the tribes had the opportunity to point out
"sacred sites." Developers designing the facility
considered sacred areas, he said. Mr. Lischeske
added that the facility is located on a 90-acre
parcel of land surrounded by 1,000 acres that
serve as a buffer zone to protect the community.
He noted that the tribes recently adopted a
resolution that declared the entire Ward Valley a
sacred site, although the state had not been able
to identify a particular sacred religious ceremonial
site.
Mr. Gerald Prout, FMC Corporation and member
of the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee,
asked why the facility is needed, if the LLRW that
would be stored there currently is stored at other
facilities. In response, Mr. Lischeske stressed
that the facility was needed because the storage
facility used by the member states of the
Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Compact (Arizona, California, North Dakota, and
South Dakota) is located in South Carolina. He
explained that access had been denied several
years earlier; consequently, LLRW had piled up
where it was generated, in the various
communities. Although the facility had reopened,
it could be closed again at any time, he continued.
Mr. Lischeske preferred the option of opening
another facility, such as that proposed for Ward
Valley, rather than allowing such waste to
stockpile in communities.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-9
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Mr. Prout asked whether any evaluation of risk
had been performed for the area where the waste
currently is stored. Mr. Lischeske said the current
storage facility met licensing agreements and,
barring a natural disaster, poses little threat.
However, there is greater potential for exposure
to the public, he stated.
Ms. Ferris asked whether the integrity of the site
had been compromised because the developer
had difficulty with compliance issues in the past.
She expressed concern about admittedly
unverified information that indicated that the
developer initially had been rejected as the
operator of the facility. Mr. Lischeske responded
with a brief overview of the corporate background
of the developer. He agreed that the firm had
experienced difficulty in the past but had
undergone significant change since its acquisition
by another firm. The state had found the firm
competent to operate the facility. Admittedly, he
said, the developer had not been the first choice
to manage the facility and had been selected only
after the first two choices had declined. Mr.
Baldridge added that all four firms that had
applied were qualified, but two other firms had
Exhibit 1-3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OVERVIEW OF THE WARD VALLEY PROJECT
In 1980, Congress passed the Low-Level Waste Policy Act, which transferred to the states responsibility for
managing the disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLRW). In 1983, the California legislature enacted a
bill that adopted the provisions of the federal act and specifically instructed the California Department of
Health Services (DHS) to identify potential sites to house a LLRW facility. In addition, DHS was directed to
select a private company to develop and operate the facility.
Specific criteria for the selection of the site included the requirement that any area considered have a small
population density to minimize the exposure of people to possible radioactive releases. Other selection criteria
included a minimal potential for earthquakes, no evidence of recent volcanic activity, minimal agricultural
activity, a deep distance to groundwater, and a topographically closed basin that prevents the drainage of
surface water. The act also required that DHS establish a citizens advisory committee.
To meet the requirements of the California Native American Heritage Act, the firm selected to develop the site
retained the services of an ethnographic consultant to identify potential effects on tribes and concerns
associated with each of the 18 sites included on the initial list. After additional study, the list was narrowed to
three areas that met the technical requirements and the concerns of the tribes: the Ward Valley basin in
southwestern California, Lassen located in northern California, and the western San Joaquin Valley in central
California.. The Ward Valley basin was selected because it was deemed a "disturbed area," with a freeway
running approximately one mile north of the proposed site. Its technological superiority also made the site the
most "legally defensible."
DHS and the ethnographic consultant approached the five Colorado River tribes that would be affected by the
facility to discuss possible mitigation measures that included:
• Construction of a fence along Interstate 40 to reduce mortality rates of desert tortoises
• Performance of a study to identify traditional Indian trails through the land
• Creation of a support grant for tribal museum exhibits
• Participation by the tribe in the environmental monitoring programs for the disposal facility
Some tribes expressed interest but ultimately no mitigation measures were sufficient to overcome the
"unalterable opposition" of the Fort Mojave Tribe to the facility.
In 1993, DHS issued a license for the facility. The Fort Mojave Tribe joined a coalition that brought legal
action against DHS over the licensing decision to site the facility at Ward Valley. After a year and a half, the
California Appellate Court ruled that the level of tribal participation in the decision-making process met
California legal standards.
1-10
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
ranked higher in the evaluation process. Mr.
Lischeske qualified his statements by adding that
other factors, such as financial stability and
acceptance of risk, had been considered in the
application process.
Mr. Grover Hankins, Thurgood Marshall School of
Law and member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, expressed his shock at the
cultural insensitivity displayed by DHS in its
statement that the lands in the Ward Valley basin
are not sacred because no one lives within a
certain radius of them.
Mr. Hill asked why two-thirds of the state of
California had been rejected. In addition, if 18
valleys originally had been selected on technical
merit for the project, what were the reasons for
rejecting the other 15 options, he asked. Mr.
Lischeske responded that two-thirds of the state
is not suitable for a variety of reasons, including
proximity to parks or sacred land, level of rainfall,
and seismic activity.
Mr. Hill commented that the requirement for
remoteness mandated the facility would be
located in California's desert region, an area
where tribes are located. He asked what criteria
are used to place facilities in the eastern part of
the country, where there are no deserts. Mr.
Lischeske replied that it is very difficult to place
facilities east of the Mississippi because of the
high levels of rainfall. He explained that it is not
easy to build a facility that will survive more than
200 years in areas that receive high levels of
rainfall. Mr. Baldridge commented that the Ward
Valley site was not located on tribal land and that
the nearest populated area is 20 miles from the
site. Mr. Hill asked whether tribes had been
consulted as parties to a government-to-
government relationship when it was realized that
all areas would suffer some effects. Mr.
Lischeske answered that tribes had not been
addressed on a government-to-govemment basis.
He said that California DHS viewed itself as the
regulatory force, and an attempt had been made
to allay any tribal concerns. To clarify that
response, Mr. Baldridge stated that the
government-to-government contact with the tribes
was established after the final three sites had
been selected.
Mr. Haywood Turrentine, Education and Training
Trust Fund and member of the Public
Participation and Accountability Subcommittee,
noted that it appeared that most of the major
decisions about the site were made before any
discussions were held with the tribes. He
suggested that the tribes should have been
involved when the state realized that a facility was
needed and the search for a location was about to
begin. Although the regulatory letter of the law
had been met, Mr. Turrentine observed, the
standards of public participation had not been
met. Mr. Turrentine added that the community
had been allowed only six minutes of public
comment time to make its case before the
Executive Council, but that the state was given
thirty minutes to express its view. Mr. Lischeske
responded that discussions with tribes began in
1986, shortly after the site was selected; those
activities ran concurrently with the deliberations of
the citizens advisory committee, he stated.
Mr. Charles Lee, United Church of Christ
Commission for Racial Justice and chair of the
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee, stated
that the tone taken by DHS in its comment that
the tribe was "unalterably opposed to the site"
appeared to dismiss the concerns of the tribe. He
asked Mr. Lischeske to address the fact that the
facility would be unlined, as well as any potential
threat that the facility may pose to groundwater
and the Colorado River. Mr. Lee requested
comment on how the facility might affect the daily
lives of members of the tribes. Mr. Lischeske
replied that performance assessments based on
failure scenarios had been conducted. The
results showed that a constructed liner would not
increase the safety of the facility, he explained. In
fact, he said, such a liner probably would fail after
approximately 100 years, while the intent was to
build a facility that would last for several hundred
years. Mr. Lischeske indicated that geological
formations in the area would provide a much
better method of containment than a constructed
liner. Studies have demonstrated that exposure
rates for the proposed facility will be lower than
government standards require, he added.
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez, Farm Labor Organizing
Committee and chair of the International
Subcommittee, expressed concern about both the
security and the sacredness of the site. He asked
whether the state could guarantee there would be
no leaks into the underground aquifer. Mr.
Velasquez paraphrased a report issued by the
U.S. Geological Survey that stated that
radionuclides from the facility might enter the
groundwater. Mr. Lischeske observed that
surface water might enter the aquifer, but that
there was no conclusive evidence whether water
moving under the conditions in the area could
carry radionuclides into the aquifer.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-11
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Mr. Velasquez also stated that, to Native
Americans, sacredness is a much broader
concept than that espoused by traditional
Christians. He described the government as
callous in disregarding that interpretation. Mr.
Velasquez stressed the importance of respect for
the religious traditions of the tribes. Before
questioning the rights of Indian people to proclaim
a site holy or sacred, non-native persons should
examine their beliefs about such issues and
about relationships among people, he said. Mr.
Velasquez commented that the actions taken
would not necessarily gain the respect of people
who fought so long to protect their heritage. He
suggested that it might be best to "scrap the
current project and begin the process again."
Mr. Amoldo Garcia, Earth Island Institute and
member of the International Subcommittee,
commented that the anthropocentric view adopted
by the state that, simply because humans do not
live in the affected area, nothing lives there, is
incorrect. He stated that the root of the problem
is not the question of siting the facility but the fact
that LLRW is being created, the period for which
the facility will be open, and who is slated to pay
for it. Mr. Lischeske replied that the facility will be
open for 30 years, after which the waste will have
decayed to the point that it will not pose a
significant threat to any intruder over the next 500
years. He stated that, until such activities as
nuclear medical research and nuclear power
generation no longer use or generate radioactive
materials, the problems associated with such
waste will remain. Mr. Lischeske added that, in
his view, the challenge is to deal responsibly with
the wastes generated.
Mr. Ray commented that there is a history of
distrust between the people and the government.
He asked whether it might be helpful if EPA or
another government agency were to provide
states with guidance on defending "against the
indefensible" because it is a difficult position in
which to be. Mr. Lischeske agreed with that
suggestion.
Ms. Ferris observed that, historically, the United
States "operates from a disaster mentality when
it cornes to the environment." Citing the cases of
Love Canal, the Cuyahoga River, and Prince
William Sound, she declared that protective
measures are not taken until a disaster occurs.
Ms. Ferris also remarked that, regardless of the
geologic formations of an area, each facility must
have a liner. She concluded that governments
should adopt a preventive approach when
addressing environmental issues. Mr. Hill
applauded Ms. Ferris's comments about adopting
a precautionary approach and asked how costly
it would be to add a liner to the facility. Mr. Hill
stated that Indian communities, unlike other
communities that can leave an area, are, by their
culture, bound to the land for life. He commented
that it appears the state doubts the sacredness of
the area. Mr. Hill also asked whether the state
could incorporate concerns about environmental
justice when it adopts other federal policies. He
urged that the state involve the public as early as
possible when decisions such as Ward Valley are
made.
Mr. Lischeske responded to Ms. Ferris's
observation, stating that the problems
experienced at other facilities were considered in
building the facility under discussion. He stated
that scientific analysis did not indicate that a liner
would improve the safety of the facility. Experts
had advised against a liner, he said, because,
water that might collect on top of the liner would
degrade the packaging and release radionuclides
into the ecosystem. Mr. Lischeske added that
cost had not been the only factor in deciding
against a liner; such costs would have been
passed on as fees to the users of the facility, he
added.
3.3 Report of EPA's AI1EO
Ms. Kathy Gorospe,, Director, EPA AIEO, provided
an overview of the activities and responsibilities of
the office. To accomplish its goals, AIEO works
with the Indian coordinators in each EPA regional
and program office, she explained. The 11-
person office often coordinates efforts through
AlEO's National Indian Work Group and the
Senior Indian Program Manager's Group, she
continued, noting that the office works primarily
with federally recognized tribes to fulfill its goals.
Ms. Gorospe stated that the primary goals of the
office are:
• Full recognition throughout EPA and regional
offices of the Agency's trust responsibility to
Indian tribes
• Building of environmental capacity for tribes
Ms. Gorospe stated that AIEO can interact with
tribes only on a government-to-government level.
Acknowledging that there are many tribes that do
not have federal recognition, she said that AIEO
must work closely with EPA's OEJ to assist tribes
outside AlEO's domain. She stated that regular
1-12
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
conference calls with various Indian coordinators
and staff of OEJ are very helpful. Ms. Gorospe
added that she hoped AIEO could serve as a
resource for referral and information for groups
interested in environmental work, especially work
with indigenous peoples. Turning her attention to
future activities, Ms. Gorospe quoted the
statement from the NEJAC report on EPA's
Brownfields program entitled 'The Search for
Authentic Signs of Hope."
"At the core of an Environmental Justice
perspective is recognition of the
interconnectedness of the physical
environment to the overall economic,
social, human and cultural, spiritual
health of the community. The vision of
Environmental Justice is the
development of the paradigm to achieve
socially equitable, environmentally
healthy, and economically secure,
psychologically vital, spiritually whole,
and ecologically sustainable
communities."
After her comments, Ms. Gorospe opened the
floor to questions and comments from the
members of the Executive Council.
Ms. Ferris acknowledged the dedication of Mr.
Terry Williams, former director of AIEO. She
stated that she hopes to continue the strong
sharing relationship with Ms. Gorospe. Ms. Ferris
commended EPA's efforts to build lines of
communication with federally recognized tribes.
She asked, however, what EPA. is doing to
communicate with indigenous people at the
grassroots level. Ms. Gorospe replied that she
envisions three-way communication among EPA,
federally recognized tribes, and tribal grassroots
organizations. Ms. Gorospe stated that such an
approach would benefit tribes that experience
internal conflict, while enabling tribal governments
to be more responsive to concerns raised by the
members of their tribes. She said she hoped that
AIEO and other offices of EPA would adopt such
a three-way communication process.
Wishing Ms. Gorospe luck in implementing her
ideas, Mr. Hill invited her to address the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee; Ms. Gorospe
accepted that invitation. Mr. Hill encouraged Ms.
Gorospe to continue reaching out to grassroots
organizations.
Mr. Lee mentioned the historic significance of
recognizing the many issues related to indigenous
peoples, as well as that of holding the NEJAC
meeting in Indian country. He informed Ms.
Gorospe of the efforts of the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee to coordinate a roundtable
meeting on issues of concern to indigenous
peoples with EPA's Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER). Ms. Gorospe
thanked Mr. Lee for the information and
commented that the issue of solid waste had
been identified as an area for further study.
3.4 Report from the Tribal Operations
Committee
Mr. James Fletcher, Morongo Band of Mission
Indians and Co-Chair of EPA's Tribal Operations
Committee (TOC), provided an overview of the
TOC. He noted that, although the TOC serves as
a forum for dialogue, it does not fall under the
requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA). He stated firmly that the TOC neither
represents nor intervenes in the government-to-
govemment relationships the Agency maintains
with tribes. The TOC, which held its first meeting
in February 1994, currently has 19 members from
each EPA region except EPA Region 3, in which
there are no federally-recognized Indian tribes,
he explained. He added that the TOC meets
twice a year and the Tribal Caucuses for various
media meet four times a year.
Mr. Fletcher reported that the mission of the TOC
is to "protect and improve the condition of tribal
health and environment in Indian country." He
highlighted TOC's work with the regional tribal
operations committees, as well as its commitment
to EPA's strategic plan. Mr. Fletcher explained
that the TOC is working to assist the agency in
removing barriers to tribal participation in
environmental programs.
His remarks concluded, Mr. Fletcher opened the
floor to questions and comments.
Ms. Dolores Herrera, Albuquerque San Jose
Community Awareness Council, Inc. and member
of the Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee, asked Mr. Fletcher to explain why
the TOC is not required to conform to FACA. Mr.
Fletcher explained that the TOC includes both
representatives of EPA and representatives of
tribal governments. In response to a request from
Ms. Herrera, Mr. Fletcher agreed to provide a
current list of members of the TOC. He noted that
the list changes quickly, as often as every one to
two years.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-13
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
To clarify Mr. Fletcher's comments, Ms. Gorospe
added that the TOC does not fall under the
requirements of FACA because it does not serve
in an advisory capacity. She remarked that the
TOC is forum for a co-management because both
the tribes and the federal government can initiate
regulations within their separate jurisdictions. Ms.
Gorospe stressed the role of the TOC and the
regional TOCs in keeping EPA and other federal
agencies informed about issues of concern in
Indian country and providing an opportunity for
tribes to express their views on how those issues
should be resolved.
4.0 REPORTS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES
Each subcommittee met for a full day on May 14,
1997. This section presents summaries of the
action items and proposed resolutions developed
during those discussions as well as updates on
the activities of the subcommittees. Full
summaries of the deliberations of the
subcommittees are presented in subsequent
chapters of this report.
4.1 Enforcement Subcommittee
Ms. Ferris reported on the activities of the
Enforcement Subcommittee. She informed the
Executive Council that Mr. Jesse Baskerville, EPA
Office of Toxics and Pesticides Enforcement, had
made a presentation about the illegal application
of methyl parathion, a potentially deadly
agricultural pesticide, in homes. Ms. Ferris
reported that the subcommittee had suggested
EPA consider the following approach:
• Implement an aggressive community
awareness campaign
• Take an "omnibus" approach to pesticide re-
registration
I1
• Provide testing, monitoring, health care, and
follow-up for members of affected
communities
• Coordinate an aggressive interagency effort
to combat the problem
• Implement a general ban against the use of
methyl parathion and parathion derivatives
Ms. Ferris also noted that Ms. Darlene Boerlage,
EPA Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement, had
provided an update to the subcommittee on the
Federal Facilities Environmental Justice Initiative.
The efforts of Ms. Boerlage and her staff were to
be commended, Ms. Ferris added, conveying the
sentiment of the members of the subcommittee.
Ms. Ferris also informed the Executive Council
that the subcommittee had discussed suggestions
for revising EPA's proposed policy on
supplemental environmental projects (SEP).
Ms. Ferris also reported that the subcommittee
had agreed to combine a community meeting with
a follow-up meeting to the EPA Region 6
enforcement roundtable meeting held in San
Antonio, Texas in October 1996. The
subcommittee decided to vote by mail ballot on
the report on the October 1996 roundtable
meeting, she added. Ms. Ferris announced that
the next enforcement roundtable meeting was to
be held in EPA Region 4 in October or November
1997. She also invited the members of the
Executive Council and its subcommittees to
participate on the planning task force.
Ms. Ferris informed the Executive Council that the
Enforcement Subcommittee had participated in a
joint session with the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee. She remarked that the session
had been productive and had helped the two
subcommittees build a relationship. Ms. Ferris
commented that the session had been especially
helpful in identifying issues related to the
enforcement of environmental regulations on
tribal lands.
4.2 Health and Research Subcommittee
Mr. Andrew McBride, City of Stamford,
Connecticut Health Department and a member of
the Health and Research Subcommittee, reported
on the deliberations of the subcommittee. Ms.
Mary English, chair of the subcommittee, had
been unable to attend the meeting. Mr. McBride
reported that the subcommittee had requested
that the Executive Council take action on a series
of resolutions that had been drafted by the
subcommittee at previous meetings of the NEJAC
and that remained outstanding:
• The subcommittee had requested that the
Executive Council withdraw Health
Resolution No. 1, which requests that EPA
examine dissenting opinions on the lead-
based standards promulgated by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD). He reported that the
subcommittee planned to update the
resolution and resubmit it at the next meeting
of the Executive Council.
1-14
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
• The subcommittee had recommended that,
given the new guidelines for screening for,
lead in children, Health Resolution No. 2,
which addresses standards for blood lead
levels in children, should be resubmitted in
the form of a letter to the EPA Administrator.
The Executive Council voted unanimously to
approve the letter.
• The subcommittee had recommended the
tabling of Health Resolution No. 4, which
addresses environmental health issues in
Puerto Rico and which had not been
discussed by the Executive Council at the
December 1996 meeting because of logistical
reasons.
The subcommittee had recommended the
resubmittal of Health Resolution No. 5 as a
letter to the EPA Administrator, which
acknowledges the efforts of the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
The Executive Council agreed to approve the
letter.
Mr. McBride then reported on the Children's
Environmental Health Initiative. He announced
that Ms. Marinelle Payton, Harvard Medical
School and member of the Health and Research
Subcommittee, had attended a conference
sponsored by the Children's Environmental
Health Network and supported by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP). Mr.
McBride submitted for consideration a letter to the
EPA Administrator in which the NEJAC calls for a
comprehensive approach to the environmental
health of children. The Executive Council agreed
unanimously to approve the letter.
4.3 Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
Mr. Hill provided a report on the deliberations of
the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee. He
reported that the subcommittee had discussed the
following resolutions:
• Indigenous Resolution No. 22, which asks
that tribes be treated substantially the same
as states with respect to all provisions of
RCRA. The Executive Council approved the
resolution, with modifications.
• Indigenous Resolution No. 23, which asks
that the EPA Administrator request a high
level meeting between other appropriate
federal agencies and the Fort Mojave Tribe to
discuss the tribes' concerns about the siting
of a LLRW in Ward Valley, California as well
as request EPA conduct an environmental
justice analysis of the decision to site the
facility in Ward Valley. The Executive Council
approved the resolution, with modifications.
• Indigenous Resolution No. 24, which
requests that EPA consider additional options
for the proposed Cluster Rule governing pulp
and paper mills. The Executive Council
approved the resolution, with modifications.
Mr. Hill reported that the subcommittee also had
discussed several letters it had drafted, in which
it addressed several topics, including: the status
of the initiative to hire Native Americans at EPA;
a request for the assistance or the involvement of
the TOC in strengthening the government-to-
government relationship between EPA and tribal
governments; and a request for a summary of
activities in EPA Region 10 related to review of
the environmental and health issues of traditional
Klickitat and Cascade Band of the Yakima Nation
in the state of Washington.
The Executive Council approved the following
letters to the EPA Administrator, with
modifications: a request for action by EPA
against the proposed commuter highways through
the National Petroglyph Monument in New
Mexico; a request for extending the deadline for
submitting comments on the proposed solution
mining project in Michigan; and a request that
EPA Region 2 make every effort to use tribal
water quality standards established by the St.
Regis Mohawk Tribe.
Mr. Hill also reported that the subcommittee had
heard two presentations on the LLRW disposal
facility proposed for Ward Valley, California.
4.4 International Subcommittee
Mr. Velasquez provided a summary of the
International Subcommittee's activities. Noting
that most of the subcommittee's deliberations had
focused on South Africa, he reported that the
subcommittee wished to establish a work group
on South Africa and to improve communications
with EPA's Office of International Activities, which
is responsible for many of the programs of
interest to South Africa.
In addition, he stated, the subcommittee had
discussed long-standing issues related to
protection of farm workers and international use
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-15
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
of pesticides. The Enforcement Subcommittee
was to address those issues, he said.
Mr. Velasquez also reported that the
subcommittee had received information about the
participation of the Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative (USTR) to comply with the
provisions of the Executive order on
environmental justice. He added that, although
USTR is exempt from the provisions of the
Executive order, the subcommittee had requested
an explanation of the rationale for lack of
involvement on the part of the USTR.
Mr. Velasquez submitted International Resolution
No. 2, which recommends that OIA consult with
the subcommittee's South Africa Work Group on
all programmatic issues associated with EPA's
South Africa initiative. The Executive Council
unanimously approved the resolution.
4.5 Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee
Reporting on behalf of Ms. Peggy Saika, Asian
Environmental Network and chair of the Public
Participation and Accountability Subcommittee,
Mr. Turrentine, stated that, although the
subcommittee had not had a quorum, the
members who were present had discussed
several recommendations for improving public
participation during the NEJAC meetings:
• The assignment of a liaison to each of the
subcommittees from the Public Participation
and Accountability Subcommittee to
encourage implementation within the NEJAC
of the Model Plan for Public Participation
• The attendance at the meetings of the
NEJAC of the regional administrator or
deputy regional administrator of the EPA
region in which the NEJAC meeting is held
Ms, Gaylord recommended that in addition to
inviting representatives of the host region to
attend its meetings, the Executive Council should
"set a place at its table" for the representatives.
The members agreed.
Ms. Ramos added that the subcommittee had
discussed a recommendation that EPA review its
interpretation of public participation within the
framework of its own programs, particularly the
permitting process.
4.6 Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
Mr. Lee provided a brief overview of the activities
of the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee.
He reported that the subcommittee had discussed
the following resolutions:
• Waste Resolution No. 5, which urges EPA to
analyze the environmental justice implications
of the proposed Crandon Mine. The
Executive Council approved the resolution,
with modifications.
• Waste Resolution No. 6, which recommends
that EPA define the concept of "community" in
the context of the EPA Community-Based
Environmental Protection Initiative. The
Executive Council approved the resolution,
with modifications.
• Waste Resolution No. 7, which requests that
EPA support the development of pilot
community impact statements. The
Executive Council approved the resolution,
with modifications.
Mr. Lee also reported that the subcommittee had
recommended that OSWER, the NEJAC, the
Tribal Operations Committee, and the National
Tribal Environmental Council sponsor a
roundtable meeting on issues of concern to
indigenous peoples, including building capacity
within tribal governments to manage
environmental protection. He stated that Mr.
Thomas Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental
Network and member of the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee, would represent the
subcommittee in the joint effort of the Indigenous
Peoples and Waste and Facility Siting
subcommittees. Mr. Lee then reported that
additional deliberations of the subcommittee had
focused on updates on Brownfields
redevelopment and urban revitalization, as well
as decisions to form two work groups: a work
group on Superfund reauthorization and a work
group on facility siting. Mr. Lee also requested
the continued support of the NEJAC for EPA's
Minority Worker Trading Program.
5.0 ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES
This section presents a summary of the
discussions of the Executive Council of
administrative issues related to the NEJAC.
1-16
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
5.1 NEJAC Guidance on Obtaining Approval of
the Executive Council
Ms. Gaylord informed the members of the
Executive Council that among their meeting
materials were copies of the NEJAC guidance on
obtaining approval of the Executive Council for
resolutions and letters to the EPA Administrator,
as well as for establishing work groups under
subcommittees. She stated that the guidance
explains the differences between action items and
resolutions and indicates when an activity
requires the approval of the Executive Council.
Ms. Gaylord also stated that the guidance had
been developed at the request of the EPA OGC
and the Protocol Committee of the NEJAC, which
is composed of the chairs of each of the
subcommittees. She explained that the document
does not require the approval of the Executive
Council; however, she wanted to ensure that the
members had been made aware of the document.
She asked that any member who has comments
submit those comments to OEJ.
Mr. Ray asked whether the guidance had been
developed and approved by all the members of
the Protocol Committee. Ms. Gaylord responded
that all members of the Protocol Committee had
agreed to the provisions of the guidance
document. Responding to Mr. Hill's request that
the document be translated into Spanish, Ms.
Gaylord stated that OEJ will be responsible for
that task.
5.2 Next Meeting of the NEJAC
Ms. Gaylord announced to the members of the
Executive Council the results of the ballot for the
selection of dates for the next NEJAC meeting.
She stated that the next meeting of the NEJAC
will be held December 9 through 11,1997 in the
Washington, D.C. area.
5.3 Turnover and Succession of the NEJAC
Members
Mr. Turrentine led a discussion of turnover and
succession among the members of the NEJAC.
He reminded the members of the Executive
Council that the term of the chair of the Executive
Council had expired and that Ms. Gaylord would
be leaving her position as director of OEJ. He
stressed that the members of the Executive
Council must engage in serious discussion of the
need for continuity and a smooth transition in the
leadership of the NEJAC. Mr. Turrentine stated
that, during previous discussions, members of the
Executive Council had suggested that the chair
and other interested members might stay on for
another term. He expressed concern that, if the
Executive Council does not act soon on the issue,
"we will be a council without a chair." Mr. Ray
expressed his agreement with Mr. Turrentine and
stated that the Executive Council must maintain a
sense of continuity and must preserve institutional
knowledge from meeting to meeting.
Mr. Lee echoed the concerns of Mr. Turrentine
and Mr. Ray, stating that as a charter member of
the NEJAC, he considers the issue of continuity a
serious one. He added that he believes that the
members of the Executive Council must leave the
meeting with a clear sense of where the NEJAC
can go and where it cannot go in the matter of
reappointment of retiring members. Ms. Ferris
stated that, as a retiring member, she believes
that it is time for "new blood" on the Executive
Council; however, she said she also believes that
retiring members can continue to play a role in
supporting the efforts of the NEJAC, particularly
in terms of institutional memory and continuing to
advance the work of federal agencies in the area
of environmental justice. Ms. Gaylord reminded
the members that the by-laws of the NEJAC allow
the Executive Council to invite "consultants" to
assist in developing recommendations and advice
for EPA; however, under the provisions of FACA,
the same person cannot be called upon
repeatedly as a consultant.
Mr. Ray then asked whether the current Executive
Council will have an opportunity to participate in
the selection of the new director of OEJ, as well
as in the appointment of the chair and members
of the Executive Council. Ms. Gaylord responded
that she believes that the Executive Council and
the subcommittees of the NEJAC should not
become involved in "personnel issues" at EPA.
She added, however, that the Executive Council
could make recommendations to the EPA
Administrator about the types of candidate who
should be considered for the position of director of
OEJ. On the subject of the selection of new
members for the Executive Council, she reminded
the members that selection is a process
conducted within EPA; however, the members
can recommend possible candidates, she added.
Ms. Gaylord also informed the members that a
notice has been published in the Federal Register
to solicit interest on the part of candidates.
Mr. Moore then reviewed the issues that
members of the Executive Council had raised
related to the turnover and succession of the
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-17
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
members of the NEJAC, as well as the selection
of a new director of OEJ. He stated that the
Executive Council would be mistaken if it failed to
provide recommendations to the EPA
Administrator on the selection of the director. Mr.
Moore then expressed his belief that the
Executive Council should develop a set of criteria
based on the principles of environmental justice
to assist the EPA Administrator in selecting a new
director. He also suggested that the Executive
Council recommend that the Protocol Committee
have the opportunity to interview candidates for
the position. The members of the Executive
Council then approved by a unanimous vote Mr.
Moore's recommendations to the EPA
Administrator on the criteria of selecting the
director of OEJ. The members also agreed that
the Protocol Committee would develop the criteria
to be recommended to the EPA Administrator.
Ms. Margaret Williams, Citizens Against Toxic
Exposure and member of the Health and
Research Subcommittee, asked whether criteria
for the position already exist. Ms. Gaylord stated
that OEJ will provide her current job description to
the members of the Executive Council.
Mr. Moore then focused the discussion on the
election of the chair of the Executive Council. He
reminded the members that action is urgent
because the terms of one third of the Executive
Council will expire July 31, 1997. Ms. Gaylord
stated that the Executive Council will have eight
new members by August 1997, and each of those
members probably would be reluctant to serve as
the chain therefore, she said the members could
vote immediately or by mail ballot to select a chair
from among the members who will continue to
serve. She also recommended that, to maintain
consistent leadership from meeting to meeting,
the members might consider designating a chair
and vice chair of the Executive Council, as well as
the subcommittees. Mr. Turrentine stated that he
believed the Executive Council has no option
other than to elect a new chair. If the members
decide to elect a new chair, the Executive Council
should develop a nomination process, he added.
Mr. Hankins then asked Mr. Moore whether he
wished to continue to serve as chair of the
Executive Council. Mr. Moore replied that he did
not have an interest in continuing to serve as
chair of the Executive Council of the NEJAC.
Mr. Ray stated that he did not "feel comfortable"
deciding the future of the NEJAC during the
current session and expressed his belief that the
Protocol Committee should address the issue by
developing a process for nominating or even
selecting the next chair. The members of the
Executive Council agreed that the Protocol
Committee will develop a process for nominating
the chair.
5.4 Update on Environmental Education
Grants Work Group
Ms. Ferris began an update on the activities of the
Environmental Education Grants Work Group by
expressing her frustration at the lack of EPA staff
support the work group had received for
scheduling teleconference calls and other
administrative duties. She requested that OEJ
provide the work group with assistance for such
activities. She also requested that OEJ provide
the members of the work group with copies of the
action items related to environmental education
grants. Ms. Ferris also stated that the lack of
support had stalled the work group's efforts to
make progress on the issue. Noting that the
issue is extremely important, Mr. Moore
commented that either the staff that was assigned
should'become more aggressive in supporting the
work group's activities or a change in staff is
necessary.
6.0 RESOLUTIONS
This section presents the text of resolutions
forwarded by the subcommittees to the Executive
Council of the NEJAC for consideration.
6.1 Resolutions from the Enforcement
Subcommittee
This section presents the text of the resolutions
forwarded by the Enforcement Subcommittee to
the Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
Enforcement Resolution No. 7
WHEREAS, the public has a right to know when
air pollution may increase in a particular area due
to pollution credit trading; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) policies related to air pollution
credit trading (the Economic Incentive Policy
regulations and the Open Market Trading Policy)
1-18
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Counci/
do not include any reference to environmental
justice; and
WHEREAS, air pollution credit trading has the
potential to concentrate dangerous toxic air
pollutants in low income communities and
communities of color (especially when multiple
facilities in a single community purchase pollution
credits thereby increasing or perpetuating their
emissions), creating or exacerbating toxic hot
spots.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that
NEJAC urges and advises EPA to:
1. Amend the Economic Incentive Policy and
Open Market Trading Policy to incorporate
environmental justice concerns, especially
concerns related to public participation and
the potential of air pollution trading programs
to concentrate toxic air pollution in
communities of color.
2. Amend the Economic Incentive Policy and
Open Market Trading Policy to include at
least the following revisions:
(a) Require any agency considering approval
of a pollution trade to post prominent
public notification of the trade at least 60
days prior to approval of the trade in a
manner expected to reach any
communities that may experience an
increase or continuation in air pollution as
a result of the pollution trade;
(b) Require any agency considering approval
of a pollution trade to hold public
hearings and comment periods of at least
30 days (following adequate public
notice) prior to approval of the pollution
trade in any communities expected to
experience increased or continued air
pollution as a result of the pollution trade;
(c) Require any agency considering adoption
of a pollution trading program to conduct
well publicized educational forums open
to the public to explain how pollution
trading programs work, to be held in
communities that may experience
increased or continued pollution as a
result of the programs, and with speakers
in favor of and opposed to the pollution
trading program under consideration;
(d) Until such times as the agency develops
policies such as those indicated in 2a, 2b,
and 2c, it shall not approve trading of air
pollutants defined as toxic chemicals
under the Clean Air Act, Section 112.
Enforcement Resolution No. 8
WHEREAS, farm work is among the most
dangerous and lowest wage occupations in the
United States; and
WHEREAS, farmworkers in the U.S. are almost
exclusively people of color and low-income
workers; and
WHEREAS, farmworkers have among the lowest
life expectancies of any U.S. workers, in large
part due to hazards encountered in the
workplace; and
WHEREAS, pesticides in the workplace constitute
a significant occupational hazard for farmworkers,
resulting in thousands of pesticide poisonings
each year; and
WHEREAS, farmworkers and their families are
more likely to be poisoned in the workplace and in
the home due to their residential proximity to
agricultural fields; and
WHEREAS, pesticide residues are frequently
found in food; and
WHEREAS, children consume certain foods likely
to contain pesticide residues, such as apples and
bananas, in amounts disproportionate to adults
and thus have greater chance of pesticide
exposure; and
WHEREAS, children are sensitive receptors
because of their body-weight and still-growing
physiologies; and
WHEREAS, President Clinton has recently issued
an Executive Order on Children's Health; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has made elimination of
environmental threats to children a high priority
and is creating the Office of Children's Health
Protection; and
WHEREAS, EPA's enforcement of pesticide laws
such as the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-19
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) should be even and
consistent; and
WHEREAS, EPA's enforcement efforts under
FIFRA have had dramatic and beneficial results.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that:
1. EPA, in consultation with affected
communities, should develop a matrix to
choose ten pesticides on which to target FY
1998-1999 enforcement efforts. Such
pesticides should be chosen by the EPA
through the development of a list based on
the following criteria: the 10 most toxic
pesticides currently in use in agriculture; the
10 most common pesticides found in food
residues; the 10 most harmful pesticides to
workers based on occupational pesticide
poisoning statistics from the past five years;
the 10 pesticides most commonly found in
groundwater; and the 10 most highly
bioaccumulative pesticides. EPA should
identify as the highest priority for monitoring,
enforcement and compliance actions,
pesticides which appear on two or more lists.
2. EPA shall make these lists available to
members of the National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) within four
months of the enactment of this resolution.
3. EPA should then focus multi-media
monitoring, enforcement and compliance
actions on the 10 pesticides, targeting
production, distribution, training for use,
application, export, and disposal.
Enforcement Resolution No. 9
WHEREAS, farm work is among the most
dangerous and lowest wage occupations in the
United States; and
WHEREAS, farmworkers in the U.S. are almost
exclusively people of color and low-income
workers; and
WHEREAS, farmworkers have among the lowest
life expectancies of any U.S. workers, in large
part due to hazards encountered in the
workplace; and
WHEREAS, despite these conditions, it took the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
more than 12 years to promulgate the Worker
Protection Standard for farmworkers; and
WHEREAS, according to testimony to the EPA
compiled in A National Dialogue on the Worker
Protection Standard. Part I: Transcripts of the
Public Meetings. EPA-735-R97-001 (March
1997), training under the Worker Protection
Standard has been fragmented and inconsistent
in its effectiveness; and
WHEREAS, this testimony and comments by the
farmworker advocates who participated in the
Worker Protection Task Force identified certain
states, such as North Carolina and Texas, as
having lagged behind other states in enacting,
implementing, and enforcing laws concerning
agricultural laborers; and
WHEREAS, EPA's oversight of states'
enforcement of farmworker protection laws has
been minimal.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that:
1. EPA should target one or two states for a
significant enforcement effort including
significant penalties under the Worker
Protection Standard, such as North Carolina
and Texas, which may have a history of non-
or under-enforcement of their farmworker
protection laws.
2. The National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council (NEJAC) should convene an
Enforcement Subcommittee meeting in North
Carolina to document and take testimony
regarding farmworkers untrained and
unprotected, in violation of EPA regulations.
Such a meeting should take place at a time of
year when farmworkers are likely to be
present in the state, such as September or
June.
3. EPA should institute a licensing procedure
under the Worker Protection Standard for
trainers.
4. EPA should launch a pilot project under the
Worker Protection Standard that would
involve conferring inspection and evaluation
authority to selected farmworker advocates to
evaluate trainings.
1-20
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
Enforcement Resolution No. 10
WHEREAS, the Shintech Corporation has
proposed the construction of a polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) complex to be located in Convent,
Louisiana; and
WHEREAS, Shintech's proposed facility would
release into the air pollutants regulated by the
Clean Air Act, including pollutants listed as
hazardous under that Act; and
WHEREAS, Shintech is seeking a permit for the
facility pursuant to Title V of the Clean Air Act
administered by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA); and
WHEREAS, Shintech's proposed Title V permit is
currently [being] reviewed by EPA Region VI; and
WHEREAS, the community within which the
proposed facility would be located is
approximately 82% African American and a high
proportion of the community lives below the
poverty level; and
WHEREAS, the community within which the
proposed facility would be located is already the
host of a series of industrial facilities that emit
large volumes of pollutants into the air and water
and onto the land;
WHEREAS, substantial environmental justice
issues have been raised before the Enforcement
Subcommittee of the National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) and before the
full Council regarding the disproportionate
amounts of pollution already present in this case
and the extent to which the proposed Shintech
facility would further exacerbate an already
extremely serious pollution problem in the
community; and
WHEREAS, NEJAC has previously adopted a
resolution requesting that EPA review its
permitting authority under existing environmental
laws, including Title V of the Clean Air, to achieve
a better integration of environmental justice
concerns into Agency permitting decisions; and
WHEREAS, the Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality and EPA Region VI could
reach decisions on the Shintech's Title V permit
application at any time.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that:
1. The EPA Administrator ensure that any
decision on Shintech's Clean Air Act Title V
permit application for a polyvinyl chloride
complex in Convent, Louisiana, fully consider
the environmental justice concerns raised by
the siting of such a facility in that community;
and
2. The EPA Administrator ensure that any
decision on Shintech's Title V permit
application fully consider the cumulative and
synergistic effects of the facility's proposed air
emissions on the community; and
3. The EPA Administrator ensure that any
decision on Shintech's Title V permit
application reflect an expansive interpretation
of the Agency's authority under the Clean Air
Act, including Title V, to take environmental
justice considerations into account in any
decision to deny or condition a Title V permit;
and
4. The EPA Administrator ensure that any
decision on Shintech's Title V permit occur
only after full and meaningful consultation
with the Agency's Office of Environmental
Justice and those in the Agency's General
Counsel's Office who have reviewed the
Agency's authority in the permitting context to
base its permitting decisions on
environmental justice; and
5. The EPA Administrator ensure that the
citizens of Convent, Louisiana, be provided
with a full and meaningful opportunity to
provide public comment on the proposed
permit application, including a public hearing,
consistent with the public participation and
community involvement protocol developed
by NEJAC; and
6. The EPA Administrator ensure that any
decision on Shintech's Title V permit
application be consistent with the Agency's
responsibilities under Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 to bar discrimination by
recipients of federal financial assistance;
7. If the Agency decides to grant the Shintech
Title V permit, the Administrator, or her
representative, provide the NEJAC with a
written explanation of how, and the extent to
which, environmental justice concerns were
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15, 1997
1-21
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
taken into account in the Agency's permitting
decision.
Enforcement Resolution No. 11
WHEREAS, Supplemental Environmental
Projects (SEPs) are environmentally beneficial
projects that a violator of environmental laws
agrees to undertake in settlement of an
enforcement action, but which the violator is not
otherwise legally required to perform; and
WHEREAS, SEPs offer substantial enforcement
opportunities for promoting environmental justice
objectives by directly involving communities
bearing the impact of the environmental harm or
risk of future harm to be remedied; and
WHEREAS, SEPs can more directly address the
affected communities' needs than can civil or
criminal monetary penalties, which must be
deposited into the general revenue fund of the
U.S. Treasury, by funding projects that benefit the
community at large; and
WHEREAS, the dollar value of SEPs in Fiscal
Year 1995 was $103,840,773, more than the
combined dollar value of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) criminal, civil judicial,
and civil administrative penalties under all federal
environmental laws; and
WHEREAS, EPA published its proposed SEP
policy two years ago in May 1995, and has not yet
implemented a final SEP policy; and
WHEREAS, EPA is finalizing its SEP policy; and
WHEREAS, EPA is currently considering ways to
modify its proposed policy to encourage further
local community involvement in the development
of SEPs in the settlement of enforcement actions
affecting those communities, including a new
introductory section on the subject of community
input into the SEP process, a new penalty
mitigation factor that rates a SEP more highly to
the extent that the defendants seek and consider
community input, and the creation of a new
category of SEP projects concerned with the
assessment and remediation of Brownfields; and
WHEREAS, EPA's current proposed SEP policy
describes seven SEP categories, including "public
health," "environmental restoration and
protection," "assessments and audits,"
"environmental compliance promotion," and
"emergency planning and preparedness," but
without describing ways in which local community
representatives and organizations could play an
effective role in implementing SEPs within these
categories; and
WHEREAS, EPA's current proposed SEP policy
provides that "performance of a SEP by a third
party is not allowed" and that SEPs may be
performed by "contractors or consultants of the
defendant," but without expressly acknowledging
either that (1) local community organizations may
serve as such "contractors or consultants"; or (2)
a SEP may legitimately require the defendant to
provide a local community with the resources that
allow the community to serve the same purposes
that are furthered by the SEP categories identified
in the SEP policy; and
WHEREAS, EPA's current proposed SEP policy
does not discuss the role of SEPs in the
settlement of enforcement actions brought by
States or by citizen groups; and
WHEREAS, the Enforcement Subcommittee of
the National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council (NEJAC) has submitted to Eric Schaeffer,
Director, EPA Office of Regulatory Enforcement,
a memorandum dated May 14, 1997, on EPA's
draft May 1995 SEP policy that further elaborates
on the relationship between SEPs and
environmental justice.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. EPA should modify its draft SEP policy to
include an affirmative endorsement of the
maximum use of SEPs to promote
environmental justice objectives; and
2. EPA should integrate the public participation
and community involvement protocol
developed by NEJAC into its final SEP policy;
and
3. EPA should expressly state in its final SEP
policy that local community organizations may
serve as contractors and consultants to
defendants in the performance of SEPs; and
4. EPA should expressly state in its final SEP
policy that SEPs may legitimately require a
defendant to provide resources to a local
community organization that, in turn,
1-22
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
undertakes activities that further any one of
the seven categories of SEPs identified in
EPA's draft SEP policy; and
5. EPA should strive to devise a creative means
to involve local community organizations at
every stage in the enforcement process, from
identification of violations to investigation;
prosecution; remedy design; and creation,
implementation, and monitoring of SEPs; and
6. EPA should include in its final SEP policy an
affirmative endorsement of the use of SEPS
to promote environmental justice objectives in
the settlement of enforcement actions
brought by States and private citizens.
Enforcement Resolution No. 12
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has established the Community-
University Partnership (CUP) Grant Program in an
effort to further environmental justice; and
WHEREAS, EPA has expended some $4.1
million in grants through the CUP Grant Program
since its inception, with at least $1.5 million
expected for FY1997; and
WHEREAS, testimony was presented to the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) that the CUP Program has not always
effectively targeted funds to community-based
organizations (CBO), favoring instead the
universities; and
WHEREAS, testimony was presented to the
NEJAC that some university applicants for CUP
grants have misrepresented the role of
community-based organizations in the CUP grant
implementation; and
WHEREAS, under the present CUP grant system,
reports are completed by the grantee, almost
invariably the university, without a requirement for
the CBO partner to be included in the process;
and
WHEREAS, once the university has received the
CUP grant, the CBO is sometimes not serviced or
included in the implementing activity; and
WHEREAS, it can be difficult for CBOs to even
determine what grants EPA has awarded; and
WHEREAS, partner relations should be
encouraged, but these grant programs should not
become a pretext for diminishing the availability of
funds to CBOs.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that:
EPA should immediately implement the following
steps to ensure that CUP grant applicants are
valid, equal partnerships between community
organizations and universities:
1. If a community-based organization is cited in
a CUP grant application as either
participating in the development of the
proposal or the implementation of the
activities it proposes, or endorsing the
specific proposal or its general purposes,
then the EPA should take all necessary steps
to ensure that the proposal's representations
about the CBO are accurate. At a minimum,
EPA should ascertain that the CBO has been
provided with a complete copy of the
proposal submitted to the U.S. EPA and that
the CBO agrees with the proposal's
representations about the CBO's perspective
and participation. This review can be
satisfied through either the submission of a
letter by an authorized representative of the
CBO describing the nature and extent of the
CBO's support or by a docketed conversation
or site visit between U.S. EPA and an
authorized CBO representative during the
proposal review phase to determine the
CBO's knowledge and support of the
proposal.
2. If a proposal is based on a performance
partnership between a CBO and a non-CBO
grantee, EPA should develop a mechanism to
ensure that the CBO's perspective on grant
performance is considered. EPA shall notify
non-grantee CBO partners of the opportunity
to contact the EPA grant monitor at any time
during the grant period. In addition, non-CBO
grantees must include CBO partners as
participants in their reports by providing them
complete copies of their financial and
performance reports, and by giving CBOs an
opportunity to submit additional information to
the EPA.
3. EPA should exercise its authority to penalize
non-CBO grant applicants and grantees for
falsely representing CBO support for a
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-23
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
proposal or CBO participation in grant
performance.
4, EPA offices and programs will publish, and
otherwise make available upon request,
complete descriptions of all grants which they
award. In addition, a system should be
developed through which all grants can be
cross-referenced by media, region, recipient,
and other important parameters.
5. EPA should develop a formula for CUP
grants to ensure that the participation of
CBOs in the process is significant and
resources are made available to fully support
their activities,
6. The five criteria identified above should be
applicable to all EPA partnership programs.
6.2 Resolutions from the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee
This section presents the text of the resolutions
forwarded by the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC for consideration.
Indigenous Resolution No. 22
WHEREAS, Presidential Executive Order 12898,
entitled "Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations," directs Federal
agencies to focus and develop strategies which
address adverse health and environmental effects
to these specific populations, and
WHEREAS, the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC) was established on
April 11, 1994, comprised of representatives of
academia, business, industry, Federal, State,
Tribal, local government, environmental
organizations, community groups and non-
governmental organizations, with the goal of
providing advice to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) on matters related to
environmental justice for minority populations and
low-Income populations, and
WHEREAS, the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee specifically addresses Tribal
environmental justice issues; and
WHEREAS, the health and natural resources of
the Indian Tribes cannot be protected or insured
by inconsistent treatment under the federal
environmental legislative acts; and
WHEREAS, under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), Indian Tribes are
included with municipalities; and
WHEREAS, municipalities under RCRA statute
are bound by the individual States' environmental
statutes, regulations, and policies; and
WHEREAS, Tribes are not municipalities and are
not bound by state environmental laws; and
WHEREAS, deeming Tribes municipalities
transgresses the federal trust relationship with
Tribes and directly violates the primacy of the
Tribes' democratic sovereign processes; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Congress, through the
Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act,
Superfund (CERCLA) Act, and Clean Water Act,
has affirmed the regulatory authority of Indian
Tribes through designation as States or tribal
authority.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that to
the maximum extent permitted by law the NEJAC
committee calls upon the EPA, through its Office
Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)
and formal policy, to afford Indian Tribes
substantially the same treatment as states with
respect to all provisions of RCRA; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that specific
provisions include, but not be limited to,
guaranteeing the Indian Tribes the ability to
establish environmental regulations, standards,
enforcement capabilities and delegated authority;
and also receive technical assistance grants,
program grants; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that EPA
implement a policy whereby the Tribes receive
early notification on the EPA development of
Tribal policy, initiatives, funding opportunities, and
information sharing related to RCRA; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that EPA re-
establish the commitment of the national
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which
delegated responsibility for addressing
environmental issues on Tribal lands, and was
signed by the EPA, the Indian Health Service, the
1-24
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council
Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the U.S. Department
Housing & Urban Development.
Indigenous Resolution No. 23
WHEREAS, the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC) Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, has heard from several
Indigenous communities regarding environmental
impacts on areas that are of cultural and spiritual
significance to these communities; and
WHEREAS, for example, the Ft. Mohave Indian
Tribe (the Tribe) has come before the
Subcommittee on behalf of the alliance of the five
Lower Colorado River Tribes (which include the
Quechan, Fort Mojave, Cocopah, Chemehuevi,
and Colorado River Indian.Tribes) to present its
concerns regarding the siting of a low-level
nuclear waste facility in [Ward Valley, California
in] areas of cultural significance to the Tribes; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the location of the
facility in an area of cultural significance to the
Tribes, the Tribes are also concerned by the site-
selection process for the waste facility, and the
ability of the State of California to construct a
facility that will not jeopardize the health and the
environment of the surrounding community; and
WHEREAS, the State of California has come
before the Subcommittee to provide an overview
of its site selection process and its dealings with
affected tribes; and
WHEREAS, areas of cultural or spiritual
significance to Indigenous communities, whether
on or off reservation, often go to the heart of what
defines an Indigenous community as culturally
and politically distinct; and
WHEREAS, federal environmental law recognizes
impacts to areas of cultural significance as
impacts on the human environment which require
consideration and mitigation; and
WHEREAS, because of the essential role these
areas play in the life ways of Indigenous
communities, mitigation is often not an option,
and the only acceptable alternative is complete
avoidance of any impacts; and
WHEREAS, because many Indigenous
communities are forced to live on small remnants
of what were once large aboriginal territories, and
because these areas are now generally "remote"
by today's standards, these areas are now
frequently targeted for siting of hazardous waste
facilities (including nuclear waste facilities and
test sites), and the indigenous communities that
live in these areas may be disproportionately
impacted by such facilities; and
WHEREAS, large-scare activities (e.g., mining or
waste facilities) frequently disturb or even
obliterate aspects of the physical environment
that are essential to the cultural or spiritual
integrity of Indigenous communities; and
WHEREAS, the NEJAC is concerned that
disproportionately high and adverse impacts on
Indigenous communities are occurring as a result
of insufficient consideration being given to cultural
and spiritual impacts on these communities; and
WHEREAS, the Subcommittee recognizes that
areas of cultural significance to Indigenous
communities are often located in areas that are
not within the boundaries of Indian reservations,
and are therefore not under the direct control of
Indigenous communities; and
WHEREAS, Indigenous communities rarely have
either the political clout or financial resources to
ensure that these issues are adequately
addressed, and therefore rely significantly upon
their federal trustees to assist communities in
identifying and preventing these impacts; and
WHEREAS, as a result of discussions with the
State of California over issues at Ward Valley, the
Subcommittee has expressed its concern to the
NEJAC that states have not been provided with
sufficient guidance on how to address
environmental justice issues of concern to
Indigenous peoples, especially in the area of
impacts on cultural resources; and
WHEREAS, the Subcommittee is also concerned
that the Lower Colorado River Tribal alliance has
not had sufficient opportunity to communicate its
concerns directly to high-level federal
representatives; and
WHEREAS, the NEJAC is concerned that
indigenous communities' claims regarding the
cultural significance of areas are often overlooked
or dismissed by non-indigenous decision-makers
because of a lack of appreciation for or
understanding of indigenous peoples' cultural
connection to these areas.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-25
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the
NEJAC that EPA should adopt procedures that
ensure that Indigenous communities are involved
in all phases of decision making when activities
impact or potentially impact areas of cultural
significance to such communities; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that EPA should
presume that indigenous communities' claims
regarding the cultural significance of areas are
legitimate and act to support such claims and
prevent impacts to these areas; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that when initiating
procedures to select a site for locating waste
facilities, impacts to areas of cultural significance
should be identified at the outset, so these
impacts can, to the maximum extent possible, be
avoided altogether when making initial decisions
about where to consider locating such facilities;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that when a state
is making a waste siting decision that impacts or
potentially impacts areas of cultural significance
to Indigenous communities, EPA should
document that environmental justice issues are
appropriately addressed, and, if necessary,
conduct a study of its own to address such issues;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that EPA should
request a high level meeting among the
Administrator, other appropriate executive branch
leaders, and the five Colorado River Tribes to
discuss the Tribes' concerns regarding the siting
of a low-level nuclear facility in Ward Valley; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the EPA
should conduct an environmental justice analysis
of the siting of the Ward Valley nuclear waste site,
including but not limited to a review of the process
of consultation with the Lower Colorado River
Tribes, the consideration of alternative locations
for the facility, impact of current storage practices
of low-level radioactive waste on environmental
justice communities, and the consideration of
impacts to areas of cultural significance to the
Tribes; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that EPA should
develop environmental justice guidance for states
to follow when state actions or decisions raise
environmental justice issues of concern to
Indigenous communities.
Indigenous Resolution No. 24
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), is a Federal agency created in
1970, with the direct purpose and responsibility to
develop and implement strategies that protect
public health and the environment; and
WHEREAS, Presidential Executive Order 12898,
entitled "Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations," directs federal
agencies to focus and develop strategies which
address adverse health and environmental effects
in minority populations and low-income
populations; and
WHEREAS, EPA is very close to finalizing a
decision regarding pending regulations, known as
the Cluster Rule, to prevent pollution from pulp
and paper manufacturing; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Cluster Rule provides
only two options: Option A - Elemental Chlorine
Free (ECF) paper which continues heavy use of
chlorine dioxide, and Option B - Oxygen
delignification as a substitute for the first phase of
chlorination, which are both inadequate steps in
phasing out chlorine in a reasonable period of
time; and
WHEREAS, paper industries are making major
capital investments now and it is counter-
productive to steer them in the wrong direction
toward continued heavy chlorine use; and
WHEREAS, a viable Totally Chlorine Free (TCF)
technology exists, which uses hydrogen peroxide
instead of chlorine and allows for a closed loop
system, which.is highly recommended and used
in Europe to eliminate persistent, toxic discharges
of bioaccumulative substances, particularly
organochlorines; and
WHEREAS, the air and water discharges of pulp
and paper industry contaminate the entire
ecosystem and food web and Native Americans
that fish, gather berries and nuts, make baskets,
and practice other land-based cultural ways will
be greatly impacted by the Cluster Rule; and
WHEREAS, many Native American communities
in the United States are affected including the
Wisconsin Oneidas, Minnesota Chippewa, St.
Regis Mohawk, Penobscot Nation, Eastern Band
1-26
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Counci)
of Cherokee Indians, Yakima and Columbia River
Basin Tribes; and
WHEREAS, the Oneida Reservation, adjacent to
the City of Green Bay on the Fox River, has the
largest concentration of pulp and paper mills in
the world with 11 paper mills on 23 miles of river
and also has an 8-acre sludge pond located
within their tribal jurisdiction which emits
chiorination daily; and
WHEREAS, according to EPA's "Analysis of the
Potential Populations at Risk from the
Consumption of Freshwater Fish Caught Near
Paper Mills," 15,000 Native Americans and
30,000 Asian Americans living near dioxin-
contaminated effluent from pulp mills "consume
an average of 100 to 150 grams of fish flesh each
day over the course of the year and those with
higher fish consumption levels may face a 1 in
1,000 cancer risk; and
WHEREAS, EPA scientists also estimated
approximately 10,000 people living near pulp mills
have family incomes at or below the poverty line;
and
WHEREAS, EPA has evaluated in detail in at
least two case studies of tribes living downstream
from pulp and paper mills, having treaty ceded
fishing rights, and engaging in subsistence fishing
in waters potentially affected by pulp and paper
mill effluent, have elevated risks of contracting
cancer from consuming contaminated fish due to
higher consumption levels; and
WHEREAS, the American Public Health
Association has called for "measurable and
progressive reductions toward the elimination of
the use of chlorine-based bleaches in the pulp
and paper industry," because of health concerns;
and
WHEREAS, the International Joint Commission
between Canada and the United States, which
included participation by Native communities of
both countries, has called for both countries to
phase-out the use of chlorine as an industrial
feedstock; and
WHEREAS, the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC), was established on
April 11,1994, comprised of representatives of
academia, business, industry, Federal, State,
Tribal, local government, environmental
organizations, community groups and non-
governmental organizations, with the goal of
providing advice to the EPA on matters related to
environmental justice for minority population and
low-income populations.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that
NEJAC hereby recommends that an "Option C"
be added to the proposed Cluster Rule which
provides for a Totally Chlorine Free (TCF)
technology using hydrogen peroxide instead of
chlorine and also allows for a closed loop system;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC urges
and advises the EPA Administrator to support
"Option C" for the Totally Chlorine Free (TCF)
bleaching process in the proposed Pulp and
Paper Cluster Rule; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC urges
and advises the EPA Administrator to respect the
EPA policy on environmental justice by not
making a decision on the Cluster Rule until an
environmental justice analysis has been
conducted by EPA to assess the impact of the
rule on Native American and people of color
communities.
