A Report by a Panel of the
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

June 2002
             MODELS FOR CHANGE:
                   EFFORTS BY FOUR
                 STATES TO ADDRESS
         ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
              NATIONAL ACADEMY OF
              PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

-------
ABOUT THE ACADEMY              ,

The National Academy of Public Administration is an independent, nonprofit organi-
zation chartered by Congress to improve governance at all levels:  local, regional,
state, national, and international.  The Academy's membership of more than 500
Fellows includes public managers and scholars, business executives and labor lead-
ers, current and former cabinet officers, members of Congress, governors, mayors,
state legislators, and diplomats.  Since its establishment in 1967, the Academy has
assisted hundreds of federal agencies, congressional committees, state and local gov-
ernments, civic organizations, and institutions overseas through problem solving, ob-
jective research,  rigorous analysis, information sharing, developing  strategies for
change, and connecting people and ideas.

Most reports and papers issued by Academy panels respond to specific requests
and needs of public agencies. Projects also address governmentwide and broader
societal topics identified by the  Academy.  In addition to government institutions,
businesses, foundations, and nonprofit organizations support the Academy.

-------
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 12,2002/
Contact Bill Shields or Suellen Keiner, (202) 347-3190
Academy Study Highlights Promising Efforts and Needed Improvements
in Addressing Environmental Justice at the State Level
State agencies must adopt performance, outcome, and accountability measures in order to reduce
community exposures to environmental hazards according to a; new study issued by a Panel of the
National Academy of Public Administration. The Panel studied four states that have utilized a
variety of innovative approaches to address environmental justice issues, but the approaches so
far have produced few tangible improvements for disadvantaged communities.

"The Panel utilized the same framework for this analysis as for our first report on EPA's efforts
to address environmental justice in permitting. We found many of the same concerns," said Dr.
Philip Rutledge, Chair of the Panel of Academy Fellows that issued this study. Rutledge is
Professor Emeritus at Indiana University's School of Public and Environmental Affairs. The
Panel specifically focused on four areas for its analysis: leadership and accountability, permitting
procedures, reducing risks, and public participation.

Models for Change: Efforts by Four States to Address Environmental Justice, is designed to
assist the public, as well as state and local agencies, in identifying and considering various
approaches to addressing environmental justice concerns. The report provides information on the
legislation, policy, procedures, and tools that Indiana, Florida, New Jersey, and California have
used to address the widely recognized fact that some low-income and people-of-color
communities are exposed to significantly greater environmental and public health hazards than
other communities.

The Panel recommends that state environmental justice programs should:

•      articulate a clear commitment to environmental justice; formalize that commitment
       through executive orders, state policies, administrative orders, or similar
       pronouncements; establish measurable goals and accountability procedures; integrate
       environmental justice into the core mission and operation of their agencies; and provide
       information and training to communities, local governments, businesses, and academic
       institutions to improve their capacity for addressing environmental justice issues

•      conduct a comprehensive examination of applicable state constitutional provisions, as
       well as state environmental, administrative, civil rights, and public health laws, to identify
       authorities for addressing environmental justice in core state environmental programs,
       including enforcement; train permitting staff to address environmental justice issues; and
       provide permit writers  with practical tools and information necessary to  execute their
       responsibilities

-------
•      eliminate backlogs for permit renewals which provide an opportunity to incorporate
       recently adopted pollution control requirements, account for new information on
       environmental hazards, mandate pollution prevention, improve Operating and      '
       maintenance practices, and address other concerns of disadvantaged communities
                                              ,
•      identify and reduce environmental hazards in communities with high exposure levels and
       produce measurable improvements by utilizing screening tools that account for race,
       income, and other relevant factors, and by targeting enforcement on pollution sources in
       these communities                      ;

•      enhance public participation by training state staff to value and utilize local knowledge;
       engage high-risk communities more frequently and effectively in state programs; increase
       the effectiveness of advisory committees by [clarifying their missions, establishing
       timelines, and providing adequate support; and expand public participation in other
       agency programs, such as enforcement and standard setting

This second report is part of the Panel's ongoing research on environmental justice. Its first
report, Environmental Justice in EPA Permitting: Reducing Pollution in High-Risk Communities
Is Integral to the Agency's Mission, was released in December 2000. Next, the Academy will
work with the International City and County Management Association to produce a study
analyzing the role of local land-use and zoning practices in creating, addressing, or alleviating
environmental justice concerns.                  ;

In addition to Rutledge, the Fellows who served on .the Panel were Jim Barnes, Professor at the
Schools of Law and Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University; Jonathan Howes,
Professor of Planning and Public Policy at the Univjersity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill;
Valerie Lemmie, City Manager, Cincinnati, Ohio; David Mora, City Manager, Salinas,
California; James Murley, Professor at  the Joint Cehter for Environmental and Urban Problems,
Florida Atlantic University; and Eddie Williams, President, Joint Center for Political and
Economic Studies.