6.3 Resolution from the International
Subcommittee
This section presents the text of the resolution
forwarded by the International Subcommittee to
the Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
International Resolution No. 2
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), through its Office of International
Activities (OIA) has developed an environmental
justice initiative in South Africa; and
WHEREAS, EPA OIA is working with the Gore-
Mbeki Working Group on Environmental
Management and Pollution; and
WHEREAS, EPA chairs this working group which
is one of the five working groups reporting to the
Committee on Conservation, Environment and
Water; and
WHEREAS, representatives from the South
African Environmental Justice Network have
requested the involvement of NEJAC and the
International Subcommittee in the implementation
of the South African Initiative; and
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15, 1997
1-27
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
WHEREAS, the International Subcommittee has
formed a South Africa Work Group, given the
importance of the South African Initiative and the
need for input and involvement from members of
the environmental justice community.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that
NEJAC urges and advises that the EPA
Administrator Carol Browner recommend,
encourage and facilitate OlA's consultation with
the International Subcommittee's South Africa
Work Group on all programmatic issues
associated with the South African Initiative,
including the implementation of the South African
Grants Program.
6.4 Resolutions from the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee
This section presents the text of the resolutions
forwarded by the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC for consideration.
Waste Resolution No. 5
WHEREAS, the United States Government
recognizes its responsibility by executive order to
operate within a government-to-government
relationship with federally-recognized Native
American tribes, and
WHEREAS, the United States Government has
repeatedly recognized its trust responsibility to
Native American tribal governments; and
WHEREAS, Presidential Executive Order 12898
directs Federal agencies to focus and develop
strategies which address adverse health and
environmental effects in minority populations and
low-income populations; and
WHEREAS, Presidential Executive Order 12898
further directs Federal agencies to collect and
analyze information assessing and comparing
environmental and hurnan health risks borne by
populations identified by race, national origin, or
income and then to use this information to
determine whether their actions have
disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, each executive department and
agency of the Federal Government by executive
order shall assure that tribal government rights
and concerns are considered during the
development of Federal Government activities on
tribal trust resources; and
WHEREAS, the Crandon Mining Company is
currently proposing to develop a zinc and copper
mine in the immediate vicinity of three Native
American Tribes: the Forest County Potawatomi,
the Mole Lake Chippewa, and the Menominee
Tribes; and
WHEREAS, a Federal environmental impact
statement (EIS) is currently being prepared by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) as lead
agency to address environmental and cultural
impacts associated with the proposed mine; and
WHEREAS, serious concerns exist regarding the
absence of defensible ground water and surface
water data needed to accurately describe water
resource impacts to Tribal lands; and
WHEREAS, based on what data is available, the
proposed mining activities are likely to adversely
affect the quality and quantity of Tribal water
resources, including the historic wild rice stand in
Rice Lake on the Mole Lake Indian Reservation
and the Wolf River which flows directly through
the Menominee Reservation; and
WHEREAS, airborne contaminants from the
proposed mining activities are likely to affect
quality of air on the Forest County Potawatomi
Reservation, currently under consideration for
redesignation to Class I air quality status; and
WHEREAS, the data used by the mining applicant
in preparation of the Environmental Impact Report
submitted to the USAGE does not describe Tribal
socio-economic and cultural issues to the extent
needed to properly evaluate impacts to the
affected Tribes.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that
NEJAC urges and advises EPA to:
1. Analyze potential environmental justice
implications and impacts to the Forest County
Potawatomi, the Mole Lake Sokoagan
Chippewa, and the Menominee Tribes from
the proposed Crandon mine, including
cultural impacts; and
1-28
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Courtcif
2. Comply with the Agency's treaty and trust
obligations, the Executive order on
Environmental Justice, and the EPA
environmental justice strategy; and
3. Provide oversight and review of the draft and
final EIS prepared by the USAGE, including
the data used and the conclusions drawn;
and
4. Carefully consider and respect the potential
cultural impacts as presented by the Tribes in
the context of the government-to-government
relationships.
Waste Resolution No. 6
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has embarked on the Community-
Based Environmental Protection (CBEP) Initiative
that is intended to improve the effectiveness of
EPA's nation-wide regulations and other
environmental programs; and
WHEREAS, EPA's goals with regard to CBEP are
to assess and manage the quality of air, water,
land, and living resources in a place as a whole,
to better reflect regional and local conditions, and
to work more effectively with all the partners in
achieving environmental protection; and
WHEREAS, CBEP offers the potential of
addressing existing environmental justice issues
through individual and collaborative action, as
well as regulatory reform.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) calls on EPA to set priorities and define
communities for CBEP activities based on the
consultation with impacted communities in a
manner that is, at a minimum, consistent with
NEJAC's " Model For Public Participation",
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC calls
on EPA to clarify, by renaming this initiative or
through clarifying language in describing CBEP,
that the initiative is not being performed by
community-based organizations, but that its
activities are intended to bring about the
improvement of environmental conditions through
the direct participation of communities in
identifying and implementing necessary activities;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC calls
on EPA to develop an accounting mechanism for
CBEP activities that allows such activities to be
creditable for budgeting priorities in a manner that
is comparable to other activities conducted by
EPA, such as enforcement actions, and
incorporates the requirements of the Government
Performance Results Act; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC calls
on EPA to formally establish, as part of the CBEP,
its commitment to assisting overburdened
communities, at their direction, to conduct various
activities including data collection; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC calls
on EPA, through CBEP, to provide technical
assistance to community-based organizations
which is patterned after EPA's small business
assistance program; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC calls
on EPA, through CBEP, to establish a community
ombudsman office for the identification and
addressment of community complaints, and the
establishment of a clearinghouse of information
for dissemination of appropriate information at the
request of community members; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC calls
on EPA to include representatives of impacted
communities in all public presentations by CBEP.
Waste Resolution No. 7
WHEREAS, existing models of environmental
impact analysis, such as those conducted under
the National Environmental Policy Act, involve
affected communities in the review process long
after key siting decisions have been made; and
WHEREAS, environmental impact studies
document the incremental impact of projects,
rather than the cumulative and synergistic impact
of multiple environmental threats in the same
community; and
WHEREAS, environmental impact studies are
currently undertaken or lead by project
proponents; and
WHEREAS, the current model generates much
more paperwork than genuine dialogue between
project proponents and potentially impacted
communities, and
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
1-29
-------
Executive Council
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
WHEREAS, there are no standard tools for
measuring environmental justice in a community,
not only to aid siting decisions, but to support
relocation decisions, Brownfields revitalization
planning, and the allocation of public resources.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) recommends that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) support
the development of pilot Community Impact
Statements, environmental documents in which
the members of affected communities determine
the scope and lead the analysis of existing
environmental conditions in those communities;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NEJAC urges
EPA to disseminate the results of the Community
Impact Statement pilots, and if those pilots prove
valuable and cost-effective, to convene meetings
to consider ways to find funding for Community
Impact Statements in all communities facing
environmental justice challenges.
1-30
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15, 1997
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 13 and 15,1997
Potawatomi Indian Reservation
Wabeno, Wisconsin
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
(A AJU&
Clarice Gaylord
Designated Federal Official
Richard Moore
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER TWO
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Executive Council of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
held public comment periods on May 13 and 15,
1997, during its meeting at the Indian Springs
Lodge and Conference Center on the Potawatomi
Indian Reservation near Wabeno, Wisconsin.
Approximately 26 people participated in the public
comment periods.
This chapter, which presents a detailed summary
of the testimony received by the Executive
Council and the deliberations that followed,
contains three sections, including this
Introduction. Section 2.0, Public Comments
Presented May 13, 1997, summarizes the
comments offered during the public comment
period held on May 13. Section 3.0, Public
Comments Presented May 15, 1997, summarizes
the comments offered during the public comment
period held on May 15. The full transcript of the
proceedings of the meeting of the Executive
Council of the NEJAC includes a verbatim record
of public comments. Chapter Seven, section 3.3
presents a review of selected action items from
public comment periods of earlier meetings of the
NEJAC.
2.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS PRESENTED
MAY 13,1997
This section summarizes the comments offered to
the Executive Council during the public comment
period on May 13, 1997, as well as the written
comments submitted for the record at that time.
Mr. Richard Moore, Southwest Network for
Environmental and Economic Justice and the
chair of the Executive Council of the NEJAC,
opened the session with a welcome to all
participants. Mr. Moore reminded the members of
the Executive Council and the audience that most
of the people who participate in the public
comment periods have traveled a considerable
distance at their own expense. It is the role of the
Executive Council of the NEJAC, he pointed out,
to address the concerns expressed by the
participants in the public comment period.
Comments that followed Mr. Moore's remarks are
summarized below, in the order in which they
were offered.
2.1 John Wilmer, Bad River Band of Lake
Superior Chippewa Indian Tribe
Ms. Rae Ann Maday, Bad River Band of the Lake
Superior Chippewa Indian Tribe, read into the
record written testimony provided by Mr. John
Wilmer, chairman of the tribe. In his letter, Mr.
Wilmer stated that the reservation of the Bad
River Band of the Lake Superior Chippewa Indian
Tribe is located near the south shore of Lake
Superior in northern Wisconsin. Mr. Wilmer wrote
that he had sent Ms. Maday to present testimony
about the solution mining project proposed by the
Copper Range Company (CRC) to operate in
White Pine, Michigan, approximately five miles
from Lake Superior. (See Chapter Eight, Exhibit
8-3 for a description of the proposed solution
mining project.) In the letter, Mr. Wilmer informed
the members of the Executive Council that the
state of Michigan has issued a permit for the
project and that the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) currently is conducting
analyses to determine whether an underground
injection control (UIC) permit should be issued.
He explained that the tribe opposes the project for
two reasons:
• Sulfuric acid used in the mining process will
be transported by train through the
reservation
• Mining waste will contaminate Lake Superior
Mr. Wilmer's letter also described CRC's
approach to preventing contamination of Lake
Superior is to pump and treat the fluids in the
mine before they migrate into the lake. He
explained that the pump-and-treat system would
have to operate in perpetuity. The letter
expressed Mr. Wilmer's disbelief that the state of
Michigan and CRC believe that they can foretell
the future well enough to allow such a project to
go forward. "The treatment system will have to
operate for longer than the Europeans have
known of the existence of Lake Superior," he
wrote.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
2-1
-------
Public Comment Periods
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
In his letter, Mr. Wilmer also informed the
members of the Executive Council that EPA had
agreed to perform an environmental analysis of
the project, which the agency claimed is a
process equivalent to that conducted for an
environmental impact statement (ElS) under the
provisions of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). Because the tribe believed that tribal
participation in the process was imperative, the
Bad River Band and other local tribes had
struggled to work with EPA Region 5 in good faith
for the past six months, he wrote. However, Mr.
Wilmer continued, it had been apparent from the
beginning that EPA Region 5 had set
Unreasonable deadlines for the submittal of
quality data by the tribes. Mr. Wilmer explained
further that EPA had allowed the tribes three
months to gather information to determine
whether the project will present a permanent risk
to Lake Superior and other tribal resources. He
concluded his letter with a request that the
Executive Council of the NEJAC recommend that
EPA:
• Allow the tribes sufficient time to obtain and
evaluate information related to the cultural
resources in the White Pine area
• Issue a national policy about the disposal of
waste that would require perpetual
maintenance and operation of systems that
prevent contamination of surface and
groundwater
Mr. Arthur Ray, Maryland Department of the
Environment and member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, asked for an explanation of the
responsibility of EPA Region 5 in the case. Ms.
Clarice Gaylord, EPA Office of Environmental
Justice (OEJ) and Designated Federal Official
(DFO) for the Executive Council, responded that
the case is not new and reminded the members
that Mr. Walter Bresette, Lake Superior Chippewa
and former chair of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, had resigned from the NEJAC
because of the case. She explained that the
primary concern of the tribes is that the process of
issuing a UIC permit does not include the conduct
of an ElS. Ms. Gaylord also explained that, after
several meetings between the tribes and EPA
Region 5, the agency had agreed to conduct an
environmental analysis instead of an ElS. Ms.
Gaylord then introduced Ms. Maday to Ms. Karla
Johnson, Environmental Justice Coordinator, EPA
Region 5, so that Ms. Johnson could provide an
update to Ms. Maday on the most recent
developments in the case.
Mr. James Hill, Klamath Tribe and chair of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, asked about
the tribe's perspective on EPA's efforts to conduct
a cultural evaluation to identify any adverse
effects the project would have on the lake, as well
as the tribes. Ms. Maday responded that the
tribes had been hampered by lack of time to
gather information that demonstrates the adverse
effects the project would have on the tribes. Mr.
Hill then asked about the role of EPA's UIC
program in the case. Ms. Maday responded that
two processes had been occurring at the same
time, the UlC permitting process and the
environmental analysis. She stated that the tribe
had participated in the conduct of the
environmental analysis but, because the permit is
for a Class V injection well, EPA does not require
that the permitting process include a public
participation component. Referring to issues
related to the UIC permitting process, Mr. Hill
asked why the tribe does not have access to that
process. Ms. Maday responded that the
permitting process for Class V injection wells
requires only that EPA ensure that no danger to
drinking water exists. Ms. Maday added that the
deadline for reports on both processes is July 1,
1997.
Ms. Rosa Hilda Ramos, Community of Catano
Against Pollution and member of the Public
Participation and Accountability Subcommittee,
asked what type of opportunity EPA Region 5 had
provided for the tribes to participate in the
environmental analysis process. Ms. Maday
replied that the tribe participated in work groups
established by EPA Region 5 that evaluated the
cultural, environmental, and economic effects of
the project on Lake Superior and the tribes. Work
groups also evaluated the effects of any spill that
might occur while the acid is in transport through
the reservation, she added. Ms. Ramos then
commented that the tribe's issues are related to
loopholes in environmental laws and regulations
that prevent the tribe from participating in the
decision-making process. She expressed her
concern that federal agencies do not comply with
the provisions of Executive Order 12898 on
environmental justice. Ms. Gaylord stated that it
was because of the Executive order that EPA
agreed to conduct the environmental analysis.
2-2
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Comment Periods
Mr. Alex Varela, EPA OEJ, told the members of
the Executive Council that, in 1982, EPA had
published in the Federal Register a list of a
number of types of wells, stating that, if a well met
certain criteria, permits were not needed for it. He
then stated that injection mining is a relatively
new technique, and EPA's Office of General
Counsel (OGC) believes that it falls within the
category of authorization by rule. In other words,
he explained, if the state of Michigan and CRC
demonstrate that the well meets the requirement
of the rule published in 1982, the permit is
"virtually automatic." Mr. Ray noted that the rule
had been developed before EPA considered the
needs of particular communities and that is a
"classic example of what environmental justice is
about." Mr. Varela replied that the rule was a very
technical one. Mr. Ray acknowledged Mr.
Varela's statement but observed that technical
rules also must include a common-sense
approach to effects on communities.
Ms. Deeohn Ferris, Washington Office on
Environmental Justice and chair of the
Enforcement Subcommittee, recommended that
the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee request
that an analysis be conducted to identify the
amount of time CRC had to conduct its analyses,
compared with the time frame that EPA
established for the tribes to gather information.
Mr. Graver Hankins, Thurgood Marshall School of
Law and member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, asked whether Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 would have "some sway" over
the 1982 rule.
2.2 Arnold Wendroff, Mercury Poisoning
Project
Ms. Gaylord stated that Mr. Arnold Wendroff,
Mercury Poisoning Project, had requested that a
written statement be read into the record. In his
letter, Mr. Wendroff stated that, at its May 1996
meeting, the Health and Research Subcommittee
of the NEJAC had discussed the domestic use of
mercury and drafted a resolution that requested
that EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxic Substances (OPPTS) and its Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA)
determine and report the extent to which mercury
poisoning related to domestic use in cultural
practices is a health issue. The resolution also
requested that the EPA offices identify the federal
agency or agencies that have the responsibility to
address the issue.
In his letter, Mr. Wendroff then explained that Ms.
Lynn Goldman, Assistant Administrator, EPA
OPPTS, had responded to the subcommittee's
resolution, but that he was not satisfied with the
response. He stated that he had drafted a letter
to the EPA Administrator to request further action
on the issues identified in the resolution. He
added that Mr. William Sanders, Director, EPA
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT)
had responded to the second request, noting that
EPA is researching the domestic use of mercury
and working with the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to
develop a "national order" on mercury. Mr.
Wendroff stated in his written testimony, "I feel
that although these efforts are laudable, they are
grossly inadequate. Both EPA and ATSDR
should be actively investigating the human health
effects of magico-religious mercury use ...."
The members of the Executive Council agreed to
forward Mr. Wendroff's written testimony to the
Health and Research Subcommittee of the
NEJAC for further action.
2.3 Monique Harden, GreenPeace
Ms. Monique Harden, GreenPeace, stated that
she was representing several communities in
Louisiana to voice their concerns about two
polyvinylchloride (PVC) companies, Westlake and
Shintech Corporation, that have applied for
permits in the state of Louisiana to build PVC
production facilities in communities that are
predominantly African-American and low-income.
She explained that companies in Louisiana
already had "wiped out" two African-American
communities - communities that were founded by
former slaves after the Civil War. Ms. Harden
stated that the communities had limited success
in preventing the construction of the Westlake
and Shintech facilities. She explained that
GreenPeace, on behalf of the communities, filed
an environmental justice petition with EPA Region
6, which had led to a temporary halt in the
process of issuing the air permit for the Shintech
facility. Ms. Harden stated her understanding,
however, that the Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) is ready to approve
the air permit.
Ms. Harden stated that GreenPeace had
identified sections of the Clean Air Act (CAA) that
focus on the vulnerability of communities. She
cited as an example section 112 (r), which
addresses the prevention of accidental chemical
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15, 1997
2-3
-------
public Comment Periods
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
releases. She informed the Executive Council
that Shintech had "lied" about the community's
ability to respond to accidental releases because
the community does not have the resources to
maintain response capabilities. She also stated
tjiat, in its application for the air permit, Shintech
failed to identify the measures that would be
taken if a release occurred and explain how the
company would minimize the effects of a release
on the community, as is required under the CM.
She then asked why EPA Region 6 "is caught up"
in analyzing the faults of the air permit application,
Instead of simply denying the permit under the
provisions of the Executive order on
environmental justice, as well as the sections of
the CAA with which the permit fails to comply.
'" , :':]ii -f . i > ', r
Ms. Harden concluded her testimony by
expressing her disbelief that EPA would allow
additional siting of facilities that produce known
carcinogenic chemicals in communities that
already bear a disproportionate burden of industry
and that are predominantly African-American and
low-income, (See sections 2.4, 2.5, and 3.3 of
this chapter for additional comments on the siting
of the proposed Shintech facility.)
Mr. Hankins asked Ms. Harden what action the
affected communities wish the NEJAC to take.
Ms, Harden responded that GreenPeace and the
communities request that EPA Region 6:
• Fulfill its oversight authority related to the
approval of the air permit for the facility by the
Louisiana D£Q
•, ir| • ,
• Address the contradiction between EPA
health officials who claim the dioxin produced
by these facilities causes adverse health
effects and EPA air officials who are allowing
approval of the permit
,ji|ji' , , ,
•. Conduct an environmental justice analysis to
determine the cumulative and synergistic
effects on the members of the communities of
the dioxin that the new facilities will produce
and the contaminants produced by existing
industries
Mr. Moore announced to the members of the
Executive Council that the Enforcement and the
Waste and Facility Siting subcommittees were to
address the issues during their deliberations on
May 14, 1997. Ms. Ferris asked whether other
siting permits were required to build the facility.
Ms. Harden replied that, in addition to the air
permit, Shintech had applied for a hazardous
waste permit, which she said is in the notice of
deficiency stage; a water permit, which is
undergoing public review; and a coastal zone
permit, which is regulated by the local
government. She explained that the air permit is
the crucial permit because, if it is approved,
construction can begin. Ms. Ramos concluded
the discussion by recommending that the NEJAC
hold a meeting in Louisiana because she said,
she believes the communities are in need of the
NEJAC's assistance.
2.4 Rose Ann Roussel, St. James Citizens for
Jobs and the Environment
Ms. Rose Ann Roussel, St. James Citizens for
Jobs and the Environment, stated that she was
seeking the NEJAC's assistance to ensure that
environmental justice prevails in her community,
St. James Parish, Louisiana. The community,
she said, is affected disproportionately by health
risks related to exposure to toxic chemicals
produced by industrial facilities. She demanded
that federal agencies protect people's health and
the environment and that EPA Region 6 under its
oversight authority deny the air permit for the
facility proposed by the Shintech Corporation.
Ms. Roussel stated that EPA Region 6 and the
Louisiana DEQ cannot continue to allow the siting
of facilities that cause adverse health effects on
already affected communities.
Ms. Roussel also informed the members of the
NEJAC that the primary concern of her
community is that the proposed facility will be
located in the immediate vicinity of an elementary
school, a Head Start center, and a low-income
housing area. Ms. Roussel then described a
personal experience, stating that, one night when
returning home from a movie, she almost died
from the smell of chemicals from one of the
existing facilities in the area. She urged the
Executive Council of the NEJAC to adopt a
resolution that supports the communities' struggle
against the proposed Shintech facility.
Ms. Gaylord noted that the community of
Freetown, also located in St. James Parish, had
submitted written testimony that supports the
construction of the proposed Shintech facility.
She stated that the written testimony was to be
read into the record during the public comment
period to be held on May 15,1997.
2-4
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Comment Periods
(See sections 2.3, 2.5, and 3.3 of this chapter for
additional comments on the siting of the proposed
Shintech facility.)
2.5 Emelda West, Resident, Convent,
Louisiana
Ms. Emelda West, resident, Convent, St. James
Parish, Louisiana, also expressed concern about
the proposed Shintech facility. She stated that
the community of Convent had been engaged in
the "fight" since August 1995. She stressed to the
members of the NEJAC that her community does
not appreciate the "last minute" information that is
provided by the state of Louisiana to inform
members of the community about issues related
to the proposed facility. Ms. West declared that
the community already is "sick" because of
pollutants produced by existing industry and
invited the members of the NEJAC to visit her
community to see the environmental degradation
that already exists.
Ms. West then stated her greatest concern, the
potential adverse health effects on future
generations. She concluded her testimony by
stating that jobs should not be a concern,
because various other facilities are being built
throughout the area. (See sections 2.3, 2.4, and
3.3 of this chapter for additional comments on the
siting of the proposed Shintech facility.)
Mr. Haywood Turrentine, Education and Training
Trust Fund and member of the Public
Participation and Accountability Subcommittee,
commented that Ms. West's testimony was a
"classic example" of problems that are faced by
communities throughout the United States. He
stated that the siting of another facility in the
community would not provide any benefits to the
members of that community. Mr. Turrentine
declared that, if the Executive order on
environmental justice means "anything at all," the
NEJAC has a role to play in the case because the
issues involve questions related to the need to
site industrial facilities, the reasons behind siting
decisions, and the benefits of such decisions to
various parties. Mr. Turrentine expressed his
belief that the NEJAC should become more
aggressive in seeking stronger commitments to
environmental justice not only from EPA but also
from all federal agencies that must comply with
the provisions of the Executive order.
Ms. Ramos agreed with Mr. Turrentine, stating
that at the December 1996 meeting of the
Executive Council, the issue of the accountability
of federal agencies under the Executive order had
been presented to the EPA Administrator. Ms.
Ramos reminded the members that the EPA
Administrator had suggested that a community
member be appointed to participate in the
meetings of the Interagency Work Group on
Environmental Justice (IWG).
2.6 William Weahkee, Five Sandoval Indian
Pueblos
Mr. William Weahkee, Executive Director for the
Five Sandoval Indian Pueblos, explained that the
Five Sandoval Indian Pueblos are small tribes
living north of the city of Albuquerque, New
Mexico. Mr. Weahkee stated that the tribes are
opposed to plans by the city of Albuquerque to
build commuter highways through the Petroglyph
National Monument. He then presented an
overview of the history of his ancestors, starting
with the entry of the Spanish Conquistadors into
pueblo lands. The tribes already had their own
religion, customs, and sacred sites, he pointed
out. He explained that many of his ancestors
"went underground" to avoid being tortured or
killed by Conquistadors for practicing their
religion. Mr. Weahkee stated that all things
related to the tribe's religion therefore became
secret. The tribes living near Albuquerque, he
added, consider a site called Mesa, which has
five volcanoes that are still visible, a sacred site.
Mr. Weahkee continued, explaining that at the
Mesa site, there are more than 17,000
petroglyphs, which are "signs or visions to the
spirit world that a body is on a journey." The
tribes, he stated, consider the area to be sacred
and perform various religious ceremonies there.
He informed the members of the NEJAC that, in
1990, Congress had set the site aside as a
national monument. However, Mr. Weahkee
stated that the city is encroaching on the area and
that the same people who had established the
site as a national monument are introducing
legislation to approve plans to build the commuter
highways. He concluded his testimony with a
request that the Executive Council urge EPA to
discuss with the city of Albuquerque the need to
conduct an EIS to identify the environmental
justice effects on the tribes.
Ms. Dolores Herrera, Albuquerque San Jose
Community Awareness Council, Inc. and member
of the Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee, asked what involvement Mr.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
2-5
-------
Public Comment Periods
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
VVeahkee had had with the government of the city
of Albuquerque. Mr. Weahkee responded that
the tribes are opposing powerful infrastructure
and that the mayor of Albuquerque favors the
construction. He also informed the members that
the tribes had established coalitions with several
local community organizations, as well as one
with the Sierra Club. He also commented that, as
Indian people, the tribes would like the site to be
protected forever because of its sacredness to the
tribes'culture.
Mr. Charles Lee, United Church of Christ
Commission for Racial Justice and chair of the
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee,
commented that the issue leads to the larger
question that federal agencies must discuss: a
consistent approach among federal agencies to
implementing the provisions of the Executive
order. The case, observed Mr. Lee, is a situation
fp.which several different federal agencies could
b.e involved, including the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), the U.S. Department of the
Interior (DOI), and EPA. He then recommended
that the Executive Council draft a resolution that
addresses the issue and transmit tfie resolution
directly to the White House Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ). Ms. Gaylord
reminded the members that any resolution must
be transmitted through the EPA Administrator.
Mr. Hill informed the members of the Executive
Council that the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee was to discuss the issues related
to the Petroglyph National Monument during its
deliberations on May 14, 1997. Mr. Moore
requested that he be notified of the time at which
the discussion was to take place, indicating that
he would like to participate in it. In addition, he
requested that a resolution on the issue drafted
by the All Indian Pueblo Council be read into the
record of the subcommittee. Mr. Moore explained
that some proponents of the highways argue that
there is no Native American support for
preservation of the petroglyphs.
2.7 Dennis Shupand, Forest County
Potawatomi Tribe
Mr. Dennis Shupand, Forest County Potawatomi
Tribe, informed the members of the Executive
Council of the destruction of the tribe's culture
and way of life that he said he believes will
happen if the Exxon Corporation begins operation
of the proposed mine in Crandon, Wisconsin. He
explained that he was making his presentation on
behalf of future generations of Potawatomi
Indians and also for those who had come before
him. He explained that the Potawatomi now are
engaging in a new fight for their land, not a fight
for removal from the land but a fight to protect
"our lives and our existence." Mr. Shupand then
stated that, when people ask what the tribe would
like to achieve through its presence at the NEJAC
meeting, his response is a request for a resolution
supporting the position of the local tribes. (See
sections 3.9, 3.10,3.11, and 3.13 of this chapter
for additional comments on the proposed Exxon
mine.)
Mr. Arnoldo Garcia, Earth Island Institute and
member of the International Subcommittee,
thanked Mr. Shupand and representatives of the
Menominee Tribe for inviting the members of the
NEJAC to visit their reservations. He stated that
the site tour of the Menominee and Potawatomi
Indian reservations had been instructive because
issues related to Indian country, particularly the
concept of tribal sovereignty, are quite complex.
Mr. Garcia commented that indigenous peoples of
the United States must hold the government
accountable for its actions, whether on native
lands or on ceded territory, for the adverse effects
of environmental contamination. He stated that
he believes it is incumbent upon indigenous
peoples to redefine their sovereignty with respect
to the United States government.
Mr. Garcia then stated that environmental
scientists had discovered something called an
"ecological footprint," in other words the way a
person walks on the land. Mr. Garcia then
defined for the members the word, "gabacho,"
which means those who walk with big feet,
stepping on plants without looking where they are
walking. He stated that, when the first Europeans
came to this land, they were called gabachos. Mr.
Garcia concluded his remarks by stating that
gabacho is not a derogatory term but that the
indigenous peoples had witnessed the imprint of
an ecological footprint on the earth.
2.8 Laura Marine, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin
Ms. Laura Marthe, Coordinator, Environmental
Resources Board, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin,
presented information to the Executive Council on
the proposed Cluster Rule for pulp and paper
mills that will regulate the type of process used to
bleach paper. She informed the members that
2-6
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Comment Periods
the EPA Administrator was to be making a
decision between two different processes for
bleaching paper:
• Endorsing only elemental chlorine-free (ECF)
paper, which continues the heavy use of
chlorine dioxide
Requiring oxygen delignification (OD) only as
a substitute for the first phase of
chlorinination
Ms. Marthe explained that EPA had failed to
explore a third option, a totally chlorine-free (TCF)
process, that uses hydrogen peroxide instead of
chlorine and allows for a closed loop system. She
believes that companies will phase out the use of
chlorine only if EPA requires them to do so. She
also stated that, in proposing regulations related
to pulp and paper mills, EPA had not determined,
as required under the provisions of Executive
Order 12898 on environmental justice, whether
the proposed rule would have disproportionate
effects on communities of people of color and
low-income communities, particularly on tribes
that live near many such mills. She explained as
an example that the people of the Oneida Nation
no longer can bury fish in their corn fields
because the fish are contaminated by the waste
generated by the mills.
Ms. Marthe stated that the Oneida Nation's
reservation is adjacent to the city of Green Bay,
Wisconsin, on the Fox River, which has the
largest concentration of pulp and paper mills in
the world — 11 paper mills on 23 miles of the
river. She requested that the Executive Council
advise the EPA Administrator to support a TCF
bleaching option and that the Administrator
respect the agency's policy on environmental
justice by refraining from making a decision until
EPA has completed an environmental justice
analysis to assess the effect of the rule on Native
American communities and communities of
people of color. (See section 3.12 of this chapter
for additional comments about the proposed
Cluster Rule.)
Mr. Hill invited Ms. Marthe to make a presentation
to the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee on
environmental justice issues related to the
proposed Cluster Rule. She stated that she
would not be able to attend the meeting of the
subcommittee on May 14, 1997. Mr. Hill stated
that members of the subcommittee were familiar
enough with the issues; therefore, the
subcommittee would discuss the issue at its
meeting. Ms. Marthe added that time is of the
essence because the EPA Administrator was to
make her decision within the following two weeks.
Responding to Ms. Marthe's statement, Mr. Luke
Cole, Center on Race, Poverty, and the
Environment and member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, expressed concern about the
length of the time it takes to transmit resolutions
approved by the Executive Council expressed to
the EPA Administrator.
2.9 Debra Ramirez, Resident, Lake Charles,
Louisiana
Ms. Debra Ramirez, resident, Lake Charles,
Louisiana, described the community of Mossville,
Louisiana, which is surrounded by industry. She
told the members there are no flowers or trees in
the community. She continued describing the
community by stating that the water running
through ditches is heavily contaminated with
ethylenedichloride (EDC). Ms. Ramirez
mentioned that "shelter-ins" are common because
of the prevailing pollution problems. "Shelter-ins,"
she explained, "are moments when sirens sound
and residents are told to stay inside until it is safe
to return outdoors." She stated that the
community suffers from a lack of proper drainage
and sewage systems and that members of the
community suffer from various types of cancer, as
well as emphysema. In addition, the children
suffer from physical ailments and behavioral
disorders, as well, she explained.
Ms. Ramirez explained that she had been
instructed to always follow the "chain of
command" to receive assistance, but that that
approach had not worked. She concluded her
testimony by stating that, if industry wanted to be
"friendly" with communities, it would have taken
that approach a long time ago.
Mr. Hill asked whether EPA Region 6 had been
contacted about the environmental justice issues
confronting the community. Ms. Ramirez
responded that the community on its own had
begun testing for contamination and that the
community had initiated litigation against several
of the industries. She stated that EPA Region 6
or the Louisiana DEQ did not "care enough" about
the community of Mossville to assist the
community in its battle against industry. Mr.
Hankins observed that, if the community is in
litigation, it is almost impossible for the
government to intervene and assist the
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
2-7
-------
Public Comment Periods
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
community. Ms. Gaylord stated that the
ipxecuth/e Council can develop recommendations
for EPA, even though a lawsuit exists.
Mr. Hankins recommended that EPA Region 6
Identify possible violations under the Clean Water
Act (CWA). Mr. Turrentine then expressed
concern that, during every public comment period
that the NEJAC had held, testimony had been
presented about environmental justice issues in
EPA Region 6. He strongly recommended that the
Executive Council address that recurring issue.
Mr. Moore commented that the Executive Council
had requested a meeting with the administrator of
EPA Region 6 to discuss the region's lack of
commitment to environmental justice. He
suggested that representatives of grassroots
organizations and members of the Executive
Council meet with the staff of EPA Region 6 to
discuss such concerns. Mr. Moore also noted
that staff of EPA Region 6 other than
environmental justice staff should also be
included in the meeting. Mr. Moore commented
that EPA Region 6 had "come a long way in
addressing community concerns. Ms. Ferris
suggested that the proposed meeting be merged
with a follow-up meeting to the enforcement
roundtable meeting held in EPA Region 6 in
October 1996. Mr. Moore requested that the
Enforcement Subcommittee draft a letter to the
administrator of EPA Region 6 to request such a
meeting.
2.10 Apesanahkwat, Menominee Tribe
ill
Apesanahkwat, Chair, Menominee Tribe, echoed
the testimony presented by Mr. Shupand, (see
Section 2.7 of Jhis chapter for additional
comments about the proposed Exxon mine),
stating that the battle to protect tribal land is
fought for the future generations. He explained
that no organization and no agency of the federal
government has been a champion or friend of the
Indian people. Apesanahkwat applauded EPA as
the first and only federal agency to implement a
goVemment-to-govemment relationship with
Indian nations. He urged the Executive Council to
recommend to EPA that Congress include
language about federally recognized tribes in all
environmental legislation. He also recommended
that current legislation, such as the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and
NEPA be revised to include federally recognized
tribes. Apesanahkwat declared that Congress
should not give states the ammunition to
challenge EPA's authorities under legislation to
delegate environmental programs to tribes. He
concluded by stating that he understood the
difficulty of asking for additional funding without
authorizations.
2.11 Hazel Johnson, Resident, Southeast
Chicago, Illinois
Ms. Hazel Johnson, resident, Southeast Chicago,
Illinois, expressed strong concern about the
partnerships that universities, establish with
community-based organizations (CBO) to apply
for funding through EPA's Community/University
Partnership (CUP) Grant program. She stated
that she believes that the universities are
committing crimes by using the names of CBOs to
receive funding from EPA. She added that, when
EPA accepts proposals without verifying that the
CBOs are indeed partners in the projects, the
agency is just as guilty. Ms. Johnson also
expressed concern that EPA does not "feel
comfortable" distributing funds directly to CBOs.
She stated that EPA should give CBOs the
opportunity to demonstrate that they can manage
funds just as well as, if not better than,
universities.
Ms. Johnson urged that EPA verify the validity of
partnerships that universities identify in their
proposals. She recommended that EPA, at a
minimum, provide to the CBO identified in a
proposal submitted by universities a copy of the
proposal to verify that a true partnership has been
established between the CBO and the university.
In addition, Ms. Johnson recommended to EPA
the following criteria to be used in awarding
grants to universities:
• Submittal of a letter from an authorized
representative of the CBO describing the
nature and extent of the CBO's support for
the project
• Communication between EPA and an
authorized representative of the CBO during
the proposal review phase to determine that
the CBO is aware that it was identified in a
proposal and that the CBO supports the
proposal
Ms. Johnson declared that the grant process
should be monitored from beginning to end and
2-8
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Comment Periods
that EPA should develop a mechanism to ensure
that the CBO's perspective on the performance of
the grant is considered. She concluded her
testimony by stating that EPA must be held
accountable for ensuring that universities are
involving CBOs as equal partners in projects
proposed for grants.
Mr. Moore expressed his appreciation to Ms.
Johnson for her commitment to the issue. He
also informed Ms. Johnson that the Enforcement
Subcommittee was to address the issue during its
meeting on May 14,1997.
2.12 Cheryl Johnson, People for
Community Recovery
Ms. Cheryl Johnson, Project Manager, People for
Community Recovery (PCR), discussed the
effects on her community of exposure to
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) from abandoned
transformers. She stated that PCR had reported
the danger to the Chicago Housing Authority
(CHA) in 1984 and that, in 1986, CHA had hired
a contractor to remove the contaminants. Ms.
Johnson explained that the job had been done
poorly and that EPA had reassessed the same
area in 1989 and determined that the
concentrations of PCBs were higher than they
had been when PCR first reported the
contamination in 1984. Another contractor had
been hired to remove the contaminants; however,
in 1997, the contaminants are still present, she
stated.
Ms. Johnson presented PCR's request that,
before a third contractor is hired, EPA Region 5
conduct additional tests to determine the exact
locations of contamination.
Mr. Moore expressed his appreciation for Ms.
Johnson's testimony and informed her that the
issue had been referred to the Enforcement
Subcommittee for further action.
2.13 Abbas Hassain, Reduce Recidivism by
Industrial Development, Inc.
Mr. Abbas Hassain, Reduce Recidivism by
Industrial Development, Inc., submitted written
testimony to be read into the record of the public
comment period about the community of Victory
Heights-West Pullman in Illinois. Mr. Hassain's
requests, as stated in his testimony, were not
clear to the members of the Executive Council.
Ms. Ferris suggested that the Executive Council
draft a letter to Mr. Hassain to request clarification
of the issues presented in his written testimony.
(See section 3.1 for clarification of the Mr.
Hassain's issues.)
3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS PRESENTED
MAY 15,1997
This section summarizes the comments offered to
the Executive Council during the public comment
period on May 15, 1997, as well as written
comments submitted for the record at that time.
Comments are summarized below in the order in
which they were offered.
3.1 Abbas Hassain, Reduce Recidivism by
Industrial Development, Inc.
Mr. Abbas Hassain, Reduce Recidivism by
Industrial Development, Inc., submitted written
testimony to be read into the record. Ms Gaylord
reminded the members of the Executive Council
that Mr. Hassain had submitted written testimony
on May 13,1997; however, his concerns had not
been clear to the Executive Council. Mrs. Gaylord
stated that Mr. Hassain's second letter specifically
outlined his concerns and requests to the NEJAC.
In the letter, Mr. Hassain made several requests
related to the community of Victory Heights-West
Pullman in Illinois. Mr. Hassain requested that
EPA:
Place contaminated sites in the Victory
Heights-West Pullman area on the NPL
• Issue enforcement actions and penalties
against all the companies in the area that
may have contributed to contamination of the
communities
Evaluate the agency's Superfund
implementation policy to ensure that it is
applicable to all potential effects of
contamination on human health, the
environment, and the economic health of the
community
• Provide technical assistance to the members
of the community and award funds for job
training to local CBOs
Establish a tracking system to identify all
companies that have "done business" in the
community since 1900
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
2-9
-------
Public Comment Periods
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Mr. Turrentine stated that the Executive Council
should not ignore Mr. Hassain's letter; however,
Mr. Turrentine stated that he did not believe the
Executive Council currently was in a position to
respond to Mr. Hassain's requests. He added
that the Executive Council should draft a
response to Mr. Hassain that explains the role of
the NEJAC and the ways in which the NEJAC can
be of assistance to his organization. Mr. Lee
stated that he has. knowledge of the issues
outlined by Mr. Hassain and that the case could
be referred to the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee. The members of the Executive
Council agreed with Mr. Lee's recommendation.
3.2 Richard Bad Moccasin, Mni-Sose
Intertribal Water Rights Coalition, Inc.
Mr. Richard Bad Moccasin, Mni-Sose Intertribal
Water Rights Coalition, Inc., submitted written
testimony to be read into the record. In his letter,
Mr. Bad Moccasin described weather-related
conditions that have had devastating effects on a
number of tribes who live in the Missouri River
Basin. He explained that the Mni-Sose Intertribal
Water Rights Coalition, Inc., representing 26
Missouri River Basin tribes, had developed a
report to assist its tribal membership with the
current flood conditions throughout the Missouri
River Basin.
In his letter, Mr. Bad Moccasin explained that the
Federal Emergency Management Administration
(FEMA) and state programs have considered
Indian tribes along the Missouri River "no-man's
land." Because the lines of authority for
emergency management teams are unclear, he
Continued, it is uncertain whether federal
emergency teams and agencies have the
authority or have established policies related to
Indian country to provide emergency relief to
residents of such lands. Mr. Bad Moccasin stated
further that there is no formal protocol between
Indian tribes and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USAdE).
, ?!';
In addition, wrote Mr. Bad Moccasin, because
funding for disaster relief is provided to the states
arid because states perceive tribes as separate
entities, tribes usually are left to their own
resources. He stated that, although tribes are
sovereign nations, they cannot declare disaster
status. The state holds that authority, he pointed
out. Mr. Bad Moccasin concluded in his letter that
equitable disaster recovery funding should be
provided to the tribes separately.
Ms. Gaylord explained that the issues of concern
expressed by Mr. Bad Moccasin are not within
the jurisdiction of the NEJAC. Mr. Hill stated that
he believed Mr. Bad Moccasin had submitted the
written testimony to the NEJAC in the hope that
the NEJAC could bring the issues to the attention
of FEMA through the IWG on environmental
justice. The members of the Executive Council
agreed to draft a letter to the EPA Administrator to
be forwarded to the IWG on environmental justice
to request that the issues be brought to the
attention of FEMA.
3.3 Citizens of Freetown, Freetown, Louisiana
The Citizens of Freetown submitted written
testimony to be read into the record. In the letter,
the citizens explain that they are residents of
Freetown, Louisiana, located in rural St. James
Parish, which is the site proposed by Shintech
Corporation for its PVC facility. The citizens
explained that they support the construction of the
facility in their community, which is opposed by
other community groups in the area. In the letter,
the citizens explained that Shintech actively had
solicited and received advice from the community
about how to be a good corporate neighbor. The
citizens nevertheless added that their community
is an example of what happens to a low-income
and predominately African-American community
that is excluded from decision-making processes
related to the siting of a facility and then forced to
live with the decisions that others have made.
The group stated that it had requested that
Shintech address the environmental concerns of
the community. The company had responded to
the satisfaction of the members of the Freetown
community, the group stated in its letter. In the
letter, the citizens also expressed concern about
outsiders, such as Greenpeace and residents of
other local communities, who exaggerate the
environmental hazards of the proposed facility but
do not offer alternative approaches to attracting
new businesses to the area. The group stated its
belief that its members had been disfranchised by
a small faction of the community, leaving the
Freetown community out of the environmental
justice debate. (See sections 2.3, 2.4, and2.5 of
this chapter for additional comments on the
proposed Shintech facility.)
2-10
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Comment Periods
Mr. Turrentine commented that on May 13,1997,
the Executive Council had heard from the other
groups in St. James Parish that oppose the
Shintech facility. He asked whether any other
members of the Executive Council had further
information about the Citizens of Freetown group.
Ms. Gaylord explained that the Citizens of
Freetown had contacted OEJ to request that EPA
pay its representatives' travel expenses to attend
the meeting. However, she said, EPA does not
have the funds to compensate community
members for travel expenses. Ms. Ferris noted
that she had been provided with a copy of the
letter for inclusion in the public dialogue portion of
the meeting of the Enforcement Subcommittee.
She added that the letter included questions to
which it was more appropriate that EPA respond
than the NEJAC. Ms. Ferris stated her belief that
the Executive Council should discuss an
appropriate response.
Ms. Ramos requested that the letter submitted by
the Citizens of Freetown be made available to the
other community groups that provided testimony
to the Executive Council on May 13,1997. Ms.
Gaylord stated that, before the letter would be
released, she would ask the advice of legal
counsel.
Mr. Hankins expressed concern that, when two
opposing community groups present their issues
to the NEJAC, a letter from one party is not
sufficient. He stated that he does not believe that
a letter should carry the same weight as the
presentation of community members who have
traveled a long way to appear in person. Mr.
Hankins then requested that the letter not be
placed into the record. Ms. Gaylord responded
that the Executive Council cannot refuse to place
into the record any material presented during its
public comment periods. Mr. Ray remarked that
refusing to accept written testimony and requiring
members of a community to make presentations
in person would set a new standard. Mr. Moore
also remarked that he would not agree to set such
a precedent. He suggested that the Executive
Council defer the issue until a later date.
Mr. Richard Lazarus, Georgetown University Law
Center and member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, reminded the members of the
Executive Council that it had approved a
resolution about the proposed Shintech facility
and that a copy of that resolution should be
forwarded to the Citizens of Freetown group.
3.4 Azania Heywood James, Citizens for
Environmental Justice
Ms. Azania Heywood James, Citizens for
Environmental Justice, submitted written
testimony to be read into the record. In her letter,
she requested that the NEJAC examine the role
and responsibility of EPA related to the U.S.
Department of Energy's (DOE) nuclear weapons
production sites, particularly the Savannah River
Site (SRS) in South Carolina and a site in Los
Alamos, New Mexico. Ms. James added that, in
the past, environmental stakeholders had not
been included in the discussion and participation
processes related to such facilities. She stated
that there is a need for assistance in Savannah,
Georgia, because the community is located
downstream from SRS and a number of chemical
companies. Ms. James also stated that
environmental justice issues at the sites must be
investigated and confronted and added that the
issue of contamination with nuclear wastes is a
serious one. She stressed the need to address
health effects related to exposure to low-level
radiation and concluded with the request that the
NEJAC examine how EPA can help affected
communities.
Mr. Turrentine commented that the issues raised
by Ms. James fall under the purview of the Public
Participation and Accountability and Enforcement
subcommittees. He recommended that the case
be referred to both subcommittees to gather
additional information. The members of the
Executive Council agreed with Mr. Turrentine's
recommendation.
3.5 Steven Lopez, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe
Mr. Steven Lopez, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe,
explained that the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe is a
member of an alliance of five federally recognized
tribes who live along the lower Colorado River.
The tribes formed the alliance to voice their
opposition to the siting of a low-level radioactive
waste facility proposed by the state of California
for Ward Valley, California. Mr. Lopez also
explained that the Ward Valley area is considered
sacred by the tribes, and he expressed his
appreciation to the Executive Council and the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee for their
understanding of what it means to hold an area
sacred. He also expressed his appreciation for
the Executive Council's approval of a resolution
that supports the position of the Fort Mojave Tribe
against the proposed facility. He also stated that
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
2-11
-------
Public Comment Periods
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
the Executive Council's approval of the resolution
signifies that the Indian tribes now have a
mechanism for communicating their concerns and
presenting issues to EPA.
He explained that the Fort Mojave Tribe had
attempted to use other avenues, such as the
concept of trust responsibility and that of tribal
Sovereignty, to express its concerns to federal
agencies; however, he said, none of those
avenues had proven effective. Mr. Lopez stated
that federal agencies should respect the
govemhnent-to-govemment relationship and treat
Indian tribes as true sovereign nations. He stated
that he believes th"| definition of a govemment-to-
government relationship should be clarified and
that employees of federal agencies should be
trained so that they understand the nature of the
relationship. Mr. Lopez concluded his testimony
by thanking the members of the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee for their work in drafting
the resolution that supports the tribes' position.
" I1. • .
Mr. Hill commented that it is Mr. Lopez who
should be thanked for his hard work in bringing
the issue to the attention of the NEJAC. (See the
next section for additional comments on the Ward
Valley project.)
3.6 Claudette White, Quenchan Indian Tribe
Ms. Claudette White, Quenchan Indian Tribe,
stated that her tribe is one of the tribes that
makes up the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe alliance
that opposes the proposed low-level radioactive
waste facility in Ward Valley, California. She
explained to the members that, at one time, her
tribe held more than a million acres of land in the
California area. Today, she said, the tribe is
located on only a fraction of that land. She
expressed her frustration with federal and state
agencies that continue to fail to understand the
cultural and spiritual significance of land to her
tribe. Ms. White also stated that the tribes object
to the facility not only for cultural reasons but also
because of the effects of the facility on their
health and on economic development.
Ms. White also characterized the presentation
made by the representatives of the state of
California to the Executive Council as misleading.
She explained that the state of California never
met with her tribe to identify the effects of the
facility on her tribe's sacred sites in Ward Valley.
She said she believes that the state of California
had a site "in mind;" therefore, the other candidate
sites never were considered seriously. Ms. White
concluded her testimony by expressing
appreciation to the members of the NEJAC for
their time in hearing her concerns.
Mr. Moore and Ms. Ferris thanked Ms. White for
traveling such a long distance to present her
public testimony. (See the previous section for
additional comments on the Ward Valley project.)
3.7 Michael Vigil, Tesuque Pueblo Indian
Tribe, New Mexico
Mr. Michael Vigil, Tesuque Pueblo Indian Tribe,
New Mexico, expressed concern about the
proposed expansion of the Santa Fe Ski Area,
which is located in the Santa Fe National Forest.
He explained that the Santa Fe National Forest
Office, the National Historic Preservation Council,
and the State Historic Preservation Office had
failed to include a geographic assessment in the
E1S that included an historical record of the
cultural uses of the area by the Pueblo Indians, as
well as by Hispanic communities in the area. He
stated that the headquarters in Washington, D.C.,
of the National Forest Service, an agency of the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, had refused to
review the EIS and address the issue that the
geographic assessment had not been included in
the EIS. Officials of the National Forest Service
had delegated its authority to the staff of the
Santa Fe National Forest, he said.
Mr. Vigil explained that expansion of the ski area
would devastate the wetlands near the ski lodge.
He also explained that expansion would create
additional pollution, related to metals, pH
imbalances, and turbidity. Mr. Vigil added that
efforts to oppose the expansion of the ski area
are supported by several organizations, including
the city of Santa Fe and Santa Fe County, as well
as the Santa Fe Ski Area Containment Coalition,
which is made up of such organizations as the
Forest Guardian, the Nature Conservancy, and
the Audubon Society. Mr. Vigil concluded his
testimony by requesting the assistance of the
NEJAC in his tribe's opposition to expansion of
the ski area.
Ms. Ferris requested that Mr. Vigil provide to the
members of the Executive Council any
documents that might assist the NEJAC in
addressing the issues he presented. Mr. Hill
asked the timeline for signing the EIS. Mr. Vigil
2-12
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
-------
National Envi'ronmenta/ Justice Advisory Council
Public Comment Periods
responded that the developer had requested a
meeting on May 29,1997, with Santa Fe County
to discuss an increase in the size of a parking lot
and that the city of Santa Fe had filed a lawsuit
against the Santa Fe National Forest, as well as
the developer. When Mr. Hill asked whether
construction had begun, Mr. Vigil answered that it
had not.
Ms. Ferris observed that the NEJAC had never
addressed a recreational operation before; she
recommended that the case be referred to the
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee to
determine how the NEJAC should proceed. The
members of the Executive Council agreed with
Ms. Ferris's recommendation. Mr. Moore
volunteered to share with Mr. Vigil names of other
organizations in New Mexico that could provide
assistance in addressing the issue.
3.8 Rose Gurnoe, Red Cliff Band Lake
Superior Chippewa
Ms. Rose Gurnoe, Chair, Red Cliff Band Lake
Superior Chippewa, voiced opposition to the
solution mining project proposed by CRC for
White Pine, Michigan. She informed the
members of the Executive Council that the land of
the Red Cliff Band is located on the southern
shores of Lake Superior and that the tribal
community from its beginning had been a fishing
community that relies on the lake for its physical
and spiritual well being. She reminded the
members of the Executive Council that, in May
1996, Mr. Bresette had requested the assistance
of the NEJAC in protecting Lake Superior from
the proposed project and that the Executive
Council had approved a resolution requesting that
EPA Region 5 conduct an EIS. Ms. Gurnoe
asked whether, since the resolution had been
approved, EPA had conducted an EIS. If not, she
asked, why hasn't it.
Ms. Gurnoe continued her testimony by
requesting additional action by the NEJAC related
to EPA Region 5's authorization of a pilot solution
mining project within the tribe's ceded territory, as
well as requesting that EPA respect its own
policies on environmental justice and Native
Americans, with respect to its trust responsibility.
She said she also was requesting that the NEJAC
support the tribe's efforts to develop its own air
and water quality standards program and asked
that Lake Superior receive special designation as
a natural resource of the United States.
Ms. Gaylord then summarized previous
presentations to the NEJAC about the proposed
project and the status of the environmental
analysis. (See section 2.1 of this chapter for
additional comments about the proposed project.)
She also informed the members of the Executive
Council that EPA Region 5 had granted an
extension until August 1997 of the public
comment period for the environmental analysis.
Ms. Ferris requested that Mr. Hill provide an
update to Ms. Gurnoe on the action taken by the
NEJAC during the current meeting. Mr. Hill stated
that the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee had
drafted a letter to the EPA Administrator to
request that EPA continue to investigate the case.
3.9 Stephanie Daniels Barea, Forest County
Potawatomi Tribe
Ms. Stephanie Daniels Barea, Forest County
Potawatomi Tribe, explained that she wished to
present background information about herself and
her people. She informed the members of the
Executive Council that she raises her five children
in a traditional manner, the way she was raised by
her grandmother. Ms. Barea stated that she was
taught not to pollute the air and that she owes it to
her ancestors and children to fight for clean air
and water. She also stated that she would give
her life to have her children grow up in a healthy
environment.
Ms. Barea then stated she wished to express her
appreciation to the NEJAC for holding the
meeting on the Potawatomi Indian Reservation so
that her words would be heard by others. She
stated that it hurts her to see that people of color
in the United States must plead just to survive in
the environments where they live. (See sections
2.7, 3.10, 3.11, and 3.13 of this chapter for
additional comments on the proposed Exxon
mine.)
3.10 Mr. Ned Daniels, Jr., Forest County
Potawatomi Tribe
Mr. Ned Daniels, Jr., Forest County Potawatomi
Tribe, explained that he had been in the fight
against pollution of his homeland since birth and
that his parents had taught him the values of
Mother Earth. He explained that the Potawatomi
Indian Tribe is called "Keepers of the Fire" and
that fire is the oldest living spirit. Mr. Daniels
stated that if every material possession were
taken away, he and his family could survive, but
only if the land is left the way it is now.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
2-13
-------
Public Comment Periods
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
He expressed his appreciation to the NEJAC for
holding its meeting on the reservation and his
hope that, if the Executive Council had any
influence, it would exert that influence to prevent
the opening of the proposed Exxon mine. Mr.
Daniels concluded his testimony by stating that
When the U.S. government created the treaty that
formally established the Potawatomi's
reservation, representatives of the government
asked the chief what they could do for the
Potawatomi? Mr. Daniels stated that his chief
replied, "AH we want is to be left alone." (See
secfions2.7,3.9,3.11, and 3.13 of this chapter for
additional comments on the proposed Exxon
mine.)
3.11 Billy Ray Daniels III, Forest County
Potawatomi Tribe
Mr. Billy Ray Daniels III, Forest County
Potawatomi Tribe, began his comments by
explaining that his father, Mr. Billy Ray Daniels,
Jr., Is the spiritual leader of the Potawatomi Tribe
and that he would like to follow the way of life his
father has led. He also explained that he was
taught to protect the earth as if it were your "flesh
and blood mothe|;" Mr. Daniels stated that he
believes that people should not "poke holes" in
the earth, as the Exxon Corporation is proposing
to do. He stated that he wishes that people would
team to understand to respect "our Mother earth."
In concluding his testimony, Mr. Daniels stated
that he is opposed not only to the mine proposed
by Exxon but also to all mines.
Ms. Leslie Ann Beckhoff, Conoco/DuPont and
member of the Enforcement Subcommittee,
remarked that the Executive Council had
approved a resolution that supported the position
of the Potawatomij the Menominee, and the Mole
Lake Chippewa tribes against the mine proposed
by Exxon. (See sections 2.7, 3.9, 3.10, and 3.13
of this chapter for additional comments on the
proposed Exxon mine.)
3.12 Damu Smith, GreenPeace
Mr. Damu Smith, GreenPeace, explained that a
few weeks before he had been in Brunswick,
Georgia, the most polluted area of the state, to
listen to the testimony of community members
about the physical ailments they are suffering.
Mr. Smith said that he wished to impress upon the
members of the Executive Council the urgency of
transmitting the resolution on the proposed
Cluster Rule for paper and pulp mills that the
Executive Council had approved to the EPA
Administrator. EPA, he pointed out, would soon
make a decision about the proposed rule. He
said he believes that, in the proposed Cluster
Rule, EPA had embraced the technology that is
most favorable to the paper industry. Mr. Smith
reminded the members of the Executive Council
that, when developing the rule, EPA had ignored
a third technology that would require paper and
pulp mills to stop using chlorine dioxide in their
bleaching process. He indicated that the Scott
Paper Company had adopted the chlorine-free
technology in 1970.