To obtain a copy of Models for Change: Efforts by Four States to Address Environmental Justice,
please contact Bill  Shields at (202) 347-3190, ext. 3014, or visit the Academy's web site at
www.napawash.org.

##                                            ;

-------
A Report by a Panel of the
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

June 2002
              MODELS FOR CHANGE:
                   EFFORTS BY FOUR
                 STATES TO ADDRESS
          ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
                   Panel
                Philip Rutledge, Chair
                 A. James Barnes
                 Jonathan Howes
                 Valerie Lemmie
                   David Mora
                  James Murley
                  Eddie Williams

-------
                                                             Officers of the Academy

                                              Mortimer L. Downey, Chair of the Board
                                                     Carl W. Stenberg, III, Vice Chair
                                                      Robert J. O'Neill, Jr., President
                                                        Cora Prifold Beebe, Secretary
                                                         Sylvester Murray, Treasurer
                                                                        Project Staff

              Suellen Terrill Reiner, Director, Center for the Economy and the Environment
                                                              William Shields, Editor
                                          ;       Frances Dubrowski, Senior Consultant
                                          I            Ann E. Goode, Senior Consultant
                                                       Lee Paddock, Senior Consultant
                                          I            Mark Hertko, Research Assistant
                                                     Stacey Keaton, Research Assistant
                                                 Veronica Lenegan, Research Assistant
                                               Charlene Walsh, Administrative Assistant
                                                               Megan Bonner, Intern
                                                                 Anne Emory, Intern
The views expressed in this document are those' of the Panel alone.  They do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Academy as an institution.

This document was funded by the Office of Environmental Justice of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency under Cooperative Agreement Number EQ-82906401-0.
                                          i
Academy Project Number 1969
                                         ii

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD	vii


PANEL MESSAGE	*


LIST OF ACRONYMS	•	xiil


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	!


CHAPTER I-INTRODUCTION	15


CHAPTER 2 - FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING STATE PROGRAMS          19


CHAPTER 3 - LEGAL AUTHORITIES TO ADDRESS
             ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE	23

      National Environmental Policy Act	24
      Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964	27
      Executive Order 12898	27
      General Discretion of an Administrative Agency	*	28
      Federal Water Pollution Control Act	•	28
      The Clean Air Act	30
      Resource Conservation and Recovery Act	32


CHAPTER 4 - INDIANA	37

      Findings	37
      Background	37
      Department Structure	••	•••	38
      IDEM's Environmental Justice Program	••••	38
      Analysis of the Indiana Program	44
      Recommendations	•	.....46
                                    ui

-------
 CHAPTER 5 - FLORIDA	51

       Findings	'	51
       Background	..51
       Impetus for the Program	52
       Florida Environmental Equity and Justice Commission	52
       Demographic Analysis	54
       Center for Environmental Equity and Justice	55
       Brownfield Legislation	58
       Center for Brownfield Rehabilitation	j	59
       Community Environmental Health Programs	59
       Everglades Restoration	59
       Analysis of the Florida Program	j.	61
       Recommendations	63
                                         I

 CHAPTER 6-NEW JERSEY	67

       Findings	,	67
       Background	i,	67
       Overview of the Program	i	68
       Advisory Council	;	68
       State Policy	,	.69
       Rule-Making Initiative	i	70
       Comprehensive State-Community Partnership Initiative	77
       Analysis of the New Jersey Program	i	78
       Recommendations	.81
                                         i


CHAPTER 7 - CALIFORNIA	:....	85

       Findings	\	85
       Background	....i	85
       Agency Structure	'.	86
       Impetus for the Programs	:	88
       Environmental Justice Legislation	89
       Agency Programs	93
       Analysis of California Program	109
       Recommendations	114


CHAPTER 8 - LESSONS LEARNED	119
                                       iv

-------
      Leadership and Accountability	119
      Permitting	,	;	127
      Setting Priorities to Reduce Pollution	131
      Public Participation	134


APPENDICES

Appendix A: List of Interviewees	141
Appendix B: Panel and Staff Biographies	143
Appendix C: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Proposed Rule	147
Appendix D: Basis and Background: New Jersey Department of Environmental
            Protection Environmental Equity Screening Model	159
Appendix E: Environmental Justice Forums - 2002	167
Appendix F: Policies and Actions  for Environmental Justice	169
Appendix G: Environmental Justice Task Force -
            the California Environmental Justice Compact	183
Appendix H: Memorandum from W.  Hickox, California EPA	185


FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Detailed Summary of  Panel Recommendations	20
Figure 5.1: Florida Environmental Equity and Justice Commission	54
Figure 5.2: Clearwater Florida - Linking Brownfield Redevelopment and
           Environmental Justice	56
Figure 6.1: N.J. DEP's Model for Environmental Equity Screening	72
Figure 6.2: New Jersey's Proposed Rule for Expanding the Community Participation
           Process of Environmental Equity	74
Figure 7.1: Organizational  Structure of California EPA	87
Figure 7.2: California Environmental Justice Working Group and Advisory Group	92
Figure 7.3: MATES II: Air Quality Characterization on the Neighborhood Level	106
Figure 7.4: Distribution of Toxic  Air Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin	107
Figure 7.5: Estimated Average South Coast Air Basin Risk Levels	 108
BIBLIOGRAPHY	189

-------
VI

-------
                                     FOREWORD


Fairness, justice,  and equity are critical to good public administration..  They are as important
and integral to the administration of public policies and programs as efficiency, economy,  and
effectiveness.   Recognizing this,  the National Academy of Public  Administration's  (the
Academy) Board  of Directors created  the Standing Panel on Social Equity in Governance.  The
Standing Panel defines  social equity as "the  fair,  just, and equitable management of  all
institutions  serving  the  public directly  or  by  contract  and the  fair,  just,  and  equitable
distribution of public services and implementation of public policy."

This report, Models for  Change: Efforts by Four States to Address Environmental Justice, is
the Panel's  second report on environmental justice and part  of its  ongoing research efforts.
The report is  designed to  assist the public, state and local agencies, and others interested in
environmental justice by identifying state initiatives that can serve as models of best practices.
It documents and analyzes how four states — Indiana, Florida, New Jersey, and California —
have  addressed  environmental  justice  to   achieve  their  objectives  through   policy  and
programmatic approaches, tools, and mechanisms.   Each state has  adopted some unique
approaches  to environmental justice  issues, such as  adopting new statutes, issuing  executive
orders,  and establishing advisory commissions.   This  variety provides valuable information
about how states  and localities can respond effectively to environmental justice concerns.

The Academy hopes  that the state  practices analyzed here will serve as models to  build
effective  environmental justice  programs at  state and local  levels.    Coupled  with the
Academy's  prior study  on how  the Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA)  can address
environmental  justice  concerns  through  permitting,   this  report  can  provide  a  better
understanding of how policies, programs, and practices related to environmental justice can be
strengthened to produce  results that address these concerns appropriately.

In conducting this study, the Panel received excellent assistance from the participating states,
EPA headquarters and regional offices, and representatives of community groups and regulated
industry.   All those  interviewed gave  generously of  their time and  expertise to  assist the
Academy's  researchers,  and we greatly appreciate  their help.  We also thank EPA's Office of
Environmental Justice for its financial support, and our Panel members and staff who devoted
their time and thought to this very important project.
                                                Robert J. O'Neill, Jr.
                                                President
                                            VII

-------
viii

-------
                                  PANEL MESSAGE
Equity and justice are at the heart of effective public administration.  The implementation of
laws must  ensure  that those most in need of protection receive  it and that government uses
inventive, responsive, and accountable approaches to provide that protection.

The issue of environmental justice brings together, in a very significant way, critical good
governance issues that resonate for all of us. These include:

    •   reducing pollution in areas experiencing high levels of exposure to hazards, and
       the potentially higher rates of adverse health outcomes that may result from that
       exposure1
    •   informed public participation
    •   enhanced community right-to-know procedures
    •   adequate data on health - disaggregated by race, income, and location - to allow
       for  appropriate  analysis  and research on  the  relationship of environmental
       stressors to public health
    •   better emissions data and  monitoring to identify the actual exposures that some
       communities experience

With the completion of this second study, the  Panel is very encouraged that  some states are
interested and  willing to take action to address the widely recognized fact  that some low-
income and people-of-color communities are  exposed to significantly greater environmental
and public health  hazards than  other communities.  These  communities also suffer  what a
recent  Institute  of Medicine report termed "double jeopardy" because they  have a higher
"frequency and magnitude"  of  exposure to emissions  and are less  able  to deal with these
hazards as a result of their limited knowledge  of exposures and  disenfranchisement from the
political process.2

During the course  of this project, the Panel learned that many of the issues raised have national
implications that transcend the  scope of this  report,  but are critical to successful problem
solving.  For example, state level data on health disaggregated by race,  income, and location
would  enhance the states' ability to address environmental justice problems.  The lack of this
data is a national issue.