Mr. Smith urged the Executive Council to forward
the resolution that it had approved to the White
House and request that the President respect his
own Executive order on environmental justice, as
well as the Executive order on protecting
children's health. He concluded his testimony by
asking whether OEJ had been consulted on the
development of the proposed Cluster Rule.
Ms. Gaylord responded that OEJ had not been
consulted by the EPA office responsible for
developing the proposed Cluster Rule. (See
section 2.8 of this chapter for additional
comments on the proposed Cluster Rule.)
3.13 Sonny Wreczycki, Mining Impact
Committee, Town of Ainsworth,
Wisconsin
Mr. Sonny Wreczycki, Mining Impact Committee,
Ainsworth, Wisconsin, stated that his committee
opposes the proposed Crandon mine. He
explained that his township is located 700 feet
from Little Sand Lake, which drains into the Wolf
River and that the town's water supply is in the
area in which the proposed tailings ponds are to
be sited. The wetlands that serve as their water
filters also would be affected by mining activities,
he added.
Mr. Wreczycki stated that the area near his
community has the highest natural resource rating
in the state of Wisconsin. He explained that the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources had
performed an air quality study in 1995 and rated
the area a "nine." He said he fears that the
proposed mining activities will damage the area
and result in a very low natural resource rating.
Mr. Wreczycki informed the members that if
Exxon is allowed to build and operate the mine,
the air quality rating will be raised to 116.5, which
2-14
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 75,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Comment Periods
is "1,200 percent more dirt into the community's
air," he said. He then stated that Exxon had
designed a zero impact area by establishing an
imaginary line and assuming that "pollution
recognizes boundaries." He remarked that his
organization had been trying to obtain funding for
a baseline inventory from the state of Wisconsin
Mining Impact Board; however, he asserted, the
board will award the funding only if his
organization cooperates with Exxon.
Mr. Wreczycki concluded his testimony by
expressing his appreciation to the Executive
Council for listening to his concerns about the
proposed mine. (See sections2.7,3.9, 3.10, and
3.11 of this chapter for additional comments on
the proposed Exxon mine.)
Ms. Ferris remarked that Mr. Wreczycki's
presentation was an excellent demonstration of
technical expertise at the grassroots level. She
also asked what role DOI's Bureau of Mines had
played in the scenario related to the proposed
Crandon Mine. Ms. Gaylord responded that OEJ
could refer the issue to the IWG on environmental
justice.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 and 15,1997
2-15
-------
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 14,1997
Potawatomi Indian Reservation
Wabeno, Wisconsin
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
— l¥_ — r_^
Arthur A. totter)
Deeohn Ferris
Alternate Designated Federal Official Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER THREE
MEETING OF THE
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Enforcement Subcommittee of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
conducted a one-day meeting on Wednesday,
May 14, 1997, during a two-day meeting of the
NEJAC at the Indian Springs Lodge and
Conference Center on the Potawatomi Indian
Reservation near Wabeno, Wisconsin. Ms.
Deeohn Ferris, Washington Office on
Environmental Justice, continues to serve as
chair of the subcommittee. Ms. Sherry Milan,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA) and Designated Federal
Official (DFO) of the subcommittee, was unable to
attend the meeting. Mr. Arthur A. Totten, EPA
OECA, served as alternate DFO. Exhibit 3-1
presents a list of members who attended the
meeting and identifies those members who were
unable to attend.
Exhibit 3-1
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 14,1997
Ms. Deeohn Ferris, Chair
Mr. Arthur A. Totten, Alternate DFO
Ms. Leslie Beckhoff
Mr. Luke Cole
Mr. Grover Hankins
Mr. Richard Lazarus
Ms. Pamela Tau Lee
Mr. Richard Moore
Mr. Arthur Ray
List of Members
Who Were Unable To Attend
Ms. Sherry Milan, DFO
Ms. Christine Benally
Ms. Peggy Shepard
This chapter, which provides a detailed summary
of the deliberations of the Enforcement
Subcommittee, is organized in six sections,
including this Introduction. Section 2.0, Update
on Subcommittee Work Groups, provides
summaries of the activities of the work groups of
the subcommittee. Section 3.0, Joint Session of
the Enforcement and Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittees, summarizes the discussions and
presentations about issues related to tribal
enforcement capacity, tribal sovereignty, and
enforcement of environmental regulations on
tribal lands. Section 4.0, Presentations and
Reports, summarizes presentations and reports
about issues related to enforcement and
compliance assurance. Section 5.0, Summary of
Public Dialogue, summarizes presentations and
discussions offered during the public dialogue
period. Section 6.0, Resolutions, summarizes the
resolutions forwarded to the Executive Council of
the NEJAC for consideration.
2.0 UPDATE ON SUBCOMMITTEE
WORK GROUPS
This section discusses the activities of the work
groups of the Enforcement Subcommittee.
Exhibit 3-2 presents a list of the members of each
work group. The Enforcement Roundtable Task
Force did not provide an update on its activities.
2.1 Worker Protection Work Group
Ms. Pamela Tau Lee, University of California
Center for Occupational and Environmental
Health and chair of the Worker Protection Work
Group, reported on the progress the work group
has made. Ms. Tau Lee commented that, overall,
the NEJAC has not focused adequate attention
on worker protection issues. She also announced
that the Worker Protection Work Group had
drafted two resolutions that attempt to address
several key issues related to worker protection.
Enforcement resolutions No. 2 and No. 3, she
said, focus on the following areas of concern:
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
3-1
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit 3-2
WORK GROUPS OF THE
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
Worker Protection Work Group
Pamela Tau Lee, chair
Baldemar Velasquez
Work Group on the Policy on Supplemental
Environmental Projects
Luke Cole, chair
Richard Lazarus
Open Market Trading of Air Emissions
Credits Work Group
Richard Drury, chair
Christine Benally
Grover Hankins
Arthur Ray
Peggy Shepard
Enforcement Roundtable Task Force
Deeohn Ferris, chair
Christine Benally
Grover Hankins
Richard Lazarus
Arthur Ray
• The current practice is that growers and
volunteers conduct training of farm workers.
The resolution focuses on improving the
quality and effectiveness of training and calls
for implementation by EPA of a procedure to
ensure that all trainers are licensed!
; ' " ii ' ',
* Trainers will evaluate whether workers have
learned safety material adequately. If a
deficiency is found, trainers will have the
authority to enforce any regulation needed to
ensure worker safety.
Members of the subcommittee approved both
resolutions and forwarded them without change to
the Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration. (See Section 6.0 for a summary of
the resolutions.) Ms. Tau Lee also commended
Ms. Shirley Pate, EPA's Office of Enforcement
Qapacity and Outreach, for her work on the
development of EPA's worker protection
handbook.
2.2 Work Group on the Policy on
Supplemental Environmental Projects
Mr. Luke Cole, Center on Race, Poverty, and the
Environment and chair of the Work Group on the
Policy on Supplemental Environmental Projects
(SEP), reported that the work group had
conducted two teleconference calls to gain a
better understanding of EPA's policy on SEPs.
He noted that, on May 5,1997, most members of
the work group had received a copy of the interim
revised policy on SEPs. Mr. Cole then introduced
Mr. Richard Lazarus, Georgetown University Law
Center, whom he said had prepared a thorough
draft memorandum outlining the steps by which a
SEP may be used to address concerns related to
environmental justice.
Mr. Lazarus described his memorandum as a
series of recommendations to EPA that outlines
revisions of the proposed policy that can make
the policy a more effective tool for promoting
environmental justice than the current document.
He noted that his recommendations fall primarily
in two areas:
• Greater and earlier involvement of local
communities in the development of SEPs
Involvement of local
performance of SEPs
communities in the
Mr. Lazarus stated that EPA's proposed guidance
on SEPs includes a statement that SEPs cannot
be performed by a third party; he commented that
a local community would be considered a third
party under the proposed guidance. EPA also
has expressed concern that use of a third party to
conduct a SEP would make enforcement of the
requirement to perform the SEP more difficult, he
explained. Acknowledging that concern, Mr.
Lazarus also stated that it remains very important
to involve the iocal community in projects that
directly affect it. Mr. Lazarus suggested as a
compromise that local communities could serve
as a contractor or a consultant to the facility
responsible for performing the SEP. In addition,
the facility can provide the community with
resources that will assist in the process, he said.
In conclusion, Mr. Lazarus stated that he was
continuing to revise the memorandum.
Mr. Richard Drury, Communities for a Better
Environment, inquired about the provisions of the
3-2
_
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
draft policy on SEPs that require that 25 percent
of all penalties assessed must be paid in cash to
the U.S. Treasury. Mr. Drury stated that any
money collected should be diverted to the
community, rather than forwarded to the U.S.
Treasury. Ms. Ferris cited the Alaska pipeline
site, located in the state of Alaska, as an example
of a case in which a consent decree had diverted
funds to the community. Mr. Lazarus responded
that once the U.S. Treasury has collected funds
paid as a penalty, it is very difficult to gain access
to those funds. In response to Mr. Drury's
declaration that such funds should not be paid to
the Treasury, Mr. Cole suggested that the issue
be referred to the work group on SEPs for further
discussion.
The members approved Resolution No. 1
concerning SEPs and forwarded it to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration. Ms. Ferris also proposed that the
draft memorandum be made final and submitted
as an attachment to the resolution. The members
agreed and the revised memorandum also was
forwarded to the Executive Council of the NEJAC
for consideration. (See Section 6.0 for a
summary of the resolution.)
2.3 Work Group on the Open Market Trading
of Air Emissions Credits
Mr. Drury, chair of the Work Group on the Open
Market Trading of Air Emissions Credits, led a
discussion of the buying, selling, and trading of air
emissions credits. He commented that the
trading of such credits can result in the creation of
toxic "hot spots" that might be concentrated in
communities of color or low-income
neighborhoods. Current regulations governing
the trading of pollution credits do not address
concerns related to environmental justice, he
added. Mr. Drury also stated that the work group
had met on April 11,1997 to draft a resolution
that addresses these concerns. Mr. Arthur Ray,
Maryland Department of the Environment, asked
whether the work group has examined the
implications associated with the "banking" of air
pollution credits, another common practice, he
said. Mr. Drury responded that the work group
had not examined that issue, which he described
as "serious" and agreed to refer the concerns
expressed by the members of the subcommittee
to the work group for consideration.
The members of the subcommittee passed
Resolution No. 5 concerning environmental
justice issues related to the trading of air
emissions credits and forwarded it to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration. (See Section 6.0 fora summary of
the resolution.)
The subcommittee also discussed a resolution
that had been developed in response to issues
raised by members about the process by which
EPA had responded to an earlier resolution
related to Rule 1610 that had been adopted by
the Executive Council of the NEJAC during the
December 1996 meeting. Members of the
subcommittee expressed concerns about what
they believe to be an unreasonable length of time
for resolutions to be transmitted to the EPA
Administrator. The new resolution outlines
procedures that OECA should follow to ensure
timely response to all resolutions approved by the
Executive Council and forwarded to the EPA
Administrator. Ms. Ferris suggested that a
teleconference call with Ms. Clarice Gaylord, EPA
Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ), be held to
resolve the issue. The members agreed to table
any further action on the resolution until the call
has taken place. She also recommended that a
cover letter accompany the resolution related to
Rule 1610. Mr. Cole agreed to draft a letter to the
EPA Administrator for consideration by the
Executive Council.
Mr. Cole suggested that a resolution concerning
spatial averaging be drafted before the next
meeting of the NEJAC, scheduled for December
1997. Mr. Drury explained that the proposed
standards allow counties to average readings
taken from several air pollution monitors to
determine whether the county is in compliance
with standards. Under such practices, the entire
county could be considered in compliance with
EPA standards, despite the fact that readings in
specific neighborhoods exceed those standards,
he stated. Mr. Drury cited Los Angeles County as
an example of a case in which several inland
communities of color are exposed to very high
levels of particulate matter pollution, while white
communities near the ocean are exposed to
much lower levels. The averaging of readings for
the county would produce an artificially low
number that essentially would "mask" the effect
on the communities living in high-pollution areas,
he continued. Mr. Drury stated that local
agencies should be required to place air monitors
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
3-3
-------
.Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
in areas suspected to have high levels of
JDOllutfon, so that any levels above EPA standards
would trigger a designation of nonattainment that
In turn would trigger remedial action. Mr. Cole
and Mr. Drury volunteered to draft a resolution
addressing these issues and provide the draft to
the members of the subcommittee for review
before the December 1997 meeting of the
NEJAC.
3.0 JOINT SESSION OF THE
ENFORCEMENT AND INDIGENOUS
PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEES
This section summarizes the joint session held by
the Enforcement and the Indigenous Peoples
subcommittees. Presented below are summaries
of their discussions of tribal enforcement capacity,
tribal sovereignty, and enforcement of
environmental regulations on tribal lands.
Ms. Elizabeth Bell, EPA American Indian
Environmental Office (AlEO) and DFO of the
indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, opened the
session by thanking the members of the
Enforcement Subcommittee for attending the joint
session. Asking what enforcement issues the
Enforcement Subcommittee should be evaluating,
Ms. Ferris requested that the members of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee suggest
Issues to be addressed by the Enforcement
Subcommittee. Mr. James Hill, Klamath Tribe
and chair of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, identified three tribal issues
related to enforcement: tribal enforcement
Capacity, tribal sovereignty, and enforcement of
environmental regulations in cases that involve
hon-lndians on Inbal lands. He continued by
stating that tribal environmental standards should
foe compatible with state and federal
environmental standards. Tribes are striving to
build an environmental infrastructure and
expertise, he said, adding that, because of a lack
"6f funding, many tribes find it difficult to achieve
that goal. Currently, tribes do not have regulatory
environmental programs that enable them to
control their environment as they wish, he
continued. Only when an environmental
infrastructure has been developed can the tribes
develop an environmental policy that reflects
cultural values of the tribe, Mr. Hill stated.
Ms. Ferris commented that the subcommittee
previously had reviewed the issue of building
tribal enforcement capacity and had submitted a
report to EPA's OEJ. Ms. Ferris requested that
OEJ distribute copies of the report to the
members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee. She added that one of her
objectives in meeting with the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee was to seek the views of its
members about how to support tribal sovereignty.
Ms. Ferris asked how EPA funds were allocated
to the tribes and whether those funds were
considered adequate. Ms. Bell responded that
approximately $700 million is available under the
State and Tribal Assistance Grant Fund. The
funds have been budgeted for state and tribal
environmental programs to address such
concerns as environmental enforcement, she
explained. Ms. Bell stated that she estimated that
tribes will require approximately $380 million in
fiscal year 1997, adding that, within five years,
EPA expects that tribes will need approximately
$500 million In technical assistance each year.
Mr. Hill argued that states have been conducting
environmental programs for 20 to 25 years, while
most tribes only recently have established
environmental programs. Consequently, he said,
tribes have a greater need for assistance. Ms.
Janice Stevens, Sac and Fox Nation and a
member of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, identified needs of tribes such as
information and technical knowledge. Because
they lack those resources, some tribes do not
know what level of environmental funding they
should ask for, she continued. Mr. Hill stressed
that a tribal environmental program should be
implemented before the tribe begins to address
enforcement issues. Ms. Stevens identified a
need to develop a tribal judicial system focused
on environmental laws.
Ms. Ferris asked the members of the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee whether the efforts of the
EPA Administrator have been of any assistance
in addressing environmental issues related to
tribes. Mr. Hill replied that the EPA Administrator
had been relatively sensitive to tribal issues and
that EPA's responsiveness is improving.
"However, the need for environmental assistance
is so great and so many tribes are struggling for
survival and land rights, these tribes consider
environmental protection a luxury," he said.
Ms. Ferris asked what issues pose problems for
tribes that do possess adequate capacity to
3-4
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
enforce environmental regulations. She
mentioned cases in which several tribes have
struggled to establish environmental standards
that are more stringent than those imposed by the
state or federal government. Ms. Stevens then
identified several issues pertinent to Ms. Ferris's
remarks:
• Overlapping jurisdictional issues, stemming
from the fact that "tribes have more
regulations than any other people in the
world," and the difficulty tribes have in finding
their place within the regulatory structure
• The need of tribes to be able to regulate
activity that occurs off the reservation that
could affect the reservation
The status of land and land rights
Mr. Charles Stringer, White Mountain Apache
Tribe and a member of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, suggested that EPA should work
more closely with tribes to better understand
jurisdictional and land issues. Such an
understanding on EPA's part, he said, would help
to ensure that tribes are better equipped to
enforce environmental regulations. Mr. Lazarus
suggested that the National Enforcement Training
Institute (NETI), an organization that trains
representatives of federal, state, and local
governments, would be a good source of training
for tribes. He asked whether any training
sponsored by NETI had been made available to
tribes. The members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee indicated that no such training had
been made available. Mr. Ray agreed to contact
NETI to suggest that it contact tribes about
participating in its training programs. He added
that funding for such training "should not be a
problem." Ms. Stevens stressed that such
opportunities must be made available to tribes.
Ms. Ferris asked for questions or comments. A
gentleman in the audience commented that each
EPA regional office should be encouraged to
learn about the tribes in that region and become
involved in assisting them in obtaining necessary
training.
Another member of the audience suggested that
a roundtable meeting be held to address issues
related to tribal sovereignty. He stated that it is
"his dream" that his tribe be able to protect its
territory. He stated further that, because EPA is
understaffed and has minimal experience in tribal
law, tribes need administrative funding to better
implement tribal environmental laws. The
enforcement of regulations is an issue that affects
not only the members of his tribe, but also non-
indigenous people who transport waste on the
reservation, he concluded. Ms. Ferris
commented that the Enforcement Subcommittee
supports any efforts that would initiate a
roundtable meeting, especially one dedicated to
indigenous peoples issues.
One participant commented that the lack of
technical knowledge has been detrimental to the
tribe with which she is associated. She cited as
examples two sites located within the boundaries
of the reservation that are not listed on the
National Priorities List (NPL), but must be
monitored for harmful effects on the environment.
She explained that the EPA attorney assigned to
oversee the sites was not experienced with tribal
legislation and therefore did not advise the tribe of
its rights. Consequently, she said, the tribe has
spent more than $100,000 for monitoring the
area, even though federal aid is available to
support that effort.
Ms. Bell stated that EPA Region 8 has conducted
a roundtable meeting with tribes at which
enforcement issues related to tribal and non-tribal
communities, were discussed; it would be very
beneficial to review the issues, she suggested.
Ms. Bell agreed to provide the Enforcement
Subcommittee with notes from the roundtable
meeting.
4.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS
This section summarizes the presentations that
were made to the Enforcement Subcommittee
about issues related to enforcement and
compliance assurance.
4.1 Indoor Use of Methyl Parathion
Mr. Jesse Baskerville, Director, EPA Office of
Toxics and Pesticides Enforcement, discussed
the widespread misuse of methyl parathion in
residences. He began by stating that the
agricultural pesticide has been packaged and
distributed improperly and therefore has been
used illegally in residential applications. Mr.
Baskerville explained that the agricultural
pesticide has been applied in homes in low-
income neighborhoods in Alabama and
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
3-5
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
""I
Mississippi and as far north as Illinois. Mr.
Baskerville stated* that the pesticide is approved
for agricultural use but not for use in homes.
"This product is extremely toxic — two teaspoons
can kill an adult," fie stressed. He explained that
the product is distributed by licensed applicators
who either apply the pesticide directly in homes or
transfer the liquid into unapproved containers for
sale to residents.
Mr. Graver Hankins, Thurgood Marshall School of
Law, suggested that EPA initiate a product liability
suit against the manufacturers of the pesticide.
Mr. Baskervilte assured Mr. Hankins that the
manufacturers have undertaken many efforts,
stich as strengthening the odor of the product and
requiring distributors to return containers after
use, to ensure the correct use of the pesticide.
However, he added, insects are such a problem
in many homes tfiat the residents are willing to
bypass safeguards and "put up with" the odor.
Mr. Baskerville added that criminal actions are
being taken against those who distribute the
pesticide for indoor use; approximately 12 to 15
people have been arrested, he said.
Ms. Ferris inquired whether any health care had
been provided to people who were exposed to the
pesticide. Mr. Baskerville replied that most efforts
locus on removing people from homes in which
the pesticide has been used. He added that he
anticipates that urine testing will be conducted to
detect any adverse effects of exposure to the
pesticide. Ms. Ferris suggested that the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR) conduct health testing and education in
affected communities. Mr. Baskerville replied that
ATSDR is involved intimately in the issue.
Mr. Ray suggested the possibility of using mass
media to communicate to the public the danger of
indoor use of the product. Ms. Tau Lee agreed,
adding that it would be useful to involve
grassroots organizations. Mr. Hankins noted that
there are many safe alternative products that can
be used to eradicate indoor pests. He suggested
a recall of methyl parathion, an action that he said
would "hit industry in the pocketbook." Mr. Cole
suggested the distribution of an educational
pamphlet that takes a "holistic approach" to the
use of pesticides and identifies adverse health
effects pesticides can cause.
Ms. Ferris asked Mr. Baskerville to suggest
actions the Enforcement Subcommittee could
take to assist EPA in addressing the issue. Mr.
Hankins volunteered to draft a list of
recommendations to be submitted to the EPA
Administrator. The members of the
subcommittee ultimately agreed that Mr. Hankins
would draft a letter from the Executive Council of
the NEJAC in which it recommends that the EPA
Administrator take the following steps to address
the issue:
Launch a community awareness campaign
through the media, grassroots organizations,
and the Congressional Black Caucus
• Develop a comprehensive register of
pesticides
• Test and monitor aggressively all individuals
who have been exposed to the pesticide
through its improper use indoors
• Place a ban on methyl parathion and all
parathion derivatives
• Contact public health services in affected
areas to assist those services in educating
the community and testing individuals who
have been exposed to the chemical
4.2 Update on the Federal Facilities
Environmental Justice Initiative
Ms. Darlene Boerlage, Environmental Justice
Coordinator, EPA Federal Facilities Enforcement
Office (FFEO), briefed the subcommittee about
the progress of the federal facilities environmental
justice initiative on which she had reported at the
December 1996 meeting of the subcommittee.
Exhibit 3-3 provides a brief summary of the
initiative. Ms. Boerlage reported that the draft
Federal Facilities Environmental Justice Initiative
Report had been completed. She presented each
of the members with a copy of the report and
requested that the members review the document
and forward any comments to her.
4.3 Update on the Louisiana Energy Services
Uranium Enrichment Facility
Ms. Ferris asked Mr. Cole to brief the members of
the subcommittee on the status of the uranium
enrichment facility proposed by Louisiana Energy
3-6
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
Services (LES) near Homer, Louisiana. She
congratulated the members of the subcommittee
who had participated in an ad hoc work group
established to- review the case. Mr. Cole then
reported that the ad hoc work group had
petitioned the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
(ASLB) of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) under the provisions of Executive Order
12898 on environmental justice and the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The petition
stated that selection of the location of the facility
had been based on the color of residents of the
community, he explained. He added that the
work group had been able to provide
documentation that selection of sites had been
based on the percentage of minorities living in the
communities adjacent to the proposed site. The
ASLB commissioners agreed that race may have
been a factor in the selection of the location of the
facility, he said. Consequently, the ASLB did not
issue the permit, he concluded.
4.4 Enforcement Roundtable Meetings
Ms. Ferris reported that dialogue during the public
comment period held on May 13, 1997 by the
Executive Council had led the members of the
Executive Council to conclude they should meet
the EPA Region 6 Administrator as well as the
Deputy Regional Administrator. She added that
the Enforcement Subcommittee also had
suggested a follow-up meeting to the
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Roundtable meeting held in San Antonio, Texas
in October 1996. The members of the
subcommittee then agreed to recommend that the
follow-up meeting and the meeting with the
Regional Administrator be held jointly.
Ms. Ferris asked members of the Enforcement
Subcommittee to participate in the planning of the
next enforcement and compliance assurance
roundtable meeting to be held in EPA Region 4.
Mr. Cole, Mr. Ray, Mr. Hankins, and Ms. Leslie
Ann Beckhoff, Conoco/Dupont, agreed to
participate in the task force that will plan the
event.
5.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE
Ms. Ferris opened the floor to public dialogue.
The section below summarizes the discussions of
environmental justice issues in two communities,
St. James Parish, Louisiana and Mossville,
Louisiana.
Exhibit 3-4
HISTORY OF OPPOSITION TO THE
PROPOSED SfflNTECH FACILITY
IN ST. JAMES PARISH, LOUISIANA
According to the Toxic Release Inventory, St.
James Parish currently ranks third in Louisiana in
the level of industrial pollution affecting it. The
city of Convent is situated in a heavily
industrialized area, located in St. James Parish,
Louisiana. Currently, approximately 2,000 people
live in Convent, of whom 73 percent are African
American and 40 percent live below the poverty
level.
Shintech Corporation plans to construct and
operate a polyvinyl chloride production facility in
St. James Parish. Shintech estimates that its
proposed facility (excluding the incinerator)
annually would release approximately 600,000
pounds of pollutants. That figure is six times the
amount of pollutants currently being released from
existing industries in the area.
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
currently is considering whether to grant Shintech
an air permit that will allow construction of the
facility.
5.1 St. James Parish, Louisiana
Ms. Monique Harden, GreenPeace, opened her
presentation on the proposed construction by
Shintech Corporation of a polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) production facility in St. James Parish,
Louisiana by stating that the production of PVC is
extremely dangerous and hazardous to the
residents of communities located near PVC
production facilities. She showed a videotape of
samples taken by GreenPeace of waste from a
PVC production facility; very high levels of dioxins
had been detected in these samples, she said.
Discussing the Shintech facility, she stated that a
public meeting had been held to discuss concerns
related to the proposed construction of the facility;
however, Shintech representatives dominated the
agenda until late in the evening and relinquished
the floor only when the majority of the members of
the community had left before expressing their
concerns, she stated. GreenPeace and the
Tulane University Environmental Law Clinic filed
a petition with EPA Region 6 that requested that
Shintech be denied an air permit. She continued
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
3-7
-------
Enforcement Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
by stressing that, in addition to the "obvious15
environmental justice issues, the community does
not have, the capacity to provide emergency
response actions that might be necessary. The
petition, she said, states that the lack of
Appropriate emergency response facilities should
exclude the community from consideration as a
location for a facility the size of Shintech's
planned operation.
Ms. Harden also expressed concern that some
members of the community had been influenced
unduly by Shintech to support the construction of
the facility. She also reported that EPA Region 6
had not been responsive to the petition filed. "I
am very unhappy with the current situation," she
said. Exhibit 3-4 provides a brief introduction to
the issues related jo the proposed construction of
the Shintech facility in St. James Parish.
; ":i;i '
In addition, Ms. Emelda West, a resident of St.
James Parish, expressed her concern about the
proposed facility because the location is very
close to an elementary school. She said that her
small community, riome already to many industrial
facilities, has a high rate of cancer and birth
defects. Ms. W^est said she fears for future
generations of the St. James Parish community.
She added that the Louisiana state government is
encouraging industry to locate in the state and
does not care about the needs of the community.
She stated further her belief that there is ho valid
argument to support construction of the Shintech
facility in St. Jamis Parish. There are "plenty of
jobs" in the St. James Parish community, she
said.
Mr. Richard Mopre, Southwest Network for
Economic and Environmental Justice and chair of
the Executive Council, credited EPA Region 6
with overcoming many of the problems it once
Had. He added, however, that the regional office
should not lake sides" in the Shintech matter;
rather it should help the people who need help.
He stated further that the Executive Council and
the subcommittee should send a message to EPA
Region 6 to "stay neutral or stay out."
Ms. Beckhoff asked whether Shintech had
considered any other locations for the facility. Ms.
garden replied that the Shintech facility
conducted alternative site analyses of 12 sites;
however, the analyses did not consider any
criteria related to the communities in the vicinity of
the various sites, she said. Mr. Moore asked
whether the community wished to offer
recommendations to the subcommittee. Ms.
Harden, on behalf of the community, provided the
subcommittee with a draft resolution. Mr. Damu
Smith, Greenpeace, stated that the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality may issue
a permit at any time and suggested that the
subcommittee quickly approve the resolution.
The members of the subcommittee reviewed the
resolution and agreed that an emergency
resolution that addresses all environmental
regulations and environmental justice issues
should be written. Mr. Lazarus volunteered to
draft the resolution.
5.2 Mossville, Louisiana
Ms. Deborah Ramirez, Mossville Environmental
Action Now and resident of the community of
Mossville, Louisiana, stated that her community is
very polluted. People in her community have
higher rates than the national averages for liver,
lung, and kidney cancer, as well as emphysema.
She stated that the yards in which children play
are contaminated and that leaks from ethylene
dichloride pipes from local industrial facilities are
not unusual. Further, she said, the community
has two water supplies, one clean (bottled water
for drinking) and the other dirty. However, she
added, some people cannot afford bottled water
for drinking. There have been many violations of
environmental regulations in her community, she
said, and, although the community has asked for
help, it has not received any.
Mr. Cole asked how many people reside in
Mossville. Ms. Ramirez replied that the
community includes approximately 325 people.
Mr. Cole asked her if those residents want to
relocate. She replied that some do and that
others want to stay. However, she said, in her
opinion, the community should be relocated.
Ms. Ferris stated that testimony received at the
public comment periods of the Executive Council
is forwarded to a subcommittee for further
consideration, and assured Ms. Ramirez that her
issues will be considered seriously by one of the
subcommittees of the NEJAC.
3-8
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Enforcement Subcommittee
6.0 RESOLUTIONS
This section summarizes the resolutions
discussed by the Enforcement Subcommittee and
forwarded to the Executive Council of the NEJAC
for consideration.
The members discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC
advise EPA to modify its draft SEP policy to
include affirmative endorsements of the maximum
use of SEPs to promote environmental justice
objectives, such as, integrating public
participation models; stating that community
organizations may serve as contractors or
consultants of the defendants; and striving to
create means to involve the community
organizations at every stage of the enforcement
process. This resolution was forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC
advise EPA to develop a matrix of pesticides
based on toxicity, occupational exposure history,
occurrence in groundwater, and commonality of
food residues, which will be used by EPA to focus
multi-media enforcement actions, targeting
production, application, export, and disposal of
pesticides. This resolution was forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC
advise EPA to focus farmworker protection
enforcement efforts in one or two states, such as
North Carolina and Texas and that EPA should
implement a licensing procedure for trainers
under the Worker Protection Standard; results of
this training program should be evaluated during
pilot studies. The resolution was forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC
advise EPA to actively monitor and participate in
Community-University Partnership (CUP) grant
awards to ensure that community-based
organizations are accurately represented in
proposals, and are active participants in the CUP
grant process. This resolution was forwarded to
the Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC
advise EPA to amend the Economic Incentive
Policy and Open Market Trading Policy to
incorporate environmental justice concerns
related to public participation and the potential of
air pollution trading programs to concentrate toxic
air pollution in communities of color. This
resolution was forwarded to the Executive Council
of the NEJAC for consideration.
The members discussed an emergency resolution
in which the subcommittee recommended that the
NEJAC advise EPA to fully consider all the
environmental justice issues and effects of
allowing the Shintech Corporation to build a
facility in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The
resolution was forwarded to the Executive Council
of the NEJAC for consideration.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
3-9
-------
..':•,::, "Ill1 f" • , ",!t
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 14,1997
Potawatomi Indian Reservation
Wabeno, Wisconsin
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Lawrence Martin
Designated Federal Official
Carol Christensen
Designated Federal Official
and Acting Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER FOUR
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 one-day meeting on
Wednesday, May 14, 1997, during a two-day
meeting of the Executive Council of the NEJAC at
the Indian Springs Lodge and Conference Center
on the Potawatomi Indian Reservation near
Wabeno, Wisconsin. Ms. Mary English,
University of Tennessee Energy Environmental
Resources Center and chair of the subcommittee,
was unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Lawrence
Martin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Office of Research and Development
(ORD), and Ms. Carol Christensen, EPA Office of
Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances
(OPPTS), continue to serve as the co-Designated
Federal Officials (DFO) for the subcommittee.
Exhibit 4-1 presents a list of the members who
attended the meeting and identifies the members
who were unable to attend the meeting.
This chapter, which provides a summary of the
discussions of the Health and Research
Subcommittee, is organized in six sections,
including this Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks,
summarizes the opening remarks of the DFO.
Section 3.0, Activities of the Subcommittee,
summarizes selected action items and resolutions
and the future goals of the subcommittee.
Section 4.0, Presentations and Reports,
summarizes the presentations made to the
subcommittee and the members' discussions of
issues related to health and research activities.
Section 5.0, Summary of Public Dialogue,
summarizes presentations and discussions
offered during the public dialogue period. Section
6.0, Significant Action Items, presents the
significant action items discussed by the
subcommittee.
2.0 REMARKS
Because Ms. English was unable to attend the
meeting of the subcommittee, Ms. Christensen
served as the acting chair of the subcommittee.
She opened the meeting by welcoming the
members and introduced Ms. Margaret Williams,
Citizens Against Toxic Exposure, a new member
of the subcommittee. Exhibit 4-2 presents a brief
statement of Ms. Williams' interests in the field of
environmental justice.
Exhibit 4-1
HEALTH AND RESEARCH
SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 14,1997
Ms. Carol Christensen, co-DFO
Mr. Lawrence Martin, co-DFO
Mr. Douglas Brugge
Mr. Andrew McBride
Ms. Marinelle Payton
Ms. Margaret Williams*
List of Members
Who Were Unable To Attend
Ms. Mary English, Chair
Ms. Sherry Salway-Black**
Mr. Kekuni Blaisdell
Ms. Rosa Franklin
Ms. Paula Gomez
Mr. Perm Loh
*New subcommittee member
**Resigned from the subcommittee
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
The members of the Health and Research
Subcommittee discussed the activities of the
subcommittee, which included a review of
selected action items and resolutions, as well as
a discussion of areas of focus for the
subcommittee.
3.1 Review of Outstanding Resolutions
Ms. Christensen led a discussion of the status of
action items and resolutions developed by the
subcommittee during the December 1996
meeting. The discussions are summarized and
updates of selected action items and resolutions
are presented below.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
4-1
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit 4-2
NEW MEMBER OF THE
SUBCOMMITTEE
Ms. Margaret Williams, Citizens Against Toxic
Exposure, described her community in Pensacola,
Florida, which was the site of the first Relocation
Roundtable meeting sponsored by EPA and the
Escambia Relocation Pilot Project Noting that
her community is contaminated with pesticides,
she explained that her community is home to the
Escambia Superfund site. She remarked that she
is interested in implementing a plan to offer health
care assistance, in addition to community
relocation, to residents of her community.
.Health Resolution No. 1: NEJAC urges EPA to
fully review dissenting opinions on the report
entitled Putting the Pieces Together: Controlling
the Lead Hazards in the Nation's Housing
(prepared by the Task Force on Lead-Based
Paint Hazard Reduction and Financing) before
implementing any of the recommendations in the
report.
|pie members of the subcommittee requested an
|ipdate from EPA on the status of the report. In
Addition, the members agreed to resubmit the
resolution to meet the newly established
requirements of the NEJAC guidance on
resolutions. The resolution will be forwarded to
the Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration during its December 1997 meeting.
Health Resolution No. 2: NEJAC urges the EPA
Administrator to communicate to the U.S.
Department of Tiealth and Human Services
(HHS), the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD), and the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP),
NEJAC's concerns about CDCP's proposed
retreat from universal screening of children and
Revision of standards for lead abatement.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
draft a letter to the EPA Administrator to transmit
the resolution that ttie Executive GPurJPil
approved at the December 1996 meeting of the
NEJAC and to submit the letter of transmittal to
the Executive Council for consideration.
Health Resolution No. 3: NEJAC recommends it
should be integrated into planning and execution
of the Children's Environmental Health
Conference, which will likely serve as a launching
pad for a national EPA initiative on these issues.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
draft a letter to the EPA Administrator that
summarizes the principles discussed at the
Children's Environmental Health, Research,
Prevention, Practices; and Policy Conference
attended by Ms. Marinelle Payton, Harvard
Medical School, and to submit that letter to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members of the subcommittee also agreed to
invite Mr. Philip Landrigan, EPA Office of
Children's Health, to make a presentation on
children's health issues at the December 1997
meeting.
11 i . ! ".i . .!! "
Health Resolution No. 4: NEJAC requests that
EPA provide an inventory of studies addressing
human health and ecological effects resulting
from environmental stressors (for example,
groundwater pollution); the report should address
community concerns about the islands of Puerto
Rico, Vieques, and Culebra.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
resubmit the resolution under the new NEJAC
guidance, pending follow-up reports from the
parties involved, including Mr. Julio Rodriguez,
Comite Timon Calidad Ambiental de Manati
(COTICAM).
Health Resolution No. 5: NEJAC acknowledges
the work of the National Institute of Environmental
Health Science (NIEHS); in addition, NIEHS and
EPA should coordinate efforts to increase funding
to support work that NIEHS does and EPA should
provide programmatic support to those initiatives.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
draft a letter to the EPA Administrator on the
subject and to submit that letter and the resolution
to the Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
3.2 Areas of Focus for the Subcommittee
The members of the subcommittee reviewed
priorities for deciding about future activities of the
subcommittee. They discussed the goals and
objectives of the subcommittee and reviewed the
list of topic areas discussed during the December
1996 meeting.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
" • '" • •••
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
Ms. Christensen suggested that the
subcommittee concentrate on the following areas
to better focus the efforts of the subcommittee:
• Pursue projects which have measurable
objectives
• Select projects have environmental justice
themes in common with those of ongoing
projects developed by EPA
Identify areas that other subcom mittees of the
NEJAC could jointly address with the Health
and Research Subcommittee
Host joint activities with the other
subcommittees of the NEJAC
Mr. Andrew McBride, City of Stamford,
Connecticut, Health Department, added that he
believes the subcommittee should address issues
related to lead poison and air pollution because
they are known environmental contaminants that
adversely affect people. Mr. Douglas Brugge,
Tufts University School of Medicine, stated that
he did not believe the mission of the
subcommittee was to "force" EPA to study issues
that are not well documented. Mr. McBride
responded that his approach to addressing
environmental factors that are known to have
adverse effects on people does not result in the
larger issues being overlooked when the
emphasis is placed on smaller details.
Ms. Christensen then led a discussion of the
goals that had been identified by the
subcommittee at the December 1996 meeting:
EPA's toxics agenda, children's health initiatives,
and a tool for community-based risk assessment.
3.2.1 Toxics Agenda
Ms. Christensen stated that EPA's toxics agenda
sets forth the priorities for testing chemicals in the
environment. The subcommittee, she continued,
could suggest a list of chemicals to be tested
during the next fiscal year. There are 70,000
chemicals included in the toxics agenda, she said.
Mr. Brugge asked how many chemicals are
selected each year and what are the criteria EPA
uses in selecting the chemicals. Ms. Christensen
responded that approximately 30 chemicals are
selected, with the selection determined mainly by
the desired adequacy of the database. She
explained that chemicals are selected that are
believed to have adverse health effects; the
sufficiency of the study conducted, and the
degree to which OPPTS has ongoing information
from other offices of EPA.
Mr. McBride said that a common-sense approach
should be applied when determining which
chemicals will be selected for inclusion in the
toxics agenda for the coming year. Public health
professionals tend to "use their senses" when
determining which chemicals are harmful, he
explained, and the public does the same. The
common-sense approach, he explained, consists
of heeding the warnings of our senses (such as
offensive odors or vapors that irritate eyes or skin)
that chemicals might have adverse effects. Mr.
McBride suggested that grouping chemicals on
the basis of sensory response would assist the
subcommittee in advising the EPA on the
selection of chemicals.
Mr. Brugge asked if there is a survey that
identifies the chemicals most likely to be found in
people of color and low-income communities. Ms.
Payton responded that such a document exist.
Ms. Payton, agreed to investigate if a list exists for
the December 1997 meeting. She added that
only chemicals that are in commerce are on the
Toxic Substances Control Act inventory.
3.2.2 Children's Health Initiatives
Ms. Christensen announced that on April 21,
1997, President Clinton had signed an Executive
order for the protection of children from
environmental risk. Exhibit 4-3 presents a
summary of the Executive order. She reminded
the members that the EPA Administrator had
asked the subcommittee to review issues related
the environment, as well as to suggest how such
issues should be addressed.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
recommend that EPA focus on the following
issues related to children and the environment:
• Focus on improving the physical and
biological environment of children
• Promote a more effective response to the
issues related to children; all involved parties
should be held accountable
• Consider intervening when a child is
adversely effected
• Promote community involvement
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
4-3
-------
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
* Encourage a multidisciplinary approach to
addressing issues related to children's health
that involves community participation at
public hearings
The members of the subcommittee agreed that
the overall goal of initiatives related to children's
health should be to provide an environment that
promotes their healthy growth and development.
3.2.3 Community-Based Risk Assessment
Tools
Mr. Martin explained that cumulative risk
exposure in communities is analyzed by multiple
exposure pathways as well as exposure to
multiple chemicals. He stated that ORD takes
both an external and an internal approach.
Externally, he continued, ORD considers what
action the state and local government will pursue.
Internally, ORD considers what type of people in
the community should be involved in evaluating
the risk assessment; what questions should be
asked by the community; what tools are available
16 the community; and how to provide the
oprnmunjty with access to those tools.
fvls. Williams stated that communities often are
told that insufficient /data exists to determine
health risks; EPA therefore concludes that there
are no adverse health effects, she said. Ms.
Payton noted that collaborative community
research should be implemented to involve the
jTiembers of the community early in the planning
§tages of the study. EPA should focus its
Activities on prevention, she added. Ms. Payton
stated that studies then can be conducted to
address how to reduce or eliminate exposure to
pollutants. Mr. McBride agreed, adding that
research should not be used as "an excuse not to
take action." Mr. Brugge also agreed; he stated
that the question becomes where and when do
you intervene to prevent future exposures. Mr.
Brugge concluded that an assumption that an
exposure has occurred can be made at a very
early stage; however, the degree and extent of
the exposure becomes the focus of the debate,
he pointed out.
Mr. McBride continued the discussion by stating
that there is more of a burden of proof on people
of color than on other communities to provide
evidence of exposure to hazardous contaminants.
Exhibit 4-3
SUMMARY OF
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13045 ON
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH RISKS AND
SAFETY RISKS
A growing body of scientific knowledge
demonstrates that children may suffer
disproportionately from environmental health and
safety risks. These risks arise because: children's
neurological, immunological, digestive, and other
bodily systems are still developing; children eat
more food, drink more fluids, and breathe more air
in proportion to their body weight than adults;
children's size and weight may diminish their
protection from standard safety features; and
children's behavior patterns may make them more
susceptible to accidents because they are less able
to protect themselves.
Therefore, to the extent permitted by law and
appropriate, and consistent with the agency's
mission, each Federal agency shall:
(a) Make it a high priority to identify and assess
environmental health risks and safety risks
that may disproportionately affect children;
and
(b) Ensure that its policies, programs, activities,
and standards address disproportionate risks
to children that result from environmental
health or safety risks
Mr. Brugge recommended that EPA conduct a
study to determine whether different standards of
care are applied to low-income communities and
communities of people of color. Mr. Brugge
agreed to investigate the issue for the December
1997 meeting. Ms. Williams also observed that
people of color must prove that the effects of the
exposure to the chemicals of concern are
harmful.
4.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS
This section summarizes the presentations that
were made to the Health and Research
Subcommittee about issues related to health and
research.
4-4
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
4.1 Lead Mining in Tar Creek, Oklahoma
Mr. Dwayne Beavers, Cherokee Nation and a
member of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee of the NEJAC, made a
presentation to the subcommittee on the
environmental effects of lead mining in Tar Creek,
Oklahoma. The area is listed on the National
Priorities List of sites most in need of cleanup, he
said. Mr. Beavers explained that the
contamination caused by lead and zinc mining
operations has resulted in serious health
problems. However, EPA Region 6 Superfund
Branch did not conduct a risk-based study to
evaluate the problems in the area, he stated. Mr.
Beavers explained that the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) had
conducted a study to determine the level of lead
in the blood of members of the community. Mr.
Beavers informed the subcommittee that the
ATSDR study had concluded that the levels of
lead in the blood of children in the area were
higher than the limits set by the current protective
standard. Mr. Beavers stated that the mines are
located near residential areas; the groundwater in
the vicinity of those residences is not suitable for
drinking, he added. Mr. Beavers also stated that
sediment ponds are contaminated with heavy
metals and that 30 percent of the homes in the
area contain lead dust.
Mr. McBride asked whether legal actions had
been taken against the owners of the mines. Mr.
Beavers responded that EPA had identified the
potentially responsible parties (PRP) that would
have financial obligations under Superfund. Mr.
McBride then asked how many children had been
affected by the contamination caused by the lead
and zinc mining operations. Mr. Beavers
responded that 164 children in the area have
been affected. Mr. McBride inquired whether the
Native American population had received less
assistance than the more affluent communities in
the area. Mr. Beavers replied that more educated
populations probably receive more assistance;
however, all of the areas where mining operations
have taken place should be evaluated for health
risks, he added.
Ms. Christensen asked whether persons living in
the mining areas are suffering from similar
adverse health effects. Mr. Beavers responded
that EPA has not evaluated health risks generally
related to heavy metals. ATSDR, Mr. Beavers
added, should investigate and address all mining
sites and develop outreach programs to educate
local communities about the risks and hazards
associated with such sites.
4.2 Uranium Mining on the Navajo Nation
Mr. Brugge made a presentation on the effects on
members of the Navajo Nation of contamination
caused by uranium mining in New Mexico. He
distributed copies of Memories Come to Us in the
Rain and the Wind: Oral Histories and
Photographs of Navajo Uranium Miners and Their
Families, published by the Navajo Uranium Miner
Oral History and Photography Project. Mr.
Brugge stated that the Navajo Uranium Workers
Program (ONUW) was established in 1990 to
identify former Navajo uranium miners, in
anticipation of the Radiation Exposure
Compensation Act (RECA). RECA, he explained,
was designed to pay "compassionate"
compensation to miners who worked in the
uranium mines during the years from 1947 to
1971, part of the Cold War era. He explained that
questions remain about the potential effects of
contamination caused by uranium mining on
members of the Navajo Nation. The U.S. Public
Health Service has acknowledged that it
conducted health studies on the uranium miners
without their knowledge, Mr. Brugge added.
Mining companies are now returning to the
Navajo Nation to obtain permission to conduct in
situ mining in areas where mining has occurred in
the past, he concluded.
Mr. McBride stated that he believes public health
agencies should be accountable for encouraging
increased involvement by other federal agencies
in addressing health issues. Ms. Williams
agreed, stating her opinion that ATSDR has done
a poor job of addressing issues related to
environmental health.
Mr. McBride stressed that the federal government
is not performing accurate assessments of the
risks associated with mining activities and that no
interagency approach has been developed. Ms.
Christensen summarized the following points
discussed related to mining:
• Percentage of metal in waste water, process
water, and tailings is key to determining
potential effects
• Outreach and education should be improved
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
4-5
-------
,, ,
Health and Research Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
• Increased government involvement in the
monitoring of mining operations is
recommended
4.3 Conference on Children's Environmental
Health
|!s. Payton presented information about the first
national research conference on children's
environmental health, Ms. Payton explained that
the conference, sponsored by the Children's
Environmental rjealth Network, was held in
|Vashington D.C. in February 1997. She reported
lhat participants in the conference had addressed
five priority areas in pediatric environmental
health research: asthma and respiratory
diseases, causes of childhood cancer,
neurodevelopmehtal effects, endocrine disorders,
and cross-cutting issues. Ms. Payton then stated
that the conference had been held to provide a
rtational forum for presentation and discussion of:
the latest research findings on pediatric
environmental health; efforts to stimulate
collaborative and innovative research among a
variety of research disciplines; how to determine
the next set of research questions to be
investigated; and how to develop research
recommendations, as well as to encourage further
research in the field of children's environmental
health. Ms. Payton concluded by enumerating
future research and study needs. She
emphasized the need to fill gaps in basic
knowledge and data about children, with study
needed in the following areas:
« The greater exposure of children to toxicants:
scientists need more and better information
about what substances children are exposed
to and the extent of their exposure
'•' The increasejj susceptibility of children to
toxicants: studies that identify adult
tolerances to chemicals do not necessarily
reflect propertolerance levels among children
A Ethical issues, particularly in the area of
';!! ''genetics "
• The cost of environmental diseases in
Children
Ms. Payton also identified a need for
epidemiological and clinical studies, including
studies of children. Mr. Brugge stated that indoor
air quality is not addressed adequately in the
handout entitled "Environmental Health Threats to
Children," an EPA report on how children's health
is affected directly and uniquely by the
environment. Ms. Payton agreed; however, she
noted that cumulative exposure to air pollutants
must be considered when addressing the
environmental effects of air pollution on children.
Mr. McBride emphasized that he does not believe
the conference addressed children's health issues
in a "realistic manner." He pointed out that the
physical environment around a child, such as
unsafe stairwells and poor lighting, should be
addressed. Parental exposure to toxins also must
be evaluated, he added. Mr. McBride stated that
EPA should demonstrate greater commitment to
the issue. Mr. Brugge asked what actions the
subcommittee could take to convince EPA to
expand the scope of children's health issues to
include these and other important factors that
affect children's health.
Ms. Payton also asked whether HUD has been
involved in areas that affect a child's physical
environment. Ms. Christensen responded that
HUD has sponsored grant programs on lead
issues in the past. Mr. Brugge concluded that an
integrated approach must be taken on the issue
of children's health, and that such an approach
should include federal agencies, such as HUD,
and other organizations, such as schools.
5.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE
The Health and Research Subcommittee
provided members of the audience the
opportunity to participate in a public dialogue
session.
5.1 Clarence Lewis, EPA National Program
Chemicals Assistance Branch
Mr. Clarence Lewis, EPA National Program
Chemicals Assistance Branch, discussed EPA's
position on targeted lead screening for children.
Mr. Lewis explained that EPA is "sympathetic" to
the approach of CDCP conducting targeted lead
screening for children. EPA, he stated, is
discussing with CDCP a joint effort to identify the
communities that will be targeted for the
screening. Mr. Lewis informed the members of
the subcommittee that EPA will take the following
steps to identify communities eligible for lead
screening:
4-6
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
_
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Health and Research Subcommittee
• Predict the sources of lead by application of
a scoring system
• Establish outreach programs to distribute
information to communities
Establish partnerships at the national level
with insurance providers, physicians, and
health maintenance organizations (HMO)
Develop outreach efforts to professionals,
such as teachers and risk assessors, at the
local level to increase their knowledge about
the risks of lead poisoning
• Consult with representatives of HUD and
CDCP to determine which communities are at
greatest risk for lead exposure
• Assist communities that have a high risk of
exposure to lead by providing grant programs
Conduct evaluations to determine the
success of the program
Mr. Lewis stated that EPA is not opposed to
CDCP's approach and declared that the Agency
would like to participate in the program.
Mr. McBride stated that cooperation between EPA
and CDCP is a positive step in addressing issues
related to lead exposure. However, he added,
CDCP's guidelines are arbitrary and
unacceptable. The standards for determining
what is risk are too high, he stated. Mr. McBride
explained that the selected target areas are not
practical from the point of view of providers of
medical care. Mr. McBride then stated that zip
codes also are not acceptable standards for
delineating neighborhoods. Further, he said, the
use of the year 1950 as a cutoff date, with homes
constructed after that date not considered likely to
contain lead-based products, is not accurate
because many homes will not be included. Mr.
Brugge added that homes that have been
remodeled or renovated also must be considered.
6.0 SIGNIFICANT ACTION ITEMS
This section summarizes significant action items
discussed by the Health and Research
Subcommittee.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
draft a letter to the EPA Administrator forwarding
Health Resolution No. 2, that was approved by
the Executive Council at its December 1996
meeting. The resolution recommended that the
NEJAC urge the EPA Administrator to
communicate to HHS, HUD, and CDCP the
concerns of NEJAC about CDCP's proposed
retreat from universal screening of children for
lead content in blood and revision of standards for
lead abatement. The letter was forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members also agreed to draft a letter to the
EPA Administrator to forward Health Resolution
No. 3, approved by the Executive Council at the
December 1996 meeting. The resolution
recommended that the NEJAC request that EPA
include the NEJAC in the planning and execution
of the Children's Environmental Health
Conference. The letter was forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
4-7
-------
l.1! (' • ii
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 14,1997
Potawatomi Indian Reservation
Wabeno, Wisconsin
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Bell
ignated Federal Official
James Hill
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER RVE
MEETING OF THE
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee of the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) conducted a one-day meeting on
Wednesday, May 14, 1997, during a two-day
meeting of the Executive Council of the NEJAC at
the Indian Springs Lodge and Conference Center
on the Potawatomi Indian Reservation near
Wabeno, Wisconsin. Mr. James Hill, Klamath
Tribe, serves as the newly appointed chair of the
subcommittee. Ms. Elizabeth Bell, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO),
continues to serve as the Designated Federal
Official for the subcommittee. Exhibit 5-1
presents a list of the members who attended the
meeting and identifies the members who were
unable to attend.
This chapter, which provides a detailed summary
of the deliberations of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, is organized in five sections,
including this Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks,
summarizes the opening remarks of the chair and
the DFO and summarizes the subcommittee's
discussion of the agenda. Section 3.0, Activities
of the Subcommittee, includes a review of the
draft mission statement for the subcommittee, a
review of selected action items and resolutions,
and a summary of the proceedings of the joint
meeting with the Enforcement Subcommittee of
the NEJAC. Section 4.0, Presentations and
Reports, summarizes presentations and reports
the subcommittee received on issues related to
the environmental justice concerns of indigenous
peoples. Section 5.0, Resolutions, summarizes
the resolutions forwarded to the Executive
Council of the NEJAC for consideration.
2.0 REMARKS
Mr. Hill opened the subcommittee meeting by
welcoming the members present and the DFO
and asking whether one of the members of the
subcommittee would open the meeting with a
prayer. Ms. Janice Stevens, Sac and Fox Nation,
volunteered a prayer of thanksgiving. Mr. Hill
continued with an apology for having allowed any
issues to "fall through the planks" because of his
recent move from Arizona to Oregon. Mr. Hill
stated that he would like to set priorities among
issues to be addressed at the current meeting.
Exhibit 5-1
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 14,1997
Mr. James Hill, Chair
Ms. Elizabeth Bell, DFO
Mr. Dwayne Beavers
Mr. Richard Monette
Ms. Janice Stevens
Mr. Charles Stringer
List of Members
Who Were Unable To Attend
Ms. Astel Cavanaugh
Mr. Henry SiJohn*
* New member of the subcommittee
Ms. Bell announced that the EPA Administrator
had appointed Mr. Henry SiJohn, Coeur d'Alene
Tribe, to the subcommittee as a tribal elder. Mr.
SiJohn, she explained, had been unable to attend
the meeting because of a prior commitment. She
also requested that the members of the
subcommittee review the minutes of their informal
meeting on April 18, 1997 in Washington, D.C.
The members accepted the minutes of the
meeting, as written.
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
This section discusses the activities of the
subcommittee, which included a review of the
draft mission statement for the subcommittee; a
review of selected action items and resolutions;
and a joint meeting with the Enforcement
Subcommittee of the NEJAC.
3.1 Review of the Draft Mission Statement
Mr. Charles Stringer, White Mountain Apache
Tribe, provided an update to the members on the
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
5-1
-------
indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
,,, i,,,,,
'I'llLfl
n "'I Hi |
Exhibit 5-2
DRAFT MISSION STATEMENT
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE
Preamble. In December 1995, two years after its creation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) created a subcommittee—the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee—to advise the NEJAC on environmental justice issues facing indigenous peoples. The NEJAC
recognized that these unique issues require the specialized knowledge, experience, and expertise of the
subcommittee because of the government-to-government relationship between the federal government and
sovereign Indian tribes, and because environmental injustices strike to the core of the cultural and political
integrity of indigenous communities.
Indigenous communities—whether Hawaiian or Alaskan natives, federally recognized Indian tribes and their
members, urban indigenous peoples, non-federally-recognized indigenous communities, or indigenous
communities across international boundaries—all belong to a community of people whose ancestors inhabited
this continent before European colonization. Since time immemorial, indigenous peoples have lived a spiritual
ethic that is founded upon a deeply held respect for the air, the water, the land, the plants, and the animals; an
ethic that recognizes the essential link between the health of communities and the health of the ecosystems and
cultures that sustain those communities.
Composition of the Subcommittee. Members of the subcommittee are selected from the following groups:
elders and spiritual leaders from indigenous communities; individuals from indigenous communities who have
first-hand knowledge of environmental justice issues facing indigenous peoples; members of organizations that
address environmental impacts on indigenous communities; members of academia who are experts in laws
governing the relationships between indigenous peoples and local, state, and federal governments;
representatives of federally recognized American Indian tribal governments that assert their sovereign powers
to manage, protect, and restore tribal ecosystems; representatives of state and local governments that govern
areas neighboring indigenous communities; and representatives of industries that directly or indirectly impact
indigenous communities. The subcommittee also includes a Designated Federal Official who is knowledgeable
about federal environmental programs available to indigenous peoples.
Mission. Together, members of the subcommittee will draw upon their collective experiences, knowledge, and
expertise to facilitate the NEJAC's formulation of recommendations and advice provided to EPA on
environmental justice policy and direction as it affects indigenous peoples. To achieve its mission, the
subcommittee will, at a minimum, perform the following functions:
• Provide a forum for representatives of indigenous communities, including grassroots organizations
from within those communities, to bring their environmental justice concerns to the attention of the
NEJAC and provide recommendations and advice to the NEJAC to address those concerns.
• Provide recommendations and advice to the NEJAC on the development of EPA-backed legislation, as
well as Agency policy, guidance, and protocol, to help achieve environmental justice for indigenous
peoples.