Approximately 25 percent  of   preventable  illnesses  worldwide  are attributable  to  poor
environmental quality.3   It has  been estimated that, in the United States, there are 50,000
premature deaths and $40 to $50 billion in health-related costs  annually  associated with air
pollution alone.4 Poor air quality also contributes to respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease,
and cancer.5 A recent study also has shown that long-term exposure to  air pollution in many of
America's largest cites, and even in some smaller ones, significantly increases the risk of death
from lung cancer.6
                                           ix

-------
Despite the lack of relevant state and local level health data that could be used for purposes of
environmental justice, some studies have documented  that people-of-color and low-income
groups  experience  disproportionately higher levels of  exposure to hazards from industrial
facilities, waste treatment sites, and waste disposal sites.7 One study found that people of color
constituted almost  46 percent  of the population of communities  that had three or  more
industrial facilities,  incinerators, or landfills.8

As research  continues on the  potential correlation between health impacts  and exposure to
environmental hazards, it is critical to collect the data needed to understand whether programs
designed to protect human health and the environment are being administered  in  a just and
equitable way.  In  the meantime, the Panel  applauds states that are addressing high exposure
levels of pollution  in people-of-color and low-income communities and working to improve
their ability to participate effectively in key processes, like permitting.

The Panel also  commends EPA's  Office  of Environmental  Justice  for  its  leadership in
supporting - through  grants,  technical assistance, a training network, and other efforts  -
various state  and  local programs that address environmental justice.  These activities have been
helpful in disseminating best practices, sharing lessons learned, and encouraging further efforts
to respond to environmental justice  concerns in a  number  of communities.   The Panel urges
EPA to continue providing this support and assistance for state and local government by:

    •   studying  the environmental justice  efforts of local agencies,  identifying  the
       lessons learned,  and making this information widely available to all types of
       local agencies
    •   exploring  additional ways EPA can assist and encourage states to expand their
       capacity for regional and neighborhood environmental monitoring
    •   providing  states and other interested  parties with periodic updates on effective
       approaches for achieving environmental justice
                                             I
                                             I
Though the focus  of this study has been on state program efforts,  the Panel  believes  that
environmental justice issues are a shared responsibility that can be addressed most effectively
through the collaborative and committed efforts pf federal, state, and local governments. Good
governance requires that no community should bear a disproportionate share of environmental
exposure  and harm and  that meaningful participation  in decisions affecting he quality and
health of our communities should  be  available  regardless of  income, race,  or ethnicity.

-------
ENDNOTES
1 Institute of Medicine, Toward EnvironmentalJustice: Research, Education, and Health Policy Needs (1999), 14.
2 Ibid., p. 6.
3 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy People 2010. 2nd ed. (November 2000), p. 40.
4 Ibid., p. 40.
5 Ibid., p. 41.
6 C. Arden Pope III et  al, "Lung Cancer, Cardiopulmonary Mortality, and Long-term Exposure to Fine Particulate
  Air Pollution," Journal of the American Medical Association 287, no. 9 (March 6, 2002) http://jama.ama-
  assn.org/issues/v287n9/abs/joc 11435.html
7 Toward EnvironmentalJustice, p. 21.
8 Ibid., p. 15.
                                                  xi

-------
xii

-------
                              LIST OF ACRONYMS
Academy
ACTION
AQMD
ARB
Cal/EPA
CEQA
CEQ
CBE
CBRA
CCEEB
CERP
Clean Water Act
DEP
DTSC
ELI
EPCRA
EPA
FIFRA
CIS
ICMA
IDEM
LEAF
MATES II
NATI
NEJAC
NEPA
NPL
OPR
RCRA
SIP
SELA
Superfund

TRI
Title VI
TSCA
National Academy of Public Administration
Active Citizens Improving Our Neighborhoods
South Coast Air Quality Management District
California Air Resources Board
California Environmental Protection Agency
California Environmental Quality Act
Council on Environmental Quality
Communities for a Better Environment
Center for Brownfield Rehabilitation Assistance
California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Department of Environmental Protection
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Environmental Law  Institute
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Insecticide,  Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
Geographic Information Systems
International City and County Management Association
Indiana Department  of Environmental Management
Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation
Multiple Air Toxics  Exposure Study II
National Air Toxics  Inventory
National Environmental Justice Advisory Committee
National Environmental Policy Act
National Priorities List
California Governor's Office  of Planning and Research
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
State Implementation Plan
Southeast Los Angeles
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
      Liability Act
Toxic Release Inventory
Title VI of the Civil Rights, Act of 1964
Toxic Substances Control Act
                                       xffi

-------

-------
                               EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In October 2001,  the Office of Environmental Justice at the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) asked the National Academy of Public Administration (the Academy) to study a
selected group of state environmental justice programs and identify opportunities for states  to
address environmental justice concerns more effectively.   This study complements a prior
Academy effort that analyzed how environmental justice could  be  incorporated  into EPA's
permitting programs for  air, waste, and water and contributed to EPA's five-step  strategy for
integrating environmental justice into its permits.'

The prior study  recommended changes  to EPA's  leadership, accountability,  permitting
programs, priority setting, and procedures for public participation to advance environmental
justice.    It determined that state environmental agencies are responsible  for issuing the  vast
majority of air,  waste, and water permits.   By focusing on state programs, the current study
expands  the  Academy's earlier analysis  and recognizes the key  role  that  states play  in
protecting public health and the environment.

This study examines four states:  Indiana,  Florida,  New Jersey, and California.  These states
have been selected because they have chosen to address environmental justice through:

    •   enacting new legislation
    •   proposing new regulations
    •   issuing executive  orders,  policies, or other directives
    •   convening advisory committees composed of diverse stakeholders
    •   implementing various management measures

The study is designed to:

    •   identify specific measures adopted by the four states to address environmental
       justice problems
    •   analyze the strengths and limitations of these states' initiatives
    •   develop  findings  and recommendations  to aid  all states  in responding  to
       environmental justice concerns
    •   aid the public —  including businesses, academia, and community organizations
       — in understanding how states can  respond to  environmental justice issues,
       evaluating their states' programs for this purpose, and participating in the states'
       environmental decisions

For the  purposes of  this study,  the  Academy  Panel relied  upon EPA's definition  of
environmental justice:

       Environmental justice is the fair treatment  and  meaningful involvement of all
       people regardless of race, color, national origin, culture,  education, or income

-------
       with  respect  to  the  development,  implementation,  and  enforcement  of
       environmental laws, regulations, and policies.  Fair  treatment means that no
       group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups, should bear
       a disproportionate share of the negative consequences resulting from industrial,     " ' •
       municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal,  state, local,
       and tribal environmental programs and policies.  Meaningful involvement means
       that:  (1)  potentially  affected   community  residents  have  an  appropriate
       opportunity to participate  in decisions about a proposed activity that will affect
       their environment and/or  health;  (2) the  public's contribution can influence the
       regulatory agency's decision;  (3) the concerns of all participants involved will
       be considered in the decision-making process;  and (4) the decision-makers seek
       out and facilitate the involvement of those'potentially affected. 2

This study is designed to enhance the ability of [the public, especially those from low-income
and  people-of-color  communities, to  learn  mbre  about how  state  agencies  can address
environmental justice problems and enhance their understanding of how state agencies can be
more responsive to their concerns.   By  doing so,  Members of the public  will be able to
participate more effectively in environmental decision-making by state agencies.

The Panel recommends that states:

   •   strengthen their leadership and accountability  to address environmental justice
       concerns                               i
   •   integrate  environmental justice into their core environmental and public health
       programs
   •   elevate  the importance  of environmental  justice issues when  setting  their
       priorities
   •   expand   their  public  involvement in  the  permitting process  and  other
       environmental decisions
   •   maximize  the  use of other  opportunities  and legal authorities to  address
       environmental justice                    ;
                                              I
COMPLETE FINDINGS

LEADERSHIP  AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Despite persistent and seemingly intractable environmental justice problems, the Panel has
uncovered heartening evidence of leadership to  address them  on the part of state legislators,
agency  managers  and  staff, universities,  businesses,   community  residents,  and  local
governments.  Each type of leader offers a distinct perspective, provides unique resources, and
produces different solutions and  results.   Our  study of four states demonstrates that to be
successful, environmental justice efforts can benefit from leadership by all six types.

-------
Legislative Leadership

Finding 1:   Although states may have untapped legal authorities to address environmental
justice issues, additional legislation can propel reluctant agencies  forward,  lend support  and
credence to the efforts of willing administrators, and  launch activities that involve external
parties.