• Provide recommendations and advice to the NEJAC to ensure that environmental justice issues of
concern to indigenous peoples are addressed by EPA in a manner that fulfills the trust responsibility,
respects tribal sovereignty and the government-to-government relationship, upholds treaties, and
promotes tribal self-determination.
• Recognize that issues facing indigenous peoples span the spectrum of issues addressed by other
NEJAC subcommittees and interface with those subcommittees to ensure that all subcommittees
address environmental justice issues of concern to indigenous peoples in an informed manner.
•;i if
5-2
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
draft mission statement of the subcommittee.
Exhibit 5-2 presents the text of the draft mission
statement. He explained that he had presented to
the subcommittee a draft mission statement at the
subcommittee's meeting on April 18, 1997 in
Washington, D.C. He stated that he wished to
incorporate into the statement the concept of
concerns related to environmental justice that are
unique to indigenous peoples. Another concept
to be addressed in the development of the
mission statement, he said, is whether
environmental issues that confront indigenous
peoples differ from those that affect non-Native
communities.
Mr. Stringer stated that the U.S. government
established the reservation system to provide
self-sustaining "homelands" for Native Americans;
thereby recognizing Native Americans' special,
long-term relationship with the land, which other
communities do not possess. Mr. Stringer added
that an Indian tribe does not have the option of
relocating or selling its land. Native Americans
believe that environmental harm to the land also
harms the people, he said. Mr. Stringer
concluded his report by stating that he would like
to receive final comments on the document during
the current meeting so that the subcommittee can
move toward adoption of the mission statement.
Mr. Richard Monette, University of Wisconsin Law
School, agreed with Mr. Stringer that it is difficult
to express in written language the special
relationship indigenous peoples have with the
land and the relationship that tribal governments
have with the federal government. Mr. Monette
stated that he believes that the concept of the
trust responsibility should not be a guiding
principle of the subcommittee's mission
statement. He said that the federal government's
definition of its trust responsibility usually is
"nebulous," explaining that the federal
government often invokes its trust responsibility
for "its own convenience." For example, he
explained, when a tribal government makes a
"democratic" decision to site a facility on its land
and a tribal grassroots organization believes that
the individual rights of members of the tribe have
been infringed, the tribal grassroots organization
often files a complaint with a federal agency. The
federal agency then can choose to invoke its trust
responsibility to reverse the decision of the tribal
government. Mr. Hill stated that issues related to
environmental justice and indigenous peoples go
beyond the trust responsibility of the federal
government to tribes. Mr. Dwayne Beavers,
Cherokee Nation, agreed, adding, however, that
the trust responsibility is a component of the
issues of environmental justice that confront
indigenous peoples.
Ms. Stevens suggested that the mission
statement be revised to read, "Since time
immemorial, indigenous peoples have lived a
spiritual ethic that is founded upon a deeply held
respect for the air, the water, the land, the plants,
and the animals, . . ." Mr. Hill also asked the
members of the subcommittee whether they
believe that the mission statement conveys the
cultural and spiritual issues of tribes that are
related to conditions found elsewhere than on
reservation land. He described a scenario in
which tribal burial sites are discovered outside the
reservation. Mr. Monette responded that he
believes that the mission statement need not
specifically identify whether issues arise from
circumstances occurring on or off the reservation.
It can be assumed that the subcommittee would
address issues regardless of the geographic
locations of their causes, he explained.
Referring to the section of the mission statement
that describes the membership of the
subcommittee, Mr. Hill asked the members of the
subcommittee their opinion of the phrase, 'The
subcommittee is led by a recognized elder and
spiritual leader from an indigenous community..."
Ms. Stevens explained that she believes that Ms.
Astel Cavanaugh, Spirit Lake Nation, who had
been unable to attend the meeting, had requested
that a tribal elder be appointed to the
subcommittee to lead it. Mr. Monette asked how
the members would determine who recognizes
the elder as such. Ms. Stevens stated that she
believes that the position of tribal elder for the
subcommittee should be treated by the NEJAC as
an additional category of affiliation. Mr. Beavers
stated that it is understood that the members of
the subcommittee would respect the advice of a
tribal elder appointed to the subcommittee, just as
they would that of any other member of the
subcommittee; therefore, he said, it is not
necessary to state specifically that the
subcommittee will be led by a tribal elder.
Mr. Stringer agreed to revise the draft mission
statement to incorporate the suggestions and
recommendations discussed by the members of
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
5-3
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
the subcommittee. He stated that he will send to
the members of the subcommittee the revised
draft mission statement before the
subcommittee's next conference call.
,'!' ,,! ' < ili.iiilii '< 1 « '
3.2 Review of Outstanding Action Items and
Resolutions
". 1 '.' ' " •• '< ;."V .'•••
Ms. Bell led a reyjew of selected action items and
resolutions drafted during earlier meetings of the
subcommittee. The deliberations are
summarized below.
Request that OEJ, In conjunction with AIEO,
develop guidance describing the relationship
between tribal operations and environmental
justice issues related to Native Americans, with
Input from EPA's Tribal Operations Committee
(TOC) and the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee.
Mr. Danny Gogal, EPA Office of Environmental
Justice (OEJ), informed the members of the
subcommittee t|at the guidance is under
development arid that the subcommittee's
adoption of a final mission statement will be of
help to him in finishing the document. He agreed
that, before the December 1997 meeting of the
subcommittee, he would provide a draft of the
guidance to the members for their review and
"comment Mr. Caoga'l stated that representatives
of AIEO had beerj working with him to develop the
guidance. He explained that he also would seek
Assistance from the environmental, justice and
Indian coordinators in "the EPA regional offices to
ensure that "regional perspectives" are integrated
Into the guidance!
Mr. Hill stated that he is concerned that the staff
pi EFy\ Headquarters and the regional offices do
not always communicate effectively with one
another. He said that he agreed with Mr. Gogal's
decision to involyi the environmental justice and
Indian coordinators in the EPA regions in
developing the guidance. He expressed concern,
however, about the lack of representation,
particulary of Indian coordinators, of the EPA
regional offices at the current meeting of the
NEJAC. He expressed concern that, even though
the meeting was the first the NEJAC had held in
Iridlan country, rib representatives of EPA regions
that have significant indigenous populations were
present. Mr. Hill added that the representatives
were missing an opportunity to increase their
awareness of and understanding about Indian
country. He then recommended that the
subcommittee draft a letter to the administrators
of each EPA regional office expressing the
subcommittee's disappointment at the jack of
participation on the part of regional staff,
particulary Indian coordinators, in the May 1997
meeting of the NEJAC and express appreciation
to those who had attended. After further
discussion of the issue, the members of the
subcommittee agreed to Mr. Hill's suggestion.
Indigenous Resolution No. 4: Draft a paper on
how EPA can assume permitting authority and
issue site-specific regulations in Indian Country
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA)Subtitle D for solid waste
management facilities.
Ms. Bell reminded the members of the
subcommittee that development of the resolution
had been based on discussions with Mr. James
Stone, Yankton Sioux Tribe, during the May 1996
meeting of the subcommittee.
Ms. Bell stated that the U.S. Circuit Court's
decision against the Campo Band of Mission
Indians will affect tribal primacy under federal
laws. She explained that the court had stated in
its ruling that EPA had exceeded its statutory
authority in treating tribes as states for the
purpose of operating solid waste management
programs. Ms. Bell stated that she believes
neither party won in the decision because the
landfill will be constructed and the tribe will be
able to operate the landfill under its own authority,
but without the flexibility it would enjoy if it had the
status of a "state" under RCRA Subtitle D. The
decision, she continued, 'throws into disarray"
EPA's plan to treat tribes as states under RCRA
Subtitle D. Ah alternative, she explained, would
be to issue individual regulations for each case.
(See Exhibit 5-3 for a description of the Campo
decision.)
Mr. Beavers then introduced a resolution which
addresses issues related to RCRA and tribes. He
stated that he would like to add to the new
resolution a section that discusses the untimely
manner in which tribes receive information from
EPA, particularly information related to grant
applications. He explained that tribes often do not
:"':" •'•",,! ..•• 'Mp::: ','•••••,<• , . ••: " : \ »'is i -..«;;..: • ;
".' . .'• ','' i '. . !'l' '!, '•',.'' .'! .I, '.V. '. . l! '
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
Exhibit 5-3
OVERVIEW OF THE
CAMPO DECISION
On October 29, 1996, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia
had issued a ruling that struck down EPA's
approval of the solid waste management program
of the Campo Band of Mission Indians. The
Campo Band of Mission Indians, who are
constructing a landfill for the disposal of waste
generated by the reservation, had requested
approval of a solid waste management program
under Subtitle D of RCRA. EPA had issued
general regulations under Subtitle D of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) for the development of tribal programs.
However, the regulations, which authorized both
states and tribes, had been challenged by
Backcountry Against Dumps, a non-Indian
community organization that has members who
live near the Campo Band Indian Reservation in
southern California.
receive copies of grant applications until three
weeks before submission deadlines. He
recommended that if EPA plans to award grants
related to solid waste issues, the Agency should
notify the tribes as early as possible to enable
tribes to prepare themselves for the call for
applications that may be distributed within a few
months.
Mr. Stringer asked whether the subcommittee
would like the new resolution to address the
Campo decision and to ask for an explanation of
the basis for EPA's interpretation of the court's
decision. Mr. Monette expressed approval of
those additions to the resolution, stating that EPA
should not be bound by the decision of one circuit
court. The agency has found ways to "go around"
decisions issued by other district courts, he
explained. Ms. Bell suggested that the
subcommittee invite a representative of EPA's
Office of General Counsel (OGC) to discuss
OGC's interpretation of the decision and the
reasons for EPA's position. Mr. Hill suggested
that the subcommittee draft another resolution
that focuses specifically on the Campo decision
and EPA's interpretation of the decision. In
addition, Mr. Hill recommended that Mr. Beavers,
with the assistance of Mr. Monette, revise the
resolution introduced by Mr. Beavers to
incorporate the suggestions discussed by the
subcommittee.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
revise the resolution on issues related to RCRA
and tribes and forward it to the Executive Council
of the NEJAC for consideration. In addition, the
members agreed to request that OGC provide to
the members of the subcommittee a written
analysis of its interpretation of the Campo
decision and participate in a teleconference call
with the members of the subcommittee to discuss
that analysis.
Distribute to the members of the subcommittee a
list of Internet addresses that provide access to
information.
Mr. Gogal provided to the members of the
subcommittee a list developed by the Northern
Arizona University's Computer Training Center of
Internet electronic mail and World Wide Web
addresses.
Request that OEJ identify how tribes can be
supported related to gaining access to the
Internet and training on the Internet.
Mr. Gogal stated that the action item is an
ongoing effort. He added that he would continue
to update the members of the subcommittee as
developments occur.
3.3 Joint Session of the Enforcement and
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittees
The Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
participated in a joint session with the
Enforcement Subcommittee to discuss issues
related to tribal enforcement capacity, tribal
sovereignty, and enforcement of environmental
regulations on tribal lands. (See Chapter Three,
Section 3.0 for a summary of the discussion.)
4.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS
This section summarizes the presentations made
and reports submitted to the indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
5-5
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
4.1 Update on Ward Valley, California
This section summarizes the presentations made
to the subcommittee about the low-level
radioactive waste ]LLRW) facility proposed by the
state of California for the Ward Valley basin.
Discussion of the presentations is followed by a
jUrrirhary of the deliberations of the members of
jhe subcommittee about a resolution on the issue
to be forwarded to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC for consideration.
Mr. Carl Lischeske, Department of Health
Services (DHS)State of California, began the
presentation with a description of the proposed
plan to construct a LLRW facility in Ward Valley.
He stated that the federal Low-Level Radioactive
Waste Policy Act of 1980 and the Policy
Amendments of 1985 made each state
responsible for providing disposal capacity for the
commercial LLRW generated within its borders.
Because fewer than 50 commercial LLRW
disposal facilities are needed, the law encouraged
states to oojisjder a regional approach to
management of LLRW by entering into interstate
compacts, Mr. Lischeske explained. In November
1988, he stated that Congress had ratified the
Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Compact Commission, which currently includes
the states of Arizona, California, North Dakota,
and South Dakota. Mr. Lischeske stated that
California, which hosts far more commercial
LLRW generators than the other Southwestern
Compact states, volunteered to serve as the host
state for the compact's disposal facility. (See
Chapter One, Exhibit 1-2 for a summary of the
state's overview of the Ward Valley project.)
Mr. Lischeske described the process by which the
state of California consults with indigenous
peoples. He stated that state and federal laws
require consideration of the effects of a project
such as the proposed facility on the cultural
resources of indigenous peoples. He explained
that DHS and US Ecology, the developer selected
to operate the facility, recognized that California's
southeastern desert lies in the ancestral
homelands of many Native American tribes and
that special outreach measures would be
necessary to involve these tribes in the site
selection process. To assist in the outreach
rneasure, US Ecology had hired Cultural Systems
Research, Ind (CSRI), an ethnographic
consulting firm, to work with the tribes to identify
any concerns about the proposed facility, he said.
Mr. Lischeske stated that CSRI had determined
which tribes have traditional or contemporary
interests in the area surrounding each of the 18
candidate sites that US Ecology had identified as
suitable sites for the disposal facility. The
consultants, he stated, had interviewed tribal
leaders and toured each area with members of
trie tribes chosen by the tribes to identify general
and specific concerns. With the assistance of the
tribes, the consultants had developed a
framework for identifying acceptable mitigation
measures, he continued. In February 1987, US
Ecology narrowed the potential sites to three
areas, Panamint Valley, Silurian Valley, and Ward
Valley, Mr. Lischeske stated. In December 1987,
the Panamint site was eliminated from further
consideration because of objections raised by the
Western Shosrione National Council, he said. Mr.
Lischeske then stated that, in March 1988, the
Ward Valley site was selected as the preferred
site because of its superiority in technical aspects
to the Silurian Valley site. Exhibit 5-4 presents a
map of the Ward Valley area. US Ecology then
initiated discussions with the tribes whose
ancestral lands include Ward Valley to develop
potential mitigation measures, he explained.
Using information gathered during those
discussions with tribal leaders, he stated, CSRI
developed the following mitigation measures:
• Redocumentation for an important collection
of Indian artifacts known as the Campbell
collection
Performance of a study of the trails used by
the Indian tribes in the Ward Valley area
• Creation of a support grant for exhibits in the
tribal museum
• Participation by the tribes in the
environmental monitoring program for the
disposal facility
• Construction of a fence to prevent desert
tortoises from entering the area of the facility
Mr. Lischeske stated that some of the tribes had
expressed support for the proposed mitigation
measures; however, none had been willing to
drop its opposition to the siting of the facility in
Ward Valley, he said. Consultations with the
8-6
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
Map Scale In Miles
10
Exhibit 5-4: Map of the Proposed Ward Valley Site
tribes were suspended in December 1989, Mr.
Lischeske continued, adding that the tribes
continued to voice opposition during the public
hearing phase of the environmental impact
statement (EIS) process. In September 1993, he
said, the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe sued DHS
when it had issued a permit for the facility. Mr.
Lischeske reported that one of the infractions
alleged by the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe was
inadequate consultation with the tribes. However,
the court found this and the other allegations
made by the tribe to be "without merit," he said.
In addition, Mr. Lischeske stated that the tribes
had lost on appeal and that the California
Supreme Court had declined to hear the case.
Mr. Stringer asked whether the developer had
identified sites for the proposed facility near non-
Indian communities. Mr. Lischeske replied that
several such sites had been identified, and that
both Indian and non-Indian communities are
located near the Ward Valley site. Ms. Stevens
asked whether the effects on the cultural
resources of the tribe had been analyzed
completely and thoroughly. Mr. Lischeske replied
that the ethnographer had met with and
interviewed the leaders of the tribes living near
Ward Valley. Ms. Stevens then asked whether
individual members of the tribal community also
had been interviewed. Mr. Lischeske responded
that the state had held public hearings. Ms.
Stevens then asked what type of cultural
information was obtained from the tribes. Mr.
Lischeske responded that he would provide the
members of the subcommittee copies of the
consultant's report on the cultural issues related
to Ward Valley.
Continuing the discussion, Mr. Stringer asked
whether, in any of the 18 cases, the communities
living near the site had not raised concerns. Mr.
Lischeske replied that concerns had been voiced
by members of communities at all the candidate
sites. Mr. Peter Baldridge, attorney for DHS, also
replied that all the tribes near the candidate sites
had expressed concern about the proposed
facility and that most did not trust the state to
construct a safe facility. Mr. Stringer also asked
whether the state had made an effort to identify
sites that would not be controversial. Mr.
Lischeske responded that he believes that, no
matter what site had been selected, there would
have been controversy. Mr. Stringer commented
that he could not believe that, in a state the size of
California, there is not one area that is technically
suitable and that would not be controversial. Mr.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
5-7
-------
indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Lfscheske statedjhat approximately two-thirds of
the state was considered not suitable in light of
|^nicalse|ectio"o criteria. Mr. Hill Suggested that
the state of Califorhia "sit down" with tribes
located in the state and ask what lands might be
considered less sacred than others. The state
could use trie results of that dialogue to determine
the technical feasibility of the areas suggested by
the tribes, he said. Mr. Lischeske explained that
the state took a side-by-side approach to the
selection of the site, that is, that technical
feasibility and cultural concerns were analyzed
concurrently.
Ms. Stevens asked how waste will be transported
to the proposed site at Ward Valley. Mr.
Lischeske responded that the waste will be
transported by truck on U.S. Route 40. He also
explained that the majority of the waste is
generated in the state of California.
Mr. Hill asked what areas the ethnographers had
Identified as sacred to the tribes Ijving near Ward
Valley. Mr. Lischeske replied that the tribes had
identified rock caves located about 10 to 20 miles
south of the proposed site, as well as several
animal species, as sacred.
Mr. Beavers asked whether any of the land at the
proposed site is owned by the federal
government. Mr. Lischeske answered that the
land is owned by the U.S. Department of Interior's
(DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Mr.
Stringer asked whether the state of California is
confident that it lias identified and selected the
"best place" that would have the least effect on
Ihe cultural resources identified by the tribes. Mr.
Lischeske replied"that the state is confident that,
no matter which site had been selected, tribes
Jiving in the area would have raised similar
concerns. He sta|ed that the Iqng-term plan is to
close the facility In 30 years and that there are no
plans for expansion of the site or for storage of
',§trjer types of waste. Mr. Hill asked what will
Kappen to the site after the 30-year operating
period. Mr. Lischeske answered that the site will
Cindergo a five-year closure process and then be
placed under institutional controls for 100 years.
He also stated that the 90-acre facility will be
secured and that the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission will provide federal oversight of the
facility.
Mr. Monette asked whether the state of California
had weighted any technical criteria more than
other criteria and whether one of the technical
criteria had been wind. Mr. Baldridge replied that
wind had not been a specific criterion of the
analysis; however, it had been considered in
evaluating the potential for paniculate matter 10
(PM10) emissions, he explained. Commenting
that, in general, the fewer residents living in an
area, the fewer concerns are voiced, Mr. Monette
asked whether the state had considered that, by
using "remoteness" as a technical selection
criterion, it was discriminating against tribes
because, throughout the history of the United
States, tribes typically have been relocated to
remote areas. In addition, he stated that it
appeared to him that the state of California used
the criterion of remoteness not only as a technical
consideration, but also as a political
consideration. Mr. Lischeske stated that
remoteness is considered when mitigating off-site
effects; the Ward Valley site is ideal for isolating
radioactive waste, he added.
Mr. Stringer asked whether the requirements of
the EIS, as outlined in the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), had been fulfilled. Mr.
Lischeske stated that, befpre DOI can transfer the
property to the state of California, DOI must
conduct an EIS under the requirements of NEPA.
Mr. Baldridge added that the EIS had been
completed, that there is no legal basis for the
conduct of a supplemental EIS, and that the state
of California does not intend to revisit the decision
to select Ward Valley as the site for the LLRW
facility.
Mr. Hill expressed appreciation on behalf of the
members of the subcommittee to the
representatives of the state of California for
further educating the subcommittee on issues
related to Ward Valley.
Mr. Steven Lopez, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe,
continued the discussion of issues related to the
proposed LLRW disposal facility at Ward Valley
by presenting the position of the Fort Mojave
Indian tribe on the proposal. Mr. Lopez stated
that the tribe continues to request that
construction of the proposed facility be stopped.
He explained that the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe
had drafted a resolution in which it requested that
the Executive Council of the NEJAC recommend
to the EPA Administrator that a meeting be
scheduled among senior-level officials of each of
the federal agencies involved to address the
issues related to the proposed facility. Mr. Lopez
5-3
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
also explained that, if the Colorado River should
become contaminated as a result of the facility,
such contamination would have an adverse effect
on the tribe's economy. In addition, he informed
the subcommittee that the environmental
evaluations conducted by the state of California
had not considered that the desert tortoise plays
a sacred role in the tribe's culture.
Ms. Claudette White, Quechan Indian Tribe,
described the disproportionate effects the tribes
living near Ward Valley would suffer on their
health, environment, and economy if the facility is
constructed. She explained that the tribes hold
sacred the land, water, animals, and plants in the
area and stated that S/ve exist because of these
things." Ms. White continued by explaining that
her people will be "desecrated" and that this issue
is very difficult to discuss because it is so much a
part of her.
The members of the subcommittee then
deliberated at length on a proposed resolution
about issues related to Ward Valley. The
members of the subcommittee also asked the
representatives of the state of California and the
representatives of the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe to
remain during its deliberations to answer any
questions that might arise.
Mr. Stringer stated that, before the meeting, the
representatives of the state of California had
expressed to him concern about the decision-
making process of the subcommittee. He stated
that he had explained to them that the
subcommittee forwards to the Executive Council
of the NEJAC resolutions that set forth
recommendations to the EPA Administrator and
that the Executive Council decides whether it will
transmit the resolutions to the EPA Administrator.
Mr. Hill commented that he believes that the state
had been provided adequate opportunity to
present its views to the subcommittee. He asked
the representatives of the state if they wished to
add anything else to the discussion. Mr.
Baldridge commented that the state had met with
EPA and various tribes in the area. He also
stated that the EPA Region 9 Office of Regional
Counsel met with BLM, DOI's Bureau of Indian
Affairs (B1A), and the tribe and then conducted
separate meetings with the state. The state, he
added, is suing BLM for attempting to stop the
transfer of land.
Mr. Stringer asked about the status of the
resolution that the subcommittee had forwarded
to the Executive Council of the NEJAC during its
December 1996 meeting. Ms. Bell stated that the
Executive Council had tabled the resolution until
it could hear the views of the state of California.
Mr. Lopez stated that tribes are not required to
include states in meetings; however, states do
have the responsibility of informing tribes of all
adverse effects of projects. He had brought the
Ward Valley project issue to the attention of the
NEJAC, he continued, because he believed it to
be an environmental justice concern of his tribe.
In addition, he expressed frustration that the
NEJAC had failed to act on his request and that it
was his understanding that the meetings of the
subcommittee were not a forum for debate. Mr.
Monette stated that he had wanted to hear both
sides of the issue before he would "feel
comfortable" making a decision. Mr. Lopez also
stated that it was his understanding that the issue
he raised could be heard and addressed,
regardless of whether he was present.
Mr. Hill replied that Mr. Lopez's understanding
was correct; however, because he attended the
subcommittee meeting, he had been able to give
more accurate advice and additional information.
Mr. Hill stated that he had learned much about the
issues related to Ward Valley. He also explained
that neither the subcommittee nor the Executive
Council of the NEJAC is a judicial body and that
the NEJAC is only an advisory body. He added
his apology for any undue expectations that the
subcommittee might have created. Mr. Lopez
stated his belief that an unfair amount of time had
been given to the state of California, explaining
that the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe could have
provided an information package for the members
of the subcommittee.
Mr. Monette again expressed concern about the
state's use of remoteness as a criterion for the
selection of the site. He reminded the members
of the subcommittee that "way back when,"
remoteness was a criterion for relocating
indigenous peoples to the areas in which they live
today. Mr. Baldridge stated that DHS would like
to know what the subcommittee views as the
"exact" environmental justice issue related to
Ward Valley. Responding to Mr. Baldridge's
question, Mr. Monette stated that the use of
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
5-9
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
remoteness as a criterion is an environmental
justice issue.
Mr. Monette again asked about the findings in the
E1S related to airborne contaminants,
commenting that Ward Valley can be very windy.
I^r. Lischeskp stated that it would be too time-
consuming to explain the technical aspects of the
results; however, he commented that the waste
would be packaged the same day it arrived and
the area would be sprinkled with water to
Suppress any dust. Mr. Monette then asked
whether any of the other members of the
subcommittee had concerns about the issue-
In response, Mr. Beavers stated that the
subcommittee could advise the EPA Administrator
only if ft believed that the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe
Is receiving a disproportionate effect of the
contamination from the proposed facility, as
described under the provisions of Executive
Order 12898 on environmental justice. Ms.
Stevens stated that she believes there is nothing
.Wrong with forwarding the same resolution again
to the Executive Council of the NEJAC to request
that a meeting be held among senior-level
managers of the federal agencies involved. Mr.
Beavers expressed agreement, but stated that the
subcommittee also should include in the
resolution environmental justice concerns related
to the use of remoteness as a criterion, as well as
address the issue that the waste stored at the
facility "will not go away."
Mr. Hill summarized the concerns of the
subcommittee in ,tfie following questions:
• Are the issues related to Ward Valley
environmental justice concerns?
• Will the project affect the tribe's cultural
resources?
i1!'™'' | :"' '., 'i" ,!,,,, yip i i!ii' • "'""i ' ,,', |I: ' •" " ',".', i1 |'° ' .•
:' Have the issues been given adequate
consideration^ as required under NEPA?
! i, » ' • ' I'li'i'iij '• .," ' ",'/"• ;; ' ' .' ii i
Mr. Hill, stated that, in the past, such questions
and issues would not have been discussed or
heard at any level of government. He also stated
that the Ward Valley case is a significant example
of the need to consider concerns related to
environmental justice when performing
evaluations for siting of a facility. In conclusion,
he stated that the resolution should include a
statement that the subcommittee is not
"condemning anyone," but that it is recognizing
that the EPA Administrator should address certain
concerns.
Mr. Baldridge recommended that the
subcommittee develop a resolution that discusses
the broad concerns about environmental justice in
Indian Country and that recommends that the site
selection process consider environmental justice
issues. However, he stated that he believes that
the resolution need not refer to Ward VaHey by
name.' , , """"J, , ' " ',',
Mr. Monette recommended that EPA require that,
when tribes believe that environmental injustice
has occurred, states "go the extra mile" to ensure
that all possible concerns are addressed. He also
stated his belief that EPA, given its trust
responsibility to the tribes, should be able to
reserve the right to -conduct its own cultural
analysis.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
forward a resolution about the environmental
justice issues related to Ward Valley to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
4.2 Petroglyph National Monument,
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Mr. William Weahkee, Five Sandoval Indian
Pueblos, presented information about the
Petroglyph National Monument, a site in
Albuquerque, New Mexico that the Pueblo Indians
consider a sacred religious site. Exhibit 5-5
presents background information about the issues
surrounding efforts by the city of Albuquerque,
New Mexico to construct commuter highways
through the Petroglyph National Monument. He
emphasized that the highways would infringe
upon the sacred site and nearby communities.
Mr. Weahkee also explained that potential
damage to natural resources, protection of the
ecology, and conflicts between the need for
environmental protection and interest in
development also are issues at the site.
S-10
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
He continued by stating that the congressional
delegation representing New Mexico plans to
introduce legislation that would authorize the
construction of the highways. He explained that
the action would violate not only the provisions of
the Executive order on environmental justice, but
also the provisions of the Executive order on
Indian sacred sites. Mr. Weahkee also believes
that the city of Albuquerque is trying to obtain an
exemption from the requirement to perform an
EIS because an EIS would reveal alternative
routes.
Mr. Richard Moore, Southwest Network for
Environmental and Economic Justice and chair of
the Executive Council of the NEJAC, stated that
he would address the subcommittee, not as the
chair of the Executive Council, but as a
representative of his organization. He explained
that the city of Albuquerque is trying to streamline
the process of acquiring approval to construct the
commuter highways. He also explained that
environmental justice issues related to this case
are similar to those related to the Ward Valley
case, because, in both cases, there is controversy
about what is considered a "sacred site." Mr.
Moore stated that the city is using the same
justifications as the state of California in
determining the sacredness of sites. The city, he
said, argues that, because the sites are not used
regularly by members of the tribes, the sites
cannot be "really sacred." Mr. Moore stated that
both the city of Albuquerque and the state of
California are making excuses to deny the
sacredness of the sites because the petroglyphs
are simply in the way of urban sprawl. He
recommended that the subcommittee draft a letter
that expresses these concerns to the EPA
Administrator and that the EPA Administrator draft
a letter to the Secretary of Interior, reminding him
of his agency's trust responsibility to tribes. In
addition, the EPA Administrator should
recommend that the Secretary of Interior issue a
written statement that the highways should not be
constructed. Mr. Moore also requested that the
subcommittee attach to its letter to the EPA
Administrator a copy of the resolution that the All
Pueblo Indian Council had adopted. Exhibit 5-6
presents the text of that resolution, which
discusses the council's opposition to the
proposed highways.
Exhibit 5-5
PETROGLYPH NATIONAL MONUMENT
The Petroglyph National Monument was created
in June 1990 by an act of Congress. The
monument spans more than 7,244 acres and is
estimated to contain more than 17,000 Indian
petroglyphs. The petroglyphs, or symbols, are
carved into volcanic rocks and are estimated to be
more than 1,000 years old. The Pueblo Indians
consider the area sacred and believe that "many
things have been buried there over the centuries
and were placed there to accompany the deceased
on their journey into the next world." Therefore,
the Pueblo Indians believe that the construction of
commuter highways through the area, as proposed
by the city of Albuquerque, New Mexico, would
disturb and threaten the sacredness of the area.
The Petroglyph National Monument Protection
Coalition consists of representatives of five
Pueblo tribes, the Tonaantzin Land Institute, the
Southwest Organizing Project, Youth Action, the
Native Lands Institute, the Progressive Student
Alliance, the Sierra Club, and In Defense of
Animals. The coalition was formed to preserve
and protect Petroglyph National Monument as a
religious site and as a national park.
Mr. Hill asked Mr. Weahkee if he had any
additional recommendations that he wished the
subcommittee to include in the letter to the EPA
Administrator. Mr. Weahkee replied that he
wished to recommend three items:
Request that the city of Albuquerque, New
Mexico, conduct an EIS for the proposed
commuter highways through the Petroglyph
National Monument
• Request that an interagency meeting among
representatives of EPA, DOI, and the U.S.
Department of Transportation be convened to
discuss the proposed commuter highways
• Request that EPA recommend and facilitate
formal participation by the Petroglyphs
Protection Coalition in the interagency
meeting mentioned above
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
5-11
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit 5-6
THE ALL INDIAN PUEBLO COUNCIL RESOLUTION
Whereas, The All Indian Pueblo Council is comprised of the Pueblos of Acoma, Cochiti, Isleta, Jemez, Laguna, Nambe,
Picuris, Pojoaque, San Felipe, San Udefonso, San Juan, Sandia, Santa Ana, Santa Clara, Santo Domingo, Taos, Tesuque,
Zia, and Zuni; and,
Whereas, these same native American people, now known as pueblo Indians, have occupied and lived in these Western
United States since time immemorial; and
Whereas, present pueblo people in their present locations are direct descendants of that race of people whose origins can
comfortably be traced to pit houses and cliff dwellings; and,
Whereas, the pueblo people have always had a holistic system of practice which includes the individual, community and
total environment; and,
Whereas, inherent in this system is an elaborate but profound practice of religion with its teachings of tenets, rituals and
promulgation of these from generation to generation through our clan system and medicine people; and,
Whereas, the whole site of the Petroglyph National Monument as situated among the great protector mountains and as
created by mother earth's great labor leaving the present volcanoes used as a communication nexus to the world beneath;
and,
Whereas, many sacred sites in this state have already been destroyed or progressively harmed into extinction where they are
no longer distinguishable or useful to the tribes; and,
Whereas, if this trend continues there will be a great danger of losing one of the last great sites which is currently being
used in ancient religious ways in the midst of a city; and,
Whereas, Public Law 101-313 was already passed on June 27,1990, with specific language under Title 1, section 101
0>X3) which states "The West Mesa Escarpment and the Petroglyphs are threatened by urbanization and vandalism, and
hundreds of Petroglyphs have already been destroyed; (6) the middle Rio Grande Pueblo Tribes have shown a strong and
sincere interest in the preservation of their heritage through protection of the West Mesa Escarpment and the Petroglyphs
and the urgent need to protect culture and natural resources of the area from urbanization and vandalism, it is appropriate
that a national monument be established in the West Mesa Escarpment area, near Albuquerque, New Mexico"; and,
Whereas, roads are the essence of urbanization; and,
Whereas, the Paseo Del Norte serves no park purpose as required by National Park Service laws and rules; and,
Whereas, the city of Albuquerque leadership is knowingly and deliberately violating its binding memorandum of agreement
among the city, state and National Park Service Laws, rules, regulations and guidelines; and,
Whereas, there arises serious but grave danger to indigenous peoples rights to worship in their customary ways in their
customary areas and places which is protected by article section of the United States constitution; and,
Whereas, a serious but potentially devastating threat has been issued by part of the congressional delegation which will
cause two roads to be dug through a presently used sacred site; and,
Whereas, this act, if carried out, will knowingly desecrate sacred hollow ground consecrated and used by priests of the
clans and medicine people from various pueblos through centuries of time; and,
Therefore be it resolved; that the nineteen pueblos declare that no more destruction of its sacred and secret sites will be
tolerated and that the contemplated actions of the congressional delegation will be met with appropriate but determined
opposition; and,
Be it farther resolved; that all local and national assistance from whatever source will be sought to help protect against
further intrusions of ancient and priceless relics which belong to all of humanity.
Hi!
5-12
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
Mr. Hill stated that the members of the
subcommittee would include those issues in the
letter to the EPA Administrator expressing the
concerns of the subcommittee about the
proposed commuter highways.
4.3 Mattaponi Indian Tribe, Virginia
Ms. Reina Miliigan, California Indian Legal
Services, presented a letter on behalf of the
Mattaponi Indian Tribe in King William County,
Virginia. In the letter, the tribe expressed
appreciation for the opportunity to address the
members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee during the December 1996
meeting of the NEJAC in Baltimore, Maryland.
Ms. Miliigan reminded the members of the
subcommittee that the Mattaponi Tribe opposes
a project to construct a 1,500-acre reservoir that
will affect the Mattaponi and the Pamunkey tribes
living in King William County, Virginia. Since
December 1996, she reported, the tribe had
developed several working relationships with
various tribal, legal, and environmental
organizations, including the Georgetown Law
Center Institute for Public Representation, the
First Nations Law Center, and the University of
Virginia Law Center Indian Program. In addition,
she stated, the tribe also had established a
relationship with OEJ, AIEO, EPA Region 3, the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), and
Dpl's Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Ms.
Miliigan explained that the tribe had established
government-to-government relationships with the
federal agencies and in consultation with the
Pamunkey Tribe.
Ms. Miliigan then informed the members of the
subcommittee that EPA Region 3 had issued a
report on the detection of dioxin in drinking-water
wells adjacent to a landfill near the Mattaponi
reservation. She stated that the tribe had
requested that EPA conduct additional testing of
the landfill for contamination in soils, biota, and
plume and determine whether the existing
contamination is a threat to the drinking water.
Ms. Miliigan stated that the tribe believes the
proposed reservoir project would have a
significant effect on the groundwater flow related
to contamination from the landfill entering the
reservation's drinking-water wells.
She also stated that the First Nations Law Group
had filed a precedential request with the attorney
general of Virginia, requesting a ruling on the
treaty and trust obligations of the Commonwealth
of Virginia as successor to King Charles II under
the treaties of 1646 and 1677. Ms. Miliigan
explained that the attorney general is under
pressure to rule on the treaty obligations before
EPA and USAGE complete their EISs, as well as
before USAGE completes the analysis permit
proceedings required under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act.
Ms. Miliigan concluded her remarks with a
request on behalf of the tribe that the
subcommittee request that the Executive Council
of the NEJAC continue to support coordination
between EPA Region 3 and USAGE.
Mr. Monette expressed concern about the
Mattaponi establishing government-to-
government relationships with federal agencies
when the Mattaponi Indian Tribe is not yet
recognized by the United States as a tribe. He
asked who is defining who the Mattaponi are: the
Commonwealth of Virginia or the Mattaponi. Mr.
Beavers commented that an environmental
justice issue, however, exists, regardless of the
tribe's status. Mr. Monette stated that he believes
that other tribes that have taken steps to become
federally recognized would be very upset to learn
that federal agencies are treating the Mattaponi
as they would a federally recognized tribe. He
explained that the process the tribes must
complete is very long and tedious and that others
who are undergoing the process are not receiving
the preferential treatment that the Mattaponi are
receiving. Mr. Alex Varela, EPA OEJ, stated
thathe believes Mr. Monette is focusing on the
issue of the status of the tribe, rather than the
environmental justice issues. Mr. Varela added
that the Commonwealth of Virginia recognizes the
Mattaponi Tribe as indigenous peoples and that,
if the reservoir is built, the Mattaponi will lose
many archaeological sites that contain evidence
the tribe needs to pursue federal recognition.
Ms. Stevens suggested that the subcommittee
draft a letter to the EPA Administrator about
environmental justice issues related to the loss of
the archaeological sites. She added that there is
no reason to include language in the letter about
the status of the tribe.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
5-13
-------
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Mr. Varela announced that, he had been advised
by a representative of the tribe by teleconference
call that the tribe had requested that the
subcommittee take no action related to the
Mattaponi Indian Tribe. He stated that the
Mattaponi expressed concern that the letter might
affect its application to become a federally
recognized tribe. Mr. Monette expressed serious
concern about Wlr. Varela's actiqri in calling a
representative of the tribe during the proceedings
of the subcommittee to inform the tribe of the
deliberations.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
table the issue and continue discussions during
its next teleconference call.
4.4 St. Regis Mohawk Indian Tribe, New York
Mr. Neil Patterson^ Tuscarora Delegate, explained
f|atthe land of tfjg St. Regis Mohawk Indian Tribe
|||ocate,d on the St. Lawre,nce River in the state
^of New York. M^patter^p^slaje^that aforrrjer
Jquhdry owned by General Motors (GM)
Corporation and also located on the river was
placed on the National Priorities List (NPL) of
lites most in ne.ed of environmental cleanup in
V|983. ^ft§r ^e,Y,en Vears °f 'nvest'9a*'on? I16
f'ppritlnuecl, "EPA" Issued ' a record ' of'" decision
(R6b) that divided the GM site into two parts,
Operable Unit (OU) 1 includes most of the GM
site, the St. Lawrence and Raquette rivers, Turtle
^Creekj and' various tl>a.!' 's^i'PQJ1'"eludes'the
past Disposaj area and the industrial landfill on
the GM site, he explained.
Mr. Patterson told the members of the
Subcommittee that, in the ROD forOU I, a remedy
had been selected that involved excavating
contaminated soils on tribal lands and the GM site
by dredging the rivers, pumping and treating
groundwater, and treating contaminated sludge
and soils. Mr. Patterson stated that EPA Region
2 had recognized the standards established by St.
fPCB). The tribe had concurred with the ROD for
OU I because it provided for excavation and
|redging consistent with tribal applicable relevant
Ifid appropriate requirements (ARAR) and a
permanent remedy based on the treatment of
soils, sediments, and sludge contaminated at
levels above 10 parts per million (ppm), he
explained.
Three years ago, Mr. Patterson continued, GM
had proposed to EPA Region 2 a new technology
for cleaning up the site. EPA Region 2 made a
preliminary decision to open the ROD so that the
cleanup standard could be changed to allow GM
to use the new technology. He expressed
disbelief at EPA Region 2's decision because he
said recent scientific evidence is documenting the
adverse effects on humans and wildlife oj
exposure to low levels of PCBs. Mr. Patterson
also expressed frustration because EPA, despite
strong public opposition to the change, has not
made a decision after three years.
Mr. Hill asked Mr. Patterson what action he would
like the subcommittee to take related to the GM
site. Mr. Patterson requested that the
subcommittee draft a letter to the EPA
Administrator to request that EPA make every
effort to support the use of tribal water quality
standards or, in the absence of such, tribal
ARARs for waters on or adjacent to Indian
reservations. In addition, Mr. Patterson requested
that no more contaminated materials be placed in
OU II. The members of the subcommittee agreed
to draft a letter to the EPA Administrator about the
environmental justice issues related to the GM
site.
4.5 Copper Range Company, White Pine,
Michigan
Ms. Jane Reyer, Bad River Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa, provided an update of the solution
mining project proposed by the Copper Range
Company (CRC) in White Pine, Michigan. Exhibit
5-7 presents background information about the
proposed solution mining project. Ms. Reyer
reminded the members of the subcommittee that
the Executive Council of the NEJAC, during its
May 1995 meeting, had approved a resolution
that requested that EPA prepare an EIS on the
effects of the proposed project.
Ms. Reyer also reminded the members that, on
October 14, 1996, CRC had issued a press
release stating that CRC had suspended its pilot
project on solution mining because the company
"cahnoi afford to continue to make such
5-14
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
!";( jf \ " ••' ' '. ' « >•' " . ' ..Jill "I",!.",;!!!'
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
expenditures in light of the uncertainty posed by
the new EPA regulatory process." Ms. Reyer
explained that the "process" CRC referred to was
EPA's decision on August 16,1996 to require an
environmental analysis. The Agency had made a
commitment to determine by July 1997 what
regulatory requirements would govern the full-
scale project, she said.
Ms. Reyer expressed concern about the
unwillingness of EPA Region 5 to extend the
deadlines for submission of data by the tribes in
the area. She explained that the time frame is not
sufficient to submit quality data to EPA. Ms.
Reyer also expressed her belief that EPA Region
5 never had intended to conduct a thorough
investigation of the environmental justice
concerns of the tribes in the area. In addition, Ms.
Reyer stated that the primary concern of the tribes
is the future contamination that the proposed
process will cause. She requested that the
subcommittee draft a letter to the EPA
Administrator to request that the deadlines for
submitting data for the environmental analysis
process be extended so that the cultural effects
on the tribes can be considered fully.
4.6 Proposed Cluster Rule
Ms. Stevens presented information that had been
made available to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC during the public comment period held on
May 13,1997 on behalf of the Oneida Nation of
Wisconsin about EPA's proposed Cluster Rule for
pulp and paper mills. Ms. Stevens explained that
the EPA Administrator is ready to make her final
decision on the proposed rule. She stated that
the Oneida Nation had expressed concern that
EPA had identified only two options in its
proposed rule:
• Endorsing only elemental chlorine-free (ECF)
paper, which continues to heavily use
chlorine dioxide
• Requiring only oxygen delignification (OD) as
a substitute for the first phase of chlorination
Ms. Stevens informed the members of the
subcommittee that EPA had failed to explore a
third option, the totally chlorine-free (TCP)
process that uses hydrogen peroxide instead of
chlorine and allows for a closed loop system. She
Exhibit 5-7
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
ON THE
PROPOSED SOLUTION MINING
PROJECT,
WHITE PINE, MICHIGAN
The Copper Range Company (CRC) first
proposed the solution mining project to the
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
(MDEQ) in early 1993. The EPA Region 5
Underground Injection Control (UIC) Branch was
contacted about the project in late 1993. Although
EPA Region 5 had not yet determined that it had
jurisdiction over the proposed project, the mining
operation did require a state groundwater
discharge permit. However, the state permit was
not issued because EPA retains direct authority to
implement the UIC program in the state of
Michigan. EPA Region 5 continued to review the
project informally, working with the MDEQ on
the technical aspects of the state's groundwater
discharge permit. Unfortunately, the shutdown of
the federal government in FY 1996 hampered the
Region's efforts to continue to review both the
solution mining project and the agency's own
regulatory authority.
After review and discussions with staff of other
EPA regional offices, state UIC programs, and
various regulatory programs at EPA Headquarters,
EPA Region 5 decided that the CRC solution
mining project fell under the UIC regulations and
that CRC's proposed pilot project could be treated
as a Class 5 well. MDEQ and CRC were notified
of the agency's decision on July 1,1996.
also stated that representatives of the Onedia
Nation believe that companies will phase out the
use of chlorine only if EPA requires it. Ms.
Stevens also stated that, in proposing regulations
related to pulp and paper mills, EPA had not
determined, as required under the provisions of
Executive Order 12898 on environmental justice,
whether the proposed rule would have
disproportionate effects on people of color and
low-income communities, particulary on tribes that
live near many such mills.
Ms. Stevens then stated that the Oneida Nation's
reservation is adjacent to the city of Green Bay,
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
5-15
-------
.Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Wisconsin on the Fox River, which has the
largest concentration of pulp and paper mills in
ijhe world — 11 paper mills on 23 miles of the
|tver. Ms. Stevens stated the Oneida Nation's
fiad requested that the subcommittee advise the
EPA Administrator to support a TCP bleaching
|ption and that the Administrator respect her own
Agency's policy on environmental justice by
refraining from making a decision until EPA has
completed an environmental justice analysis to
assess the effect of the rule on Native American
communities and communities of people of color.
Ms. Bell stated that this is the type of issue the
subcommittee should address because it affects
national policy and many diverse communities,
Including tribal communities. The members of the
subcommittee agreed to draft a resolution related
to the issues presented in the letter from the
Oneida Nation of Wisconsin.
ill J '< • ';::ii , ' ' i; ' • •• '
5.0 Resolutions
This section summarizes the resolutions
discussed by the Indigenous Peoples
§ubcomrnittee and forwarded to the Executive
jSouncif of the NEJAC for consideration.
The members discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee requests that EPA support, in the
groposed Cluster Rule for pulp and paper mills,
an "additional option that uses a chlorine-free
bleaching process and advises the EPA
Administrator to respect the EPA policy on
environmental justice by refraining from making a
jfecisjqn ontbQ~ClHs"ter. ..Ruje. until EPA has
cc-mpieted an environmental justice analysis. The
resolution was forwarded to the Executive Council
Of the NEJAC for consideration.
The members discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee requests that EPA's Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) treat
Indian tripes in substantially the same way states
are treated with respect to all provisions of RCRA,
implement policy under which tribes receive early
notification of the development of policies and
initiatives related to tribes, and reestablish a
commitment to the national memorandum of
agreement. The resolution was forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members discussed a resolution in which the
subcommittee recommends that the NEJAC
request that:
• EPA adopt procedures that ensure that
indigenous communities are involved in all
phases of decision making when activities
affect or might affect areas of cultural
significance to such communities
• The EPA Administrator request a meeting
among appropriate leaders of the executive
branch arj
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 14,1997
Potawatomi Indian Reservation
Wabeno, Wisconsin
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Dona Canales
Designated Federal Official
Baldemar Velasquez
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER SIX
MEETING OF THE
INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The International Subcommittee of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
conducted a one-day meeting on Wednesday,
May 14, 1997, during a two-day meeting of the
NEJAC at the Indian Springs Lodge and
Conference Center on the Potawatomi Indian
Reservation near Wabeno, Wisconsin. Mr.
Baldemar Velasquez, Farm Labor Organizing
Committee, continues to serve as chair of the
subcommittee. Ms. Dona Canales, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of
International Activities (OIA), continues to serve
as the Designated Federal Official (DFO) for the
subcommittee. Exhibit 6-1 presents a list of the
members who attended the meeting and identifies
those members who were unable to attend. No
quorum of members was present for the meeting.
This chapter, which provides a detailed summary
of the deliberations of the International
Subcommittee, is organized in five sections,
including this Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks,
summarizes the opening remarks of the chair.
Section 3.0, Activities of the Subcommittee,
summarizes the discussions of the activities of the
subcommittee, such as the subcommittee's work
group on South Africa and a review of selected
action items and resolutions. Section 4.0, Issues
Related to International Activities and Worker
Protection, summarizes the subcommittee's
discussion of enforcement of regulations
governing worker protection and issues related to
environmental justice. Section 5.0, Resolutions,
summarizes the resolutions forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
2.0 REMARKS
Mr. Velasquez opened the subcommittee meeting
by welcoming the members present and the DFO.
Mr. Velasquez expressed concern about
maintaining continuity between retiring and new
members of the NEJAC and its subcommittees.
He suggested that the NEJAC develop guidance
that describes the responsibilities of the chair, as
well as the mission of the subcommittee, and
summarizes its past activities. Such guidance, he
said, would help the subcommittee maintain
Exhibit 6-1
INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 14,1997
Mr. Baldemar Velasquez, Chair
Ms. Dona Canales, DFO
Mr. Arnoldo Garcia
Ms. Mildred McClain
Ms. Denise Ferguson-Southard
List of Members
Who Were Unable to Attend
Mr. John Borum
Mr. Jose Bravo
Ms. Janet Phoenix
Mr. Bill Simmons
continuity during the transition process. Ms.
Canales agreed to address the issue.
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
This section discusses the activities of the
subcommittee, which included an update on the
work of the South Africa Working Group and a
review of selected action items and resolutions.
3.1 Update on the South Africa Working Group
Ms. Mildred McClain, Citizens for Environmental
Justice, led the discussion of the South Africa
Working Group by reviewing the resolutions
related to South Africa that had been adopted at
the December 1996 meeting and forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC. (See Section
3.2 for a detailed discussion of the status of
International Subcommittee resolutions No. 2 and
No. 4.) Ms. McClain then stated that she was
unable to provide an update on the South Africa
Working Group of the International Subcommittee
because of a breakdown in communications with
OIA. She added that the NEJAC guidance on
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
6-1
-------
International Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
establishing work groups is not clear. Ms.
McClain oommgnted that the breakdown in
communications with OIA she had experienced is
Delated to the broader issue of the need to
develop mechanisms to more effectively
communicate concerns and recommendations
submitted to Ql/\ by the subcommittee. Ms.
McClain stated, for example, that OIA had ignored
her concerns and recommendations in planning
|s latest trip to South Africa and about the grant to
Organized Northeasterners and Clay Hill and
North End, Inc. (ONE/CHANE), one of two non-
profit organizations selected to manage the EPA
community grants program with South Africa. Ms.
McClain asked how communication with OIA
could be improved.
In response to Ms. McClain's remarks, Ms.
Canales stated that OlA had tried to contact Ms.
McClain by telephone, facsimile, and mail to
discuss her concerns. Ms. Canales explained
that each party probably had been waiting for the
other's response. Ms. McClain remarked that she
would resubmit her concerns and
recommendations to OIA. Ms. Man/a King, EPA's
Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ), added that
the International Subcommittee and OIA should
take the initiative to improve their relationship and
build more effective avenues of communication.
Ms. Canales then addressed the process of
establishing work groups and selecting their
members. She explained that, as the DFO, she
generally approves nominations submitted by the
subcommittee because she believes that the
member who nominates a candidate to participate
jn a Work 9rouP °ften '? rnore knowledgeable
about the qualifications of the candidate than she
is, Mr. Velasquez asked about the status of the
effort to select members to participate on the
South Africa Working Group. Ms. Canales
.•"indicatedffi^the|panflidates nominated had been
approved and that OEJ had been notified of their
appointment to the working group. Mr. Velasquez
reminded the members of the need to draft a
resolution for establishing the work group and
forward it to the Executive Council for
|*fX)n^|c}ei'ajon,i; K/jg^iyicClain added that she would
provide a brief resume of each of the members of
the work group, If necessary.
i ;„
, • •. :..• ': •?. • • , •; • • ' • ';, ;lv;;|:;,;{'«
>' -il1 / ' ' : :•' ' Is1 " *'"
3.2 Review of Selected Action Items and
Resolutions
Because several members of the subcommittee
had been unable to attend the meeting,
discussions of several action items were deferred
until the next meeting of the subcommittee.
Selected action items and resolutions are
summarized below:
International Resolution No. 2: NEJAC
recommends that EPA OIA consult with the
International Subcommittee's South Africa
Working Group on all programmatic issues
associated with the South African Initiative,
including the implementation of the South African
Grants Program.
Mr. Velasquez informed the members of the
subcommittee that, during its December 1996
meeting, the Executive Council of the NEJAC
returned the resolution to the subcommittee for
revisions. He explained that the language
originally drafted by the subcommittee had
directed EPA to perform certain actions. Under
the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA), he explained, the members of the
NEJAC only can provide advice and suggest
recommendations to the EPA Administrator. Mr.
Velasquez stated that federal agencies, however,
should ensure that they have obtained all
pertinent information about organizations to which
grants are awarded.
Ms. Denise Ferguson-Southard, State of
Maryland, and Ms. McClain had prepared new
language for the resolution, in which NEJAC
urges the EPA Administrator to:
"recommend, encourage and facilitate OJA's
consultation with the International
Subcommittee's South Africa Working Group
on all programmatic issues associated with
the South African Initiative, including the
implementation of the South African Grants
Program."
The members of the subcommittee forwarded the
revised resolution to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC for consideration.
intemaiionaltiesplutiQn /Vo, 3: NEJAC requests
that the EPA Administrator^ the EPA Assistant
Administrator for International Activities, and Ms.
Marsha Coleman-Adebayo meet with those
S 6-2
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
fnternationaf Subcommittee
program offices that contribute resources to the
program.
Mr. Velasquez informed the members of the
subcommittee that the Executive Council had
discussed the resolution at the December 1996
meeting of the NEJAC. He explained that the
resolution had "brought some confusion" to the
members of the Executive Council. The
members of the subcommittee, he said, believed
that there would be no further action related to
this resolution.
International Resolution No. 4: NEJAC requests
that EPA transfer management of the South Africa
program to EPA OEJ in joint collaboration with
OIA.
Mr. Velasquez informed the members of the
subcommittee that the Executive Council of the
NEJAC had decided not to forward the resolution
to the EPA Administrator.
International Resolution No. 5: NEJAC requests
that EPA acknowledge the success of the South
Africa Study Tours Program, as well as the
contribution of the program officer to the success
of the study tours and other relevant activities.
The members of the subcommittee agreed to
draft a letter to the EPA Administrator that
acknowledges the success of the South Africa
Study Tours Program.
Draft a letter to be sent by the EPA Administrator
to the President's Council on Sustainable
Development commending their efforts and
offering the assistance of the International
Subcommittee.
Mr. Velasquez indicated he had not reviewed the
letter; therefore, he suggested that the action item
be deferred to the next subcommittee meeting so
that the members can review the letter.
Provide information, evaluations, and reports of
the public participation required under the toxic
release inventory (TRI) process related to
transboundary issues concerning the Walpole
Island First Nation case.
Mr. Velasquez stated that he would discuss the
issue with members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee about the case.
Develop a proposal for and convene a roundtable
on international environmental justice issues
Mr. Velasquez agreed to contact Mr. Jose Bravo,
Southwest Network for Environmental and
Economic Justice and a member of the
subcommittee, to discuss the status of the
proposal to host a roundtable meeting on
international issues related to environmental
justice. Ms. McClain expressed her belief that
such a meeting is necessary and that the
members of the subcommittee should support Mr.
Bravo in developing the proposal.
Request that EPA release the results of its study
on the New River, which runs between the
southwestern border of the United States and
Mexico.
Mr. Velasquez agreed to contact Mr. Bravo to.
discuss the request that EPA release the results
of its study of the New River.
4.0 ISSUES RELATED TO INTERNATIONAL
ACTIVITIES AND WORKER PROTECTION
This section summarizes the discussion of the
subcommittee about issues related to the
enforcement of regulations governing worker
protection and to environmental justice.
4.1 Environmental Justice and Worker
Protection
The members of the subcommittee discussed
issues related to the manner in which the U.S.
Department of Labor (DOL) enforces and
complies with the provisions of Executive Order
12898 on environmental justice and the protection
of foreign migrant workers, in particular workers
governed under its 2A program. Mr. Velasquez
indicated that the subcommittee should identify
who in DOL manages worker protection programs
and invite that staff member to make a
presentation to the subcommittee on issues
related to environmental justice and worker
protection. Ms. Canales agreed to provide to the
subcommittee the name of an appropriate
representative.
Mr. Velasquez also reported to the subcommittee
on his activities as a member of the Worker
Protection Work Group established by the
Enforcement Subcommittee. He stated that his
recommendations had been forwarded from the
work group to the Enforcement Subcommittee,
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
6-3
-------
International Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
which was to draft a resolution.
recommendations include:
The
I EPA should develop a procedure for licensing
those vyhp trgj? others iti the standards for the
protection of farm workers. Mr. Velasquez
explained that, currently, "anybody can do it."
Growers that conduct their own training may
not be thejrjgst effective agents in ensuring
that workers receive adequate and
appropriate training, he continued. He added
that there is a need for guidelines on who can
conduct traiping, certification requirements
that the EPA can issue and enforce, and
training centers located in states in which
farm workers are employed.
• EPA Should allow farm workers to serve as
enforcement officers. Mr. Velasquez
recommended that EPA create an
enforcement mechanism based on the
concerns of farm workers, and through which
workers on the grassroots level can report
violations.
• EPA should conduct hearings in those states,
such as North Carolina, in which there are
numerous violations of the farm worker
protection standards. Mr. Velasquez added
that such hearings would provide a forum for
representatives of both industry and workers
to develop a means of determining "what is
working and what is not working."
'"•!'' •! ••:"' :';:1' • !'!!'•'• •'. .: '-S5':;
Mr. Velasquez added that, in such states,
significant amounts of pesticides are applied, but
there is no mechanism for protection and
enforcement.