Agency Leadership

Finding 2;   Champions are important  for leading environmental justice initiatives because
these programs require state agencies to change their traditional ways and adopt new strategies
for doing business.

University Leadership

Finding 3:  University-based programs can play an important role in developing solutions to
environmental justice concerns.

Compared with state agencies, university-based programs may be:

    •  somewhat more insulated from political change,  and thereby provide continuity
       to environmental justice programs
    •  better positioned to provide credible and trusted advice to citizens
    •  capable of conducting more extensive scientific research than state agencies
    •  effective intermediaries among competing interests
    •  strong advocates for citizens

Community Leadership

Finding  4:   An active,  informed  citizenry is  critical to  the success  of  every state's
environmental justice initiatives.

Business Leadership

Finding 5:   Some businesses and business organizations have recognized the importance of
environmental justice, adopted  environmental justice  policies,  and supported their states'
environmental justice initiatives.

Finding 6:  Business  leaders have significant opportunities to improve their relationships  with
neighboring communities  by moving beyond  meeting  minimum  environmental requirements
and responding directly to  community concerns.

-------
 Local Government Leadership             j

 Finding 7;  Local governments have many powers to address the environmental concerns of
 disadvantaged communities because local agencies decide on land-uses, geographic locations of
 industrial  facilities and residential areas,  site designs, distribution of public services  and
 facilities, road construction, access to housing land pubic transit, and school siting.
                                            i
                                            i
 Accountability                             ;

 Finding 8:   None of  the  states  in  this study  has  adopted performance, outcome, or
 accountability measures for integrating environmental justice concerns into the daily operations
 of its environmental agencies.  Without such measures, it will be difficult:
                                            j
    •   for agency staff to know how to change their activities
    •   for  agency managers,  legislators, businesses,  and communities to  determine
        whether or how states' environmental; justice  initiatives are improving public
        health, environmental conditions, or overall quality of life in the communities to
        which they apply                     I  '
                                            I
 Finding 9;  California has required reports to the legislature that  might help the  public to
 assess  the  progress  that state agencies  have, made  in  implementing environmental justice
 programs.                                '   i  ,

 PERMITTING                            |

 Legal Authorities                           \

 Finding 10:  Only two of the states studied j- California and Florida — have enacted laws
 specifically designed to address environmental justice, but none of these laws fully integrates
 environmental justice concerns into core environmental programs or permitting requirements.

 Finding 11; A close review of state constitutions and state environmental, civil rights, public
 health,  and other related laws may reveal  that existing state laws provide legal authority to
 address  environmental justice concerns.

 Training

 Finding 12: Agency staff may have limited experience with environmental justice problems,
 including how to address these issues in their dkily work.

 Permitting Tools

 Finding 13: States have  developed very few tools to help permit writers take environmental
justice issues into consideration.

-------
Eliminating Permit Backlogs

Finding 14: Permit backlogs create barriers to addressing environmental justice issues.

State Coordination with Local Governments

Finding 15:  State  agencies are  finding ways to coordinate their efforts with local land-use
authorities.  Together, they can provide better responses to environmental justice concerns.

Finding 16:  Local governments may hold jurisdiction over solutions to environmental justice
problems, and may have information that states can use to craft solutions, such as information
relevant to permit writers.

Also, states have begun to experiment with increasing coordination with local governments on
permit issuance.

SETTING PRIORITIES TO  REDUCE POLLUTION

Data on Concentrations of Facilities

Finding 17:  States have found that data on the concentration of environmentally hazardous
facilities — often presented  in map form — are important tools to overcome skepticism about
whether environmental justice  is a real problem.

Importance of Monitoring  to Reduce Pollution

 Finding 18:  Ambient monitoring data greatly facilitate better state targeting of resources and
 provide important support for  new strategies to reduce hazardous exposures.

 Need for Early and Visible Initiatives to Reduce Pollution

 Finding  19:   Community  members, neighborhood  organizations,  and  other advocates may
 grow frustrated if state environmental justice programs do not include early and visible efforts
 to reduce health risks from pollution.

 Linking Environmental Justice and Community Health

 Finding 20:  Using state environmental justice programs to address community health concerns
 may broaden support for these initiatives.

 Enforcement

 Finding 21;  Enforcement of environmental laws holds the key to producing benefits from the
 pollution control requirements that are part of an environmental justice program or are already
 embedded in existing state rules and permit conditions.

-------
 Targeting Efforts to Protect Communities of Concern

 Finding 22:  States should develop practical ways to target their efforts on communities with
 high exposures to pollution.

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

 Programs to Expand Public Participation

 Finding 23:  States have implemented  a broad range of public  participation initiatives to
 address environmental justice concerns.

 Advisory Committees                       1

 Finding 24:  Broadly  representative advisory committees,  given clear  tasks, can play an
 important role in assisting states to develop environmental justice programs. If states choose to
 establish advisory committees, they should use them to generate wide and diverse input for
 developing and improving environmental justice programs.  However, states should recognize
 that committees  have limited ability  to  provide  prompt relief for hard-pressed community
 groups.  Therefore, they are no substitute for direct, immediate agency actions that respond to
 the concerns of disadvantaged communities.

 Using Brownfield Programs to Address Environmental Justice Concerns
                                            I
 Finding   25:     Well-designed  state  brownfield  redevelopment  programs   can  provide
 opportunities for communities to collaborate with state and local agencies on redevelopment
 projects.  They can contribute significantly to alleviating environmental justice problems.

 COMPLETE RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation 1:  State environmental agencies and other interested organizations should
support and encourage programs  designed to  provide better information to state legislators
about environmental justice issues, including information about:

    •  the existence of disproportionately high concentrations of industrial facilities
       and contaminated sites in or near people-of-color and low-income communities
    •  the potential  adverse health and environmental  effects  that could result from
       such siting practices
    •  the status of ongoing efforts to address environmental justice concerns  in their
       respective states
    •  models of innovative, creative approaches for solving similar problems in other
       states                                S
                                          6

-------
Recommendation 2:  State legislators should  examine environmental justice  issues in their
jurisdictions, as well as environmental justice legislation adopted by other states.  They should
consider legislation establishing clear legal authority  to  address and  resolve  their  states'
environmental justice problems.

Recommendation 3:  States'  highest-level executives,  such as the governor,  commissioner,
and other agency heads,  should articulate a clear commitment to environmental justice.

Recommendation 4:  States should formalize their commitment to environmental justice in a
written document that clearly establishes principles for state and local agencies to  follow.  This
document  could  be  an  executive  order,  state  policy,  administrative order,  or  similar
pronouncement.

Recommendation 5:  States should ensure that their commitment is supported  by an adequate
administrative  structure and  allocation  of resources  to   achieve  full  implementation  of
environmental justice policies.  This structure might include an office or staff devoted  to
environmental justice.  Agency officials with environmental justice responsibilities should
report directly to the commissioner or department head.

Recommendation  6:  States should ensure that their environmental justice policies produce
actual results by, fully integrating the policies into  core agency missions  —  including  state
planning mechanisms  — so they can permeate programs and govern day-to-day staff functions
and activities.  The program results should be regularly evaluated and reported to  the public.

Recommendation  7:   State leaders should examine the  role that universities can  play  in
addressing environmental justice  issues.    However,  university-based programs should not
replace environmental justice programs at state regulatory agencies.

Recommendation 8:  States should cultivate an active, informed citizenry on environmental
issues, especially  for those living  in people-of-color and low-income communities where
 poverty,  loose organization, lack of political power, or limited access to resources may limit
 citizen involvement.  State agencies should use  a  variety of tools  for  achieving  this goal,
 including:

    •   providing financial assistance to community organizations in the  form of direct
        state funding or, where such funding is not available, such indirect assistance as
        educating community leaders about the availability of federal,  state, or other
        grant programs,  helping community groups apply for such grants,  and providing
        community  leaders with written descriptions of environmental  problems  and
        needs which can be used to prepare grant applications
    •   providing technical assistance to community organizations
    •   establishing community or field liaisons
    •   promoting and facilitating interaction between communities and businesses

-------
 Most importantly,  state leaders  should  maintain  an  atmosphere that  welcomes
 community involvement.

 Recommendation 9:   State agencies should encourage business leadership  in responding  to
 environmental justice concerns by:

    •  providing  information to  help  businesses understand  environmental justice
       concerns
    •  developing environmental  justice and/or*  community  outreach  guidance  for
       business leaders and permit applicants    !
    •  using brownfield  restoration as a mechanism  to address environmental justice
       concerns

 Recommendation 10:  States should assist local governments in understanding:

    •  the extent to which they have authority to address environmental justice issues
    •  the  data available on  the  health, environment,  and quality of life of local
       residents in high-risk communities
    •  various approaches that are available to solve environmental justice concerns
                                               i;
 Recommendation 11;   States should ensure  that all local agencies with jurisdiction  over
 potential  environmental justice problems are  prpvided with training, guidance documents,
 and/or educational materials prepared for local officials.   States also  should  ensure that  local
 governments have the necessary technical tools  to [use their legal authority wisely.