Mr. Velasquez then discussed "anecdotal and
published stories" about farm workers dying from
overexposure to pesticides. He asked, "Are these
workers exempt from the protection standards,
just because they are foreign?" What is the
epfprcerfient mechanism for protecting these
fyorkers, Mr. Velasquez asked. Ms. Clarice
paylord, Director™ EPA OEJ, described her
impressions after reviewing the transcript of
public hearings on protection of farm workers held
by the North Carolina legislature. She stated that
the testimony of the migrant farm workers had not
b^en received jn § "sympathetic manner" by the
legislators; workers have little protection and the
||at,eV;peniorc^ she
fjqdecf.". Commenting that he had been aware of
cgrnplaints about the effects of the actions of the
agriculture industries on farm workers, Mr.
Melasquez recommended that the Enforcement
Subcommittee of the NEJAC hold a hearing in the
state of North Carolina to address not only issues
of concern to farm workers, but also those of
concern to workers in other agricultural
operations, such as poultry and pork production.
Ms. Gaylord explained that EPA Region 4 is
attempting to raise funds to host an enforcement
and compliance assurance roundtable meeting in
October or November 1997. Mr. Velasquez also
recommended that . the Enforcement and
International subcommittees meet jointly meeting
during the roundtable meeting.
4.2 Consideration of Executive Order 12898
on Environmental Justice by Other Federal
Agencies
Mr. Velasquez led a discussion of the reasons
certain federal agencies are not required to
comply with the provisions of Executive Order
12898 on environmental justice. For example,
the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
(USTR), which is responsible for negotiating trade
agreements with other countries, is not required
to comply with the provisions of the Executive
order during negotiations that set standards for
worker protection. Ms. Gaylord stated in
response that the EPA Administrator was to invite
representatives of several other federal agencies,
including the Federal Emergency Management
Administration (FEMA) and USTR, to comply with
the Executive order; however, because of issues
internal to EPA, the letters had not been sent.
Ms. Gaylord commented that FEMA had
responded voluntarily and that the White House
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) also is
urging the other agencies to comply.
5.0 RESOLUTIONS
This section sets forth the resolution that the
subcommittee discussed during its meeting,
adopted, and forwarded to the Executive Council
of the NEJAC for consideration.
The members revised a resolution through which
it recommended that the NEJAC urge and advise
the EPA Administrator to recommend, encourage,
and facilitate OlA's consultation with the
International Subcommittee's South Africa
Working Group on all programmatic issues
associated with the South African Initiative,
including the implementation of the South African
Grants Program. That resolution was forwarded
to the Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members also forwarded a request to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC to establish a
formal work group on issues related to South
Africa.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 14,1997
Potawatomi Indian Reservation
Wabeno, Wisconsin
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
Renee Goins
Alternate Designated Federal Official
J J y
IjtJ&ZSff ^ Jl /A A 'MJL/ ^-1
Haywood Turrentine
Acting Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER SEVEN
MEETING OF THE
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Exhibit 7-1
The Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee of the National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) conducted a
one-day meeting on Wednesday, May 14,1997,
during a two-day meeting of the Executive
Council at the Indian Springs Lodge and
Conference Center on the Potawatomi Indian
Reservation near Wabeno, Wisconsin. Because
Ms. Peggy Saika, Asian Pacific Environmental
Network and chair of the subcommittee, was
unable to attend the meeting, Mr. Haywood
Turrentine, Education and Training Trust Fund,
served as acting chair for the meeting. Mr.
Robert Knox, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Office of Environmental Justice
(OEJ), continues to serve as the Designated
Federal Official (DFO) for the subcommittee;
however, Ms. Renee Goins, EPA OEJ,
represented Mr. Knox at the meeting. Exhibit 7-1
presents a list of the members who attended the
meeting and identifies the members who were
unable to attend. No quorum of members was
present for the meeting. (See Section 2.0,
Remarks, for further discussion of this issue.)
This chapter, which provides a detailed summary
of the deliberations of the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee, is organized in five
sections, including this Introduction. Section 2.0,
Remarks, summarizes the opening remarks of the
acting chair. Section 3.0, Activities of the
Subcommittee, summarizes the members'
discussions of the activities of the subcommittee,
such as a review of the subcommittee meeting
held on April 17 and 18,1997; a review of action
items; discussions of the role of the members of
the subcommittee; discussions of turnover and
succession of NEJAC members; and improving
the NEJAC's planning of site tours. Section 4.0,
Issues Related to Public Participation and
Accountability, summarizes discussions about the
participation of EPA regional administrators and
staff at meetings of the NEJAC; public comment
periods of the NEJAC; the need for publications
and services in Spanish; and scheduling of a
meeting of the NEJAC in Puerto Rico. Section
5.0, Significant Action Items, summarizes action
items discussed by the members at the meeting.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
AND ACCOUNTABILITY
SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 14,1997
Mr. Haywood Turrentine, Acting Chair
Ms. Renee Goins, Alternate DFO
Mr. Frank Coss
Ms. Dolores Herrera
Ms. Rosa Hilda Ramos
List of Members
Who Were Unable to Attend
Ms. Peggy Saika, Chair
Mr. Robert Knox, DFO
Mr. Lawrence Hurst
Mr. Dune Lankard
Mr. Munir Meghjee
2.0 REMARKS
Mr. Turrentine opened the meeting by welcoming
the members of the subcommittee. Mr.
Turrentine stated that a quorum of members was
not present for the meeting and explained that, for
that reason, the subcommittee would not be able
to forward resolutions to the Executive Council of
the NEJAC for consideration.
3.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
The members of the Public Participation and
Accountability Subcommittee of the NEJAC
discussed various activities of the subcommittee.
They reviewed the minutes of the subcommittee
meeting held on April 17 and 18, 1997, the
subcommittee's selected action items and
resolutions, and selected action items developed
as a result of views presented during the public
comment period of earlier NEJAC meetings. The
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
7-1
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
* ..... £ •
members discussed the role of the members of
the subcommittee turnover and succession of the
of th| NEJAC, plans for the next
meeting of the subcommittee, improving the
NEJAC's planning of site tours, and developing a
public participation process.
3.1 Review of the Minutes of the
Subcommittee Meeting, April 1 997
Mr. Turrentine requested that the members
feview the minutes of tr^e meeting of the
subcommittee held in Washington, D.C. on April
J7 and 18, 1997. Copies of a memorandum from
Mr. David Ouderkirk, EPA Superfund Community
jnvolvement and Outreach Center, to Mr.
Lawrence Hurst, Motorola, Inc., about issues
discussed at the April 1997 meeting were
distributed to the members of the subcommittee.
Ms. Cathy McGirt, Tetra Tech EM Inc. (Tetra
^ech), also reported that EPA's Office of
^uperfund had appointed a liaison, Ms. Leslie
Leahy, to the subcommittee. Ms. Leahy had been
finable to attend the subcommittee meeting in
Wabeno, Ms. McGirl said, but would attend future
meetings of the subcommittee held in the
Washington, D.C. area. Ms. McGirl also noted
that Ms. Leahy plans to ask the members to
review the Community Advisory Group Toolkit
being developed by the Superfund Community
jnvolvement and Outreach Center and provide
comments to Ms. Leahy.
Ms. Dolores Herrera, Albuquerque San Jose
Awareness Council, Inc., reported on the status of
her discussions with Mr. Nicholas Ashforth,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and
meetings held between representatives of her
''$btrjrrjjjplty and MIT. She noted that members of
her community have prepared a draft preamble to
Include in the final MIT report on the research
project conducted by the university. The
community has not yet received the final report,
she explained, and is waiting to hear from
lepresentatives of MIT. Citing the continued
problems related to community members who are
not paid for their participation in such projects,
"pg, y'errfera^ commented on, the difficulties she
^experienced within her community. She asserted
that community people should be paid for their
involvement in projects. She acknowledged that,
although the project was personally difficult for
her at times, she also considered it a good
learning experience. Exhibit 7-2 provides "a
••.' .. '•••!. '/?• „ iiifj '•„> , •.,;, vi •,.; : • ;
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
summary of the subcommittee's discussion of the
MIT project at the April 1997 meeting.
The members then approved the minutes of the
meeting held in April 1997, as written.
3.2 Review of Selected Action Items
Mr. Turrentine led a discussion of selected action
items and resolutions that had been agreed upon
during earlier meetings of the subcommittee.
Selected action items are presented and the
members' discussions are summarized below.
Recommend that OEJ explore options to develop
an environmental justice resource bank for a
variety of public outreach efforts related to
environmental justice; follow up with Bob Bullard,
Clark Atlanta University, and Beverly Wright,
Xavier University, about information repositories
already established; set up conference call with
Bob Bullard to discuss.
Mr. Turrentine reported that an environmental
justice resource bank has been established at the
Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark
Atlanta University, Atlanta, Georgia. The
members agreed to recommend that the NEJAC
Home Page on the World Wide Web (WWW)
include a link to the resource bank.
Public Participation Resolution No.
Recommend that the NEJAC consider:
2:
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 the 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.
The members agreed that the review of action
items identified during public comment periods
will become an ongoing activity of the
subcommittee. (Section 3.2 of this chapter
presents a discussion of the action items
identified during previous public comment period.)
7-2
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
Exhibit 7-2
UPDATE ON THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY PROJECT
At the December 1996 meeting of the Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee held in Baltimore,
Maryland, the members agreed to invite a representative of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
office that awarded the grant for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) project, "Strategies for
Participation in Contaminated Communities," to attend the next meeting of the subcommittee. Mr. David
Ouderkirk, EPA Superfund Community Involvement and Outreach Center, attended the April 1997 meeting
of the subcommittee in Washington, D.C. to provide an update on the MIT project and to discuss EPA's
process of awarding grants.
The members expressed to Mr. Ouderkirk their concern and frustration about communities that are not being
engaged at every level of decision making and the apparent inequities and difficulties experienced by
community groups in receiving grants, compared with universities like MIT and Harvard University. Ms.
Dolores Herrera, Albuquerque San Jose Awareness Council, Inc., also described her experiences with other
projects sponsored by MIT in her community. In addition, she expressed concern that she and the other
members of the subcommittee have about the MIT project, particularly the issues of large educational
institutions receiving grants to research issues related to local communities and of the institutions' failure to
compensate community members for their participation as experts.
The MET project, said Mr. Ouderkirk, began in 1991 with a broad scope of work and access to various offices
at EPA. He also stated that the project is conducted under a grant from the Superfund Office, not an
environmental justice grant. The draft report has been completed, he explained, but he does not expect the final
report to be completed until 1998. MTT has made an effort, Mr. Ouderkirk noted, to include minorities on the
task force that was established to oversee the project.
Ms. Herrera also discussed her recent dialogue with Mr. Nicholas Ashforth and Ms. Christian Willauer, MIT,
about Ms. Herrera's request to include a preamble prepared by Ms. Herrera's community in the final report.
Mr. Ouderkirk said he agreed with Ms. Herrera's community about including the preamble and confirmed that
he would discuss the issue with Mr. Ashforth and Ms. Willauer.
The subcommittee members agreed to work more closely with EPA program offices that are responsible for
awarding environmental justice grants. Mr. Ouderkirk agreed with that decision and stated that he would
welcome the subcommittee's comments and suggestions on his office's projects.
Discuss with the NEJAC the need for establishing
"NEJAC-like" councils at the regional level; meet
with representatives of the EPA regional offices to
determine their need for such bodies.
Mr. Turrentine commented that this issue had
been discussed during the December 1996
meeting of the Executive Council. The issue
"died," however, because of lack of interest on the
part of the Executive Council and EPA, he said.
Reorganize the process by which the
subcommittee interacts with the other NEJAC
subcommittees.
The members agreed that interaction with other
subcommittees is an ongoing issue to be
addressed during the meetings of the Executive
Council. Mr. Turrentine added that the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee Work Group on
Superfund Reauthorization provides the members
of the Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee an opportunity to participate in an
activity of another subcommittee. He also
referred to earlier discussions about holding
meetings with designated liaisons of the other
subcommittees before the NEJAC meeting
convenes. The purpose of such meetings, he
said, would be to review the agenda and site tour
for that meeting to make any necessary changes.
Reminding the members of the need to better
integrate issues related to public participation with
the activities of the other subcommittees of the
NEJAC, Mr. Turrentine recommended that this
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
7-3
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
issue be presented again to the Executive
Council. '
', i.1: •' ,' i „. , :i 'AF\ . ;i ', ij ', j,, b "; * ' i, !i
;|j ;if , ; / ,"- • |jj|j| ' ,• ,ju"'V: ,,! " •; '• " .'' •',:
"(Develop methods to ensure the participation of
loca/ community organizations in the public
'comment periods sponsored by the NEJAC.
1 n1 si; ''i, :: i, •'. • SP'.i ",:.;»'! \ ' '• ~ "n I1 i 1 , •' : ' " '
The members agreed that the action item is an
ongoing priority for the subcommittee. Mr.
Turrentine also mentioned the responsibility of the
members to follow up on the testimony and
concerns presented during public comment
periods at the meetings of the NEJAC. (Section
3.3 of this chapter summarizes the review of
selected action items from the public comment
periods of earlier meetings of the NEJAC.)
Explore potential options for translating the model
plan into languages other than English.
Ms, Herrera staled that a preliminary draft of a
Spanish translation of the model plan had been
completed by Ms. Delta Figuero, EPA Office of
Pollution Prevention and tpxics (OPPT). Ms.
Goins stated thatshe would contact Ms. Figuero
to obtain a copy of the Spanish translation so that
|t can be reviewed and Tjade available for
distribution. (See'Section 4.3 of fhfs chapter for a
discussjpn of tfje need for publications and
services in Spanish J
Recommend to the members of the Protocol
Committee that tije Spring 1998 meeting of the
NEJAC be held in California.
I (II i| !;
Mr, Turrentine reminded the members of the long-
standing promise of the Executive Council to hold
a NEJAC meeting in Indian Country. The
members of tfie subcommittee agreed to
ilcprnfriend tP the Protocol Committee that the
Spring 1998 meeting of the NEJAC be held in
California to bring theNEJAC to ah Asian-
American community.
Develop a cover letter to accompany the model
"plan.
Ms. Goins informed the members that copies of
the model plan had been distributed to EPA
environmental justice coordinators in Spring
1997. "" ' i' . ,. '". ^ '
Public Participation Resolution No. 3: Recom-
mend that the NEJAC urge the formal adoption of
the model plan for public participation by the EPA
Administrator for implementation throughout EPA
and by the inter/agency Working Group on
Environmental Justice (I WG).
Mr. Turrentine reported that a letter to the EPA
Administrator has been drafted and was to be
sent to the Executive Council for consideration.
3.3 Review of Selected Action Items from the
Public Comment Periods of Earlier
Meetings of the NEJAC
Mr. Turrentine led a discussion of selected action
items that had been identified during public
comment periods at earlier meetings of the
NEJAC. Referring to earlier discussions about
the need to monitor the status of such action
items, he suggested that the members of the
subcommittee focus their attention on action
items related to public participation. The
subcommittee's deliberations are summarized
below.
Investigate a method of providing environmental
education to the Concerned Citizens of JFK High
School about health and safety issues related to
exposure to toxic substances.
Mr. Turrentine provided a summary of the
testimony presented by Ms. Wynella Brown and
Ms. Lemona Chandler, Concerned Citizens of
John F. Kennedy (JFK) Senior High School, New
Orleans, Louisiana, during the public comment
period at the December 1996 meeting of the
NEJAC. Exhibit 7-3 presents background
information on JFK Senior High School. He noted
that Ms. Brown had expressed concern on behalf
of the faculty and students of JFK about the
discovery that the school had been constructed
on top of a toxic waste dump 29 years earlier.
Ms. Brown, Mr. Turrentine added, also had stated
that members of the community wish to educate
themselves about health and safety issues related
to the situation!
.Ms." Shirley Augurson, EPA Region 6
Environmental Justice Coordinator, provided an
update on actions taken by EPA since the
December. 1996 meeting of the NEJAC to
address the issues raised by Ms. Brown and Ms.
Chandler. She stated that the cleanup at JFK has
been completed; however, she added, members
of the community remain concerned about
receiving information about the cleanup from
EPA.
7-4
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmentaf Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
Exhibit 7-3
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON
JOHN F. KENNEDY SENIOR
HIGH SCHOOL
NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA
Ms. Wynella Brown, Concerned Citizens of John F.
Kennedy (JFK) Senior High School, New Orleans,
Louisiana reported to the Executive Council of the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) during its December 1996 meeting that on
November 18,1996, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) informed the faculty and students of
JFK, that the school had been built on a toxic waste
dump 29 years earlier. She expressed concern about
the types of toxins to which the faculty and students
are expose and the effects of such exposure. Ms.
Brown stated that six members of the school's
faculty have been diagnosed with cancer.
Ms. Lemona Chandler, a member of the same
organization, explained that the community is
developing educational awareness programs to
address the concerns outlined by Ms. Brown. The
community, she also explained, has developed
partnerships with local colleges and universities.
Ms. Augurson then described discussions held
between Ms. Brown and representatives of EPA
Region 6 about information that had been
provided to members of the community about the
dump site and the effects of exposure on
members of the community. EPA Region 6, she
affirmed, had contacted the EPA Office of
Superfund and determined that JFK had
established its own committee to address issues
related to the dump site and community outreach.
JFK's committee, she explained, had determined
that the information provided by EPA Region 6 to
the community was adequate. Ms. Augurson
added that EPA Region 6 staff also contacted the
principal of JFK to discuss the concerns
expressed by Ms. Brown and Ms. Chandler at the
December 1996 NEJAC meeting. The principal,
she said, believed that Ms. Brown and Ms.
Chandler, both former students of JFK, did not
believe they had received adequate information,
since they were no longer affiliated with the
school.
The members of the subcommittee discussed
what they believe EPA considers "educating the
community." They generally agreed that
information EPA believes to be educational may
not truly provide useful information to members of
an affected community. Ms. Augurson
commented that EPA Region 6 had provided
copies of the model plan for public participation to
communities interested in becoming more
involved in the decision-making process. She
also pointed out that EPA's Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response (OSWER) had
developed extensive public participation
guidelines addressing the involvement of
community members.
In response to Ms. Chandler's request for
guidance in applying for grants to support
community outreach efforts, Ms. Augurson also
noted that EPA Region 6 staff had provided a
proposal package for grants to Ms. Brown and
Ms. Chandler. In addition, she stated that Ms.
Brown had been unable to submit a grant
application for 1997 funds because of illness and
that EPA Region 6 staff will continue to provide
information about available funding, including
information about the fiscal year 1998 grant
process.
Investigate and follow up on the situation
described by Mr. John Simmons, Kennedy
Heights Civic Association, concerning the
contamination of air, water, and land caused by
railroad tanks in the Kennedy Heights Community
located in Houston, Texas. Specific
recommendations include:
Scheduling a meeting with the EPA Region 6
environmental justice coordinator
Establishing a committee to investigate,
develop, and present recommendations to the
NEJAC
Ms. Augurson summarized the testimony that Mr.
John Simmons, Kennedy Heights Civic
Association, presented at the May 1996 meeting
of the NEJAC about issues related to the
Kennedy Heights community in Houston, Texas.
Exhibit 7-4 presents background information on
the Kennedy Heights community which was built
on a toxic waste site. Referring to the ongoing
litigation between the community and Chevron
USA Inc., she noted that a court date had been
scheduled for late May 1997. Ms. Augurson
added that there had been some indications that
Chevron is attempting to settle the case out of
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
7-5
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
court. EPARegfon 6 had declined totesfflyas requested
by attorneys representing the community
(plaintiff), Ms. Augurson said.
iliWJ'l ;;i' i •': •• , ,"('• «yii{ , f'j ; •'' : ;' :" % \ ",'-, I, , ' , I,; f ' I
ps. Herrera asked for a review of EPA's findings
about the potential contamination. Ms. Augurson
responded that EPA's findings so far indicate that
there is no basis to conclude that there is
• Imminent or substantial endangerment of human
ijjje^lltri qrtt1i^nv!!2inm,e^ t°.t^ke action under'tine
authorities of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). She also stated that
1 ^mpling at the site had been completed by the
plaintiff and Chevron; however, the results
Obtained by the two parties are in conflict. Mr.
Simmons, Ms. Augurson said, had requested that
the NEJAC recommend that EPA conduct
additional sampling at the site.
i'1 4,"! , , ! , ,,""'• ' Kill i' » ', ii, ' ' ' ,i, i 1
Mr. Frank Coss, CgmiteTirnon Calidad Ambiental
"He! Manati (COflCAM), asked what efforts had
been taken to clean up the site. Ms. Augurson
responded that the Texas Railway Commission is
the lead state agency because it had been
delegated the authority to regulate or to perform
detection of waste in the field and that the
commission ha.d declined to relinquish its
leadership role. She also said that EPA Region 6
is working with the Texas Natural Resource
Conservafon Corjimiisi^n (TRNCC) to develop a
response plan. t^s. Augurson noted that EPA and
TRNCC have stated their willingness to assist the
Texas Railway Commission in developing the
response plan forthe site.
', \ : Vi'lll! • . , i' ',''„.
Ms. Rosa Hilda Ramps, Community of Catafio
Against Pollution, expressed her frustration with
the situation facing the Kennedy Heights
community. Citizens are not receiving the
Information they need to participate in the
decision-making process, she said. Ms. Ramos
recommended the establishment of an
"environmental justice inspector general's office"
to investigate allegations similar to those made by
Mr. Simmons, The NEJAC, she said, is not
delegated the authority to enforce regulations or
Investigate allegations. Ms. Goins responded that
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECAj is responsible for investigating
allegations, as well as enforcing environmental
regulations and laws. She added that OEJ
responds to complaints received from
communities. Ms. Ramos restated her belief that
an ombudsman office is necessary to respond to
cases such as that of the Kenrjedy Heights
Neighborhood.
Exhibit 7-4
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON
KENNEDY HEIGHTS COMMUNITY
HOUSTON, TEXAS
Mr. John Simmons, Kennedy Heights Civic
Association, reported to the Executive Council of
the National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council (NEJAC) during its May 1996 meeting
that in the community of Kennedy Heights,
Houston, Texas, 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. He reported
that the community's water supply is transported
through pipes that "sit in toxic waste" and that
when the water lines break, the residents drink in
the contamination from the pits. Mr. Simmons
emphasized that the children of the community are
sick, and cited the need for continued testing of
the 2,000 residents of the community for evidence
of the effects of contamination.
Ms. Herrera asked whether public meetings have
been held in the Kennedy Heights neighborhood
and what the members of the community have
requested. The members of the community wish
to be relocated, Ms. Augurson responded.
3.4 Role of the Subcommittee
Mr. Turrentine encouraged the members of the
subcommittee to understand their role as
members of the NEJAC. The purpose of the
NEJAC, he emphasized, is to provide advice to
the EPA Administrator about issues related to
environmental justice. Mr. Turrentine also
commented that, although some members of the
NEJAC, including himself, are community
activists, the members should "remember what
hat they're wearing" during meetings of the
NEJAC. He expressed his frustration about what
he described as "activist" views presented by
members when they should be wearing an
"advisory hat."
Mr. Turrentine also encouraged the members to
participate in conference calls during which
NEJAC meetings are planned. The members of
the subcommittee, he said, are accountable for
1 ' '.If:
7-6
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
ensuring that public participation is integrated into
all activities sponsored by the NEJAC. Mr.
Turrentine added that the members cannot blame
others for what is not accomplished if the
members themselves do not participate in the
planning of meetings and site tours. The
members, he emphasized, must become involved
in the planning to more accurately control what
happens during site tours. (Section 4.1 of this
chapter provides a detailed summary of the
members' discussion of the site tour during the
May 1997 meeting).
3.5 Turnover and Succession of NEJAC
Members
Referring to the discussion at the April 1997
meeting of the subcommittee about the turnover
and succession of the members of the NEJAC,
Mr. Coss asked about the process of nominating
candidates to subcommittees of the NEJAC. Ms.
Herrera responded that the nomination process is
described in the by-laws of the NEJAC. She
explained that members are appointed by the
EPA Administrator, in consultation with the
Executive Council and the DFO of the particular
subcommittee. Members of the Executive
Council also are appointed by the EPA
Administrator, in consultation with the DFO of the
Executive Council, as well as the chair of the
Executive Council, she added. Ms. McGirl then
reminded the members about the
recommendation made by Mr. Knox that
members of the subcommittee identify individuals,
including representatives of their own
organizations, interested in serving on the
NEJAC. Ms. Goins agreed, adding that the
resumes of interested individuals should be sent
to Ms. Man/a King, EPA OEJ.
The members of the subcommittee then
discussed the turnover and succession of the
membership of the Executive Council. Mr.
Turrentine stated that the Protocol Committee had
not developed a process for identifying and
selecting a new chair. He also noted that the
Protocol Committee had discussed issues related
to maintaining continuity in the actions and
activities of the NEJAC. Several members asked
whether Mr. Richard Moore, Southwest Network
for Environmental and Economic Justice and
chair of the Executive Council, might remain chair
when his term expires. Mr. Turrentine also
informed the members that Ms. Clarice Gaylord,
EPA OEJ, soon would retire from the position of
director of OEJ. He added that Mr. Knox will
serve as acting director until a new director is
appointed. Expressing her disappointment that
the members of the NEJAC do not have a role in
recommending candidates for the positions of the
NEJAC chair or OEJ director, Ms. Ramos
suggested that the members of the NEJAC
should have an opportunity to identify appropriate
criteria for both the chair and the director.
3.6 Planning for the Next Subcommittee
Meeting
Mr. Turrentine stated that the subcommittee
would meet during the second or third week of
September 1997 in the Washington, D.C. area.
The purpose of the meeting, he said, would be to
develop an agenda for the meeting of the
subcommittee in December 1997; plan the site
tour; and review arrangements for the public
comment periods. Noting that conference calls
may be necessary before the September 1997
meeting, he requested that members make
themselves available to participate in planning
sessions. Ms. Goins agreed to schedule the
conference calls and to identify issues and topics
of discussion for the September 1997 meeting of
the subcommittee.
The members also discussed preliminary plans
for the site tour to be held during the December
1997 meeting of the NEJAC. Noting that a
number of jurisdictional issues divide the
Washington, D.C. Financial Control Board and
elected city officials, Mr. Turrentine remarked that
the subcommittee will have many issues to
discuss when planning for the meeting and site
tour.
In response to a question asked by Ms. Ramos,
Ms. McGirl stated that the NEJAC meetings are
advertised in local newspapers. Radio
announcements also are developed, Ms. Goins
added, and meeting announcements are
distributed by EPA regions. Ms. Ramos
requested that Ms. Goins provide her a list of the
telephone and facsimile numbers of local
newspapers and radio stations in Washington,
D.C. She also asked whether she could send
press releases to the newspapers on behalf of the
NEJAC. Several members responded that
individual members of the NEJAC cannot
distribute press releases. Observing that several
members of the NEJAC live in the Washington,
D.C. area, Ms. McGirl pointed out that those
members can help identify local organizations
within EPA Region 3 that should be invited to
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
7-7
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
attend the meeting. These groups, she said, also
Could be invited to participate in preparations for
tie site tour. Ms. Augursoh agreed that
community representatives should participate in
determining the route of the site tour.
3.7 Planning of Site Tours
Mr. Turrentine led the discussion by expressing
his frustration about the site tour held on May 13,
1997. Referring to discussions during conference
calls conducted ib prepare for the site tour, he
stated that he did not understand why certain
activities had not occurred. The site tour, Mr.
Turrentine said,'"did"not follow the route or the
agenda discussed during several conference
Calls. He added that a Native American
participant on the bus he rode asked the narrator
why the tour was not stopping at certain places.
Other members of the subcommittee also
pxpressed dissatisfaction with the site tour,
Including tine observation that the narrator oh one
bus had provided significantly more information
than the narrator on the other bus. Several
questions also were raised about the lack of
representation of the Mole Lake Chippewa Tribe.
Mr. Turrentine responded that representatives of
the Mole Lake cBppewa Tribe had participated in
sej/eral conference calls. Mr. Turrentine
explained that steff of EPA OEJ had tried to
ajT;ange a visit to Mole Lake during the site tour;
fiowever, the. Mole Lake Chippewa Tribe would
fib! allqw representatives of industry, particularly
representatives of the Exxon Corporation, to enter
tie reservation. Because meetings of the NEJAC
must be open to the public, he said, the site tour
could not include a visit to the Mole Lake.
Ms. Ramos disagreed with Mr. Turrentine's
comment that the NEJAC could not visit the
j^servatipn because industry members of the
public were not allowed on the reservation. The
JvjEJAC, she declared, should always "side with
the CQmrnupity." She also suggested that the
subcommittee develop recommendations to
address similar issues that might arise during
future meetings of the NEJAC.
Mr. Turrentine requested that Mr. Alex Varela,
EPA OEJ, provide background information about
the preparations for the site tour and discuss the
last-minute changes in the route of the site tour.
The members of the subcommittee, he stated,
had not been informed about the changes. The
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
site tour, he added, had "unraveled at the last
moment," a circumstance that he said he believed
reflected poorly on the subcommittee. Mr. Varela
explained that the original plan did include a visit
to Mole Lake; however, the members of Mole
Lake Tribe had been concerned about the
participation of representatives of the Exxon
Corporation. Mr. Varela also explained that,
because the provisions of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) require that meetings of
the NEJAC be open to the public, denying any
members of the public the right to visit Mole Lake
during an event sponsored by EPA would raise
legal issues for EPA.
Ms. Ramos asked why members of the NEJAC
had not been given the opportunity to visit Mole
Lake. Mr. Varela explained that, because of
recent conflicts within the tribal government, tribal
representatives recommended that the site tour
not include a visit to Mole Lake. Mr. Varela added
that the Menominee Tribe had agreed to host a
visit, despite the fact that May 13, 1997 was a
holiday for the tribe. Further, Mr. Turrentine
added, the Mole Lake Chippewa Tribe specifically
requested that the NEJAC not visit Mole Lake.
Ms. Ramos commented that, as a member of the
NEJAC, she should have been given the
opportunity to visit Mole Lake on her own; she
would have paid her own expenses, she stated.
Mr. Varela noted that a few members of the
NEJAC did visit members of the tribe at Mole
Lake. The members who visited, he explained,
had been invited to do so by members of the
tribe.
Expressing her extreme displeasure, Ms. Herrera
stated that she was very upset and disappointed
that members of the subcommittee had not been
invited to participate in this visit. Mr. Varela
responded that it was the choice of the Mole Lake
Tribe to invite the members of the NEJAC;
however, he agreed to suggest to the Mole Lake
Tribe that a member of the subcommittee be
invited to participate in future meetings. Mr.
Turrentine disagreed, stating that the
subcommittee must understand that the Mole
Lake Chippewa Tribe is a sovereign nation;
therefore, the subcommittee, he said, should not
attempt to impose its participation in Mole Lake
meetings without approval by the Executive
Council.
Ms. Herrera agreed, but recommended the events
at Mole Lake be shared with the other members
7-8
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
of the NEJAC, so that all members would
understand the situation more clearly. If she had
been informed of all the problems at the Mole
Lake Reservation before the site tour, Ms.
Herrera added, she would not have been so
upset.
The members of the subcommittee, as well as
members of the audience, discussed several
recommendations for increasing the effectiveness
of site tours. Ms. Herrera requested that
members of the NEJAC be provided with a
briefing before each site tour. Mr. Coss also
recommended that the communities visited during
site tours should be informed about the tour and
the schedule of activities. In addition, Ms. Ramos
suggested that the subcommittee ensure that site
tours include visits to communities in which the
most pressing environmental justice problems are
found.
Observing that the site tour held in Wisconsin
would be only the third activity of its kind, Mr.
Turrentine stated that the planning for and
conduct of site tours are improving. "The
subcommittee has come a long way," he said,
"and we need to keep focused on where we've
been and where we've come."
3.8 Development of a Public Participation
Process
Ms. Ramos opened the discussion by referring to
deliberations during the April 1997 meeting of the
subcommittee about the decision to develop a
process or model for encouraging early
involvement of the public in EPA's decision
making. As previously discussed, the members
were to identify the processes that already exist at
EPA, identify legal requirements, and determine
what tools could be developed to improve the
processes. Citing the need to develop a tool for
the whole process of public participation, Ms.
Ramos offered to lead the activity. The
subcommittee, she stated, should develop
processes that improve information exchange
between EPA and communities. She said she
also believes that EPA's public hearing process
should be changed to require that EPA invite all
stakeholders to participate in initial meetings
during which decisions are made. Ms. Ramos
asked that a resolution on the issue be developed
and forwarded to the Executive Council for
consideration.
At the request of Ms. Ramos, Mr. Joe Young,
Potawatomi Tribe, discussed his experiences
related to the practice of federal or state agencies
of making decisions without inviting the
participation of members of the communities
affected. Referring to issues related to the
proposed Crandon Mine, Mr. Young said that
involving the public in the initial decision-making
process always is a struggle.
Citing the need to offer the public sufficient time to
respond to requests for information, Ms. Ramos
stated that members of the public often have
neither the time nor the expertise to respond in a
timely manner to requests of federal, state, or
local agencies. Ms. Herrera agreed, referring to
similar experiences in her community in
Albuquerque, New Mexico. Members of the
community often must respond to requests from
state, city, and county organizations, and the
regulations of various agencies often conflict, she
continued.
Mr. Turrentine then reminded the members of the
work done by the subcommittee on the model
plan for public participation. Referring to the letter
to be sent to the EPA Administrator (Section 3.3
of this chapter presents a detailed discussion of
this action item) requesting her formal
endorsement of the model plan for
implementation within EPA and the Interagency
Work Group on Environmental Justice (IWG), he
explained that the model plan addresses the early
involvement of all stakeholders in decision
making related to environmental justice issues.
Emphasizing that the model plan is an "evolving
document," he observed that he is unsure
whether the subcommittee should undertake
efforts to develop another public participation
process. The subcommittee, he said, should
encourage the EPA Administrator, the IWG, and
the White House Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ), to implement the model plan.
Referring to efforts to distribute the model plan to
federal, state, and local agencies, Mr. Turrentine
recommended that the first step should be to
place the model plan into the "hands of
communities." If the model plan is not adopted
and used, he asked, how can the subcommittee
develop something else? The implementation of
the model plan should be the subcommittee's
starting point, he said. Mr. Turrentine described
the implementation of the document as a "long
journey that will not be without struggles."
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
7-9
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
|Q response, Ms. Ramos insisted that she was not
attempting to revise the model plan, but
imphasized that public participation is a process
^ai, involves more than meetings. For example,
•she, sale!, communities" should be invited to
rttcipate in the permitting process as soon as
Dresehtatives oTindustry decide to construct a
icfqry or plant. The public participation aspect of
ffie permitting process should be revised, she
stated, to allow community involvement early in
the process, before decisions are made.
Mr. Young agreed, referring to permitting
decisions that affected his community but that
|ferS made without involving community
^embers, He also expressed interest in the
Model plan, specifically in helping to implement
the document for use in Wisconsin. Mr.
Turrentine commented that, in his opinion, the
|Mbcqmmittee is t|juch more likely to influence the
definition of public participation than to change
the methodology for ensuring public participation.
Mr. Young also suggested that the framework for
preparing an environmental impact statement
(EIS) be revised to include a section on issues
related to environmental justice. Such a section
would focus attention on such issues as they
arise during the preparation of the EIS, he said.
Ms. Ramos concluded the discussion by agreeing
to prepare a draft resolution requesting that EPA
analyze the role of public participation in the
permitting process. She will develop that draft
lesolutiop and distribute it to subcommittee
m'embers for review and comment
4.0 ISSUES RELATED TO PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY
This section summarizes the discussions of the
subcommittee about issues related to public
participation and accountability, as they affect
concerns about environmental justice.
4.1 Participation of EPA Regional
Administrators and Staff at NEJAC
Meetings
Ms. Herrera opened the discussion of increasing
ttie participation by EPA regional administrators
jjmclsietffat NEJAC meetings by recommending
[fiat; tfie" subcommittee" review the process for
Inviting administrators and staff of EPA regions to
the meetings. The subcommittee should ensure
that the EPA regional administrator is encouraged
to attend and fully participate in the NEJAC
meeting, as well as the site tour, she stated. She
emphasized that the issue should be a priority of
the subcommittee. "Forcefully nudging" the staff
of EPA regional offices to attend the meetings will
prevent the recurring situation in which citizens
make public comments to which there is no
response, she remarked.
Declaring that EPA staff members representing
the region in which the NEJAC meetings are held
"shcjw nq interest when the N EJAC comes to their
area,'* Mr. Turrentine recommended that the
members develop a plan to increase the
participation of EPA regional staff in the meetings.
Neither the EPA Region 3 administrator nor the
deputy regional administrator, he observed,
attended the December 1996 meeting held in
Baltimore, Maryland. He also repeated
comments expressed by Mr. Moore, who had
described the EPA Region 5 Administrator as
someone who is not concerned about issues
related to public participation and environmental
justice. Mr. Turrentine added that the absence of
senior members of the staff of EPA Region 5
indicated, in his opinion, that they are not
concerned about listening to the issues of
concern to the people living in the region. Ms.
Rarnqs agreed, stating that this approach is the
only way to make EPA regional offices
accountable to community members.
Mr. Turrentine then expressed his displeasure
that Ms. Michelle Jordan, Deputy Regional
Administrator^ EPA Region 5, attended the
meeting only to give a "dog and pony show" and
departed shortly thereafter. Ms. Jordan did not
make an effort to meet with anyone or take the
opportunity to "mix and mingle" with the citizens
present, he stated. Although he was not
suggesting that Ms. Jordan was to blame, he
observed, her minimal participation reflected
poorly on the office of the regional administrator
she represents. Referring to questions raised
during the public comment periods, he stated that
"people needed answers and no one was here
invested with the authority to even respond to
issues and concerns raised."
Mr. Turrentine added that the "cameo
appearance" of Ms. Jordan indicated to him that
the environmental justice coordinators in EPA
Region 5 are "here on a wing and a prayer." The
members then discussed what they described as
the "unfair beating up" of the environmental
7-10
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
justice coordinators by some members of the
public and the NEJAC. Ms. Herrera observed that
it "isnt justice when the lower-level employees get
all the heat." The environmental justice
coordinators can do only what the EPA regions
allow them to do, Mr. Turrentine observed. Mr.
Turrentine stated his opinion that there is no
reason for EPA regional or deputy administrators
to fail to attend the NEJAC meetings. He stated
he was not suggesting that all the EPA regional
administrators attend, but, certainly, he declared,
the regional administrator of the region in which
the NEJAC meeting is held should be present.
Ms. Linda Smith, EPA OEJ, explained that Ms.
Jordan originally had been scheduled to attend
the full meeting of the NEJAC, including the site
tour; however, her participation was cut short
because she and Mr. Steven Dodge, Tribal
Liaison, EPA Region 5, had been required to give
a deposition for an ongoing legal case in Chicago,
Illinois. Other representatives of EPA tribal
programs were involved in the deposition;
therefore, they also had been unable to attend the
NEJAC meeting, Mr. Danny Gogal, EPA OEJ,
added.
Referring to the Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance Roundtable meeting held in San
Antonio, Texas in October 1996, Ms. Augurson
commented that the EPA Region 6 administrator's
office was well represented at that meeting, as
well as on the site tour. The members of the
community commended the participation of Mr.
Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator, OECA,
and Ms. Jane Saginaw, Regional Administrator,
EPA Region 6, during the roundtable meeting.
Ms. Ramos added that staff from EPA Region 2
participate in meetings and are available for
question-and-answer sessions with community
members. Several participants also commented
on the good representation of EPA Headquarters
staff, as well as regional environmental justice
coordinators at the NEJAC meetings.
At the request of Ms. Herrera, Mr. Gogal
described how staff and administrators of EPA
regions are invited to attend meetings of the
NEJAC. Ms. Smith also explained that, once a
decision has been made about the location of a
meeting, Ms. Gaylord sends a letter to the EPA
regional administrator to invite him or her to
present welcoming remarks. A member of the
audience, Mr. Oliver Warnsley, Environmental
Justice Coordinator of the Superfund Division,
EPA Region 5, then described how information
about meetings of the NEJAC is distributed within
his regional office. The problem, Ms. Herrera
then noted, is that the EPA regional
administrators are invited only to present
welcoming remarks, rather than to participate in
the full meeting. The members of the
subcommittee agreed to recommend that future
dialogues between EPA OEJ and the EPA
regional administrators indicate that the regional
administrator is expected to participate in the
entire meeting.
Ms. Smith, commenting on the success of the
model plan developed by the subcommittee,
suggested that the members develop a check list
or establish guidelines for inviting EPA regional
administrators and staff to attend the NEJAC
meetings. Mr. Turrentine agreed, stating that the
subcommittee should be involved in developing
mechanisms to guide OEJ in the invitation
process. The subcommittee should advise EPA
about what the subcommittee expects from the
EPA regions, he stressed.
The members of the subcommittee discussed a
proposal to develop a letter to the EPA regional
administrator in the region in which the NEJAC
meeting will be held. The letter, Ms. Herrera
explained, should clearly identify what staff of the
EPA region should attend the meeting. She
stressed, to ensure accountability, that EPA
decision makers responsible for, or capable of,
answering questions asked during the public
comment periods should be present at those
sessions.
Stating again that the public comment periods are
the most important aspect of the meetings, Ms.
Herrera also recommended that the letter identify
issues that might be raised during public
comment periods. With the assistance of OEJ
and the environmental justice coordinators of the
EPA regional offices, Ms. McGirl said, the
subcommittee also could identify "hot" issues
within the EPA region to help the regional
administrator become familiar with such issues
and prepare to respond to comments from the
public. Mr. Gogal cautioned the members,
however, that OEJ does not always have advance
notice of the issues that are raised during public
comment periods.
Ms. Herrera suggested that the regional
administrator be invited to present an overview of
the regions's activities related to environmental
justice during his or her opening remarks. Such
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
7-11
-------
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
a presentation, she said, would help set the tone
for the meeting and help to teach others about
%nvironmentai justice.
••; BUI
h/^s. McGirl then suggested that the letter be sent
from the NEJAC to the EPA regional
administrator. She noted that the regional
administrator might be more likely to attend a
meeting if invited by members of the NEJAC,
father than by OEJ staff members. Mr. Warnsley
agreed, remarking"that, if a regional administrator
responds to a request from the subcommittee, he
pr she will follow through on that commitment.
The members agreed to discuss the development
and content of the letter at the next meeting of the
subcommittee. Mr. Turrentine also stated that he
would inform the members of the Executive
Council of the recommendation.
i ii"1.11, m i
4.2 Public Comment Periods
lyis, Herrera askedwhether the written comments
submitted during public comment periods are sent
Jp the appropriate EPA regional staff members.
She stated she was unsure what the follow-up
process is. Ms".'" Smith responded that OEJ
distributes to the environmental justice
Sbordinators copies of all written comments or
statements. She also explained that, if the
NEJAC requests that a specific action be taken or
has an inquiry about a particular issue, the chair
of the Executive Council sends a
recommendation to the EPA Administrator, who in
turn, sends the request to the EPA regional
administrator, The EPA regional administrator
fien responds to the inquiry, Ms. Smith said.
I f:..rV;:",'' !f "•.,. , ••• ^ :•:,•. •: '$4 ;.'..
Ms. Ramos outlined her concerns that public
comment periods are not structured in a manner
that provides the NEJAC with the information it
needs to identify "cracks in the system." The
purpose of the public comment periods, she said,
should be to identify how and why the "system is
failing people arid communities.* Ms. Ramos
IjUlJH ,| j *"* n!ni ii * . ... , i „ in
suggested that guidelines for public comment
periods be established and that such guidelines
Should include encouraging commentersto define
how and why they believe the system is failing
them. The NEJAC, she continued, could request
Men public commenterto present two questions
or issues directed specifically at the regional
idministrator. Asking commenters to identify
issues will allow the NEJAC to better understand
how the system is failing community members,
she declared.
Mr. Turrentine disagreed, responding that the
NEJAC members are not in a position to tell
members of the public what they "can and cannot
tell us." Who are we, he asked, to tell
commenters .how they should make their
presentations to the NEJAC? He also cautioned
the members that the NEJAC does not want to
"police" public comment periods. Ms. Gaylord
agreed, stating that she does not believe the
NEJAC should require commenters to analyze
their particular situations. The public comment
periods, she explained, provide a forum for
"people to tell their stories." She then stated that
the members of the NEJAC should ask probing
questions during the question-and-answer
session. It is the responsibility of the NEJAC, Ms.
Gaylord stated, to analyze the issues presented
during public comment periods and identify any
loopholes in the system. Commenters should not
be asked to make such analyses, she concluded.
Again, voicing his opposition to restrictions on
what community members can present, Mr.
Turrentine strongly disagreed with Ms. Ramos'
suggestion that questions should be asked of
commenters before their testimonies. Although
he agreed that the NEJAC has a need to know
about the issues in the communities and what the
members of trie NEJAC can do to help, he
strongly disagreed with the concept of preparing
a form for classifying testimonies. Ms. Herrera
then added her opinion that community
representatives would not be willing to fill out
forms to present testimony.
4.3 Need for Publications and Services in
Spanish
Mr. Coss opened the discussion by repeating the
concerns he had expressed during earlier
meetings of the subcommittee that EPA
documents are available only in English.
Referring to his recommendation at the April 1997
meeting of the subcommittee, Mr. Coss stated
that EPA should take immediate action to
translate all its documents into Spanish. He also
suggested that OEJ establish a toll-free telephone
"hot line" for Spanish-speaking callera EPA
must, he emphasized, provide documents that
members of all communities can read and
understand easily. Mr. Coss also expressed his
7-12
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
frustration that EPA had taken no action to
respond to his recommendations.
Ms. Goins responded that she will discuss with
Ms. Gaylord the possibility that an intern be
assigned to answer the toll-free telephone line
and respond to inquiries from Spanish-speaking
callers. She also explained that most publications
of OEJ have been or are being translated into
Spanish. The members also agreed to
recommend that EPA OEJ translate all EPA
documents into Spanish.
4.4 NEJAC Meeting in Puerto Rico
Mr. Coss opened the discussion by expressing
his frustration that no NEJAC meeting has been
held in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico, he stated, has
serious environmental problems that should not
be ignored. He asked about the status of EPA's
response to his recommendation at the December
1996 meeting of the subcommittee that a meeting
of the NEJAC be held in Puerto Rico. Mr.
Turrentine responded that EPA's initial decision
was not to do so; however, the decision since has
been referred to members of EPA's Office of
General Counsel (OGC) for review. Reporting
that EPA OGC is reviewing and researching the
issue, he explained that a final decision has not
been made. Referring to the views of EPA and
other government agency officials, who consider
Puerto Rico a "resort location," he reaffirmed that
the issue is not "dead" and is taken seriously by
the members of the NEJAC. The members of the
NEJAC understand that it does not matter where
the NEJAC meetings are held because members
"know we spend our time in meetings," he said.
Mr. Turrentine cautioned the members of the
subcommittee, however, that representatives of
the federal government take a "jaundiced view" of
meetings held in any location that might be
considered a resort area.
Mr. Coss then expressed his concern that
meetings of the NEJAC have been held on Indian
reservations, but not in Puerto Rico. The NEJAC
must, he emphasized, understand the serious
environmental problems in Puerto Rico, as well
as other Caribbean and Latin American countries.
It is the responsibility of the members of the
subcommittee to show the Executive Council that
opportunities for public participation are needed in
Caribbean and Latin American countries, he
stated. He repeated his frustrations that because
"Puerto Ricans are not Indians, their issues are
not being addressed." Mr. Coss also stated his
belief that EPA Region 2 is ignoring
environmental problems in Puerto Rico. He does
not Understand, he declared, why Puerto Ricans
do not have the same rights to present their
issues to the NEJAC as members of other
communities do.
Echoing Mr. Coss' comments, Ms. Ramos
expressed sadness that EPA chooses to "deprive"
communities in Puerto Rico of the opportunity to
present their environmental problems to the
NEJAC. Describing the guidelines used to
determine meeting locations as "arbitrary and
discriminating," she stated that Puerto Rican
communities should be "given a voice." Ms.
Ramos also referred to her discussion of the
issue during the meeting of the Executive Council
at the December 1996 meeting, specifically her
request that a meeting of the NEJAC be held in
Puerto Rico. She is very upset, she said, that she
has received no response from OEJ about her
request for an official written statement about the
decision that the NEJAC cannot meet in Puerto
Rico. She needs a written statement denying
communities in Puerto Rico the opportunity to
host a NEJAC meeting, she declared. Ms.
Ramos repeated that she does not want a "word-
of-mouth" response, but instead prefers a written
response from EPA.
Mr. Turrentine then commented on what he
described as the "realities of the political
environment we're in" that sometimes affect
decisions about locations for meeting. For
example, he explained, a congressional inquiry
examined the scheduling of a meeting of the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development
in Puerto Rico. Two senior officials were brought
before the Congressional Oversight Committee
and forced to resign because of questions raised
about the conduct of a meeting in a "resort
location," he said. That case is just one example,
he added, that shows why EPA is carefully
reviewing the issue of holding a meeting in Puerto
Rico. The NEJAC may not agree with the
decision, but the members should understand the
position of EPA on the issue, he said. Mr.
Turrentine encouraged the members to be aware
of the current political climate and to avoid any
actions that might endanger the credibility of the
NEJAC.
Ms. Herrera recommended that the subcommittee
continue to raise the issue before the Executive
Council. Mr. Turrentine agreed, stating that he
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
7-13
-------
* li1 "
sts
m
Public Participation and Accountability Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
follow up on the members'
recommendation to hold a meeting of the NEJAC
In Puerto Rico. In addition, Ms. Ramps stated
that she will write "a letter to the EF3A Administrator
about her request for a written response. She
'ejxplained that she had been waiting three months
for a response that EPA was supposed to provide
in 10 days. She added that she is offended that
BEPA brings me to a casino" but will not allow a
visit by the N E JAC to Puerto RicoT
5.0 SIGNpCANT ACTION ITEMS
This section summarizes significant action items
discussed by the Public Participation and
Accounting Subcommittee.
The members discussed an action item by which
the subcommittee agreed to develop a check list
for planning and preparing for the site tours
conducted during NEJAC meetings.
The members discussed an action item by which
the subcommittee agreed to develop a process
for inviting EPA regional administrators, as well as
regional staff, to attend and participate in the
entire meeting of the NEJAC.
The members discussed an action item by which
the subcommittee recommended that EPA OEJ
translate all EPA documents into Spanish and
identify a Spanish-speaking staff member to
respond to calls to a toll-free telephone number.
It!
""I11!,,
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the
WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
May 14,1997
Potawatomi Indian Reservation
Wafoeno, Wisconsin
Meeting Summary Accepted By:
ent Benjamin
Designated Federal Official
Charles Lee
Chair
-------
-------
CHAPTER EIGHT
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) met on May 14,1997, during a
two-day meeting of the NEJAC at the Indian
Springs Lodge and Conference Center on the
Potawatomi Indian Reservation near Wabeno,
Wisconsin. Mr. Charles Lee, United Church of
Christ Commission for Racial Justice, continues
to serve as chair of the subcommittee. Mr. Kent
Benjamin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER), continues to serve as the
Designated Federal Official (DFO) for the
subcommittee. Exhibit 8-1 presents a list of
subcommittee members who attended the
meeting and identifies those who were unable to
attend.
This chapter summarizes the subcommittee's
deliberations and is organized in five sections,
including this Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks,
summarizes opening remarks of the chair.
Section 3.0, Presentations and Reports,
summarizes presentations about issues related to
waste and facility siting, including tribal issues
and activities related to EPA's Brownfields
Program and discussions of issues presented
during the December 1996 meeting of the
subcommittee. Section 4.0, Resolutions,
summarizes the resolutions forwarded to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
2.0 REMARKS
Mr. Lee opened the meeting by welcoming
members of the subcommittee, the DFO, and the
other participants. Mr. Lee presented an
overview of the agenda, noting particularly that
the subcommittee previously had discussed the
need for a roundtable meeting to consider issues
of concern to indigenous peoples. He pointed out
the necessity that the subcommittee move
forward with plans for such a meeting.
3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS
This section provides a summary of the
presentations made and status reports submitted
to the subcommittee.
Exhibit 8-1
WASTE AND FACILITY SITING
SUBCOMMITTEE
List of Members
Who Attended the Meeting
May 14,1997
Mr. Charles Lee, Chair
Mr. Kent Benjamin, DFO
Ms. Sue Briggum
Ms. Teresa Cordova
Mr.TomGoldtooth
Ms. Vernice Miller
Mr. Jon Sesso
Mr. Lenny Siegel
Mr. Ricardo Soto-Lopez
Mr. Mathy Stanislaus
Ms. Connie Tucker
List of Members
Who Were Unable to Attend
Ms. Dollie Burwell
Mr. Donald Elisburg
Mr. David Hahn-Baker
Ms. Lillian Kawasaki
Mr. Thomas Kennedy
Mr. Gerald Prout
3.1 Activities of OSWER Related to Tribes
Ms. Charlene Dunn, State and Tribal Coordinator,
OSWER Outreach and Special Projects Staff
(OSPS) and Mr. Stephen Etsitty, Indian
Coordinator, EPA Office of Solid Waste (OSW),
presented information about activities of OSWER
that are related to federally recognized tribes. Ms.
Dunn stated that, on October 29,1996, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Circuit Court for the
District of Columbia had handed down an opinion
about EPA's approval of the solid waste landfill
permitting program of the Campo Band of Mission
Indians. She explained that Backcountry Against
Dumps, a community organization of individuals
living near the Campo Band Indian Reservation in
southern California, challenged EPA's authority to
review and determine the adequacy of the Campo
Band's program. She stated that the Campo
Band Indians, who are constructing a landfill for
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
8-1
-------
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
," I Jilli ; '>' ',, ;,• ,:!,", ;,: :., i !': ;';! ''v^ii;
the disposal of waste, had requested approval for
a solid waste management program under
Subtitle D of RCRA. Bagkcountry Against Dumps
challenged EPA's treatment of tribes as states,
specifically in its authorization of tribes to operate
solid waste programs under Subtitle D of RCRA,
she said.
lyis. Dunn JJiien. gated Jh§t the court's decision in
favor Of BackcQuntry Against bumps will affect
tribal primacy under federal laws. She stated that
the court believed EPA exceeded, its statutory
authority in treating tribes as states for the
purpose of operating solid waste management
IJirograrns because the intent of Congress was to
•treat tribes as municipalities under RCRA. The
jiui i" L, iii i,,!, "!' .!.,:,, .i minimum : i
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
Other activities Ms. Dunn described included:
• A brownfields pilot grant award to a county
and municipality in Michigan to address tribal
issues
• A proposed one-day meeting in conjunction
with the Brownfields '97 Conference to
discuss issues related to tribes
• The award of two Brownfields pilot grants to
Native American tribes
Mr. Goldtooth requested the participation of
Native Americans in the Brownfields '97
Conference. Ms. Dunn asked that he provide her
with the names of individuals EPA should invite.
Members of the subcommittee asked about the
feasibility of distinguishing between landfills
operated on Indian lands that handle wastes
produced by the Indian reservation and
commercial landfills that handle wastes from
other areas on Indian lands. Members discussed
whether the subcommittee should "take a stand"
on the existence of open dumps on Indian lands.
Ms. Garczynski pointed out that if open dumps
become Superfund sites, under the requirements
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, tribes would be
treated as states, with regard to cleanup
obligations. Such a development would create a
"weird incentive and backward approach" to
treating tribes as states, she observed. Mr. Siegel
pointed out that, legislative action might be
necessary to adequately address issues related to
open dumps. He stated that a resolution
therefore "may not be strong enough." Ms.
Garczynski expressed agreement, adding that the
subcommittee should educate "legislative and
congressional bodies to ensure that the
appropriate people are aware of the issues; EPA
cannot take on that role."
Members of the subcommittee agreed that the
subcommittee should address short-term issues,
such as the case of the Campo Band of Mission
Indians, as well as long-term issues related to
regulations under RCRA. Ms. Sue Briggum,
WMX Technologies, noted that precedents exist
in cases in which federal agencies other than
EPA have provided funds to clean up open
dumps on tribal lands. She suggested that the
NEJAC ask EPA to solicit support from other
federal agencies. Members of the subcommittee
agreed that the issues raised should be discussed
during a roundtable meeting.
Members asked that the staff of OSWER consider
a roundtable meeting as a method of addressing
tribal issues. OSWER will ask other program
offices at EPA to assist in developing a strategy
for addressing tribal issues, she stated. Members
then agreed that the roundtable meeting should
be a joint effort of OSWER, the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee of the NEJAC, EPA's
Tribal Operations Committee, the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee of the NEJAC, and
the National Tribal Environmental Council, as well
as other organizations that focus on tribal issues.
Mr. Goldtooth pointed out that the roundtable
meeting should be a "strategy forum," not an
"educational forum." He added that duplicative
efforts should be avoided and related information
developed at previous meetings and drawn from
reports should form the foundation from which a
strategy is developed.
3.2 Proposed Crandon Mine
Mr. Mathy Stanislaus, Minority Environmental
Lawyers Association and Enviro-Sciences, Inc.,
expressed appreciation to the Potawatomi and
Menominee tribes for inviting the members of the
NEJAC to visit their lands. He then noted that the
tribes are concerned about issues related to the
proposed Crandon mine to be operated by the
Exxon Corporation. Figure 8-2 presents
background information about the proposed
Crandon mine. Mr. Stanislaus reminded
members of the subcommittee that it is important
that the subcommittee submit a resolution on the
issue. Ms. Connie Tucker, Southern Organizing
Committee, commented that the decision in the
Louisiana Energy Services case in EPA Region 6
was couched in what she described as "cutting-
edge" language that the subcommittee might
adapt for use in a resolution about the proposed
mine.
3.3 Copper Range Mine, White Pine,
Michigan
Ms. Jane Ryer, Legal Counsel, Bad River Band of
Lake Chippewa Indians, presented an overview of
the primary issues related to the plan for a
solution mine in White Pine, Michigan proposed
by the Copper Range Company (CRC). CRC
proposes to use solution mining to recover copper
from mined out areas. Exhibit 8-3 describes the
proposed solution mining project. Ms. Ryer
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
8-3
-------
Waste and FadlitySiting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Exhibit 8-2
BACKGROUND DEFORMATION
ON THE PROPOSED
CRANDON MINE, WISCONSIN
The Exxon Corporation proposes to mine zinc and
copper ore near the lands of three Native
American tribes, the Forest County Potawatomi,
the Mole Lake Chippewa, and the Menominee, in
Crandon, Wisconsin. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers is preparing an environmental impact
statement (EIS) that will assess the environmental
and cultural effects of the mine on the tribes in its
vicinity.
Members of the tribal communities assert that
information provided by Exxon for the EIS did not
address socioeconomic or cultural issues in a
manner sufficient to properly evaluate those
effects. The tribal communities have expressed
concern about the absence of "defensible"
groundwater and surface water data needed to
accurately describe the effects on the water
resources of tribal lands. The tribes also are
concerned about the potential effects on (1) the
historic wild rice stand in Rice Lake on the Mole
Lake Indian Reservation; (2) the Wolf River,
which flows through the Menominee Reservation;
and (3) air quality on the Forest County
Potawatomi Reservation, which is under
consideration for reclassification to Class I air
quality status.
explained that the tribes in the area are
concerned about the pump-and-treat system and
the required long-term maintenance of the
system. Ms. Ryer also explained that indigenous
peoples have a different sense of time than
"mainstrearn" society and are concerned about
the impact of the project on future generations.
the tribes in th'gjjirea question whether EPA can
be certain that its decisions will not adversely
affect the healfi of future generations. If EPA
approves CRC's proposal, EPA essentially would
be approving trie creation of waste containing
sulfuric acid, brine, and heavy metals that would
become a Superfund site, she stated. Ms. Ryer
pointed out that the company was being allowed
to fo,c,us on mining issues, without dealing
specifically with waste disposal issues, and that
the company therefore had been able to "diffuse
the issues." If mining issues and disposal issues
had been addressed separately, she observed,
certain environmental and health threats could
have been examined more closely.
Ms. Vernice Miller, Natural Resources Defense
Council, described a case in New Jersey that
involved a state-recognized tribe and the Ford
Motor Company, which wanted to dispose of
waste from underground tin mines. Ms. Miller
noted that the issues in that case were similar to
those in the CRC case. She stated that the long-
term remedy in the New Jersey case had proven
insufficient. After 15 years, she reported, waste
began to seep from underground storage
containers; the waste is beginning to "ooze up"
into the property of local communities, she said.
Exhibit 8-3
OVERVIEW OF THE
COPPER RANGE COMPANY PROPOSED
SOLUTION MINING PROCESS
The conventional copper mine at White Pine,
Michigan no longer can be mined by conventional
methods. However, five percent of the ore body
remains in the mine, in the form of pillars left
intact to support the roof of the mine. The pillars
are divided into discrete units, called panels. To
extract this ore, the Copper Range Company
(CRC) plans to blast a limited number of panels at
a given time, leaving piles of ore. CRC then
would send a seven percent solution of sulfuric
acid into the mine through a pipeline to saturate
the ore and leach out the copper.
CRC claims that the solution would be recovered
and reused. It expects to recover about 1.5 billion
pounds of copper over the 24-year life of the
project. However, at the completion of the
project, 11 billion gallons of spent solution would
be left in the mine.
Mr. Lee noted that the New Jersey case is "a
classic case of things falling through the cracks"
and asked what the subcommittee should do
about the proposed CRC solution mine.
Members of the subcommittee inquired about the
history of the case. Ms. Ryer explained that no
environmental impact statement (EIS) is required;
therefore, EPA is conducting an environmental
analysis instead, she said. She also pointed out
8-4
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
that the findings of an environmental analysis are
not enforceable through the courts. Ms. Ryer
requested that the subcommittee, with the support
of the Executive Council of the NEJAC, bring the
issue to the attention of the EPA Administrator.
Mr. Lee stated that the subcommittee would
review the history of the case and explore its
options. Mr. Siegel commented that OSWER
should take the position that EPA will not make
decisions that might lead to the creation of
additional Superfund sites.
Ms. Teresa Cordova, Community and Regional
Planning Program, School of Architecture and
Planning, University of New Mexico, expressed
her disappointment with the "lack of EPA Region
5 presence" at the NEJAC meeting. She noted
that the state of Wisconsin's tribal liaison also was
not present.
3.4 GM/Messina Superfund Site
Mr. Neil Patterson, Haudenosaunee
Environmental Task Force, presented information
about the GM/Messina Superfund site in New
York. Exhibit 8-4 presents background
information about the site. Mr. Patterson
explained that the task force is a coalition of tribal
nations, adding that the tribes believe that EPA's
decision did not acknowledge the scientific
standards that the tribes have set for themselves.
He further explained that the tribes view the issue
as one of "jobs and economics taking priority over
the health of the tribes." Mr. Patterson also stated
that the tribes are suspicious of the apparent
influence of the potentially responsible parties
(PRP) over EPA decisions. He charged that GM
was "in cohoots" with the industry competitive
council established during the administration of
President Bush.
Mr. Patterson stated that, some two years earlier,
the tribes had requested that the NEJAC develop
a resolution; however, EPA had taken no action,
he said. He requested that the subcommittee
develop another resolution and action items
addressing issues related to the site.
Mr. Lee noted that a resolution had been drafted
when the initial request was made, and that the
NEJAC had sent letters to EPA. Mr. Patterson's
report, he added, "raises the issue of how things
are followed up on." Ms. Miller asked whether
EPA had ever reexamined or revised records of
Exhibit 8-4
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE
GM/MESSINA SUPERFUND SITE
The St. Lawrence Seaway was used by a large
number of businesses, including General Motors
(GM), and historical records exist with respect to
Superfund cleanup efforts of related sites in the
New York area. GM created industrial lagoons
containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) that
leak into the St. Lawrence River and Turtle Creek.
GM also created an industrial landfill, which was
not in compliance with the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA). In 1983, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) placed
the site on the National Priorities List.
According to the local community, liability-related
questions existed with respect to who the
potentially responsible parties (PRP) are. EPA
signed a record of decision (ROD) in 1990 that
involved two operable units (OU): OU1 consisted
of tribal lands and OU2 consisted of the landfill.
In 1992, EPA issued a unilateral order. The local
community learned of problems associated with
the site through local newspapers. Subsequently,
tribal communities developed their own cleanup
standards, which were much more stringent than
the cleanup standards set by EPA in the ROD.
decision (ROD) to address issues related to
environmental justice. Ms. Garczynski replied
that there must be a judicial basis for "reopening"
a ROD.
Ms. Miller cited a case in New York City in which
a ROD was reexamined because the remedy
selected for the cleanup did not reduce the
amount of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB)
present at the site in question. Ms. Garczynski
pointed out that the case Ms. Miller had referred
to was an example of the discovery of new
information, a circumstance that judicially justifies
the reexamination of a ROD.
Ms. Tucker suggested that the subcommittee
question the extent to which EPA seriously
attempts to involve affected communities in the
decision-making process. She also stated that
questions should be raised about the influence of
PRPs on EPA's decisions and about EPA's
treatment of Native American tribes. She pointed
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
8-5
-------
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
out that EPA will accept standards promulgated
by states but will not accept tribal standards. Ms.
Garczynski commented that the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee also had discussed the
GMlMssina case. She suggested that the two
subcommittees work together on the specific
issues of excessive influence on the part of PRPs
and community involvement.
Ms]Briggum also expressed concern about the
implication of excessive influence on the part of
PRps. She also stated that she "felt
uncSmfortable* about making a decision about a
case Without haying an opportunity to listen to the
industry's perspective. She urged the members
of fie subcommittee to be careful in assessing
thernotives 'arid influence of industry because the
subcommittee's credibility could be affected
adversely if it were to make rash judgments.
Mr Lee suggested that the subcommittee draft a
letir to tie EPA Administrator to call attention to
the issues raised by Mr. Patterson and the
suSxjmmltee's sub'sequeht discussion of those
issues.
3.5 Community Involvement Protocol of the
^American Society of Testing and Materials
Ms! 'Catherine ti awes,OSAAfeR OSPS, and Ms.'"
Mifer presented information about efforts of the
American Society of Testing and Materials
(ASTM) to develop a community involvement
protocol for the Brownfields redevelopment
initiative. Ms. Dawes explained that ASTM is a
voluntary organization that develops technical
standards in a variety of areas. She mentioned
that ASTM had established a sustainable
dlvetopment subcommittee and various task
gfoups lo deal with Phase 1 and Phase 2 site
assessments, petroleum standards for risk-based
olrrdctiye action (RBCA), and restoration of
property under trie Brownfields Program. She
explained that the Transfer Improvements Act,
signed by President Clinton in 1995, directs EPA
and all other federal agencies to use technical
standards developed by voluntary consensus
dfgsnizations! MsI Dawes added that EPA's goal,
tHerefore, is to integrate its Brownfields action
agerfda goals into the process developed by the
ASTM's sustainable development subcommittee.
She noted that several of the ASTM task groups
Ire discussing issues related to community
involvement in the redevelopment process. One
task group, in particular, is developing guidance
to help communities, developers, and
municipalities work through redevelopment
issues, she added.
The members of the subcommittee discussed
their concerns that ASTM is defining standards for
community involvement. Ms. Miller explained that
ASTM is attempting to define a process for
ensuring successful redevelopment, rather than
trying to define standards for community
involvement. She added that she is the only
member of the task groups who represents
environmental justice interests. She emphasized
that other advocates of environmental justice
should be involved in the task groups. Ms. Miller
stated that the overall goal of the ASTM task
groups is to prevent roadblocks to
redevelopment, pointing out that communities
often are viewed as roadblocks. Ms. Miller stated
that she was concerned because different task
groups define community involvement differently.
She noted that industry and federal and local
governments use standards developed by ASTM.
'Their standards are taken seriously and are held
up in courts of law," she stated.
Ms. Garczynski added that states are
incorporating ASTM standards in their entirety into
state standards. She stated that the NEJAC
should decide whether it wants to influence the
process, and added that "in order to influence the
outcome of an ASTM standard, you must be at
the table." Ms. Garczynski also stated that ASTM
standards play a role in all transfers of
commercial property.
Ms. Miller and Ms. Dawes pointed out that ASTM
plans to develop a draft guidance by June 1997.
They reported that ASTM's activities, plans, and
concerns related to property redevelopment will
be discussed at a session of the Brownfields '97
Conference. Ms. Dawes noted that ASTM also is
developing a proposal for an EPA grant of funds
to involve community groups in the activities of
ASTM, either by compensating community
members for attendance at meetings of ASTM or
by holding its meetings in locations accessible to
such groups. The proposal also involves testing
the redevelopment standards under a pilot project
in a community to determine whether the
standards work, she added.
Mr Lee stated that there are impediments to
community participation in the redevelopment
process. He reminded the members of the
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Garczynski commented that CBEP originated in
EPA's Office of Water, and "it has taken a while
for the concept to expand beyond watersheds."
Mr. Stanislaus commented that CBEP should be
a mechanism for developing community-based
regulations. He noted that, in East St. Louis,
Illinois, EPA Region 5 had done "a good job" of
involving the community. Mr. Stanislaus said that
EPA should be commended for its efforts in that
area. "In contrast," he added, "EPA Region 2 had
private consultations with state and local
agencies" about a project in the South Bronx area
of New York and then announced its decision. He
noted that some individuals in EPA Region 2
have good intentions; however, he said, the
process of setting priorities must involve
communities "in an active way."
Mr. Perrecone pointed out that EPA had been
able to work directly with the community in East
St. Louis because no local government agencies
were involved in the process. He added that "the
bigger the city, the tougher it is to get coordination
among all parties." Ms. Melva Hayden,
Environmental Justice Coordinator, EPA Region
2, pointed out that when EPA is not the lead
agency, it does try to facilitate the process of
bringing state or local partners to the table. "In
the South Bronx, that's what happened," she
stated.
Mr. Perrecone mentioned that CBEP requires an
analysis of ways to involve all parties in
addressing broad issues that affect numerous
parties and interests. He added that EPA Region
5 is developing a regional environmental network
to identify and address air quality problems. The
network, he said, will include Caucasian
communities, multi-racial communities, and
others. Mr. Perrecone added that there is a need
to make "the leap from existing community
involvement approaches to community-based
approaches."
Mr. Lee commented that the issues are complex.
He pointed out that it is difficult to bring
community members from different areas
together to cooperate on efforts. 'The answers
will not necessarily come easily, but engagement
must occur," he added.
Mr. Perrecone noted that state and local agencies
may interpret and understand differently the
definition of environmental justice, its importance
and relevance, and the definition of public
participation. When that is the case, the issues
become more complex, he stated. Mr. Perrecone
pointed out that "there must be a greater
understanding at all levels of government" of what
EPA is attempting to accomplish in the areas of
environmental justice and CBEP. He added that
EPA Region 5 will have access through OSEC to
a social scientist who will help the agency
investigate CBEP issues. Mr. Perrecone told the
members that he is responsible for developing a
plan for involving stakeholders, and requested the
NEJAC's assistance in developing that plan. Ms.
Dawes recommended that the subcommittee
request that EPA clarify its definitions of
"community" and "CBEP."
Mr. Stanislaus distributed to the members of the
subcommittee copies of a draft resolution on
CBEP. The members discussed the contents of
the resolution, as well as concerns about whether
the CBEP initiative is truly "community based."
Members also expressed concern that EPA does
not address adequately issues related to airborne
contaminants. The members of the
subcommittee adopted the resolution and
forwarded it to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC for consideration.
3.8 Proposed Shintech Polyvinylchloride
Complex, St. James Parish, Louisiana
Ms. Emelda West, St. James Citizens for Jobs
and Environment, and Mr. Damu Smith,
GreenPeace, presented information about a
polyvinylchloride (PVC) facility that the Shintech
Corporation proposes to build in St. James
Parish, Louisiana. Ms. West explained that there
currently are three facilities near residences and
schools in the St. James Parish community and
more facilities "are not needed or wanted," she
declared. She explained further that the
proposed Shintech facility would create jobs;
because some 40 percent of local residents live
below the poverty level, some residents have
expressed support for the proposed facility only
because of the potential job opportunities, she
noted. Upper respiratory problems and cancer
cases are prevalent in the area, Ms. West said,
and the area is located in what is commonly
called "Cancer Alley."
Ms. West described the community as "plagued
with contamination and health threats." She
mentioned that "shelter-ins" are common because
8-8
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
['National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
of the prevailing pollution problems. "Shelter-ins,"
she explained, "are moments when sirens sound
|bd residents are told to stay inside until it is safe
Jo retiirri.'.pUtd'pofs." Ms. West added, that local
residents are concerned about exposure to
chemicals, particulate matter, and "trucks
fransporting waste through the community." She
stated that many residents are "troubled" because
"Ihey'suspectthat EPA Region 6 is promoting and
Supporting industry, rather than pursuing
concerns about the health of local residents.
Mr. Smith then provided an overview of activities
related to the proposed facility. He explained that
EPA Region 6 had delegated permitting authority
to the Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality (LDEQ) and that Shintech had applied for
several permits, including water discharge and air
permits, the facility, he explained, cannot be
constructed unless an air permit is issued. Mr.
Smith also explained that, at a public hearing held
In 1996 to discuss the proposed air permit, more
than 350 people opposed issuance of the permit.
However, Shintech, he stated, "imported about
500 people from a community outside of Texas to
support the permit." Mr. Smith stated that, during
the public meeting, he was saddened by the
comment of one resident who exclaimed, "We're
already dying; one more facility won't make a
difference; what we need is jobs." Subsequently,
he explained, GreenPeace filed a petition
objecting to the air permit because of concerns
about Issue? related to environmental justice and
Violations of the provisions of Executive Order
12898 on environmental justice. Mr. Smith
explained that trie "permit had not yet been issued,
fjut that, Lp'EG; might issue a permit in the near
|utures l^eurgecimembers of the subcommittee
to "act quickly,*stating that timing was critical
because of the impending issuance of the air
permit.
Mr. Smith explained that GreenPeace had
become involved in the issue at the request of
local residents. He then stated that, when local
communities invite organizations such as
GreenPeace to become involved, they do so
because they are facing powerful adversaries,
like "David trying to fight Goliath," he said. Mr.
Dmitri Jtatec) "that the Sierra Club, the _ Southern
Iprganizing" Committee,"' and" ' the Southwest
fe Economic Justice
also have "joined forces" with the local community
tp fight the proposed facility. Mr. Smith accused
LDEQ of encouraging local residents to support
the proposal and of "taking advantage of poorly
educated residents who are suffering
economically."
Mr. Smith also pointed out that, "in the eyes of the
local community," staff of EPA Region 6 and
LDEQ have engaged in unacceptable behavior,
including holding "closed-door" meetings. He
added that the response on a national level had
been quite different, and he noted that EPA's
Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) "has been
extremely open and helpful." Members of the
subcommittee discussed at length steps the
subcommittee might take and issues the
subcommittee should focus on. Several
members expressed concern about whether the
staff of EPA Region 6 and LDEQ are "doing their
jobs properly." Mr. Lee pointed out that, in the
past, successes have been achieved through a
process of discussing issues and taking steps to
understand how the agency operates. He
stressed that the questions raised during the
presentation brought up real issues; however, the
subcommittee is not in a position to "decide the
facts of the case." Ms. Tucker commented that
certain issues fall under the purview of the
subcommittee, including the public hearing for the
air permit, issues related to Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act, and questions about LDEQ's alleged
conflict of interest related to the organization of
residents in support of the facility.
Mr. Stanislaus asked the presenters to clarify their
request for action by the NEJAC. Mr. Lee noted
that the Enforcement Subcommittee of the
NEJAC would take the lead on developing a
resolution and forwarding it to the Executive
Council for consideration. Mr. Lee added that the
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee would
review the issues in the case that are pertinent to
facility siting. Mr. Stanislaus proposed that the
subcommittee hold a conference call to further
discuss those issues. Mr. Lee agreed with that
request.
3.9 Status of OSWER's Siting Guidance
Ms. Ginny Phillips, OSW, distributed to the
members of the subcommittee copies of an EPA
guidance document, "Sensitive Environments and
the Siting of Hazardous Waste Management
Facilities," which discusses various technical
issues and sensitive environments that require
special consideration in making decisions about
the siting of such facilities. Ms. Phillips explained
that members of the subcommittee were "the first
outside EPA management" to receive copies of
liar i .
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
8-9
-------
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
the document. She stated that the document
would be placed on the World Wide Web and
distributed to various stakeholders.
In addition, Ms. Phillips distributed to the
members copies of a draft guidance document,
The Social Side of Siting Hazardous Waste
Management Facilities: Opportunities for Public
Involvement to Reduce Social Impacts,11 which
also discusses social issues that require special
consideration in making siting decisions. She
explained that the document was in draft form
and that she would like the subcommittee to
review it and submit comments. Ms. Phillips
suggested that the subcommittee take part in
conference calls to discuss specific issues and
address comments received.
Mr. Jon Sesso, Butte-Silver Bow Planning
Committee, commented that EPA should not
make value judgments with respect to the "right"
and "wrong" ways to involve the public. Rather,
he said, EPA should include a section that
outlines the "dos" and "don'ts" of public
participation. He also mentioned that issues
related to the delegation of authority are
confusing to local residents. He suggested that
residents be provided with information to answer
such questions as "Who will make the decision?"
and "What specific decisions will be made?" He
pointed out that public participation is an entire
process and that communities often focus on only
one aspect of that process. For example, he said,
the community near the proposed Shintech facility
had focused primarily on the air permit; however,
"construction could be stopped even if the air
permit is approved," he stated.
Mr. Stanislaus suggested that the subcommittee
form a work group to address the social aspects
of siting. He added that the work group also
could address siting issues raised during the
presentation on the proposed Shintech facility.
Mr. Stanislaus also suggested that the members
focus on the social aspects of siting when they
review the guidance. Mr. Benjamin pointed out
that some members' terms were to end in July.
He urged those members who would be retiring
from the subcommittee to submit their comments
on the draft guidance before the end of July.
3.10 Status of the Brownf ields National
Partnership
Ms. Garczynski updated the members on the
status of Brownfields activities at EPA. She
explained that EPA had held a series of
interagency meetings and had obtained more
than 100 commitments from other federal
agencies to work with EPA and each other on
Brownfields cleanup and redevelopment. Ms.
Garczynski noted that the day before the
subcommittee meeting, Vice President Gore had
announced interagency commitments for
Brownfields redevelopment, including a
commitment by the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) to coordinate its
empowerment zone initiative with EPA's
Brownfields activities. Ms. Garczynski then
distributed to the members information about
ongoing Brownfields activities and
accomplishments, including voluntary cleanups.
In addition, Ms. Garczynski mentioned that EPA
had requested budget increases for fiscal year
1998 for the Superfund and Brownfields
programs. She stated that an increase in the
Superfund budget had been requested to address
"a backlog of sites for which there is no funding."
EPA had requested a fiscal year 1998 budget of
$87 million for the Brownfields program, she
added.
Ms. Garczynski also announced to the members
that a revolving loan program would be
established to lend funds to prospective
purchasers to clean up properties. She added
that, to receive the loans, purchasers would be
required to demonstrate a commitment to
environmental justice and community
involvement. Ms. Garczynski noted that EPA will
ensure that grant recipients involve communities
adequately. EPA will conduct site investigations
and make telephone calls to determine the extent
of community involvement, she added.
Mr. Soto-Lopez noted that EPA Region 2 tends to
focus solely on sites owned by municipal
authorities. Consequently, many privately owned
sites in EPA Region 2 remain to be cleaned up,
he said. Because of this, he said, community
involvement has suffered in that region. Mr. Soto-
Lopez explained that community groups want to
form partnerships with the private sector to clean
up sites; however, those groups are "left out of
8-10
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
-------
Nations! Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
the process because the focus is on city-owned
property," he stated.
!,. - : :• •"..• , .•; !< ;;<'
Ms. Garczynski commented that seller liability is
a major issue affecting Brownfields properties.
She stated thaf mgny corporations are waiting for
reauthorization oTsuperfurid before they develop
properties because of issues related to joint and
several liability. Ms. Briggum pointed out that
companies historically have sold properties" that
have been use^", subsequently' lor residential
purposes. "Corporations were then sued, instead
of the property owners, for environmental
contamination," she added.
Ms. Garcyzynski stated that current regulations do
not allow EPA to award money directly to
community groups to conduct cleanups. She
added that, of the 15 pieces of legislation
currently being considered, none would chan
the regulations to allow EPA to award cleanup
funds directly to community groups. Ms. Miller
commented that "local politics will always play a
role" and questioned whether grant awards would
ever "not involve awarding funds to local
governments."
Mr. Stanislaus commented that controls and
conditions should be put in place to ensure that
funds are used for the purposes intended. He
;;,thern rjpentfonecj ........... Jriaj ..... he, .had,, prepared a .draft
resolution that addressed issues related to Title VI
|gHhe,C/fvil Rights Act and Brownfields. Mr. Lee
'" adjdecf , that" the "members", niif st , ..... understand, .the
issues Before they coulS move forward on the
resolution- Ms. Qgrczynski offered to provide the
ijnembers of the subcommittee with copies of a
publication on Brownfields that had been
fJrepared by the Northeast-Midwest Institute. The
pubiicatipn, she said, might help members to
'' B'" '
.h inB'"pn 'thelssues. Ms. Garcyznski
also offered to participate in the conference calls
!;';"pf 'the ".subcommittee' and its work groups to
discuss issues related to Brownfieids.
Ms. Garczynski further noted that EPA is seeking
In panel discussions at the Brownfields '97
|*c^nfe.r§nce^'^,b^held"in'^an^as"dity, Missouri,'
September 3 through 5, 1997. Mr. Benjamin
!';'|d
-------
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
two years. After that time, she explained,
"Superfund shuts down." Ms. Garczynski stated
that the Superfund program has an annual budget
of approximately $1.6 billion; however, Congress
authorized a budget of only $1.4 billion for this
fiscal year. Congress stated that EPA would not
be given additional funding until it can
"demonstrate that it can spend the money already
allocated," she explained. Ms. Garcynski added
that negotiations are underway in the Senate and
House subcommittees with respect to whether
funding "really exists" for Brownfields and other
program activities. She pointed out that
"Superfund reauthorization is not just about NPL
(National Priorities List) cleanups, but also
Brownfields, worker training, and other programs."
Ms. Briggum commented that there is a
perception that members of the Democratic party
do not want revisions to be made in CERCLA.
Perhaps, she said, there is a "mindset of do
nothing, let Superfund lapse, and then we can say
we have a do-nothing Congress." Ms. Briggum
stressed that there seems to be a lack of
understanding about the importance of Superfund
to communities affected by contamination from
hazardous waste sites. Mr. Stanislaus added that
some members of Congress had proposed that
voluntary cleanup programs be incorporated into
the reauthorization of Superfund. He suggested
that the subcommittee hold a meeting to focus
solely on the effects of reauthorization of
Superfund and voluntary cleanup programs on
communities of low-income people and people of
color. Ms. Miller suggested that the
subcommittee brief members of Congress to
explain the issues of concern related to
environmental justice and reauthorization of
Superfund. She noted that her Congressional
representative is the ranking Democrat on the
House Ways and Means Committee. Eventually,
she said, the proposed legislation related to the
issues will come before that committee for
approval.
Mr. Benjamin reminded the members that EPA
"cannot spend money in any way to finance
lobbying activities." He also reminded the
members that the NEJAC is a committee
established under the provisions of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA); members can
conduct activities "on their own time," but EPA
cannot fund such activities, he said. Ms. Briggum
commented that the subcommittee could express
its concern to the EPA Administrator.
Ms. Tucker also commented that contractors that
receive federal funds should be required to hire
citizens from affected communities who have
received training. 'That includes not just
minorities, but low-income whites as well," she
stated. Ms. Garczynski responded that EPA does
not have a statutory authority to mandate that
contractors hire local residents. However, she
stated, EPA has established an award fee
program in all remedial action contracts that
encourages contractors to involve small and
disadvantaged businesses in the conduct of
cleanups.
Ms. Miller and Ms. Tucker requested that EPA
brief the subcommittee on the potential effects of
reauthorization of Superfund on low-income and
minority communities. They suggested that
members of the Enforcement Subcommittee, as
well as other members of the NEJAC, be invited
to attend the briefing. Ms. Garczynski responded
that Mr. Steve Luftig, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (OERR), and Mr. Cliff
Rothenstein, OSWER, should present the
briefing. She explained that these gentlemen
lead the EPA staff teams that have been
discussing Superfund reauthorization issues with
the Senate and the House.
Ms. Tucker proposed that the subcommittee
establish a work group to address issues related
to reauthorization of Superfund and develop
recommendations to the EPA Administrator for
the subcommittee to review. She suggested the
work group meet in November 1997 in
Washington, D.C. The members then discussed
candidates to serve on the work group. Mr.
Benjamin reminded the members of the
subcommittee that appointments of individuals to
the work group who are not members of the
subcommittee would require the approval of the
Executive Council of the NEJAC, EPA OEJ, and
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA) because members of the work
group essentially become a part of the NEJAC.
Therefore, their participation is subject to the
provisions of FACA. Mr. Benjamin suggested,
therefore, that subcommittee members make up
the work group and that members identify other
individuals to make recommendations to the work
group. Mr. Benjamin also urged members to
remember that public meetings must be
announced in the Federal Register and that
mechanisms must be in place to address public
comments voiced at the meetings.
8-12
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14, 1997
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
f Mr. Lee stated that the subcommittee wished to
discu§s the issues raised with EPA to clarify
.; Information ;iaboutthe Superfund and Brownfields
programs arid their effects on communities of low-
jjncprne people and people of color. The
subcommittee will use the information to make
recommendations to EPA, he said.
3.11.2 Community Impact Statements
Mr. Siegel distributed and read to the members of
the subcommittee a draft resolution on community
impact statements (CIS). He explained that the
resolution requested that EPA support the
development of pilot CISs to assist communities
in analyzing environmental conditions in their
neighborhoods. The resolution also requested
tflit EpA disseminate the results; of the pilot CISs
aned, if the results prove valuable, convene a
ierjes of meetings to discuss options for funding
CISs in communities of low-income people and
people of color, fie stated.
, I'll , ! ii. "| • : ] 'l^nin , , ' ,' i • '
Jhe subcommittee adopted the resolution and
forwarded it to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC for consideration.
i nil' • • ,','!.,, »'r ''' ' I'liWiiil :••. • « „ " ' . "'', "' : '
3.11.3 Superfund Relocation Policy
n,i. i ' " ' , lhll|!l,i,l, . , ' '"'
Mr. Benjamin distributed to the members two
handouts developed by OERR that summarize
©verits related to the discovery of the agricultural
Insecticide mefHyi parathion in residences in
areas of the South and in the western part of the
United States. Many residents were relocated as
•"'a' result of the discovery, he said. Ms. Tucker
pointed out that, although arrests have not been
made that affect any of the corporations involved,
arrests have occurred when individuals have
been found to be liable for misuse or improper
distribution of the insecticide.
Mr. Benjamin also pointed out that EPA is
reacting to stakeholders' comments and other
information gathered through the Relocation
Roundtable Meeting held in Pensacola, Florida,
May 2 th rough 4,1996. He added that EPA was
to issue draft policy on relocation in summer
1997. (See Chapter Three, Section 4.1 for a
more detailed discussion about methylparathibn.)
4.0 RESOLUTIONS
This section summarizes the resolutions drafted
by the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
and forwarded to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC for consideration.
The members of the subcommittee discussed a
resolution that requested that EPA analyze the
potential environmental justice and cultural effects
of the proposed Crandon mine to be operated by
the Exxon Corporation on land adjacent to the
tribal lands of the Forest County Potawatomi, the
Mole Lake Chippewa, and the Menominee Indian
tribes, as well as review the EIS prepared for the
proposed mine. The resolution was forwarded to
the Executive Council of the NEJAC for
consideration.
The members of the subcommittee discussed a
resolution that requested that EPA define the term
"community" within the context of the CBEP
initiative, develop a mechanism for evaluating
CBEP activities to ensure their cpnfprmarice wj|h
the Government Performance and Results Act,
establish a community ombudsman office to
address community complaints, provide technical
assistance to community-based organizations,
and establish a clearinghouse for dissemination
of information to communities. The resolution
was forwarded to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC for consideration.
The members of the subcommittee discussed a
resolution that requested that EPA support the
development of pilot CISs; disseminate the results
of testing of the pilots; and, if the pilots prove
effective, consider ways to fund CISs in all
communities facing environmental injustices.
This resolution was forwarded to the Executive
Council of the NEJAC for consideration.
Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 14,1997
8-13
-------
Appendices
-------
-------
List of NEJAC Members
-------
-------
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
Alphabetical List of Members
1996-1997
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL
Dr. Clarice Gaylord, Director
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202/564-2515
Fax: 202/501-0740
E-mail: king.marva@epamail.epa.gov
CHAIR
Richard Moore - 1 year
Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic
Justice
P.O. Box 7399
Albuquerque, MM 87194
Phone: 505/242-0416
Fax: 505/242-5609
E-mail: sneej@igc.apc.org
Other Members
Leslie Ann Beckhoff - 3 years
Conoco/DuPont
One Lakeshore Drive, Suite 1000
Lake Charles, LA 70629
Phone: 318/497-4834
Fax: 318/497-4717
E-mail: leslie.a.beckhoff@usa.conoco.com
Christine Benally - 2 years
Sanostee Chapter of the Navajo Nation
P. O. Box 722
Shiprock, NM 87420
Phone: 505/368-1260
Fax: 505/368-1266
E-mail: cjbenally@ncc.cc.nm.us
John C. Borum - 1 year
Vice President
Environment and Safely Engineering
AT&T
131 Morristown Road
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Phone: 908/630-2700
Fax: 908/630-2718
E-mail: none
Dollie B. Burwell - 2 years
Warren County Concerned Citizens Against PCB
P. O. Box 254
Warrenton, NC 27589
Phone: 919/257-2942
Fax: 919/257-1309
E-mail: w.burw@aol.com
Luke W. Cole - 3 years
Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
631 Howard Street, Suite 330
San Francisco, CA 94105-3907
Phone: 415/495-8990
Fax: 415/495-8849
E-mail: crpe@igc.apc.org
Mary R. English - 2 years
Associate Director
Energy, Environment and Resources Center
600 Henley Street, Suite 311
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996-4134
Phone: 423/974-3825
Fax: 423/974-1838
E-mail: menglish@utk.edu
Deeohn Ferris - 1 year
Washington Office on Environmental Justice
1511 K Street NW, Suite 1026
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202/637-2467
Fax: 202/637-9435
E-mail: woej@igc.apc.org
Rosa Franklin - 3 years
Washington State Senate
409 Legislative Building
P. O. Box 40482
Olympia, WA 98504-0482
Phone: 360/786-7656
Fax: 360/786-7524
E-mail: franklin_ro@leg.wa.gov
Arnoldo Garcia - 3 years
Development Director
Earth Island Institute
2263 41st Avenue
Oakland, CA 94601
Phone: 415/561-3332
Fax: 415/561-3334
E-mail: agarcia@igc.apc.org
Grover Hankins - 2 years
Director
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Environmental Justice Project
Texas Southern University
3100 Cleburne Avenue, Room 212
Houston, TX 77004
Phone: 713/313-7287
Fax: 713/313-1087
E-mail: ghankins@tsulaw.edu
-------
Dolores Herrera -1year
Albuquerque San Jose Community
Awareness Council, Inc.
P. O. Box 12297
Albuquerque, MM 87195-2297
Phone: 505/243-4837
Fax: 505/243:3085
E-mail: sanjosecac@aol.com
James Hill - 3 years
Klamath Tribe
P. O. Box 436
Chiloquin, OR 97624
Phone: 541/783-2218
Fax: 541/783-2029
E-mail: jhill@cvc.com
Lawrence G. Hurst-2 years
Director, Strategic Issues and Communications
Motorola, Inc.
8220 East Roosevelt (MD R 3125)
Scottsdale, AZ 85257
Phone: 602/441-3210
Fax: 602/441-3965
E-mail: p26227@email.mot.com
i Kawasaki-2 years
;-General'Manager
City of Los Angeles Department of Environmental Affairs
2^)1 Np,rth Figueroa Street, Suite 200
«" Los Angeles; CA 90012
J Phone: 213(580-1045
jiFax: " 2l|/580;1084,,, '' "" , ' ', "[
'""^E-mail: Ikawasak@ea3.ci.la.ca.us'_' "m '
Richard Lazarus - 1 year
Visiting Professor
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202/662-9129
, , , ..
E-mail: iazarusr@law.georgetown.edu
',;,; ^Charles,'tee-2 years
Director of Research
United Church of Christ
Commission for Racial Justice
475 Riverside Drive, 16th Floor
" I'Nev York, NY 10015"
Phone: 212/870-2077
«!;Fax: „ "212/870-2162' ;
fe-mail: l63601.2273@compuserve.com
Gerald Prout - 3 years
FMC Corporation
ili'lgfitK Street, NW, Suite400
•*l: Washington, DC 20036
'rpio'ne: 202/956-5209
Fax: 202/956-5235
E-mail: jerry_prout@fmc.com
Rosa Hilda Ramos - 3 years
Community of Catano Against Pollution
La Marine Avenue
Mf 6, Marine Bahia
Catano, Puerto Rico 00962
Phone: 787/788-0837
Fax: 787/788-0837
E-mail: irosah@coqui.net
Arthur Ray - 2 years
Maryland Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
Phone: 410/631-3086
Fax: 410/631-3888
E-mail: aray@charm.net
Peggy Saika - 1 year
Asian Pacific Environmental Network
1221 Preservation Parkway 2nd Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: 510/834-8920
Fax: 510/834-8926
E-mail: pks@igc.apc.org
Haywood Turrentine - 2 years
Education and Training Trust Fund
500 Lancaster Pike
Exton, PA 19341
Phone: 610/524-0404
Fax: 610/524-6411
E-mail: none
Baldemar Velasquez - 1 year
Director
Farm Labor Organizing Committee
507 South St. Clair Street
Toledo, OH 43602
Phone: 419/243-3456
Fax: 419/243-5655
E-mail: none
Margaret L. Williams - 3 years
Citizens Against Toxic Exposure
6400 Marianna Drive
Pensacola, FL 32504
Phone: 904/494-2601
Fax: 904/479-2044
E-mail: none
-------
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
List of Members by Stakeholder Category
1996-1997
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL
Clarice Gaylord, Director
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street S.W. (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 564-2515
ACADEMIA - 3
Mary R. English - 2 years
Energy, Environment and Resources Center
600 Henley Street, Suite 311
University of Tennessee
Knoxvffle, TN 37996
Richard Lazarus - 1 year
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Grover Hankins - 2 years
Environmental Justice Project
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Texas Southern University
3100 Cleburne Avenue, Room 212
Houston, TX 77004
INDUSTRY - 4
John C. Borum - 1 year
Environment and Safety Engineering
AT&T
131 Morristown Road
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Lawrence G. Hurst - 1 year
Motorola, Inc.
8220 East Roosevelt (MD R 3125)
Scottsdale, AZ 85257
Gerald R. Prout - 3 years
FMC Corporation
1667 K Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006
Leslie Ann Beckhoff - 3 years
Conoco/DuPont
One Lakeshore Drive, Suite 1000
Lake Charles, LA 70629
CHAIR
Richard Moore
Southwest Network for Environmental and
Economic Justice
P.O. Box 7399
Albuquerque, NM 87194 •
Phone: (505) 242-0416
Other Members
COMMUNITY GROUPS - 4
Dolores Herrera - 1 year
Albuquerque San Jose Community Awareness
Council, Inc.
P.O. Box 12297
Albuquerque, NM 87195-2297
Dollie B. Burwell - 2 years
Warren County Concerned Citizens Against PCB
P. O. Box 254
Warrenton, NC 27589
Margaret L. Williams - 3 years
Citzens Against Toxic Exposure
6400 Marianna Drive
Pensacola, PL 32504
Rosa Hilda Ramos - 3 years
Community of Catano Against Pollution
La Marine Avenue
Mf 6, Marine Bahia
Catano, PR 00962
NON-GOVERNMENT - 4
Charles Lee - 2 year
United Church of Christ
Commission for Racial Justice
475 Riverside Drive, 16th Floor
New York, NY 10015
Baldemar Velasquez - 1 year
Farm Labor Organizing Committee
507 South St. Clair Street
Toledo, OH 43602
Luke W. Cole - 3 years
Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
631 Howard Street, Suite 330
San Francisco, CA 94105-3907
-------
I' NEJAC List of Members by Category
' "'
a Page 2
••' In, "I! i'!' I
- 4 (Continued)'
Haywood Turrentine - 1 year
^'Education and Training Trust Fund
500 Lancaster Pike
Exton, PA 19341
.; STATE/LOCAL,; 31
Arthur Ray - 2 years
Maryland Department of the Environment
*,'25(X) iBroening liighway
Baltimore, MD 21224
^'RosaFranldin- 3' years _
Washings State Senate
'"' 4^9 Legislative Building '
P.O. Box40482
Olympia, WA 98504-0482
/ Lillian V. Kawasala - 2 years
City of Los Angeles Department of Environmental
"''Affairs "..n ' ,.' , ^ , , "^ ' ,i '„
201 North Figueroa Street, Suite 266
Los Angeles, CA 90012
TRIBAL -3
, '" „ ' li il!!!:|||!'
Christine Benally - 2 years
Sanostee Chapter of the Navajo Nation
P.O. Box7i2
Shiprock, NM 87420
*," James D'. HJll - 3 years '
itklamatn Tribe
..
ChM{>qum, OR 97624
Vacancy
>•,••• ••..;, *'.:...'.f-,. >^ ..
ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS - 4
Richard Moore - 1 year
Southwest Network for Environmental and
Economic Justice.
P.O. Box 7399
Albuquerque, NM 87194
Peggy Saika - 1 year
Asian Pacific Environmental Network
3126 California Street
Oakland, CA 94602
Peeohn Ferris, -1 year
Washington Office on Environmental Justice
1511 K Street'KtW, Suite 1026
Washington, D.C. 20005
Arnoldo Garcia - 3 years
Earth Island Institute
2'263 41st Avenue
Oakland, CA 94601
•' 4:,,
.,i I
its,'1'' li
-------
t e £ o
^ o S .ts
Il-Si.3
isiai
3SS1 «
nci<^>£2
-------
•IT
ENFORCEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
List of Members
1996-1997
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL
Sherry Milan
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 564-2619
""Fax: (202) 501X)284
CHAIR
Deeohn Ferris - 1 year (EV)
Washington Office on Environmental Justice
1511 K Street NW, Suite 1026
Washington, DC 20005'
Phone: (202)637-2467
Fax: (202) 637-9435
Other Members
Leslie Beckhoff - 3 years (IN)
Conoco/Dupont
One Lakeshore Drive, Suite 1000
lake Charles, LA 70629
Phone: (318)497-4834
Fax: ([318)497^4717
,1" : I '•• ", ,",, liij'illij1! ' i
d, "! . '" fll'lll ' i , , " , ,„ I' • ',
ristineBenalty - 2 years (TR)
Sanostee Chapter of the Navajo Nation
Shrorbck, NM 87420
Phone: (505)368-1260
Fax: (505)368-1266
" •" ., " •' 7, , '!' hfii ' " , ''' „ ' ' ' : '
!!', . IHIllI, , " II ' ......
Lamont Byrd - 3 years (NG)
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202)624-6960
Fax: (202) 624-8740
'Luke Cole - 'fyeafs ; (NG)
Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
" #ii Howard Street^ Suite 330
i-San Francisco, CA 94105-3907 "
Phone: (415)495-8990
(415)495-8849
Richard Drury "- 3 years (NG)
Communities for a Better Environment
500 Howard Street, Suite 506
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: (415)243-8373
Fax: (415)243-8930
Graver Haitians - 2 years (AC)
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Texas Southern University
3100 Cleburne Avenue, Room 212
Houston, Texas 77004
'.'jpfeine: (T '13) 313^7287
Fax: (713) 313-1087
Richard Lazarus - 1 year (AC)
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202)662-9129
Fax: (202) 662-9408
'.:.• ; •',' iiii,?, • , ', .:.••• i : ' " , .' ' i
,' •• ""'::: ^"iiilBl! V ' :,: ' ••• ::;") " ' • " ' ': • <"
Pamela Tau Lee - 1 year (AC)
Center for Occupational and Environmental Health
University of California
2515 Charming Way, 2nd Floor
Berkeley, CA 94720-5120
Phone: (510)643-7594
Fax: (510) 643-5698
Richard Moore - 1 year (EV)
Southwest Network for Environmental and
Economic Justice
P. O. Box 7399
Albuquerque, NM 87194
Phpne: (505)242-0416
Fax: (505)242-5609
Arthur Ray - 2 years (SL)
Maryland Department of the Environment
2500 Broenihg Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
Phone: (410) 631-3086
Fax: (410) 631-3888
Peggy Shepard - 2 years (CG)
West Harlem Environmental Action, Inc.
271 West 125th Street, Suite 211
New York, NY 10027
Phone: (212) 961-1133, Ext. 303
Fax: (212) 961-1015
CG=Community Group
= Nongovernmental Organization
EV=Environmental Group IN=Industry
TR=Tribal
SL=State/Local Government
-------
HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
List of Members
1996-1997
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL
Lawrence Martin
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 8105)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202)260-7667
Fax: (202) 260-0507
Kekuni Blaisdell -1 year (EV)
Ka Pa Kau Kau
3333 Kaohinani Drive
Honolulu, HI 96817
Phone:
Fax:
Douglas M. Brugge - 2 years (AC)
Department of Community Health
Tufts School of Medicine
Tufts University
136 Harrison Avenue
Boston, MA 02111
Phone: (617)636-0326
Fax: (617) 636-7417
Rosa Franklin - 3 years (SL)
Washington State Senate
409 Legislative Building
P.O. Box 40482
Olympia, WA 98504-0482
Phone: (360)786-7656
Fax: (360) 786-7524
Paula Gomez - 2 years (NG)
Brownsville Community Health Center
2137 East 22nd Street
Brownsville, TX 78521
Phone: (210)548-7473
Fax: (210) 546-2056
CHAIR
Mary English - 2 years (AC)
Energy, Environment and Resources Center
600 Henley Street, Suite 311
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996-4134
Phone: (423)974-3825
Fax: (423) 974-1838
Other Members
Penn S. Loh - 2 years (NG)
Alternatives for Community & Environment
2343 Washington Street, 2nd Floor
Roxbury, MA02119
Phone:
Fax:
Andrew McBride - 2 years (SL)
City of Stamford Health Department
888 Washington Boulevard
Stamford, CT 06901
Phone: (203)977-4396
Fax: (203) 977-5506
Marinelle Payton - 3 years (AC)
Harvard Medical School
181 Longwood Avenue
Boston, MA 02115
Phone: (617)525-2731
Fax: . (617)525-1451
Margaret 'Williams - 3 years (CG)
Citizens Against Toxic Exposure
6400 Marianna Drive
Pensacola, FL 32504
Phone: (904)494-2601
Fax: (904) 479-2044
AC=Academia CG=Community Group EV=Environmental Group IN=Industry
NG=Nongovernmental Organization TR=Tribal
SL=State/Local Government
-------
'* '•'*•'•• '1;V''^iiTOIGlEN6uS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE
THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
' ;.'« " , List of Members ' , '.,
1996-1997
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL
Elizabeth Bell
Office of Envkonmental Justice
U.S. Envirpnmentil Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW CMC 3103)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (2b^ 260-8106
Fax: (202)260-7509
1
'Dwayne Beavers - 3 years (TR)
Cherokee Natiqn/OES
«;:P.O. Box'948,"'""' "",„ ", ''"
l/T^ahlequah, OK 71165-0671
*;Phone: (9i8)45p496'
;!;:Fax:' (918) 4JS^5499
CHAIR
James D. Hill-3 years (TR)
Klamath Tribe
P.O. Box 436
Chiloquin, OR 97624
Phone: (541)783-2218
Fax: (541)783-2029
Other Members
i , . . i
Cavanaugh - 1 year (IN)
Ecosystem Development
Spirit Lake Nation
P.O. Box 222
.......... St, Michael, ND 58370
^^Phone:""'" "^70'l) 7^803
Fax: (701)766-4253
"i ' ' ' i i ....... IHT'TIP1!1 ' ' ' • !: "
>:'': ,,":,' .:•„ ..... ",,' ii ..... i! :: • ..... " :
Richard Monette - 1 year (AC)
University of Wisconshi Law School
Madison, f 53706
Phone: (608) 26l^74f)9
Fax: (608)262-5485
Henry SiJohn-2 years (Tribal Elder)
Coeur d5 Alene Tribe
'"P.O." Box 401"
Plummet ID 83851
Phone:
Fax:
Janice Stevens - 1 year (TR)
Sac and Fox Nation
Office of Environmental Services
219 South 8th Avenue
Stroud, OK 74079
£hone: (918;) 968-2583
Fax: (918)968-4727
Charles Stringer - 2 years (TR)
White Mountain Apache Tribe
P.O. Box 700
Whiteriver, AZ 85941
Phone: (520)338-4346
Fax: (520) 338-4767
nil
AC—Academia CG=Community Group
NG=Nongovernmental Organization
EV=Environmental Group IN=Industry
TR=Tribal
SL=State/Local Government
-------
INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
List of Members
1996-1997
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL
Dona Canales
Office of International Activities
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2621)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202)260-4174
Fax: (202) 260-4470
CHAIR
Baldemar Velasquez - 1 year (NG)
Director
Farm Labor Organizing Committee
507 South St. Clair Street
Toledo, OH 43602
Phone: (419)243-3456
Fax: (419) 243-5655
Other Members
Jose T. Bravo - 1 year (EV)
Southwest Network for Environmental and
Economic Justice
16717 Kettner Boulevard, Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: (619)239-8030
Fax: (619) 239-8505
John C. Borum -1 year (IN)
Environment and Safety Engineering
AT&T
131 Morristown Road
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Phone: (908)630-2700
Fax: (908) 630-2718
Denise Ferguson-Southward - 1 year (SL)
Office of the Attorney General
State of Maryland
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
Phone: (410)631-3053
Fax: (410) 631-3943
Arnoldo Garcia - 3 years (EV)
Earth Island Institute
2263 41st Avenue
Oakland, CA 94601
Phone: (415)561-3332
Fax: (415) 561-3334
Mildred McClain - 2 years (CG)
Citizens for Environmental Justice
P.O. Box 1841
Savannah, GA 31402
Phone: (912)233-0907
Fax: (912) 233-5105
Janet Phoenix - 3 years (NG)
Public Health Programs
National Lead Information Center
1019 19th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036-5105
Phone: (202)974-2474
Fax: (202) 659-1192
Bill Simmons - 2 years (TR)
International Indian Treaty Council
54 Mint Street, Suite 400
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone: (415)512-1501
Fax: (415) 512-1507
AC=Academia CG=Community Group
NG=Nongovernmental Organization
EV=Environmental Group IN=Industry
TR=Tribal
SL=State/Local Government
-------
j'i;.1
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
in ; ,., .. / "" List of Members
i! •" " , '1996-1997 ''"'•"•
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL
Robert Knox
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S- Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2101A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202)564:2515
Fax: (202) 501-0740
CHAIR
Peggy Saika - 1 year (EV)
Asian Pacific Environmental Network
3126 California Street
Oakland, CA 94602
Phone: (510)834-8920
Fax: (510) 834-8926
Other Members
Frank Cbss - 2 years (NG)
' " '
P.O. Box 1459
^anati, PR 00674
Phone: (787)884-0212
Fax: (787) 854-5756
Dolores Herrera - 1 year (CG)
Albuquerque San Jose Community Awareness
Council, Inc.
P. O. Box 12297
Albuquerque, NM 87195-2297
Phone: (505)243-4837
Fax: (505) 243-3085
Hi.,1, ' ,iJ'l i | • ' , ' ' ' '" " ' „ '
Lawrence G. Hfirst - 2 years (IN)
Director, Communications
Motorola, Inc.
8220 East Roosevelt (MD R 3125)
Scottsdale, AZ 85257
Phone: (602)441-3210
)Fax: (602)441-3965
Dune Lankard - 1 year (TR)
EYAK Rainforest Preservation Fund
P.O. Box 460
Cordova, AK 99574
Phone: (907)424^5890
Fax: (907)424^5891
Munir Meghjee - 3 years (EV)
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund
1631 Glenarm Place, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: (303) 623-9466
Fax: (303) 623-8083
Haywood Turrentine - 2 years (NG)
Executive Director
Education and Training Trust Fund
500 Lancaster Pike
Exton, PA 19341
Phone: (610)524-0404
Fax: (610)524-6411
Rosa Hilda Ramos - 3 years (CG)
Community of Catafio Against Pollution
La Marine Avenue
Mf 6, Marine Bahia
Catafio, Puerto Rico 00962
Phone: (787)788-0837
Fax: (787) 788-0837
.1 1; t, ,(, f ",(, 1"
::;
-------
WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
List of Members
1996 -1997
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL
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)260-1692
Fax: (202) 260-6606
CHAIR
Charles Lee - 2 years (NG)
United Church of Christ
Commission for Racial Justice
475 Riverside Drive, 16th Floor
New York, NY 10015
Phone: (212)870-2077
Fax: (212)870-2162
Other Members
Sue Briggum - 1 year (IN)
WMX Technologies, Inc.
1155 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: (202)628-3500
Fax: (202) 628-0400
Dollie Burnett - 2 years (CG)
Warren County Concerned Citizens Against PCB
P.O. Box 254
Warrenton, NC 27589
Phone: (919)257-2942
Fax: (919) 257-1309
Teresa Cordova - 1 year (AC)
Community and Regional Planning Program
School of Architecture and Planning
University of New Mexico
2414 Central Avenue, SE
Albuquerque, NM 87131
Phone: (505)277-7535
Fax: (505) 277-0267
Donald Elisburg - 1 year (NG)
Donald Elisburg Law Offices
11713 Rosalinda Drive
Potomac, MD 20854-3531
Phone: (301)299-2950
Fax: (301) 299-8752
Tom Goldtooth - 1 year (TR)
Indigenous Environmental Network
P.O. Box 485
Bemidji, MN 56601
Phone: (218)751-4967
Fax: (218) 751-0561
David Hahn-Baker - 1 year (EV)
Inside-Out Political Consultants, Inc.
440 Lincoln Parkway
Buffalo, NY 14216
Phone: (716) 877-2004
Fax: (716) 877-2004
Lillian Kawasaki - 2 years (SL)
City of Los Angeles
Department of Environmental Affairs
201 North Figueroa, Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone: (213)580-1045
Fax: (213) 580-1084
Tom Kennedy - 1 year (NG)
Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials
444 North Capitol Street, Suite 315
Washington, D.C. 20001
Phone: (202)624-5828
Fax: (202) 624-7875
Vernice Miller - 3 years (CG)
Environmental Justice Initiative
Natural Resources Defense Council
40 West 20th Street
New York, NY 10011
Phone: (212)727-4461
Fax: (212) 727-1773
Gerald Prout - 3 years (IN)
FMC Corporation
1667 K Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: (202)956-5209
Fax: (202) 956-5235
AC=Academia CG=Community Group EV=Environmental Group IN=Industry
NG=Nongovernmental Organization TR=Tribal
SL=State/Local Government
-------
NEJAC Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
List of Members for 1996 -1997
Page 2
Jon Sesso - 1 year (SL)
Butte-Silver Bow Planning Committee
155 West Granite Street
Bune, MT 5970i
Phone: (406) 723-8262
Fax: (406) 782;6637
L ,»,' iliitllilil, in ...... i " ,:,, . ...... f • : • • „• .jf. , , •
Ricardo Soto-Lopez - 3 years (EV)
Puerto Rico - Northeast Environmental Justice
Network
75 Park Avenue
FNewark, ..... NJ 07104 .......
Mione: (501)482-8312
Fax: (201)482-1883
Mathy Stanislaus - 3 years (NG)
Enviro-Sciences, Inc.
Ill Howard Boulevard, Suite 108
Mt. Arlington, NJ 07856
Phone: (201) 398-8183.ext. 1246
Fax: (201) 398-8037
: ' ' , |,"' iiii'iJ i1' ' ., , • ' ,
Connie Tucker - 2 years (NG)
Southern Organizing Committee
P.O. Box 10518
Atlanta, GA 30310
Phone: (404) 755-2855
Fax: (404) 755-0575
AC=Academia CG=Community Group
NGsNongdvemmental Organization
EV=Environmental Group IN=Industry
TR=Tribal
SL=State/Local Government
-------
List of Participants
-------
-------
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
Potawatomi Indian Springs Lodge, Wisconsin
May 13 through 15,1997
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Dina Alloway
Forest County Potawatomi Tribe
P.O. Box 340
Crandon.WI 54520
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Edward Alloway
Forest County Potawatomi Tribe
P.O. Box 340
Crandon.WI 54520
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Gloria Alloway
Forest County Potawatomi Tribe
P.O. Box 340
Crandon.WI 54520
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Carolyn Amegashie
Program/Planning Analyst
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Room 451
P.O. Box 7965
Madison, Wl 53707
Phone: 608-266-2965
Fax: 608-266-7818
E-mail: camegash@mail.state.wi.us
Apesanahkwat
Chair
Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin
Keshena,WI54135
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Shirley Augurson
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Region 6
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Phone: 214-665-7401
Fax: 214-665-7446
E-mail: augurson.shirley@epamail.epa.gov
Peter A. Baldridge
Senior Staff Attorney
California Department of Health Services
714 P Street, Room 1216
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-657-3877
Fax: 916-657-3017
E-mail:
Stephanie Barea
Tribal Member
Forest County Potawatomi Tribe
P.O. Box 502
Crandon.WI 54520
Phone: 715-478-5729
Fax: 715-478-5280
E-mail:
Jesse Baskerville
Director
Toxics & Pesticides Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2325
Fax: 202-564-0023
E-mail: baskerville.jesse@epamail.epa.gov
Dwayne Beavers
Program Manager
OES
Cherokee Nation
P.O. Box 948
Tahlequah, OK 74465-0671
Phone: 918-458-5496
Fax: 918-458-5499
E-mail:
Leslie Ann Beckhoff
Conoco/Dupont
One Lakeshore Drive
Suite 1000
Lake Charles, LA 70629
Phone: 318-497-4834
Fax: 318-497-4717
E-mail: leslie.a.beckhoff@usa.conoco.com
Elizabeth Bell
American Indian Environmental Office
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 4401A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-8106
Fax: 202-260-7509
E-mail: bell.elizabeth@epamail.epa.gov
Kent Benjamin
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: 202-260-2822
Fax: 202-260-6606
E-mail: benjamin .kent@epamail.epa.gov
Karen Biestman
Director
Indian Education
Region 9
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
75 Hawthorne Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: 415-744-1688
Fax:
E-mail: biestman.karen@epamail.epa.gov
Darlene Boerlage
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW(MC 2261)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2593
Fax: 202-501-0644
E-mail: boerlage.darlene@epamail.epa.gov
Sue Briggum
Director
Government Affairs
WMX Technologies Inc.
601 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
North Building #300
Washington, DC 20004
Phone: 202-628-3500
Fax: 202-628-0400
E-mail:
Donna Brown
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
4802 Sheboygan Avenue
P.O. Box 7913
Madison, Wl 53707-7965
Phone: 608-267-0445
Fax: 608-267-0294
E-mail: dbrown2@mail.state.wi.us
Patty Brown
Forest County Potawatomi Tribe
P.O. Box 211
Crandon.WI 54520
Phone: 715-478-5018
Fax:
E-mail:
Douglas Brugge
Department of Community Health
School Of Medicine
Tufts University
136 Harrison Avenue
Boston, MA 02111
Phone: 617-636-0326
Fax: 617-636-7417
E-mail: dbrugge@aol.com
-------
,;., HEJAC List of Participants "
Potawatomi Indian Springs Lodge, Wl
i]Lij:,Ft fiflay 13 through 15,1997 ~_
.'!,'', P'a"ge2o'f8 ^^
DortaCanales
Program ATiaryst
Office of International Activities
U,S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW(MC 2621)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-4174
Fax: 202-260-4470
E-mail, canales.dona@epamail.epa.gov
Rodney Cash
Associate Director
Of o« of Cjyil Rights
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
461 M Street, sW (1201)
Washington, DC 20460
Phons: 202-26
-------
MEJ AC List of Participants
Potawatomi Indian Springs Lodge, Wl
May 13 through 15,1997
Page 3 of 8
Richard Drury
Legal Director
Communities for a Better Environment
500 Howard Street, Suite 506
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: 415-243-8373
Fax: 415-243-8980
E-mail: cbelegal@igc.org
Charlene Dunn
State and Tribal Coordinator
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: 202-260-9466
Fax: 202-260-6606
E-mail: dunn.charlene@epamail.epa.gov
John Dyer
Interim Director
Haudenosaunee Environmental Task Force
P.O. Box 177
Chittenaugo, NM 13037
Phone: 315-697-6055
Fax: 315-697-5003
E-mail: jldyer@syr.edu
Stephen B. Etsitty
Indian Coordinator
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (5303W)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703-305-3194
Fax: 703-308-8638
E-mail:
Elisabeth Evans
Director
Region 8
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: 303-312-6053
Fax: 303-312-6826
E-mail: evans.elisabeth@epamail.epa.gov
Samantha Phillips Fairchild
Senior Assistant Regional Counsel
Region 3
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Phone: 215-566-2627
Fax: 215-566-2604
E-mail: fairchild.samantha@epamail.epa.gov
Denise Ferguson-Southard
Legal Counsel
Office of the Attorney General
State of Maryland
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
Phone: 410-631-3053
Fax: 410-631-3943
E-mail:
Deeohn Ferris
Executive Director
Washington Office on Environmental Justice
1511 K Street, NW, Suite 1026
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202-637-2467
Fax: 202-637-9435
E-mail: woej@igc.apc.org
Angela Fitzgerald
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Office of Remediation and Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2442A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-1018
Fax: 202-564-0069
E-mail: fitzgerald.angela@epamail.epa.gov
Jim Fletcher
Environmental Officer - Grants Specialist
Morongo Band of Mission Indians
11581 PotreroRoad
Banning, CA 92220
Phone: 909-849-4698
Fax: 909-849-4425
E-mail: morongo2@worldnet.att.net
Gus Frank
Potawatomi Tribal Elder
Potawatomi Tribe
Crandon, Wl
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Howard Frank
Geologist
Horsley & Witten, Inc.
3179 Main Street
Barnstable, MA 02630
Phone: 508-362-5570
Fax: 508-362-5335
E-mail: hfrank@horsleywitten.com
Pwagen Frank
Forest County Potawatomi Tribe
P.O. Box 23
Crandon, IL 54520
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Arnoldo Garcia
Development Director
Earth Island Institute
2263 41st Avenue
Oakland, CA 94601
Phone: 415-561-3332
Fax: • 415-561-3334
E-mail: agarcia@igc.apc.org
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: 202-260-4039
Fax: 202-260-6606
E-mail: garczynski.linda@epamail.epa.gov
Clarice Gaylord
Director
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW(MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2603
Fax: 202-501-0740
E-mail: gaylord.clarice@epamail.epa.gov
Jeff Gersh
Environmental Communications
P.O. Box 4552
Portland, OR 97208
Phone: 503-222-7358
Fax:
E-mail:
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
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 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2598
Fax: 202-501-0740
E-mail: goins.renee@epamail.epa.gov
Tom Goldtooth
Indigenous Environmental Network
P.O. Box 485
Bemidji, MN 56601
Phone: 218-751-4967
Fax: 218-751-0561
E-mail: ien@apc.ipc.org
-------
NEJAC List of Participants
Potawatomi Indian Springs Lodge, Wl
||ay 13 through 15,1997
"Page 4 6? 8
, , .
Kathy Gorospe
Director
American Indian Environmental Office
MiS- Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Strjwij, "SW "'' " " " ................
Washington, DC 20460
Phone'.
' ' " '
. , . , .
E-mail: gorospe.kathy@epamail.epa.gov
i ,',',,' ,'",•', ' ii il,.!lili!!!ill'l i. ' ' ", "
,11 "'I' ., |lhl"" , ' , ' I ' . I ', lil.'l'l '•
Rose Gumoe
Chairperson
Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
P.O. Box529
BtyffeM, Wl 54814
flftooe: 715-779-3700
ax; 715-779-3704
' "
B«th Hailstock
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Cincinnati Health Department
3101 Burnet Avenue
CfncinnaC t>H 4S229
513-357-7206
513-357r7290
:"'<: *;.; , • • • • • . !l! ...... 3
Grover Hanklns
Director
Environmental Justice Clinic
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Texas Southern University
3100 Ctebume Avenue, Room 212
Houston, TX 77004
Phot^e: JfS-SIS;??^
Fax; 713-313-1087
E-mail; ghankins@tsulaw.edu
Christine Hanson
Director "^ ..... „ ...... .. ....... .. , ...... . ",t",
ErjylronmSijfai Program
Potawatomf Triije ..........
Crandoo.Wi 54520
f?kx»: W5-478-7209 ...........
Fax; ..................
,;:; ' , III",; , '• :• ...... ;i '
Monique Harden
Greenpeace
1436 U Streel, NW
Washington, DC 20009
Phone: 202-319-2453
faxt 202-462^507
E-mail: monique.harden@dialb.913
„ , , . ...,
Rose Harvell
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2273A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-6056
Fax: 202-564-0074
E-mail: harveillrose@epamail.epa.gov
Jim Havard
Staff Attorney
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington,DC 20460
ffone: 202-260-1003
Fax: 262-260-8393
E-mail: havard.james@epamail.epa.gov
Melva J. Hayden
Environmental Justice Coordinator •
Region 2
US. Environmental Protection Agency
290 Broadway, 26th Floor
New York, NY 10007
Phone: 212-637-5027
Fax: 212-637-4943
E-mail: hayden.melva@epamail.epa.gov
Steven Herman
Assistant Administrator
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
UIS. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2419
Fax:
E-mail: herman.steveh@epamail.epa.gov
Dolores Herrera
Executive Director i ' i ' |"
Albuquerque San Jose Community Awareness
Council, Inc.
': P,;b. Box 12297
Albuquerque, MM 87195-2297
Phone: 505-243-4837
Fax: 505-243-3085
E-mail: sanjosecac@aol.com
James D. Hill
Kiamath Tribe
P.O. Box 436
Chiloquin, OR 97624
Phone: 541 -783-2218
Fax: 541-783-2029
E-mail:
; if
Jennifer Hill-Kelley
Environmental Quality Director
Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin
P.O. Box 365
Oneida, Wl 54304
Phone: 414-497-5812
Fax: . 414^96-7883
E-mail:
Chad Holmes
P.O. Box 121
Crandon.Wi 54520
Phone: 715-478-5468
Fax:
E-mail:
Robert Jacobson
P.O. Box 121
Crandon, Wl 54520
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Cheryl Johnson
Project Manager
People for Community Recovery
13116 South Ellis
Chicago, IL 60627
Phone: 773^468-1645
Fax: 773-468-8105
E-mail:
Hazel Johnson
Chief Executive Officer
People for Community Recovery
13116 South Ellis Avenue
Chicago, IL 60627
Phone: 773-468-1645
Fax: 773-468-8105
E-mail:
Karla Johnson
Environmental Justice Regional Team Manager
Region 5
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77 West Jackson Boulevard (T-17J)
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: 312-886-5993
Fax: 312-886-2737
E-mail: johnson.karla@epamail.epa.gov
Michelle Jordan
Deputy Administrator
Region 5
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail: jordan.michelle@eparriail.epa.gov
-------
tteJKC \_\st
-------
I
f , 'iiff
NEJAC Ust of Participants
Potawatomi Indian Springs Lodge, Wl
May 13 through 15,1997
Page 6 of 8
Glen Nathan
U.SI Environmental Protection Agency
.$1 M Street, SW
%sh"inalon,"bc 20460
Phone:
Fax:
E-/naft hathan.glen@epannail.epa.gov
:' ' I.,,,.'IIP'I . ' ' .ft I,'!' ' "I' " I II I II 1
Mark Nelson
Partner
Horetey & Witten, Inc.
EO, Box 7
Barnstabte, MA 02630
Phone: 508-362-5570
Fax: 508-362-5335
E-maff; mnelson6horsteywitten.com
MaryO'Lone
Office of General Counsel
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2322)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone; 262-260^1487
Fax: 262-266^8393"
H-maft olone.mary@epamall.epa.gov
'„'" I: • '!'•• >"":'> •?•:" ''"i ,.'.' ''"•'
QlutntJnPalr
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Sfrset. SW (MC 2201 A)
Washington. DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2569
Fax: 202-501-6740
E-mail: palr.quentin6epamal.epa.g6v
' in ": ' •. '' " :.. "' '"" Jffii •' •'• ' '"•"• '
Ksvin Sujit Parikh
Office of Civil Rights
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
4Q1 M Street, SW(MC 1201)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-4585
Flax: £02-260-4586
E-malt parlkhlkevlngepamal.epa.gov
Shirley Pate
Qfflce of Enforcement Capacity and Outreach
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M streeC SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-584-2507
fjex: "202-681^0284" _" ™ ' ;
E-maii: pate.shlriey@epamaiepa.gov
Nell Patterson
Tuscarori Delegate
Haudenqsaunee Enyironmental Task Force
2045 Upper Mountain Road
Sanbom, NY 14132
Phona: 315-475-1170
Fax; 315-475-6719
E-mail:
Marinelle Payton
Harvard Medical School
181 Longwood Avenue
Boston, MA 02115
Phone: 617-525-2731
Fax: 617-525-1451
E-mail: remari@gauss.bwh.haivard.edu
Ji ,| .I n !' I |. , : HI ' I1'" il'l ,l|l/ |! 1'"11 , , ' , ,!„ " , ... ' ,,i!
Patrick J. Pelky
Area Manager
Oneida Environmental Health and Safety
Department
P.O.Box 365
Oneida, Wl 54155
Phone: 414-497-5812
Fax: 414-496-7883
E-mail:
John Perrecone
Community Involvement Coordinator
Region 5
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: 312-353-1149
Fax: 312-353-1155
E-mail: perrecone.john@epamail.epa.gov
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
E-mail:
Gerald Prout
Director
Regulatory Affairs
FMC Corporation
1667 K Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: 202-956-5209
Fax: 202-956-5235
E-mail: jerry_prout@fmc.com
Connie Raines
Environmental Justice Coordinator
Office of Environmental Justice
Region IV
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104
Phone: 404-562-9671
Fax: 404-562-9664
E-mail: raines.connie@epamail.epa.gov
Debra Ramirez
Mossville Environmental Action Now
1313 6th Avenue
Lake Charles, LA 70601
Phone: 318-433-0449
, Fax:
E-mail:
Rosa Hilda Ramos
Community of Catano Against Pollution
La Marine Avenue
Mf 6, Marina Bahia
Catafio, PR 00962
Phone: 787-788-0837
Fax: . 787-788-0837
E-mail: rosah@coqui.net
Arthur Ray
Deputy Director
Maryland Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
Phone: 410-631-3086
Fax: 410-631-3888
E-mail: aray@chamn.net
Doretta Reaves
Program Analyst
Public Liason Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 1702)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-260-3534
Fax: 202-260-0130
E-mail: reaves.doretta@epamail.epa.gov
Brian Renaud
1400 Woodward Avenue, Apt. 101
Bloomfield Hills, Ml 48304
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Jane Reyer
Natural Resources Attorney
Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
P.O. Box 39
Odanah.WI 54861
Phone: 715-682-7107
Fax: 715-682-7118
E-mail:
Deidi Reyes
Region 8
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
Phone: 303-312-6055
Fax: 303-312-6826
E-mail: reyes.deldi@epamail.epa.gov
Rey Rivera
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: 312-886-1450
Fax: 312-353-9176
E-mail:
-------
WEJA.C List of Participants
Potawatomi Indian Springs Lodge, Wl
May 13 through 15,1997
Page 7 of 8
Rose Ann Roussel
Member
St. James Citizen For Jobs and the
Environment
P.O. Box 117
Hester, LA 70743
Phone: 504-869-5827
Fax:
E-mail:
Laura Scheele
Afton Associates
403 East Capitol Street
Washington, DC 20003
Phone: 202-547-2620
Fax: 202-547-1668
E-mail: Ischeele@afton.com
Jon Sesso
Planning Director
Montana Planning Committee
Butte-Silver Bow
155 West Granite Street
Butte, MT 59701
Phone: 406-723-8262
Fax: 406-782-6637
E-mail:
Elaine Shepard
Project Director
Forest County Potawatomi Education Program
P.O.Box 340
Crandon, Wl 54520
Phone: 715-478-7370
Fax: 715-478-7372
E-mail:
Peggy M. Shepard
Executive Director
West Harlem Environmental Action, Inc.
271 West 125th Street, Suite 211
New York, NY 10027
Phone: 212-961-1133303
Fax: 212-961-1015
E-mail:
Sara Shipp-Parran
Program CEO
Committee for Economic Recovery
P.O.Box 438747
Chicago, IL 60643
Phone: 773-468-6151
Fax: 773-468-6213
E-mail:
Dennis L. Shupand
Potawatomi Tribe
P.O.Box 234
Crandon, Wl 54520
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Lenny Siegel
Director
Pacific Studies Center
222-B View Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
Phone: 415-961-8918
Fax: 415-968-1126
E-mail: lsiegel@igc.org
Damu Imara Smith
National Association Director
Greenpeace
1436 U Street, NW
Washington, DC 20009
Phone: 202-319-2598
Fax: 202-462-4507
E-mail:
Linda Smith
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2602
Fax: 202-501-0740
E-mail: smith.linda@epamail.epa.gov
Yvonne Smith
Audio Visual
Forest County Potawatomi Tribe
P.O. Box 340
Crandon, Wl 54520
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Chris Soman
Potawatomi Tribe
5320 Wensant Lane
Crandon, Wl 54520
Phone: 478-5693
Fax:
E-mail:
Ricardo Soto-Lopez
Environmental Justice Network
Puerto Rico-Northeast
75 Park Avenue
Newark, NJ 07104
Phone: 201-482-8312
Fax: 212-482-1883
E-mail:
Mathy Stanislaus
Minority Environmental Lawyers Association
Enviro-Sciences, Inc.
111 Howard Boulevard, Suite 108
Mt. Arlington, NJ 07856
Phone: 201-398-81831246
Fax: 201-398-8037
E-mail:
Janice Stevens
Environmental Coordinator
Office of Environmental Services
Sac and Fox Nation
219 South 8th Avenue
Stroud, OK 74079
Phone: 918-968-2583
Fax: 918-968-4727
E-mail:
Charles Stringer
Assistant Tribal Attorney
White Mountain Apache Tribe
P.O. Box 700
Whiteriver, AZ 85941
Phone: 520-338-4346
Fax: 520-338-4767
E-mail:
Pamela Tau Lee
LOHP
Center for Occupational and Environmental
Health
University of California
2515ChanningWay
2nd Floor
Berkeley, CA 94720-5120
Phone: 510-643-7594
Fax: 510-643-5698
E-mail: ptlee@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Charlene Theobald
Lac du Flambeau Band of Chippewa
Crandon, Wl 54538
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Arthur Totten
Environmental Protection Specialist
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW(MC 2252A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-7164
Fax: 202-564-0072
E-mail: totten.arthur@epamail.epa.gov
Connie Tucker
Executive Director
Southern Organizing Committee for Economic
& Social Justice
P.O. Box 10518
Atlanta, GA 30310
Phone: 404-755-2855
Fax: 404-755-0575
E-mail: socejp@igc.apc.org
David Turney, Sr.
Commander
Veterans of the Menominee Nation
P.O.Box 1054
Keshena, Wl 54135
Phone: 715-799-4948
Fax: 715-799-1365
E-mail:
-------
st of Participants
Potawatomi Indian Springs Lodge, Wl
May 13 through 15,1997
Page 8 of 8
'T. • . ... .
Hay wood f urrentine
Executive Director
Educatfon and Training Trust Furid
50JJ Lancaster Pike
Exton, PA 19341
Phone. 610-524-0404
Fax: 610-524-6411
E-maik
Victor Van Fleet
Fort Mojave
2410 Spirt Mountain
Mohave Valley, AZ
Phpna: 619-326-4591
Fax: 619-326-2468
E-maf:
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ifl M Sheet, SW(MC 31 03)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-564-2597
Fax: 202-501-0740
E-rnask varela.alex@epamail.epa.gov
Baldemar Velasquez
Director
Farm Labor Organizing Committee
1221 Broadway
Toledo, OH 43609
Phonal 419-243-3456
Fax:" '3'19£43-56'5IS ..........
Michael Vigil
Environmental Technician/Tribal Councilman
Tesuque Pueblo Tribal Government
Route 5 Box 360-T
Santa FeJfM' 87501 '
Ffiooa: 505-983-2667
Fax: 505-983-2331
g-mafk
Oliver LWarnsley
Environmental Justice Coordinator
SuperftjnJ'Division
Regions ..........................
" "U.S. Environ.rnentai|iProtectioniiAgency
'"'l''
CJiteago.iL 60604
Phone: 31 2-886-0442
Fax: 312-886-4071
E-maN: wamstey.oliver@epamail.epa.gov
William F. vVeahke«
E^ecutivaDirector
Five Sandoval Indian Pueblos " (' .....
'" ............ '"
Bemalillo, NM 87004
Phons: 505-867-3351
Fax:
Emelda West
St. James Citizens for Jobs and the
Environment
6258 Loisiana Highway 44
Convent, LA 70723
Phone: 504-562-3582
Fax:
E-mail:
Claudette C. White
Council Member
Quechan Indian Tribe
P.O.Box 1899
Yuma.AZ 85366
Phone: 619-572-0213
Fax: 619-572-2102
E-mail:
Elmer Wilber
Vice Commander
Veterans of the Menominee Nation
P.O.Box 1054
Keshena.WI 54135
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Margaret Williams
President
Citizens Against Toxic Exposure
6400 Marianna Drive
Pensacola, FL 32504
Phone: 904-494-2601
Fax: 904-479-2044
E-mail:
Sonny Wreczycki
Mining Impact Committee
Town of Ainsworth
N10912 East Shore Road
Pearson, Wl 54462
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Danita Yocom
Assistant Regional Counsel
Region 9
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, VA 94121
Phone: 415-744-1347
Fax: 415-744-1041
E-mail: dariitayocom@epa.gov
Joe Young
Attorney
Environmental Program
Potawatomi Tribe
Crandon.Wl 54520
Phone: 715-478-7209
Fax:
E-mail:
-------
Public Comment Period
Handouts
-------
-------
Handouts Distributed During the Public Comment Period
of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
May 13,1997
2.2 Package of Information from Arnold P. Wendroff, Mercury Poisoning Project to the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council.
- Wendroff, Arnold P. Letter to Shannon Glascock, PRC Environmental Management, Inc.
concerning public comment, (May, 6 1997).
Wendroff, Arnold P. Letter to Marva King, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Environmental Justice, (March 25, 1997).
Wendroff, Arnold P. Letter to Administrator Carol Browner, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, (March 17, 1997).
Sanders, William H. Letter to Arnold P. Wendroff, Mercury Poisoning Project.
2.4 St. James Citizens for Jobs and the Environment. Statement by Rose Ann Roussel to National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council concerning Proposed Shintech Site, (May 15,1997),
including:
"Fight Over Chemical Plant Site Involves Race." New York Times, (May 12, 1997).
- Map of Proposed Shintech Site.
2.13 Hassain, Abbas. Letter to National Environmental Justice Advisory Council Executive Council,
(May 13, 1997).
Handdouts Distributed During the Public Comment Period
of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
May 15,1997
3.1 Hassain, Abbas. Letter to National Environmental Justice Advisory Council Executive Council
in response to May 13, 1997 comment made by Mr. Hassain, May 15, 1997).
3.2 Mni-Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition, Inc. Summary of Report Submitted to the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council, including:
Bad Moccasin, Richard. Letter to Tama Clare, PRC Environmental Management, (May
14, 1997).
- Mni-Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition, Inc. Missouri River Basin American Indian
Flood Plain Issues Report On Tribal Susceptibility to Hazardous and Disastrous
Weather Conditions, (May 14, 1997).
3.3 Citizens of Freetown. Package of information from Carol A. Gaudin to the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council, (May 15, 1997).
- A Summary of an Open Letter to the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
from the Residents of Freetown, Louisiana, (May 9, 1997).
Gaudin, Carol A. Letter to Clarice Gaylord, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Environmental Justice, (May 10, 1997).
- Open Letter from Residents of Freetown, Louisiana to National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council Members, (May 9, 1997).
- Gaudin, Carol A. Letter to J. Dale Givens, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, (April 21, 1997).
- Gaudin, Carol A. Letter to Jane Saginaw, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6.
Maddie, Gladys. "Letters to the Editor." The News Examiner, (April 24, 1997).
-------
- Petition:! Am Interested in Employment Opportunities Shintech Has to Offer, (191
Signatures), (May 10, 1997).
'!»"',! '" „ ' IRIdilii ' ; • . , , I. ' ' " , ' ' • .' ' ',„,''»' i" '<1 ' 1 i , .'," !" Vi .' • '"',"' '• . '"i, I-' • ' '",i,,i i ' ,> M • , ,:if, ,'„' „ ,;' jijj,, „ ' ijnipi , iiiii.' ,|,
3.4 Heywood-James, Azania. Memorandum to National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Executive Council concerning "Affected Communities Living Near DOE Facilities," (May 14, I
i', ' : • I, „ ''' "I1,1,1 i ' 'Hill! , '''"' ., " "I:"1 ":''", . ' ' .I'M:,1 ' :•.',' 'i i,'1"1 '> 'M\' •:'.," '• • „ ",: „' 'nl'l • , i „ ' , , , ,„ • I'"! .!!!!"!','.»l If IPiiilll'i, '"illMilhi " " '"ill I
1997).
3.12 Smith, Damul Statement to National Environmental Justice Advisory Council on Pulp Paper.
(May 15; 1997).
3.13 Wreczycki, Sonny. List of Questions to DNR about the Affects of Mining, (May 15, 1997).
ii ••:•
vii1;
..'It.
if! 1!
,.
-------
Public Comment Period
2.Z
Arnold P. Wendroff, Ph.D.
Mercury Poisoning Project
544 Eighth Street
Brooklyn, NY 11215 USA
(718) 499-8336 Tel & Fax
May 6, 1997
Shannon Glascock
(Representing USEPA-NEJAC)
PRC Environmental Management Inc. . •
1593 Spring Hill Road (Suite 300)
Vienna, VA 22182
Dear Ms. Glascock,
Thanks so much for faxing me the information on the upcoming
NEJAC meeting and the agenda of the Health and Research
Subcommittee. As we mentioned, it is not feasible for me to
attend in person, but I wish my comments to be included in the
record.
In May of 1996,, the NEJAC's Health and Research Subcommittee
discussed the "Domestic Use of Mercury," and incorporated that
discussion into their "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.
This resolution was sent by NEJAC Chairman Richard Moore to
Carol Browner, the EPA Administrator in a letter dated September
24, 1996.
In a letter to Mr. Moore dated December 9, 1996 EPA
Assistant Administrator Lynn R. Goldman responded to the
Subcommittee's resolution. However, as my letter of March 25,
1997 to Marva King (of the EPA's Office of Environmental Justice)
pointed out, Dr. Goldman's letter failed to answer the two
questions raised by the NEJAC resolution.
I am not sure that Mr. Moore was satisfied with Dr.
Goldman's bureaucratic gobbledygook, but I was not. I wrote to
Ms. King, and then, on March 17, 1997 to Ms. Browner, for
clarification.
After some confusion and delay, I finally received a
response dated April 29, 1997 from William H. Sanders III,
Director of the OPPT. He correctly observed that "you will not
be surprised when I report EPA has no information on this subject
that you would consider new."
-------
1. "jiiif ,11 if
:i ,111' III! ,J
Public Comment Period,
Dr. Sanders goes on to note that EPA is researching the use
o| mercury in Chicago, and is developing a national alert on
mercury with ATSDR.
1 feel that although these efforts are laudable, they are
girossly inadequate. Both EPA and ATSDR should be actively
investigating the human health effects of magico-religious
mercury use, and not merely surveying "the availability of
mercury for ritual uses."
„!'!! "i , '! , , „
Withoutthe clinical evidence, the "national alert" that
«v?ill mention the ritual uses of mercury" will certainly- fall on
deaf ears. '' ' ' """"
in ii -, , • . .' ' • . '•;'. :' . • . . i ;i ,•..., '. ';«:;,, :f '" ..' f :;;, j, ; \ ,/..<•.
I've enclosed some of the more recent background
correspondence on this subject, as well as some recent
publicationsand a draft summary. If the NEJAC Health and
Research Subcommittee could peruse this material, it might assist
tEem to formulate another resolution, and to insist that
questions raised in that resolution be answered, rather than
merely being responded to.
I
-------
Public Comment Period
Arnold P. Wendroff,pn. D .
Mercury Poisoning Project
544 Eighth Street
Brooklyn, NY 11215 USA :
(718) 499-8336 Tel & Fax
March 25, 1997
Marva King
Office of Environmental Justice
United States Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (MC 2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Ms. King,
Thanks very much for your time over the phone this morning,
as well as for faxing me a copy of the Assistant Administrator's
letter of 12/9/96 to the NEJAC Chairman, written in response to
his letter of 9/24/96 to the EPA Administrator.
My particular interest in this letter is the first two
paragraphs of page 4 of the (copy enclosed) which responds to
Resolution 4 of Mr. Moore's letter:
Resolution 4: NEJAC requests that OPPTS and OECA examine and
report back at the next meeting (of NEJAC) 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. CUnderlining mine.]
Assistant Administrator Goldman's letter fails to answer the
two questions posed by Resolution 4:
1. What is the extent of mercury poisoning associated with
domestic use in cultural practices?
2. Which Federal Agency/Agencies has/have the
responsibility to address this issue?
Dr. Goldman apparently responded to question 1. by alluding
to EPA's "Risk Management assessment of the ritual uses of
mercury." However that "RM2 Assessment Document for the Cultural
Uses of Mercury," (June 9, 1993) does not provide information on
"the extent to which mercury poisoning associated with domestic
use in cultural practices is a health problem."
To be fair, the NEJAC Resolution 4 assumes that there
actually is "mercury poisoning" associated with "domestic use in
cultural practices." At present, to my knowledge, there is no
published evidence for any case of "mercury poisoning"
attributable to these "cultural practices."
-------
Public Comment period
n^TTT^TTTC^
'The assumption that sprinkling mercury on the
t .* —'"— _— """ • '"' • „_ _. -v,—,^'!—,. trr *- j—\ T T*vF :3T"i t~ c; t" fi ft T~iniC V71
'!' i JLiJLC Cl g ._ J LJ-U 1 1}-J L. J- yJ 1 1 U.11CLU, .3 M-t- u-i*J»"*- -*-**Cl *h»*— — *•* *»— ^ --- _ .
dwelling, or giving mercury to infants to drink will result in
"mercury poisoning" is a reasonable assumption. However it
remains' an assumption,, rather than fact. This absence of fact
(data), and reliance on conjecture is due to EPA ^failure to
investigate the biomedical effects of mercury's "domestio use in
cultural practices." .
...... '• ' r: I "content 'that' some Federal Agency ..... or Agencies • has/have a
•*rg^jj5ji§ibiilty» t6 conduct the biomedical studies, that will
determine if, and to what extent, mercury's "use in cultural
prlctices is a health problem?"
• iii ..... i1' • ..... .'f,;i. , ; 't'igm '' ,'.;' •• i1,. '»• '"; •* • •• '"• i, • • - i;1";:1 ••,'.' ; ..... &'•, • , • ;,,-,.. • ", • ......
This1 "brings us to 'question 2 of Resolution 4 namely where
within the "Federal Agencies" does the responsibility lie for
answerincr Question 1., as well as for addressing the several
eSviroSlnS; health problems consequent to the distribute* in
commerce; use; and disposal of mercury put to cultural use in the
home.- " ................... ..........
Dr. Goldman's response implies that EPA has some
rllporibibiiity. She implies that EPA' s -responsibility has been
met by its production and dissemination of multilingual fact
sheets. She does not mention any other Agency as having
responsibility in this matter.
A review of the literature (copy enclosed) indicates that
, , ESfi/s fact sheets and risk assessment document have fled in
their intent to protect the public from exposure to
its cultural uses in homes. A close reading of ^e
Administrator's letter indicates that EPA has f ailed _ to address
the NEJAC Health and Research Subcommittee's Resolution 4.
I therefore respectfully request that at the next HEJAC
SiS'^
.'"of the" HealtE and'Research Subcommittee.
I also request that I be informed of the date and venue of
, ng f and ^ invited- to participate in/ testify at
the public.
Z.Z
Thank you again for your assistance
Sincerely yours
enc
-------
Public Comment Period
Arnold P. Wendroff, Ph.D.
Mercury Poisoning Project
544 Eighth Street
Brooklyn, NY 11215 USA
(718) 499-8336 Tel & Fax
March 17, 1997
Ms. Carol Browner
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Administrator Browner,
Thanks for your encouragement during our brief meeting at
the Children's Environmental Health Conference in late February.
You suggested I speak with Lynn Goldman regarding my concern over
the sale of unlabeled mercury for magico-religious use in
Hispanic homes. I spoke with Dr. Goldman, but her response was
that OPPTS has done all it could do. I fear that is not enough
to address this problem, which is not diminishing, but rather
increasing.
After the Conference, I.wandered around the halls of 401 M
Street, SW, and spoke with several of your colleagues. One of
them was Clarice Gaylord, the Director of the Office of
Environmental Justice. I learned -from her that the NEJAC had
passed a resolution in May of-1'996, which was incorporated into a
letter to you dated September 24, 1996. It stated:
Resolution 4: NEJAC requests that OPPTS and OECA examine and
report back at the next meeting (of NEJAC) 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, [italics mine]
Suggested Next Step: The Administrator's Office_should
communicate this charge to the appropriate parties in
OPPTS and OECA with instructions to the NEJAC at the
December meeting. [copy enclosed]
I would like to know what your answers were to the three
questions raised in Resolution 4, namely:
1. Is domestic mercury use a liealth. problem?
2. To what extent is it a health problem?
3. Where does responsibility lie within the Federal Agencies?
-------
i!i!i"".'i'i , ''.''.; a '! iiniii: i!'iji»"""i" '„ „• , in1!,..1 ••.. .''',• "!l|i!l . '"'"i"!., \J i'l, ''i1
Public Comment Period
2,2
|i|,h ',. ill!!1 '!:!'!';. .'i i IIIIIIH i'" - i, ' ', f* ''H , '•'' .: M 'I linill: >""'Ji „ ,; .'!V '•...'',• i'1' . :i, '. " i'"i, ''!' . ' , ,",i \ • F L ..I I I .1 *^^!T^ff^^!S^^^^^^^
Does EPA have any responsibility regarding the sale of
> unlabeled mercury recommended to be sprinkled on JJ°°rs, °= ,
; dwellings or to be ingested by infants? Do any other Federal
^•l(.t' ''Sgeiacies-JsucH as ATSDR, CDC, CPSC, NIEHS) share this
responsibility?
I look forward to your response.
"i;1,* ,' "" ', '"}:'" , ;' ":,'.• ••":•'''* ." '„'"';'*. ' '• Sincerely yours/"" "'
cc: Representative Frank Pallone, Jr.
•il
• I1;'
-------
Public Comment Period
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR 2 9 1997
OFFICE OF
PREVENTION. PESTICIDES AND
TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Arnold P. Wendroff, Ph.D.
Mercury Poisoning Project
544 Eighth Street
Brooklyn, NY 11215
Dear Dr. Wendroff:
Thank your for your March 17, 1997 letter sent to the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) concerning domestic uses of mercury in cultural and religious
practices. As a co-leader of EPA's Mercury Task Force, the Administrator has asked the Office
of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) to respond to your questions and concerns.
In your letter you reference a May 1996 resolution passed by the National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) that was forwarded to the EPA Administrator in a letter dated
September 24, 1996. NEJAC requested EPA to examine the extent to which mercury poisoning
associated with domestic use in cultural practices is a health problem and where the
responsibility lies within Federal agencies to address this issue. EPA responded to the NEJAC
request in a December 1996 letter from the Office of Pesticides, Pollution Prevention and Toxic
Substances (OPPTS) Assistant Administrator. OPPT offers a similar response to your specific
questions.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has for many years been concerned about
the cultural and religious use of mercury, as you know from your long personal interest in this
subject. Therefore, I am sure you will not be surprised when I report EPA has no information on
this subject that you would consider new.
EPA undertook a Risk Management assessment of the ritual uses of mercury in response
to a 1992 referral from the State of California concerning the sale of mercury to consumers at
botanicas ("folk pharmacies"). The assessment indicated a high concern for chronic exposure to
significant levels of mercury that could result from repeated use of mercury in cultural practices
in the home. Domestic use of mercury is a health problem. In response to this finding, my
Office worked with regional and State authorities, as well as with relevant national organizations.
In particular, we developed a mercury alert sheet in English, Spanish and Portuguese, and a 4-
page fact sheet in English and Spanish. This EPA material was sent to the States and to all
others who requested the information. EPA also ran bulletins describing the dangers on Spanish
language radio programs.
Recycled/Recyclable . Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Postconsumer)
-------
II 1(1
Public Comment Period
sriod /- -• *—
The Consumer Product Safety Commission regulates the commercial sale of mercury via
banning sales to minors and a ban on sales without a warning label and also distributes fact
sheets about the dangers of ritual use in English, Spanish, Portuguese, Creole and French.
EPA's Region 5 Office is currently researching, via a grant, with the Hispanic Health
Coalition, Chicago Department of Health, the availability of mercury for ritual uses in that city
anil is conducting surveys of experience with ritual use.
EPA's Office of Emergency and Remedial Response is developing a national alert on
njercury exposure jointly with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. This alert
vlill mention ritual uses of mercury. ,
Thank you for your interest in the uses of mercury.
i' • ; ,:. , : Sincerely,
,:IS|
William H. Sanders III, Dr. P.H., P.E.
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention
, ! , Vii|, ., I":1 ' :', •. .HI I ..... I "'III: T ;.' „ „ , , " • "'',. I
and Toxics
.
• " '*,if
-------
Public Comment Period •
-£^2T2_^i=±^C.
J^Cte
v cL 1?$0.
^ 1/ "**^"*~"~ • " ' Jjr *-^-—~~- y-y ^ - ^^n^( ~i/n XJ*Q>&*ii&i*J&i*;
-------
lie Comment Peritid j££
-Ig v') ecu, m fir.y,
'~
^ au^^l^.
ty&l&juito&^C&x. gy^t/u^L p(tfA
sT **./> ^t-* /7 , -J—J . JH v$
-------
Public Comment Period
tod <<£_/.
^brx> ^> LJ^L-t s "\
-------
lilil
li
I !.
rt
*53
1
4-T
c
5; Map of Convei
«
D
r
,, ,„. •»::
CO
• D
3
£
a
• S
6
O1
, ^ ***r
i V !""i' 'n'1 '
HI i
<
a:
<
j
<£
RESIDENTI,
»^ i
^
- ' ,
! '" -
m
I
j
>; INDUSTRIA
t^JL
P>
•'.:: '
f1 '•
e
CO
r SHINTECH
*X
•^
V
fi
H POLYVINYL COMPL
a
z
CO
1 PROPOSED
,:,
indicators:
o
turner!
•"I,:
! ••
CQ
(0
1 2
Public Comment
3
o
1
I
lementi
!•§£« 11
g § <§ b -IS
2 S S 8-g S i
w C _, P C c co
*u es •-* ^- «J o v
K fc. O O ffl DJ «
"i „
,,, '|ii '"^r , ;
":,:.
Retail store
Tire shop
Church
n-_r.
O '
c c
a g
"5.S
(ao t-
'53 8*
« "° t-
Chlorine pn
Volunteer fii
Grain elevat
•< "-"
>>
•'' -
/'
... \
-------
Public Comment Period
THE NEW YORK TIMES NATIONAL MONDAY. MAY 12, 1997
Fight Over Chemical Plant SiteJnvolves Race
By The New York Times
CONVENT, La. — Emelda J. West
said she believed that President Clin-
ton was thinking of her when he
signed an executive order on envi-
ronmental justice in February 1994.
"I don't guess he knew I existed,"
Mrs. West said. "But he did have
people like me in mind."
Now Mrs. West, who is 71,- and
other members of a local group, St.
James Citizens for Jobs and the En-
vironment, hope that the Clinton Ad-
ministration will keep her in mind.
In March, the Tulane Environmen-
tal Law Clinic, on behalf of 19 envi-
ronmental groups in Louisiana,
asked the Environmental Protection
Agency to use Mr. Clinton's order to
reject a permit for a proposed chem-
ical plant here, halfway between Ba-
ton Rouge and New Orleans. It was
the first time that the environmental
agency had been asked to reject a
permit on the grounds of environ-
mental justice-... - ._ _
[The request by the citizens' group
to the environmental agency was bol-
stered when the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission announced on May 2
j that it had denied a license to Louisi-
• ana Energy Services, which had
sought to build an $855 million ura-
nium-enrichment plant near Homer.
[The commission's action was the
first time that a Federal agency had
used Mr. Clinton's order on environ-
mental justice to deny a license or
permit. The .commission also or-
dered its staff to investigate accusa-
tions that Louisiana Energy had pur-
posely chosen to locate the plant in
poor black neighborhoods. "
["Certainly, the possibility that ra-
cial considerations played a part in
the site selection cannot be passed
off as mere coincidence," the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board said in a
91-page decision.]
The proposed $700 million chemi-
cal plant -^ sought by Shintech, a
subsidiary of the Shin-Etsu Chemical
Company of Tokyo — would produce
polyvinyl chloride resin, which is
used to make plastic products like
pipes. The factory would be built on a
3,700-acre site that is now covered
with foot-high rows of sugar cane.
In Houston, the controller of Shin-
tech, Dick Mason, said Convent was
the most remote of 30 sites that the
company had considered. Mr. Mason
said the company had chosen the site
in St." James Parish because it is
near the Mississippi River, rail lines
and gas pipelines.
"We did not look at the racial or
socioeconomic makeup of the area."
he said.
The proposed project has divided
this working-class parish of 21,000
residents. The-parish is home to
more than 12 plants that produce and
ship fertilizers, petrochemicals,
Environmentalists
seek help in a
Presidential
executive order.
grains and metal products. The par-
ish also has the third-highest level of
industrial pollution in the state.
The parish president, Dale Hymel
Jr., who favors the Shintech plant,
said it would help alleviate poverty.
"We need to do something to deal
with that," Mr. Hymel said. "And
getting people a job is the best way I
know."
Shintech, he said, would add 165
jobs in the parish. '
An opponent of the plan, Pat Me-
lancon, said the factories in the re-
gion had done little to help residents.
.Driving past dozens of ramshackle
homes within miles of the Shintech
site, she asked, "If these plants are
so good for us, why don't we have.
more economic development here?"
In an area where per capita in-
come is $7,259, Mrs. Melancon point-
ed to the 1990 Census, which showed
that within five miles of the site, 80
percent of the residents are black
and nearly 43 percent have incomes
below the poverty level
Mrs. Melancon said she believed
that the E.P.A. would have to deal
with the question of environmental
justice. On April 3, the opponents
received a'favorable response from
Samuel J. Coteman, a regional direc-
tor in the compliance assurance divi-
sion of the agency. In a letter to J.
Dale Givens, the Secretary of the
State Environmental Quality De-
partment, Mr. Coleman said the is-
sue of environmental justice should
"merit your, attention prior to permit •
issuance." ' • .
Although the state agency would '
have to issue the air-quality permit '
for the plant, the Federal agency
can, under the Clean Ah- Act, over-
rule the state. But Federal officials-
conceded that they were unclear
about what effect Mr. Clinton's order •
would have on the Shintech proposal.
"The E.P.A. has not defined what
an environmental-justice communi-
ty is," said a spokeswoman in the
agency's Dallas office, Cheryl Hoch-
stetler. "So we are waiting to see
what is. going to happen with this.." -
Ms. Hochstetler said the final deci-
sion on the Shintech permit, which is
due by June 2, would be made by
administrators .in Washington.
The executive order says each
Federal agency "shall make achiev-
ing environmental justice part of its
mission." The order requires agen-
cies to identify and address the
health and environmental effects of
their policies on "minority and low-
income populations."
Paul H. Templet, a professor of
environmental studies at Louisiana
State University in Baton. Rouge,
said such vague wording, along with
the support of Gov. Mike Foster, a
Republican, put Federal officials in a
difficult position.
"If they do overrule the state,"
Professor Templet said, "then they
have the Congressmen to deal with,
and that's a tough political call."
In any case, Mrs. West of the citi-
zens' group said she believed that
Federal officials would deny Shin-
tech the permit it needed to build its
plant-a few miles north of the blue
wooden house where she has lived
for 50 years. "They will not locate
here, darling," she said. "We have
too many problems here already."
-------
r •," i T mm sii i' i iiiirH! ::wtmmt IIP-w rui •iifiii!1 "t" r i«"; "%• • y: 2" is" "• i "in:
Public Comment Period
iodZ/3
Reduce Recidivism by
Industrial Development,
!nc.(RRID)
Post Office Box 438554,
Chicago, Illinois 60643
(773)(65 1994the p'iesidentof the United Stati issued an
jfiSJB^,M^fl» SiVJlRights Act of 1954, each Federal Agency shall ensure that all
Rnancial Asslstance that affect nurnanhealth orihT
ual or «*"• a^ngements, use criterfa, methods, or
effects, mdudrng human health, economic and social effects ,of Federal
"""onty communities and low-income communities, when such analysis
et^T
nan e!wironmertal assessmert, environmental impact
'Sttat^ Oltter
-------
Public Comment Period
The U.S. EPA fn Region 5 has systematically denied the residents in the Victory Heights West
Pullman Communities all of the above including funding. All funding grants has been given to other
organizations that are not even part of the affected communities nor do any of them reside in the
affected communities. Organizations such as Citizens for Better Environment (CBE) Chicago
Neighborhood Technology (CNT) Clean Sites. Can Do. Chicago South, Chicago Legal Clinic and
many more.
Grants for technical assistance or funding should be provided and made available to any group of
individuals which may be affected by a release of threatened release at any facility in the community
which is affected by the contamination. Nevertheless, the only individuals receiving funding are those
listed on the National Priorities List under the National Contingency Plan which is also under the
Superfund Implementation Policy.
Accordingly, the Dutch Boy Site is a Superfund Sfte which should be listed on the National Priority list
SEr ^^ of the many under ground Stora9e tanks that are buned on the site and around the
Victory Heights West Pullman Community. Next to the Dutch Boy Site is the" International Harvester
Site" with underground storage tanks, (PAHs) & (PCBs).
Technical Review and Comments on the Potential Release of Lead from the Manufacturing
Processes Conducted at the Dutc.h ppy SuoerfundSte prepared by Science Applications
We^iona^rporation for U.S. EPA. Dated-February 14,1996. (See Administrative Order V-W."96-
C-347) Attachment B-Page 3).Sl
Sincerely,
Abbas Hassain
Executive Director,
-------
Endusfri
inc.(RROD)
Public Comment Period
Chicago. Iffinois 60SC
(373) <660-4186
May 14,1997)
to\^I wouldEtetfce (NCEJAQto do.
ccrtanaiated
.......... ' "" " '" "' ''
Order JK^coS to fesue
. ,„ . .,,.,. , . ..
tion, fioes atd penalties ^amst ALL oonopaaies -Bat have done
,
lte
i apeak vn&ifae Ptasidept and Ocaeipess feat they
Ilaft k sBpfy aooss tbe board in terns of-PRlOHY. TMX ENVIRONMENTAL
^
Urited Saes Bxvi
T««n OSDKI) andbas awrifaWeto itiheiesources fiomtfae Department of Sate, De
bmOmitceft^i^Pepaan«ttof&teck^
of cnesgy, Dejartxaaff of Jjfcoc; Department of Humaa Services, Dqwtaaat of
Envirc««t*3i Ftutouiou Agengr, Feteal Emas^Ky Maoagemeat Agpqr, UMafl
•*hg"g «hnnld baao l
eaoarfart dean ur>. asaa at ndsV
statecy fer nwos J
.
|»1D^
West PuRman Community.
.'|5i>
received 'federal ftmcfing''^ behalf of the'Duteh '
, intetr^icjnal Harvester Site, Rodwell Intemafionaf Site or any Contaminated Site
W«t Ptimai Comrnuntty mat they return AU. ft«ds that was paid out to
fj fbr »|a purpose of assisting mis community.
Msi
-------
Public Comment Period
3.)
Thank You
Sincerely,
Abbas H&ssssn
Executive director,
-------
Public Comment Period
I'!'!
iii
PUBLIC COMMENT TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD
I,.'-1 ; ;" '.'; MAY 15,1997 ; ;;
Summary of Report Submitted by the
Mni-Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition, Inc.
the Mni-Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition is submitting a report on the Missouri River
Basin American Indian Flood Plain issues. The report is in response to the weather-related
Conditions that devastated numerous Missouri River Basui Tribes earlier this year.
v-'Ji"' • „ . '"''i! ' ", ("is I',.,,,""' "IV""'1" ,' 'iuri!,,",:, " '" ," ,. •"" ,,|i,i,i T " I|1T'!'!'" !""" „'" ;,;,; . ' •'j , ;•„ ,,,„;, jj5 ;:"".,, ]£, \ ».\ 1$, ,•«$"'/••. '>,>u^!!\ k\,> ' .'rw l'i\ ', i'1 'i:""j' .i.i'i'j'i.iSji'i'iii!
"The Mni-Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition, representing 26 Missouri River Basin Tribes,
has developed this report to assist its' tribal membership in the current emergency flood
conditions throughout the Missouri River Basin area, an area that encompasses not only the
mainstem Missouri, but its tributaries as well. The Army Corps of Engineers has informed the
Coalition that conditions have not yet been fully documented, but that several Tribes have
experienced serious property damage from flooding. Thirteen tribes live along the Missouri
River and thirteen more along its tributaries.
fThe Mni-Sose Coalition is a multi tribal organization, chartered and funded by the Bureau of
Indian Affairs and the Administration for Native Americans/Department of Health and Human
Services with the close cooperation of the Bureau of Reclamation, the Army Corps of Engineers,
and the Missouri River Basin Association, an organization comprised of the states within the
Missouri River Basin...
...Indian Tribes along the Missouri River have been considered by Federal Emergency
Management Assistance (FEMA) programs and by State Flood Assistance programs, as a
geographic and political "no-man's land." Several factors intrude on flood management
planning for Indian reservations. First, the reservations are usually resistant to outside
Interactions and jurisdictional issues. Second, the matter of sovereignty is regarded as a serious
matter for Indian people and is respected by state and federal agencies. Third, the lines of
authority for emergency management teams is very unclear; it is uncertain if federal emergency
teams and agencies have the authority or the established policy regarding Indian nations. Fourth,
there is no established communications protocol between the Tribes and the Army Corps of
Engineers. And finally, there are only limited means or plans in place to fight flood problems...
"...Conclusion: Because the funding for disaster relief is provided to the states, and because the
states visualize the tribes as separate entities, the tribes are usually left to their own resources
where disaster relief is concerned, the tribes themselves, although they are sovereign
governments, cannot officially declare disaster status. i The state where they are located must do
§gV'f|n eacffra not seen as requiring state assistance by state officialdom.
Equitable disaster recovery funding should be provided to the tribes separately. This should be
solidly embedded in disaster relief provisions for disaster relief disbursements of funds for
Tribes."
-------
Public Comment Period
mtive Director:
ard Bad Moccasin
iker Txike«:
litoino & Sioux Trite* of
Peek, Poplar, Montana
enne River Sioux Trite,
e Butts, Soutk Dakota
pewa Cree Trite,
Elder, Montana
-Trite
' Agency, Montana
r Creek Sioux Trite,
Tkompeon, Soutk Dakota
dreau Sanice Sioux Trite
dreau, Soutk Dakota
Belknap Trite,
em, Montana
apoo Trite in Kama*,
on, Kasau
• Brule Sioux Trite,
«r Brule, Soutk Dakota
•Mm Ckeyenne Trite,
e Deer, Montana
da Sioux Trite,
: Ridge, Soutk Dakota
ika Trike,
LnilL Nekr«ka
ea Trite of Netracka,
>rara, Nekratka
rie Band of Poiawatomi,
•Ha, Kanu*
ekud Sioux Trite,
id, Soutk Dakota
& Fox Nation of Mi»ouri,
TVC, Kanaas
tee Sioux Trike,
orara, Nekraaka
etoifWakpHon Dakota
ion, Soutk Dakota
rit Lake Trite,
t TotUn, Nortk Dakota
nding Rock Sioux Trike,
t Yate»; Nortk DakoU
Mni-Sose Intertribal Water Ri^kts Coalition, Inc.
P.O. Box 2890, 514 Mt. Ru«kmore Roal
Rapid City, Soutk Dakota 57709-2890
May 14, 1997
Tama Clare
c/o Indian Springs Lodge
Highway 32
Wabeno, WI 54566-0332
Dear Ms. Clare:
Enclosed is a report from the Mni Sose-Inllrtribal Water Rights Coalition on the Missouri
River Basin American Indian Rood Plain-issues. This-report is in response to the weather-
related conditions that devastated .nun^Srous Missouri River Basin Tribes earlier this year.
The Mni Sose.Intertribal Water^g'h|s?5Coalition, fo^§Uy:0r;ganized:.in;:iJ.anuary of 1993, is
currently cbnipft^d of 26 of the'-lftndian Tribes jqcafep|i^eMi^dUri'River Basin. The
main objectiv^ofthe.Coalition are'to..pro^(^a:^^'iun^^^elBr^sr.ifesues relating to the
protection jiaffd^evelopment of tribal ."water,, .tfejjeurces in"ij|^Missou^lSSyer Basin and to
jership.
s record of this week's National
Environmental Justice Advisory Cbuttcil''me^tihg^ndid in Wisconsin. Please contact me at
(605) 343-6054 if you have questions rega^Kqg the Coalition's proposal.
I appreciate your assistance.
Sincerely,
Richard 13ad Moccksin
Executive Director
enc.
'Town, Nortk Dakota
tie Mountain Band of
ippewa*. Nortk Dakota
onekago Trite ol Nekra«ka
mckago, Nekravka
».VOATA\E?A\CLARE.WPD
ition Sioux Trite
rtf, South O«iot.
-------
Public Comment Period
". 2.
Executor* Diixctor.
RkUtJ Bad Moccum
Tzito:
A»*ki!]»ui« £T Sioux Trite* of
Fort P«clr, PopLr, MonUn*
Cn*y*oa« Rivtr Sioux Trite,
E»f« Buiu, Soutk DJwU
,. Trite,
' POX EU«. MonUiu
C«nr Trite
Crcv A<«ncy, MonUa*
Fett TJv>mp»on, Soult D*leoU
FkadnMu S*at*« Sioux Trit*
FknJtMU, Scrult DJtoU
Pott Btlloup Trite,
Hurittn. MonUn*
KkUpoo Trite
Hosted, Kuuu
Lnnir BnJ* Sious, Tritv,
LowBnJt, SoulkD»koU
LUSM D*cr, MonUn*
OlLl* Sitoux Tril.,
Pirn* Ri*t*jh?wuj
Pnlrit Bind ot PoUvktomi, ,,,:«u:_ *u- xx- • p>-
M«.M^ Tf.»... • within the Missouri River
Fart TatWn, North DairoU
„ ', ', , ....... , , " IRt! .i, /I ..... ..... i'",i ..... 'I
SUaJlni Roclr Sioux Trite,
Fort Y« W, Noril, D«l«oU
Now Town. Nottl) D«lraU
Turtlt MounUin Ban} of
Yuitton Sioux Trite
. SoutK DA]MU
One of the primary reasons the"fedlm(^^i|i^.supported the charter of the Mni Sose
Coalition as a tribal governmental organizau|Hreiigible for funding and contracting under P.L.
93-638 was the assistance the Coalition;jyb|p%;Fovide federal agencies information dealing
with issues related to the Missouri River(-The;;bioyition has provided a central focal point for
communication with the federal government on tribal issues within the Missouri River Basin.
Federal and state agencies now depend on the Coalition for a more cost-effective method of
wo*!nS,,™* J» Tribes within the basin. The tribal membership has also found the Coalition
to be effective and productive. In 1993, the Coalition was composed of three Tribes. Today,
n has a membersh'P of 26 tribes covering a seven-state region within the Missouri River
Basin.
Indian Tribes along the Missouri River have been considered by Federal Emergency
Management Assistance (FEMA) programs and by State Flood Assistance programs, as a
geographic and political "no-man's land." Several factors intrude on flood management
planning for Indian reservations. First, the reservations are usually resistant to outside
interactions and jurisdictional issues. Second, the matter of sovereignty is regarded as a
feriolsniatterfor Indian people and is respected by state and federal agencies. Third, the lines
-------
Public Comment Period
3.Z
Mni Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition
Missouri River Basin American Indian Flood Plain Issues Report
May 14, 1997 "
Page 2
of authority for emergency management teams is very unclear; it is uncertain if federal emergency
teams and agencies have the authority or the established policy regarding Indian nations. Fourth
there is no established communications protocol between the Tribes and the Army Corps of
Engineers. And finally, there are only limited means or plans in place to fight flood problems.
Immediate Issues and Concerns with Disaster Mitigation: The Missouri River Basin Tribes are
stil gathering data regarding the impact of flooding in the first quarter of 1997. In Wakpala South
Dakota, for example, a housing project was developed directly in the path of potential floods. Other
housing sites are located near the Missouri or close enough to a number of its tributaries as to
position them in serious danger of lost lives and/or property destruction. In Crow Agency, Montana
a levee was constructed several years ago, but there was no organization dedicated to its
maintenance, nor was there assigned funding for that purpose. That levee has already sustained
damage with more expected in days.
Planning Assistance to States/Tribes: The Coalition needs to assist its tribal membership to develop
junsdictional emergency procedures to facilitate the implementation of emergency measures on tribal
properties tnbal procedures and measures in flood damage reduction, tribal planning to mitigate
flood hazards, and emergency management technical services including flood and flood plain data and
information and planning assistance on all aspects of flood plain management planning The Coalition
a so needs to assist its tribal membership to design and plan debris removal, post-flood
clearing/straightening and development of methods to improve drainage for future disaster
occurrences. The Coalition is also obliged to assist its tribal membership to develop an emergency
communications protocol, in additiori'to a flood mitigation plan.
Damage Reduction Programs: The Mni Sose Coalition supports efforts of its tribal membership to
design, create and implement a series of plans which would include:
(1) Resolution of tribal jurisdiction^ issues and concerns about federal state and local
emergency procedures aimed at disaster recovery and mitigation and damage reduction
programs:
(2)
Flood Damage Reduction Projects (not specifically authorized by Congress)
Purpose: Define flood problem, evaluate solutions, select flood control plan, design and
construct project for flooding in cities, towns, villages. The program will be fulfilled through
technical assistance, training, and flood-related information and data. The Coalition will work
with the Army Corps of Engineers, FEMA along with State and Local emergency agencies
to ensure a timely beginning and completion of this project
-------
c
Public Comment Period.
e Intertribal Water Rights Coalition
Missouri River BagnAmerican Indian Flood Plain Isxies Report
May 14, 1997
Page3
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Emergency Streambank.and,Shoreline Protection
Purpose: define erosion problem, evaluate solutions, select flood-control plan, design and
Construct emergency streambank and shoreline protection to prevent erosion from
highways, bridges, roads, streets, utilities, public buildings, hospitals, churches, and other
nonprofit public facilities.
Channel Clearing for Flood Control
?u*P°seJ to clear channels to increase flow capacity, decrease flooding, and reduce
Damage caused by debris carried in floods
Project Modifications for Improvement of Environment
Purpose: to modify structures or operations of existing projects for restoration or
enhancement of environmental values, especially fish and wildlife values
Water Resource Projects
Purpose: larger flood control or multi-purpose projects
Emergency Management
•|:i; ••-.:,. Purpose: to respond in times of natural disaster
Development of Emergency Preparedness Measures
Flood-time Emergency Operations
Flood Rehabilitation Activities
Emergency Water Supply and Flood damage Assistance
Pre-flood (Prevention) Advance Measures
Destructive flooding is a symptom of an ecosystem in poor health. "In some cases where the
design capacity of the (flood control) structure is exceeded, floods have been provoked by
the very measures designed to prevent them," (P. 118, Overview of River-Flood Plain
Ecology).
Equitable Disaster Recovery Funding: By January, 1997, snow was piled 10 feet high on the
NorthernPlains, and in some places was even higher. Eagle Butte, on the Cheyenne River Indian
R^*rY?t!E!l!n,?ou!hJ?akp?a,rePorted drifts as hi§h as 25 feet, sufficiently high and packed tightly
ei*Hi8».t?.®v*P "nped6 snow-removal equipment. FEMA anticipated record flooding and developed
a program to encourage residents in flood areas to buy flood insurance. That action failed to generate
.the, Jesjredire^ts, with only one person in ten actually purchasing flood insurance. In Grand Forks,
.^»PP°. B$eiHs> *"i!Sgre *J!aP IP.QOO houses, only 946 policies were in force. Only 25
of the ]° IB!!!ion home?in f °
-------
Public Comment Period
Mni Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition
Missouri River Basin American Indian Flood Plain Issues Report
May 14, 1997
Page 4
On Indian reservations, a survey revealed that fewer than 1 person in 50 has flood insurance. A study
conducted in April of 1997, by the Mni Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition revealed that the
amount of damage created by severe weather conditions such as winter blizzards, spring floods and
initial snow pack melt was severe. Accurate figures were not immediately available although the first
assessment indicated an overall tribal average ranging between $50,000 and $100,000 per Tribe. All
livestock deaths, however, had not been calculated nor had the damage to homes and properties, and
the total damage was estimated. The Army Corps of Engineers forewarned in the May 13, 1997,
Rapid City Journal that the anticipated spring mountain melt may result in the highest runoff in a
century of record-keeping. Therefore, calculations cannot be accurately totaled until after the full
impact of the mountain melt runoff has been experienced.
Tribes were impacted more severely than non-Indian communities by the floods. Many non-Indian
communities have disaster-relief programs available. The Tribes, according to the Army Corps of
Engineers, were not prepared for (1) extreme blizzard conditions, (2) flood conditions and (3)
excessive snowpack melt runoff. Most do not even have a protocol to address such concerns. The
Army Corps, state emergency relief crews, and federal disaster relief agencies could neither identify
nor locate the tribal personnel in charge of disaster relief. Furthermore, no matter the conditions of
flood, blizzard, snow-melt, Indian Tribes are not empowered to call for disaster relief. The state must
make the call, and before 1997, states paid little heed to conditions on Indian lands. There are few
Aid agreements in effect between states and Tribes. Few Tribes have available Civil Emergency
Response Teams (CERTs), crisis relocation centers for threatened tribal populations to designated
high-ground areas, or Disaster Field Office/Disaster Assistance Centers. Provisions for mass shelter,
feeding, health needs and social services are typically not available to tribal people in "homeless
condition" during disaster situations. Emergency management measures are often missing or not
utilized. Tribes, for the most part, have never created an emergency operations plan, nor an
evacuation plan. A quick survey revealed that no tribal person could ever remember there being a
hazard analysis performed in Indian Country. Furthermore, the Tribes have never been encouraged
to identify key workers, who would remain in a high hazard area to function in the critical areas of
health, welfare, public utilities, and law enforcement during and after evacuation.
No mention has been made beforehand about the welfare of the Tribes in the recent flooding that has
occurred in the basin area. It is clear that the Missouri River Basin Tribes will need to be adequately
represented in these matters of federal disaster planning. A number of Tribes have suggested that the
Coalition needs to be of assistance to the Tribes in supporting their need to be included in disaster
recovery and funding procedures
Conclusion: Because the funding for disaster relief is provided to the states, and because the states
visualize the tribes as separate entities, the Tribes are usually left to their own resources where
disaster relief is concerned. The Tribes themselves, although they are sovereign governments, cannot
officially declare disaster status. The state where they are located must do so. In each instance, the
-------
I Publi
Public Comment Period
Mhi Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition
Missouri River Basin American Indian Flood Plain Issues Report
May 14, 1997
PageS
tribes are not seen as requiring state assistance by state officialdom. Equitable disaster recovery
&nd«8 should be provided to the tribes separately. This should be solidly embedded in disaster relief
provisions for disaster relief disbursements of funds for Tribes.
The National Mitigation Strategy consists of established national programs to mitigate the impacts
of a number of natural hazards. However, these programs have often been hazard-specific as well as
region-specific and the evaluated conditions are those that exist outside of American Indian
homelands. As a direct consequence, Tribes are often "the forgotten people," when mitigation plans
are being developed. Most certainly, most state and federal disaster-relief agencies have only limited
plans to address disaster conditions on Indian reservations and in Indian communities. In short,
disaster mitigation means relief for everyone-but Indian Tribes. The nation has the capability to
design and implement mitigation measures for local, regional, and national populations. But for the
American Indian Tribes, particularly those along the Missouri River, disasters continue to inflict
injuries, ruin lives, and cause millions of dollars in property loss.
ne cu¥e? ""defying Pn!losophy for the majority population says that "those who knowingly
PP^se to assume greater risk, must accept responsibility for that choice. Indian people have not very
pfljen had the luxury of choosing where they live.
1! KI ' iHi'i'H'i "SiiS!1!
i|\data\b5a\floodpl.pro
"Iff
-------
Public Comment Period
A Summary of an Open Letter to NEJAC
From the Residents of Freetown, Louisiana
May 9, 1997
Dear NEJAC Members:
"We are the residents of Freetown, Louisiana. Freetown is located in rural St. James Parish and is the
proposed site of the future $700 million dollar Shintech polyvinyl chloride facility. The groups opposed to
Shintech (a minority) and the professional outsiders have had your attention for many months, but we feel
it is time that the view of the majority be heard: We are in favor of the construction of the facility and we
want our views to be heard. From the beginning, we have been interested and very excited about the
prospect of the impact of $700 million from one facility being infused into our small community and what
that would mean for the people.
"We support Shintech and welcome its arrival into our community because, of all the industries to come to
St. James Parish, Shintech is the first company whose officials visited us, their potential Freetown
neighbors, explained their operational processes and employment opportunities, and actively solicited our
advice on how to be the best corporate neighbor.
"Our community is a prime example of what happens to poor or predominately African-American
communities throughout the United States. We are excluded from the decision making processes involved
in addressing the issues discussed above and forced to live with the decisions made by detached and
disinterested government bodies and so-called "do-gooders" who could care less about the "expendable"
segments of society. It was our understanding that Environmental Justice was supposed to address and
remedy these types of injustices.
"We have asked Shintech to address our environmental concerns, and they have responded to our
satisfaction. We are concerned, however, about the proselytizing of unsubstantiated and exaggerated
environmental hazard claims made by Greenpeace and other outsiders. Those who are opposing the
Shintech facility have not offered any. ideas on how to attract new business to St. James Parish, and it
seems as if EPA and its Environmental Justice Section are acceding to the influence of these outside
Environmental Groups - thereby disenfranchising a minority community and leaving them out of the
environmental justice debate. We feel this is a grave injustice to this community. We believe that EPA
takes any action on the Shintech issue, we need to know the name of the impacted or the environmental
justice community, and whose concern they are addressing.
"Many would have the NEJAC members believe that Freetown's problems have been caused solely by the
chemical industries existing in St. James Parish. This is not true. The problems stem from a variety of
sources. These sources include, but are not limited to, the sugar cane fields that surround Freetown,
inadequate sewage treatment, and poor draining which results in many homes being flooded during heavy
rains. The groups opposed to Shintech (a minority) and the professional outsiders have had your attention
for many months. We feel it is time that the view of the majority community be heard.
"On behalf of Freetown, we would like to thank you for taking time to learn more about our community, as
well as for providing us with answers to the attached questions.
-------
Public Comment Period
would like to address the following questions to NEJAC. We would also appreciate written
responses."
1. What is Environmental Justice?
a) Is Environmental Justice only related to air, water, and land, or does it also include socio-
economic issues?
2. What is an Environmental Justice Community?
3. What are the geographic boundaries of an Environmental Justice Community?
4, Who decides who speaks for an environmental Justice Community?
$, Why does the U.S. EPA give preferential, red-carpet treatment to national environmental groups
and, at the same time, ignore or dismiss the concerns of poor or African-American citizens?
iiii, ',•' ' .'.'.. .iiii i ' '. ' . i , ,„ ''V. i ..,'• '•;•.• , . . ,;,.,' ' ,i ,.-' if,:11' ,\ ju,'t ,PII'":,I '• ,• v). ,' ' ...': '.';; , .: ii<'
6. Why does the U.S. EPA only consider environmental impacts from TRI facilities in its attempt to
evaluate Environmental Justice conditions in Louisiana?
7, What methods have been used by the U.S. EPA and the NEJAC to advise communities like ours
that Environmental Justice programs exist?
',;,. ''! ' ' I Illilllll ,. ' '. .''I' ' " I'1', " „ - . . ... , ln , „ .in, . . i. . : .... . . miir
8. Hpw enforceable is Presidential Executive Order 12898 pn Environmental Justice?
9_. How does the U.S. EPA address Environmental-Justice complaints lodged against other federal
"" : agerifcies? .- ' "
10. Does the U.S. EPA have any written Environmental Justice policies? If so, may we have copies?
11.
13.
•i 'Will"i', ,i\\P T
What types of investigative methods do the U.S. EPA and the NEJAC use to determine the
accuracy of reported Environmental Justice information and complaints?
jniiiiiiM' ViM! n" hjln Ml !V, ,«
1.2. Ppw many: communities have the U.S. EPA or NEJAC assisted in addressing Environmental
Justice cgmplaints, particularly in Louisiana? What are the names of these communities and what
was accomplished? Did the quality of life for people living in these communities improve as a
result of U.S. EPA or NEJAC involvement?
What resources are available through the U.S. EPA and NJEJAC to assist indigent communities
like ours in meeting with people in policy-making positions to familiarize them with our situation?
14. If Freetown residents had concluded that the Shintech facility was not in the best interests of the
community, would our quality-of-life have improved as a result of Shintech not locating here?
iiiii in ,:ii:».: ',-,: '•>'••
-------
Public Comment Period
May 10, 1997
Ms. Clarice Gaylord, Director
EPA
Office of Environmental Justice
Dear Ms.
Enclosed is information we would like to be included in the official meeting of the NEJAC
meeting. I am sorry we could not afford to be present. I have included (3) packets: a copy
for Mr. Richard Moore, Chairman, JEJA, a copy for Ms. Shirley Augerson, and a copy for
you. I would appreciate it deeply if you would see that they are received in the time for the
meeting.
Thank you hi advance.
Carol A. Gaudin
for the Citizens for Freetown
8236 Pleasant Hill
Convent, La. 700723
(504) 865-5520
(504) 562-7105
-------
Public Comment Perind
i. ,: ,' •. :' ( 'si;,::: , , •. .. .• •. : :-. '. :"i . ' .... , ,••;; •> , .. .1. j „• , • • i \ ,. at
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM
THE RESIDENTS OF
'''''" "' _| " " ' '"' ' FREETbWN, LOUISIANA '_' ' \
MAY 9, 1997
[FOR INCLUSION IN THE OFHCIAL RECORD]
"ISil,,,! . Ji , , ,. ' II .. " • ''',•"! !, ' i',,,:1 ',' ' ' „ ' ' 'I ..'„ • 3 '' , ! • ,••'"' ' 11 ,,i, i,.,';,' i,,. i,Hi.
Dear NEJAC Members:
We are the' residents of Freetown, Louisiana. Freetown is located in rural St. James Parish
a'fid is the proposed site of the future $700 million dollar Shintech polyvinyl chloride facility.
Most of our families have lived in this exclusively African-American community for generations.
Everyday, we experience the effects'' of discrimination, governmental neglect, and
industrialization. The deplorable conditions of Freetown are directly related to years of neglect
and Jim Crowism. '
^We were.under the impression that the creation of the Environmental Justice movement
\yould provide us with an opportunity to participate in the decision making process so that we
could be active participants in the betterment of our community- We have come to the realization
that many of the problems that plague Freetown are the direct result of decisions made by
outsiders without our input.
Many would have the NEJAC members believe that Freetown's problems have been caused
solely by the chemical industries existing in St. James Parish. This is not true. The problems stem
from a variety of sources. These sources include, but are not limited to, the sugar cane fields that
surround Freetown, inadequate sewage treatment, poor drainage which results in many homes
being flooded during heavy rain, and railroad tracks to the east of the community that are in
desperate need of repair.
Rpmeville Elementary School is near Freetown. All the children of Freetown attend this
school, which is approximately 90% African-American The physical condition of the school is
deplorable. The resource materials and textbooks available to the students are severely antiquated
and the education that students receive in Romeville is substandard.
Freetown youth cope with unemployment or underemployment on a daily basis. This
condition has produced a generation of residents that has resigned itself to a life of poverty and
• I :; Ollli I; V!1,!! Jfflili:, „ liiliili!!! r.i.i.
-------
Public Comment Period
3-5
hopelessness. Employment opportunities are limited for our children not because of a lack of
training, but because of the color of their skin and lack of local access. In St. James Parish, race
and nepotism determine who receives gainful employment, not education.
Many homes in Freetown are in need of repair. However, many homeowners do not have
the financial resources to make repairs. Although federal funds are available for repairs,
Freetown residents have not been the recipients of these federal funds.
Over the years, Freetown residents have had to undertake shelter-in-place because of
releases at nearby plants. So far, shelter-in-place has proved effective. Nobody has died because,
contrary to the myths about the conditions of dwellings in Freetown, our homes are able to
provide adequate protection. Even if Shintech does locate in Freetown, we will still have to
practice shelter-in-place on occasion.
Many years ago, the governing body of St. James Parish decided on the type and width of
the streets in Freetown. These decisions were made without the input of Freetown residents. The
roads are substandard, narrow, and are less than ten feet from some of the houses in Freetown.
The people who are now outraged about the roads in St. James have relatives who served or
continue to serve on the governing body that regulates the construction and specification of
parish streets and roads.
In addition to being concerned about the health effects from the chemical industry, we are
also concerns about other negative health impacts and the lack of an adequate health care
delivery system. We have had people in the community die not only from cancer, but from AIDS
and diseases commonly found in areas of poverty. Death from cancer, premature death from any
source, as well as inadequate healt-h care, are unacceptable. We can document the number of
people who die from AIDS and poverty related illnesses, but we are unable to document why
people die from cancer. We believe that the only way to document cancer related deaths is to
conduct a long-term health study on residents. If NEJAC members are as concerned as we are,
why do they not use their resources and understanding of the Environmental Justice issue in order
to bring together federal and state health experts, as well as other health professionals, to
conduct a study aimed at identifying the sources and reasons for cancer deaths in Freetown?
The parish health clinic that serves our community is located in Lutcher Louisiana,
approximately 20 miles from Freetown. The decision to locate the facility in Lutcher was made
by public servants without the input of Freetown. Many of the people who today express concern
for our health were the same people or relatives of those government officials who decided to
locate the health clinic 20 miles away from Freetown. Had Freetown residents been invited to
give their input into the clinic site selection, they would have been able to voice concerns about
-------
Public Comment Period
1"
community accessibility.
The local parish governing body makes decisions about evacuation routes. Freetown's
main evacuation route is the (Mississippi] River Road However; additional evacuation routes are
available to Freetown "residents. IPieasent Hill St. to Highway 3125 and Hargis St. to Highway
3125]: Those seeking to prevent Shintech from coming to SL James Parish often portray the River
Road as the only evactuation route. This simply is not true.
TransportaSon for many people living in the Louisiana sugar cane country is a real
problem. There is no access to public transportation because it simply does not exist. Therefore,
moving from one point to another in the sugar cane growing area is a major undertaking for
those who do not have transportation.
Tjipse who are opposing the Shintech facility have not offered any ideas on how to attract
new businesses to St. James Parish. [One must keep in mind that the major businesses in the
parish are chemical and oil industries, shipping, grain elevators, and sugar cane cultivation].
There are presently several iron production facilities under construction in the community and
palish. "T&ese'''facilities"will" have' incinerators: Nobody has expressed1 any opposition to these
faliities.'ili::uS^ 'iron''facility"officials have"made no efforts to' contact "Freetown
residents to explain the nature of their facility, as well as possible employment and business
opportunities for Freetown residents. Contraryto popular belief, we feel that the iron plants will
pole1 Some problems to the community. We are extremely concerned about exposure to lead and
other metals. i _ i i
Local land use and zoning policies determine what can locate in certain areas. Freetown
residents were never asked to assist-in the development and implementation of zoning laws and
land use planning policies. To the best of our knowledge, no individual or group is presently
working to change land use or zoning policies in the parish.
Our community is a prime example of what happens to poor or predominately African-
American communities throughout the United States. We are excluded from the decision making
processes involved in addressing the issues discussed above and forced to live with the decisions
made by detached and disinterested government bodies and so-called "do-gooders" who could
in i j ,. .,, „ *f „ , ,, , . ,,
of society. It was bur understanding that
Environmental Justice was supposed to address and remedy these types of injustices.
Mi^ insensitive majority.'Weare
quickly achieving what is commonly referred to as "community empowerment" and will no
lo^erMowotnlrs'to jrtate tKaf they represent"us 'of are'eriipoWliifed to make decisions for us
jiiiSjs/! i::;;l:i'l;;1,-t£ i/hi lull, t&'ifcpi:).i.4".J:, i?: "S.: ""t; i!' .'.<, :. HT't1;; ,• i: t .'/• ?= *; ;• *:' :.v;:.; ::>'ti i: •
when they, in fact, do not.
T'lllin! \jfiiti ill ...... I '.! ,: , ..... Nl!i :,i.: : :'
"I'i! ..... .iillillU'K'i' ..... i 'i't: lib! •: ..... . ;iiil' ..... -
-------
Public Comment Period
We would like to address the following questions to the NEJAC. We would also appreciate
a written responses.
I) What is Environmental Justice?
a) Is Environmental Justice only related to air, water, and land, or does it also include
socio-economic issues?
2) What is an Environmental Justice Community?
3) What are the geographic boundaries of an Environmental Justice Community?
4) Who decides who speaks for an Environmental Justice Community?
5) Why does the U.S. EPA give preferential, red-carpet treatment to national environmental
groups and, at the same time, ignore or dismiss the concerns of poor or African-American
citizens?
6) Why does the U.S. EPA only consider environmental impacts from TRI facilities in its
attempt to evaluate Environmental Justice conditions in Louisiana?
7) What methods have been used by the U.S. EPA and the NEJAC to advise communities like
ours that Environmental Justice programs exist?
8) How enforceable is Presidential Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice?
9) How does the U.S. EPA address Environmental Justice complaints lodged against other
federal agencies? \
10) Does the U.S. EPA have any written Environmental Justice policies? If so, may we have
copies?
11) What types of investigative methods do the U.S. EPA and the. NEJAC use to determine the
accuracy of reported Environmental Justice information and complaints?
12) How many communities have the U.S. EPA or NEJAC assisted in addressing Environmental
Justice complaints, particularly in Louisiana? What are the names of these communities
and what was accomplished? Did the quality of life for people living in these communities
improve as a result of U.S. EPA or NEJAC involvement?
13) What resources are available through the U.S. EPA and NEJAC to assist indigent
communities like ours in meeting with people in policy-making positions to familiarize
them with our situation?
14) If Freetown residents had concluded that the Sliintech facility was not in the best interests
of the community, would our quality-of-life have improved as a result of Shintech not
locating here?
15) If Shintech does not locate in Freetown, what resources will the U.S. EPA and NEJAC offer
to our community to help us to continue to address issues related to the environment?
-------
Public Comment Period
16) If Shintech does locate in our neighborhood and we had failed to negotiate benefits for
our community, would the quality of our lives improve?
''
-------
Public Comment Period
April 21 1997
Mr. J. Dale Givens, Secretary
Louisiana Dept. of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 82263
Baton Rouge, LA 70884
Dear Mr. Givens:
We, the members of the community of Romeville, the community in which Shintech, Inc. is
proposing to locate (1 1/2 miles from proposed site) and the 4th District Citizenry of St.
James Parish are in favor of the construction of the facility and we want our views to be
heard.
For the last year, we have had groups such as Greenpeace, the Tulane Environmental Law
Clinic, and the Louisiana Environmental Action Network swarm into our community
proposing to speak for us. They don't know us. They don't know what we want or what
we need for our community — and they have not asked us! These groups have come at the
urgings of a handful of local residents led by Pat Melancon and her organization, the St.
James Citizens for Jobs and the Environment. Although the facility will be located in our
community (as opposed to residents like Pat melancon who live several miles away from the
site in Convent), these groups have neither consulted us nor invited us to share our thoughts
on the matter. We thought it was high time we speak for ourselves.
From the beginning we have been interested and very excited about the prospect of the
impact of $700 million from one facility being infused into our small community and what
that would mean for the people. A large portion of the 4th District of St. James Parish is
unemployed and underemployed (contrary to the image being spread about the community,
we have high school and college educated people). We have just not gotten the jobs in the
past. We have two Federal Housing projects in the 4th District and within two years, we will
be faced with former Welfare recipients added to the unemployment lines. We realize that
as a community, we have much work to do and partners like Shintech afford us that
opportunity with the jobs and residual economic impact that would result.
We support Shintech and welcome its arrival into our community because of all the industries
to come to St. James Parish, Shintech is the first company whose officials visited with us,
their potential Freetown neighbors, explain their operational processes and employment
opportunities, and actively soliticted our advice on how to be the best corporate neighbor.
We have asked Shintech to address our environmental concerns, and they have responded to
our satisfaction. We are also satisfied that the appropriate agencies will require that Shintech
operate within the pollution guidelines requirement. We are concerned, however, about the
proselytizing of unsubstantiated and exaggerate environmental hazard claims made by
Greenpeace and other outsiders. This is an attempt to molest the intelligence of the people .
The people of the community, however, have not been convinced, but it seems as if EPA
-------
.;,:, ''',,
,• &•.:.:/I iv I
in•,,' M?V..;;;V: I isi,:; ••
ill !i. !,
Public Comment Period
3*3
II",
and its Environmental Justice Section are acceding to the influence of these outside
Environmental Groups- thereby disenfranchising a minority community and leaving them out
of the environmental justice debate. We feel this is a grave injustice to this community. We
have 'asked EPA to identify the invironmntal justice community. We believe that before EPA
takes any action on the Shintech issue, we need to know the name of the impacted or the
environmental justice community, and whose concern they are addressing.
e '.believe that the economic infusion that will be provided by Shintech to Freetown far
outweighs any environmental risks the facility may pose. Quite frankly, we believe it is
shamefully hypocritical of the Pat Melancons of St. James Parish to criticize the
environmental impact of Shintech when many of then- families provided the land for existing
ig^ustries to locate in the Parish and presently derive their livelihoods via employment in
existing industrial facilities. Perhaps Shintech opponents should have thought about the
environment when they were transferring property titles to other St. James Parish industries.
The group opposed to Shintech (a minority) and the professional outsiders have had your
attention now for many months. We feel it is time that the view of the majority community
be heard. We are asking that we have an opportunity to meet with you to express our views
concerning this matter. It is vital.
..... . . i *•*, , ........... . , , . , ,,, ......
May we hear from you soon as possible.
X;.
V
cc:
Sincerely,
Carol A. Gaudin
for the Citizens of Freetown,
.J!1;.!1! . • ' ' ;•',! " jijjifiv'i '!',;; ,!,;, i* ;„ :, ;]'",,:! A • •: ,;:„ .i1 '
St. James Parish, Louisiana
8236 Pleasant Hill
Convent, LA 70723
(504)865-5520
:i ; ';;!•! ' " i • '. ; :; • • •• • '. ';, (504) 562-7105
' ''i::!1 ' .'• ' ' , ' , ' i. V p ; <|V||i . . ;• •;
Governor Mike Foster
Mr. Ernest Johnson, Pres., Louisiana. NAACP
i ;' ; it'll :*i'lJi'iil!lit !.:/] i"1!,' '...r ' i-, • * , : i ... ' . •• ,P . ..... . .;
State Representative Melvin (Kip) Holden
State Representtive. Roy J. Quezaire
Senator Louis J. Lambert
Louisiana Legislative Black Caucus
V' ,' "' rl ' '"'"P'l'llj'jn IllMlll '"' il'1!.,.?^!'" ,'l'l"l l..!!'l I" 'i ' '"" , „ ,., , • " • ., • „„. ,'l I • ,1" I .,.
-------
Public Comment Period
April 15, 1997
Ms. Jane Saginaw, Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
Region VI
Fountain Place
12th Floor, Suite 1200
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Dear Ms. Saginaw:
We, the members of the community of Romeville, the community -in which Shintech, Inc. is
proposing to locate (1 1/2 miles from proposed site) and the 4th District Citizenry of St.
James Parish are in favor of the construction of the facility and we want our views to be
heard.
For the last year, we have had groups such as Greenpeace, the Tulane Environmental Law
Clinic, and the Louisiana Environmental Action Network swarm into our community
proposing to speak for us. They don't know us. They don't know what we want or what
we need for our community — and they have not asked us! These groups have come at the
urgings of a handful of local residents led by Pat Melancon and her organization, the St.
James Citizens for Jobs and the Environment. Although the facility will be located hi our
community (as opposed to residents like Pat melancon who live several miles away from the
site in Convent), these groups have neither consulted us nor invited us to share our thoughts
on the matter. We thought it was high time we speak for ourselves.
From the beginning we have been interested and very excited about the prospect of the
impact of $700 million from one facility being infused into our small community and what
that would mean for the people. A large portion of the 4th District of St. James Parish is
unemployed and underemployed (contrary to the image being spread about the community,
we have high school and college educated people) . We have just not gotten the jobs hi the
past. We have two Federal Housing projects hi the 4th District and within two years, we will
be faced with former Welfare recipients added to the unemployment lines. We realize that
as a community, we have much work to do and partners like Shintech affords us that
opportunity with the jobs and residual economic impact that would result.
-------
. illi i1 UNI! |l, .1 :< ; i' B!H 0" ! i'1- ,; '!',•„ '£
industry- See attached Sale of Properly).
.
We; would like to hear from you as soon as possible regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Carol A. Gaudin
for the Citizens of Freetown,
St. James Parish, Louisiana
""SSWJIIB"," .«'(.'
cc:
Carol Browner, A&st^ator; Environmental Protection Agency
EPA, Region IV
-------
Public Comment Period
50120
RECORD
-S PARISH. LA.
447 --
ACT OF CASH SALE OF PROPERTY
BY
ROSALIE F. NASSAR,
ANTOINETTE NASSAR, FREIDA
NASSAR BROUSSARD, JOYCE
BOURGEOIS wife of/and
MICHAEL R. NASSAR, NAHEEM
GEORGE HASSAR (a/k/a
George H. Nassar) and
JOSEPH S. NASSAR
• TO
THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF LOUISIANA
PARISH OF ST. JAMES
BE IT KNOWN, that on this «< / day of the month of
November in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred
and seventy-eight,
BEFORE ME, CHARLES S. BECNEL, a Notary Public,
duly commissioned and qualified, in and for the Parish of
St. James, State of Louisiana, therein residing, and in the
presence of the witnesses hereinafter named and undersigned, •
PERSONALLY CAME AND APPEARED:
- Rosalie F. Nassar, who declared under oath, that
she has been married but once and then to Naraatala
Nassar who is deceased; Antoinette Nassar who de-
clared, under oath, that she has been married
three times, first to Vincent Ancona from whom
she was divorced, secondly to William Cain from
whom she was divorced and thirdly to Gusta Veazey
from whom she was divorced, that she is not presently
married and that she uses the name, Antoinette
Nassar; Freida Nassar, who declared, under oath,
that she has been married but once and then to
Paul Broussard with whom she is laving and resid-
ing; Joyce Bourgeois Nassar, wife of/and' Michael
R. Nassar who declared under oath, that they have
been married but once and then to each other and
are presently living and residing together; Naheem .
George Nassar who declared under oath that he is
sometimes also known as George N. Nassar; and
Joseph S. Nassar, all persons of the full age of
majority (hereinafter sometimes jointly called
"Sellers"), all of whose mailing address for the
purposes of this Act of Sale is c/o Mrs. Rosalie
F. Kassar, Convent, Louisiana 70723t
said Sellers do by these presents grr.nt, bargain, sell, convey,
.transfer, assign, set over, abandon ai:d deliver with full war-
ranty of title and with full substitution and subrogation in
and to all rights of actions of warranty which said Sellers
have or may have against all preceding owners and vendors unto:
-------
448
Public Comment Period
'£ 448
THE B. ?. GOODRICH COMPANY, a corporation
under the laws of the State of New York, with a
^ailLraddress of 500 S. Main Street, Akron, Ohio
44318? herein represented by Irwin Gerber, its
Assistant Treasurer,.
Bribed property i-n full ownership, ta-wits
PARCEL C
CERTAIN PORTION OF GROUND, together with all
uildinas and improvements thereon, and all
.
attached hereto and made part hereof, and said
larcll C is more fully described and measures as
follows:
Beain at the intersection of Sections 16, 17, 27 and
28 1rilS-R4E, St. James Parish, Louisiana, thence
«8i6o 2!- OO1 W, along a line common to Sections
16 and 28 called the 40 Arpent Line, a f^tance
of 296 52 feet, to a point; thence N 64 e 17' 00 E,
°fd?Stonce of 331.38 feet, to a point, the point
*426-31-01) , a 300 foot wide
.
-SS w??h a survey of Ralph P. Fontcuberta, Jr.
dated November 16, 1978; thence N 31« 44 00 W
point of beginning of this tract. Containing
15.007 acres.
PARCEL D
•THAT CERTAIN l?Oia.'ION OF GROUND, together with a 11
Se buildings and improvements tAereon , -»J «JL°f
Se rights, ways, privileges, servitudes, appur-
'
-------
Public Comment Period
,_ 449
Ralph P. Fontcuberta, Jr. dated November 16, 1978,
attached hereto and made part hereof, and said
Parcel D is more fully described and measures as
follows:
Begin at the intersection of Sections 1"6, 17, 27
and 28, T11S-R4E, St. James Parish, Louisiana;
thence N 26° 25' 00" W, along a line common to
Sections 16 and 28 called the 40 Arpent Line, a
distance of 296.52 feet, to a point; thence N 64°
17' 00" E, a distance of 331.38 feet to a point;
thence N 64° 20' 00" E, 2550.48 feet to a point on
the easterly right of way of the proposed Louisiana
Highway No. 3125 (Project 1426-31-01), a 300 foot
wide highway right of way acquired by the Louisiana
Department of Highways by expropriation order re-
corded C.O.B. 197, folio 517; thence S 34° 01' 52"
E along the easterly line of said highway right of
. way 90.97 feet to the point of beginning; thence
N 64° 20' 00" E 1336.68 feet to a point; thence S
39° 11' 04" E 205.70 feet to a point; thence S 64°
20' 00° W 1355.36 feet along a line marked by
G.I.P.(s) in accordance with the survey of W. H.
Taylor, Jr., dated Kay 1,. 1978 marking the south
line of the property of Mrs. Namatala Hassar, et
al., to a point on the easterly right of way line
of said proposed Louisiana Highway 3125; thence N
34" 10'_52" H 202.15 feet along said highway right
of way line to the point of beginning. Containing
6.194 acres.
PARCEL E
In accordance with the. R. p. Fontcuberta, Jr. Survey
dated November 16, 1978 annexed hereto Parcels C
and D conveyed herein"are separated by, and front
on, Parcel "E", which is a 300 foot wide right of
way conveyed by Sellers herein by fee title, with
reservation of mineral rights, to the Louisiana
Department of Highways, for construction of pro-
posed Louisiana Highway 3125, and for the same
consideration herein expressed, Sellers convey to
Buyer, without warranty, but with full substitu-
tion and subrogation, all of their right, .title
and interest, excepting minerals as reserved, in
and to Parcel E, and agree that Parcels C and D
are intended to extend to and front upon said
highway right of way wherever it may be finally
located and constructed, and, in compliance here-
wxth, agree to execute any acts of correction re-
quired by Buyer.
Said Parcels C, D and E being portions of the same
property acquired by Sale dated December 3, 1932
filno for record on December 5, 1932 in C.O.B. 66.
folio 467 and by Judgment of Possession in the
Succession of Michael Nassar filed for record on
April 3, 1951 in C.O.B. 90, folio 381, records of
St. James Parish aad by Judgment of Possession in
the Succession of Samatala Nassar filed for record
on April 6, 1953 in C.O.B. 93, folio 164, records
of St. James Parish and further acquired by sale
from Nassar H. Wassar to Michael R. Nassar filed
for record on April 6, 1967 in C.O.B. 133, folio
171, records of St. James Parish.
-------
c
Public Comment Period ^
450
|his sale is made subject to'all recorded pipeline and power-
i:i:' •• 'line servitudes. - •
TO HAVE AHD TO HOLD, the above described proper-
ties unto the said Buyer, and Buyer's successors, heirs and
'""assigns forever.
Sellers reserve unto themselves all oil, gas and
other minerals in, on and under Parcels C and D hereby con-
veyed- but Sellers agree that, in the exercise of che mineral
rights reserved, Sellers shall have no right to conduct, and
no operations shall be conducted, upon the surface of'said
Parcels C and D, the exerciseof said rights being restric-
ted to directional drilling from locations on other lands
at depths of no less than two hundred (200*) feet under Parcels
C and D, ort by means of pooling and unitization with other
lands upon which such surface operations may be conducted.
Also, Sellers will have the exclusive right to
hunt for deer on Parcels C and D during the current Louisiana
deer hunting season, but said hunting rights will automatically
terminate, without notice to Sellers, at the end of the current
deer hunting season on January 14, 1979.
Sellers shall have the right to cut- and remove from
Parcels C and D any timber which they select for a period of
one (1} year from the date hereof, provided, however, that
said Sellers' rights may be- sooner terminated by Buyer by
ninety (90) days' written notice of cancellation and provided
v£» fur^er that. Buyer shall have the right at any time on and
after the date hereof to cut and remove all of said timber
and vegetation as Buyer may deem necessary to facilitate the
; exercise of the rights granted to it under the provisions of
the following paragraph hereof.
:Notwithstanding the reservation by Sellers of the
timber and hunting rights hereinabove set forth. Buyer and
its officers,'agents, employees, contractors and licensees
shall have the right at all times to conduct, on Parcels C
and D, surveys (including topographic surveys), tests and
analyses, including without limitation, the right to make
soil analyses and borings, to drive test pilings and to
excavate in connection with such tests and analyses and the
right to use as owner as much of the surface thereof, as may
be necessary or desirable.
.Sellers and Buyer did further declare that the
above described property is not the family home of any person.
This Act of Sale is made and accepted for and in
consideration of the prlee and—sma-»€-Two Hundred Twelve
Thousand Ten and 00/100/1^212,010.00) Dollars, cash, which
the said Buyer has well and truly paid, in ready and current
jnp,ney, to the said Sellers, who hereby acknowledge the
receipt thereof and grant full acquittance and discharge
therefor.
By reference to the mortgage certificate of the
Clerk of Court and ex-officio Recorder of Mortgages for St,
James Parish, annexed hereto, it does not appear that said
__property is subject to any mortgage, lien or other encum-
""brance.
The parties hereto waive the production of convey-
ance certificates and are aware that the above described
mortgage certificate has been procured, dated and signed.
-------
Public Comment Period
... 451
and will be re-dated and re-signed subsequent to the recorda-
tion of- this Act, and thereafter annexed heretoT and relieve
and release me. Notary, from any and all responsibility in
connection therewith.
All taxes due and exigible assessed against the
property herein sold have been paid through 1977 as per the
annexed tax•certificate. The 1978 taxes have been prorated
between the parties hereto and Sellers shall timely pay the
1978 taxes assessed against the property herein sold and
sfeall promptly thereafter furnish Buyer with written evi-
dence of payment.
THUS DONE AND PASSED, in triplicate original coun-
terparts, at Convent, Louisiana, -on the day; month and year _
herein first above written, in the presence of S'JwsiJ 2r".
ttn\*r, •?>, ajid -^n /T tf &. hCS // e W , competent witnesses,
who hereunto sign their names with the said appearers and me.
Notary, after reading the whole. '
WITNESSES•TO.ALL SIGNATURES J
RO§AlE F. NASSAR
ANTOINETTE NASSAR
MXCHAElr-R. NASSAK— ..
EEM GEORGE _...^_^^
(a/k/a George N. Nassar)
» :
NAS'SXR
THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY
IRWIN GERBER,
Its Assistant Treasurer
NOTARY PUBLIC
-------
Public Comment Period
3,3
Page 2, The News-Examiner, Thtirsday, April 24, 1897]
IK 1 II
LETTERS
TO THE EDITOR
>' \
i, ill' I, ,'f!1'
Dear Editor:
''Where is the Environmental Justice?"
We are the residents of Freetown, a small unincorporated
\frican-American community in St. James Parish, Louisiana.
)ur families have lived in Freetown and St. James Parish for
lenerations.
The purpose of this letter is to express our views on the pro-
josed Shintech facility in St James Parish. For those who may
adf know, Shintech wishes to build a $700 million dollar
solyvinyl chloride facility on a 2,400 acre tract of land in St.
James. For about one year, we have witnessed groups such as
Sreenpeace, the Tulane Environmental Law Clinic, and the
Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) descend
ipon St. James like a plague of locusts. Together with a handful
jf local residents led by Patricia Melancon of the St. James
Citizens for Jobs and the Environment, these groups and indi-
viduals have naaae"it"theirtbp priority to prevent Shintech from
receiving the requisite environmental discharge permits.
One of the most powerful weapons these groups utilize in
their struggle is us - the people of Freetown - who they portray
as the poor, pitiful, exploited, and environmentally overbur-
dened African-American populace of a rural Louisianaparish.
Although our community is buttressed up against the Shintech
property (as opposed to residents like Pat Melancon who live
SSveral miles away from the site in Convent), these groups have
neither consulted us nor invited us to share our thoughts on the
matter. Therefore, for the record and in the interest of
Freetown, we thought it high time to speak for ourselves.
First, -we resent Pat Melancon and company's use of race as
a tool to intimidate federal and state regulators into kowtowing
id their demands not to permit Shintech. These people, many of
wEom'we" have known for decades, have never once expressed
an interest or concern in helping us address the issues impor-
tant to our community such as crime, poverty, health care, raw
sewage, and pollution from other industries. Now, when it is
convenient, these people have done a complete about-face, hung
up their sheets, and have become modern day abolitionists -
anointing themselves our champions and protectors. We find
jlie exploitiye use of the color of our skin and our socio-economic
condition sickening'and Insulting. Once the Shintech contro-
versy is resolved, will these people continue to be concerned for
pur well-being or will they revert to their previous attitudes of
indifference and ostracism?
"'; ;'? '''{Second, as AfricanrAmericana, we do not appreciate groups
aueh'asthe Tulane Environmental Law Clinic, Greenpeace, and
LEAH swarming into our communities along the Mississippi
River, feigning concern for our health and safety, receiving me-
dia attention, doing everything possible to thwart economic and
industrial growth, and then, as quickly as they arrived, depart -
leaving the community in the same or worse condition in
they found it All these activities are usually undertaken wij
out the input of the people most affected, namely us. In all hd
esty, we wish these carpetbagger groups would just leave al
let us decide for ourselves what is in our best interests.
Third, we believe that the economic infusion that will I
provided by Shintech to Freetown far outweighs any envird
mental risks the facility may pose. Quite frankly, we believd
is shamefully hypocritical of the Pat Melancons of St. Ja
Parish to decry the environmental impact of Shintech v
many of then- families provided the land for existing indust
to locate in the Parish and presently derive their livelihoods
employment in existing industrial facilities. Perhaps ShintJ
opponents should have thought about the environment 1
they were transferring property titles to other St James Pa
industries. . . ,
Finally, there has been much discussion about
Environmental Justice issues surrounding the permitt
Shintech. In our minds, Environmental Justice means cot
nity empowerment, community participation in the dec
making process, and economic opportunity. We do not unc
stand how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency can *
acterize itself as an advocate of Environmental Justice wh
allow itself to be bullied, deliberately deceived, and overly-r
enced by groups that do not represent the people most afied
As for us, we support Shintech and welcome its arrival
our community. Of all the industries to come to St. J
Parish, Shintech is the first company whose officials tool
time to visit us, their potential Freetown neighbors,, expl
their operational processes and employment opportunities, I
actively desire our advice on how to be the best cprpoj
neighbor possible. These visits, coupled with our own indei
• dentinquiries, have allowed us to sift through the ps
ence and misinformation being spread by facility o
order to arrive at our own conclusions. .
Shintech will be good for Freetown. Although nobody
ever bothered to ask us, we see Shintech as providing hope
financial security for many Freetown families. We decline
Melancon and company's offer to speak for us and elect to
resent ourselves. /
/s/Gladys Mai
I!
-------
? -5
Public Comment Period''--'*—•>
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Name
Address
Phone #
Community
-------
Public Comment Period.
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Name Address Phone # Community
>' l! "II
'"'lillilli,
PV I
i:',,,i,ili .' .r1 ,',.! ,,.,!•':PI. , .Mi1,' ' I,!'.'!
J ' ' *.:•• C )' I lflt K;i> •' I'M
-------
Public Comment Period
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Name Address Phone # , Community
-------
ilii!;!
Public Comment Period
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Name Address Phone # Community
WYU
^*-
XZXT>-»-AS.
aaX
1
- \
. 39
a
v
- 73 Of
L-O
nt/e
^
0
7
J, (T
-------
Public Comment Period
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Name Address Phone # Community
-------
KJ, i «: ,;i • 'i
'«, Kl'l •', ' : " .••JWfcW.illK. iiSlilillk ;U
Public Comment Period QJ^.
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Name Address Phone# Community
6
2^
Km
V
xf .
\
li
^
RlU
"to* (51 3 \63-J. ?
9/07 te.i-fe
mem*
5^75"
• • •••
- 73.7;
C. f.^rr . r
%&
/I A/
-------
Public Comment Period •
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Name Address JPhone # Community
f «?;)•>.
( .(lot ofo%
I
f
«-
•^>L,:~lJ^^^
/ ,Vi.i-
/,-//
i.
fj'O OO
C-.i Si-
-
Si Tc
>?. '•
°°
f ( D
"
C J
Ll, /A
C~-;
r
-J ^ '
1
i: A
lf I
5
IT
TT
-------
Public Comment Period <3-
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Address Phone # Community
wa.
S/,
I/
.97^
-------
Public Comment Period
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
has to offer.
Name Address Phone # Community
l-larns
Nar-
m
5osPhHS4
-V--
L-A
^^ ___
Sf- .Jcr^ n.c.0
S4-
-------
...... : iiHiiii: •"( > !l1" ::: iiiiii1 urii.
,. '..' 'IS'!'!,} : ,.
;II;K ..... i ..... iT iiiiiii!- iiK' ........ »u • ........ »•?< ..... ; :!!!1:: : IE,! ...... [
!• •'',•' (till1! ' !'"' "." •'";!'" :,! 'Si1 ' "" .,: "
•" »* • -;ii is;*1 -f vswmi!iw iiiiBiii re; I
'IVi ,;>
Public Comment Period
I am interested in Employment and Business Opportunities Shintech
'<;, " :W'! if" ' ii "'„ '"i 'lr" i "! •• !. ' • • . .• .:•, ••<:,» • • > i •'., .",• ', . • •.
has to offer.
Address Phone # Co.mpiunity
.f:
•ii
.' ;;;,';! " ;' V J: \ ••,'.^1 , . f
"
a. SI "'',:!,I
-------
Public Comment Period ~~*e _T
To: NEJAC
From: Azania Hey wood-James, Coordinator
Citizens for Environmental Justice, Inc.
Subject: Affected Communities Living Near DOE Facilities
Date: May 14, 1997
This is a formal request to NEJAC to examine the role and responsibility of EPA relative
to the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons production sites, particularly the
Savannah River Site and the Los Alamos Laboratory.
We feel that People of Color living near these sites are not included nor integrated
adequately in the stakeholder participation processes at these sites. Our voices are not
heard or acknowledged.
We need assistance in Savannah, Georgia because we live downstream from SRS; we
live near a paper mill and many chemical companies. There are environmental justice
issues that must be investigated and confronted for resolution.
The nuclear issue is a serious one - exposure-to low and high level radiation and the
health impacts are crucial areas to be addressed. We need NEJAC to examine how
EPA can help these affected communities.
-------
r
Public Comment Period.
5/15/97
"" smith/Greenpeace
Statement: to NEOAC on Pulp & Paper-
On behalf of Greenpeace, I want to thank iro JAC _ metnbers for
aSopting the Indigenous Subcommittee - s^esolutxon^^
' ' " .....
paper ' "regulations "known as ' the ' "Cluster" ..... Rule . »
to foiled ' up ' on this resolution by underscoring the
^
Proposal
urgency of this issue;
AS NEJAC met here this week,
^i^^^S
Kq the White House next week, probably
ul andae*. Most of the industry is already
pulp
this process.
"The second option, option «B^ would «quire t
oxvojen as a1 substitute for chlorine dioxide in tne
SXir chemical processing but would allow chlorine
thlir Sal bleSching proce^. About *o% of the industry is
ijising this process - -
Both of these options will result in water pollution containing
HoSin: <3BlyaP*CF process, uses no ejloarine cog°uj d|c^ p
tlierefore produces no dioxin corrtamination. A:f^o"|ht°° „ S
pttente-d tnis process in X97O, only one pulp mill in the U.S.
SSes this process. About 30 mills world wide use the TCP
pocess, including Sodra Cell, Europe's largest pulp producer.
- Count less' ......... studies' by" ..... gdvernment '"and " industry have' "consistently
shown that .dioxin is one of the most dangerous human «atfs
"•••substances' known to science. Dioxin. was .most ^^
5¥guman 'cSrciiibgen by the World Health Organization.
aleo linked to a multitude of health Affects ranging
reproductive and immune disorders to endometriosis and diabetes
te'
"EPA ahd; the' paper industry hve ' acknowledged the
tiaper rnaSstry ' "s cetieral role in polluting rivers, lakes and
streams with dioxin and other chlorinated pollutants.
Additional studies have demonstrated that people living near pulp
and paper mills are among the highest exposed Americans to
dioxinT More than 90% of .this exposure is through food,
IS;:'
f "fS
.1 ii
-------
Public Comment Period •
especially, dioxin contaminated. fish.
These studies, also show that Native Americans. African Americans
and Asian Americans living near these mills are among those who
are the most exposed. Due to economic, cultural and geographic
circumstances, these communities'have been found by the EPA to
eat 100 to 300 times the fresh water fish tha't "average"
Americans consume. •
According to the EPA, the only other known subpopulation exposed
to similar levels of dibxin is nursing infants. The EPA also
found that the breast milk levels of dioxiri like PCBs from Native
American women in these communities was up to 1O times higher
than average.
In addition, to testing the President' s commitment to his
executive order on environmental justice, this issue tests the
Administration's commitment to their most recent executive order-
(#13045) on protecting children from environmental risks.
U.S. Census data also show that African. American cotnmrun.ities in
the southeast U.S. are disproportionately located near'pulp and
paper mills using chlorine based bleaching processes.
Because the EPA's decision will go to the White House for final
approval on Monday, we urge uEtTAC to send copies of its
resolution to the white House asking- them to honor their, own
executive orders by. forcing the EPA to consider a third option,
TCP, in their final decision.
No risk that is avoidable is acceptable. Like lead iii gasoline,
chlorine in the paper making .process represents serious but
unnecessary risks to communities and workers. By switching to a
safer1 svibetitute s-ueh. as oxygen., we can. continue making paper
without the pollution•resulting from chlorine based paper making
processes.
Thank you again.
-------
Public Comment Period
WAtM QUANTITY:''
1, The water budget for Rolling Stone Lake is incomplete- most particularly since the drawdown
is going to affect its incoming streams. The water budget being used has been pieced together
?om various years in the 1980's and omits important data-e.g. all of the incoming waters are not
•' , ;'.:;Hclude4 n^feS^Pj^ingto do a complete and coordinated study?
:' h" I'/llliI Illl n IIKiM' ' I i ! "'"' 'i! ''i ,"! IB I,"1 !I|1M 'i, "" .on!1! '"i, II, III"',,1" '»,:•• ",ii,'i, *", 'i "'/i''I!",,:' I1!' liil'i'iil'l1,!.' '"I!1' " JIUlll.i.l ' ' 'U! '" I I"111!'1,! •' ," ',•' ll, ' •" «l i • ,r • 'III1:: 1S>97 "Pdate to the EER shows an upgradient over the orebody on its west end.
J**™™™ data it was located on the east end of the orebody directly above Little Sand Lake.
W* raw 5 e!d dala has bepn obtained to change the location of the upgradient?
8' I^the.ttchnicjl1 "^ngs with the DNR and all of the other experts, the bedrock hydraulic
conductivity has not been resolved. CMC claims that the fractures in the bedrock at the orebody
TOSatolBjM m<* an? not contiguous. Down hole camera data analysis is available today
YOfild prove or disprove this statement The size of the fractures and the amount of flow
.' '1 llll'ISS': JIPIlllll .<
-------
Public Comment Period
. could also be determined. Will the DNR require this technology to be used? If not, why not?
9. Two crown pillar hydrological studies have been submitted by CMC. Both have been rejected
by the DNR. What is the present status of the crown pillar hydrological studies?
10. The Early Wisconsin till/saprolite pump test completed in 1994 has had no review by the DNR
or other interested parties at the technical meetings in Madison. When will a review be completed?
11. CMC's current plans do not include the monitoring of groundwater over the orebody. Will the
DNR require continuous monitoring wells at this location? If not, why not?
12. Are the various studies cited and proposed for surface water analysis and mitigation available
for examination? If not, when will they be available?
13. The October, 1984 water table map of the project has been reviewed and has been disagreed
upon by the experts at many of the technical meetings in Madison. To date this has not been
resolved Will the DNR request anew water table map? If not, why not?
WATER QUALITY:
14. Waste characterization work is incomplete. Will the DNR know all of the reagents used in the
flotation processes for zinc, copper, lead, gold and silver, including their quantities, and what goes
into solution coming out of the TMA? In addition, will the DNR require a study that mimics the
entire flotation process, simultaneously using the combination of all of the metals, reagents and
chemicals that are coming from the Crandon orebody? If not, why not?
15. What about the backfilled mine which will contain 22 million tons of tailings plus all of the
reagents, etc. that the TMA will contain ? Are there any plans to remove the pore water from the
reflooded area or to fill all of the passageways, shafts, working areas, etc.? In the EIR, CMC uses
the term "tight filling." What is "tight filling?" Also, what equipment will be left in the mine?
16. Pyrite recovery studies have been done by CMC and found by them that pyrite recovery is
unprofitable. Pyrite recovery studies should be reconsidered because of the long term problems
associated with the tailings ponds and the unprotected backfilled mine. Currently there is no
technology to prevent or control acid mine drainage. Will the DNR require additional pyrite
recovery studies?
17. After researching volumes of data and confirming this with the Mineral Policy Center in
Washington D.C., we have learned that there could be radioactive hotspots in this orebody. These
hotspots will be treated the same as all other wastes. Why?
18. CMC's EER shows that contaminant transport modeling over the orebody will not be
performed. This is unacceptable. Will the DNR require this modeling?
19. The process which was used to determine the location of the proposed Tailings Management
Area (TMA) needs to be re-evaluated. An explanation needs to be provided as to why this
location was chosen when: a) this is the highest surface land in the Pickerel Basin; b) this is a
recharge area for the basin; c) this is a groundwater divide which sends water in four different
directions; d) this is die source of our drinking water and e) it is surrounded by Hemlock Creek,
Swamp Creek and a burr oak swamp. We want to have raw field data provided to us as to why all
of the other 40 plus locations were not chosen for the TMA.
-------
r
ill ill III
fih V'H .i(V! ,J fVI.
[rf''h'f'|:' 'I ! *!::'^
........... fi, ........
O
Public Comment Period- (
20. Tlie TMA cap and liner described in section 4.2.5.10 of the EIR (revised March 17,1997) is
.as iollows: "Geo/syntec (Dec. 1996) the HDPB geomembrane liner and cap at the TMA facility
should function as designed for a longtime (e.g.hundreds of years) without deterioration in
performance." This is all that is said. The chemical nature and properties of the liner are never
detailed Also, what are the effects of subsiding over time, temperature and season on the
'i'ljiiiju'f ty! (" ; rrwi't,,t»i?. •; i. j->" : "'' ••"' : • • ^-! J • r •'• '•" "" •"•• '•"• •' ill';"-1" •'*••>'• ' "" '*>•'• !
cpmpbsition of the liner?
'"ZjL 'Thp'originai plan fofthe TMA 'liner called for S'fwt'oTnataraJ'clay' liner We are now down
to a GCL which Is 1/4 inch of sodium pentonite plus 12 inches of screened Early Wisconsin till
and a 60 ml. plastic sheet. This is supposed to last thousands of years, but no one can show us a
single facility to date using this method which has not contaminated the groundwater. CMC is
asking us to accept unproven teclinology to protect our groundwater, surface water and drinking
water. Is this acceptable to the DNR?
22, lylercury level studies in groundwater and sediments of Little Sand Lake, Creek 12-09 and
Rolling Stone Lake should be performed using the latest low level measurement technique. Is the
D!NR planning to do these studies? If not, why not?
•' """ l>r;"!i ...... i.'iiiiii :'•:•• •, •• , ;. • i":,1!1!:; ••"•.-< ' f:>r:i: '• >. .,*,.•.. !.•;.: ,j ..... \ , > ' ;••„•, ,-j ..!•[. i .1 . . >. iruB'
23. There has been no collection of baseline data lor the private wells in the Town of Ainsworth
pertaining to heavy metals. Will such baseline data be collected? If not, why not? Also, some
town residents have wells which are located on and in bedrock and produce low volumes of water.
What measures will be taken to prevent impacts to these vveils?
'Pi1'""' : "'I: if "I'lHiii, '"'"""i, , "'/i' r,ii '• ir.:" i;iii:::ii:]« i'» i : ' •". : "' \> ",. ' », i1',;1 .1. „' ;1 ':iii.:,.,; ' N| ,:•"!;, p1 , ij'iN1'!1; : ' ;" f ,:,'•' ' - i: • ',i i ,, •' ' if i: ,' , i,;i: ,' I'm
j;'M6pMI)W'M"ODELINrG: ..... ' ''"'"..' '' ........ .".'.'. ...... '.'" ' ', .' " '". ,' .'".. ...... "'
24. The current Mod Flow model has been modified to the maximum without any corresponding
peer review. We believe that this is not a proven way of modeling. Is the DNR willing to accept
this unproven method of modeling?
25. In the geological cross section 1-1, which is south of Swamp Creek, CMC made an
^siiSnipti"on to change "this cross section from coarse outwash to fine outwash based on drill hole
No^ RR-2j because the model was not converging^ Additional raw field data with drillholes needs
to be qblained (to ' verily this assumption inasmuch as drill hole No. RR-2 is located considerably
north of cross section I-I. Will the £)|JR request raw field data? '
1" ' ' ' l ' ' ' '
^S-lS, and^ 13-02^ which are trout reproducing creeks and ^springholes feeding Roiling
': 'v'ption? ie.''^^11 riot being use'di in the'modet" ' Wny'ribt?''1'lts1 '"^ere' raw field data which shows"thit
ffiese springholes will not be impacted?
. »<", . ...... iiji,;" .i'laiiiii Jt'J'Si 'iiiiiiiLiTfi'tiiiUfl ..... !3'kc)
of1984
This is the foundation of the model. This data has not been agreed upon or accepted by the DNR
bflhe other interested parties at the technical meetingsin Madison. When will the DNR revisit this
j^Jssue^ , ,j ,ii|;,,i/ . ii;: i|i;, ,,;iii i,
model concerning precipitation which is being collected from the
-------
Public Comment Period
North and South Pelican weather stations north of Rhinelander. The evaporation studies are from
the Rainbow Flowage in the west central part of the state. In 1986 both Exxon and the DNR used
the data from the I^iona weather station. Why is the data from the T-aona site not being used this
time around? Better yet, why has a weather- station not been located at the project site?
29. CMC shows in its contaminant transport model lor particle tracking in the reflooded mine that
the particle comes out of bedrock at the west end in approximately 600 years [Practical Worst
Case (PWC) scenario]. "Die particle was placed at the bottom of layer 6. Why wasn't it placed at
the top of layer 5 which is beneath the crown pillar? Is the DNR going to rerun the model with the
particle at the top of layer 5?
AJR QUALITY:
30. The air quality in our community is pristine, per your DNR 1995 Air Quality Study. For
example, particulate matter (total suspended particles or TSP) has a numerical reading of 9
according to the air monitor which was installed at the site where Creek 12-09 enters Rolling Stone
l
-------
(Ill III
I HI I
Public Comment Period .
transportation and routes will be used to transport these reagents and chemicals? Local
„'' communities will need to have personnel who are properly trained in the case of an accident en
route. Who will be responsible for training these people?
So, in summary, we feel that the socioeconomic issue has not been addressed. Will the DNR
require that anew and complete sociocconomic study of the Town of Ainsworth be performed?
If not, why not?
GENERAL:
3§. Cui-rentry Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd of Australia (BHP) has been granted an exploration
permit near Bishop Lake by the Town of Nashville. This location is approximately 1/2 mile north
of the Town of Ainsworth and approximately one mile west of the proposed Crandon mine. Are
there going to be any studies by the DNR as to the possible cumulative impacts?
39. The wastewater treatment plant will remove contaminants that cannot be transported to the
Wisconsin River. .These contaminants will be placed into the TMA. The TMA will leak forever
into pur groundwater. Why is it acceptable to put these contaminants into our groundwater and
drinking water, but not acceptable to put them into the Wisconsin River?
40. In EIR Section 2.2 (revised September 29, 1995) CMC is requesting an exemption from
testing for "organic substances, turbidity, radioactivity, asbestos, fluoride, bacteria, color,
corrosivity, foaming agents and odor." Has any raw field data been submitted to verify that these
items wjll not occur at the proposed Crandon project? Is this requested exemption valid?
41. Currently suite groundwater quality protection standards allow a 1200 ft. compliance boundary
in areas where mining wastes will be stored. No other activity or a private citizen is allowed this,
including hazardous waste facilities. Does the DNR support this excessive compliance boundary?
. I ,; oii'ii! ,i ,,;, „
------- |