 Recommendation 12:   Each  state should ensure that innovative,  successful environmental
justice best practices adopted by local governments within the state are reported to other  local
 officials with similar responsibilities throughout the state.

 Recommendation 13;  States should ensure that their  environmental justice programs produce
 results by:

    •  establishing clearly defined outcomes      '•:
    •  translating  desired outcomes into clear performance goals
    •  evaluating program effectiveness at regular] intervals, such as annual reports
    •  holding  program   managers  and staff [accountable  for achieving desired
       performance goals                       ,
    •  tracking pollution levels in high-risk communities to determine if environmental
       problems, such as air and water pollution and waste disposal, are being solved
    •  tracking  public  health effects  in high-risk  communities  to learn  whether
       pollution-related problems are decreasing, such as tracking key health indicators
       like cancer, asthma, school attendance levels, and hospital admissions

-------
Recommendation 14:  Each state should undertake a comprehensive analysis of existing legal
authorities to address environmental justice, including whether:

    •   there is legal authority to address environmental justice in state constitutions or
       state public health, civil rights, administrative, and environmental laws
    •   they are required to address environmental justice
    •   they have  discretion to address environmental justice in the absence  of an
       explicit statutory directive
    •   there are legal barriers to addressing environmental justice

Recommendation 15;  In analyzing their existing legal authorities,  states should pay special
attention to provisions of state law derived from, modeled on, or adopted in response to federal
laws.  When integrating such provisions, states should consider ELI's analysis of comparable
federal laws.

Recommendation 16:  States should ensure that their legal analysis clarifies the authority of
permit writers to deny,  condition, or require additional conditions or controls on  permits for all
regulated facilities located in or near high-risk communities.

Recommendation 17:  States should communicate the results of their legal analysis to their
agencies' staff in terms that can be easily understood and  incorporated into day-to-day work by
program personnel, such as permit writers.

Recommendation 18:  State agencies should commit to train, within a set period of  time,  all
of their employees  and managers on environmental justice.   These training courses  should
address:

    •   how to identify  potential environmental justice problems
    •   why solutions to environmental injustice are important
    •   what approaches can be used to solve environmental justice concerns
    •   when and how to coordinate solutions with federal and local agencies
    •   how to utilize non-agency  —  community,  academic, and  public  health —
        resources to expand the range of available options
    •   how  to  improve  public   participation  in  environmental  decision-making,
        especially in high-risk communities
    •   what types of additional information are needed to address environmental justice
        more fully and what can be done to improve such information gathering
    •   how to ensure  that state enforcement  adequately targets pollution problems  in
        high-risk communities

 Recommendation 19: States should develop practical tools to  help  permit writers consider
 environmental justice in their day-to-day activities.

-------
 Recommendation 20:  States should have mechanisms in place to ensure that permit writers
 have access to and use information commonly available to community residents but frequently
 unknown  to regulatory  officials, such  as eyewitness accounts  of  permit violations;  poor
 maintenance practices;  odors;  spills;  illegal dumping; fish kills; presence of  unpermitted,
 under-permitted, or intermittently polluting facilities; and high levels of potentially pollution-
 related health problems like asthma or cancer.                                ......

 Recommendation 21; Permit writers should be trained to seek and respond appropriately to
 information from communities  facing  higher risks where further  research: or investigation is
 warranted.  This might require them to request additional information from permit applicants,
 insist on a site-specific study, coordinate with jlocal  government or public health officials, or
 refer potential violations to enforcement officials for further investigation.

 Recommendation 22:   Permit  writers  should be trained  to   incorporate the  results of
 investigations into permitting decisions through appropriately  crafted pollution limits, permit
 terms, permit conditions, and monitoring and reporting requirements,  and to deny issuance of
 permits where warranted.  Also, they will need  clear instructions about their legal authority to
 address environmental justice problems, as  well as adequate time, and resources to respond to
 community concerns.
                                            I
 Recommendation  23: State agencies  should eliminate  any backlogs  of permit renewals  and
 commit to reviewing and modifying any expired permits on a timely  basis.  Permit renewals
 provide  an opportunity  for agencies  to incorporate  newly   adopted  pollution   control
 requirements, account for new information  on  environmental stresses, mandate  pollution
 prevention,  reflect current operating  and  maintenance practices,  and consider community
 concerns.

 Recommendation 24:  When preparing permits for  new and existing facilities, states should
 coordinate with local governments at the pre-application stage to:

    •  develop mechanisms to ensure permit writers obtain relevant information  from
       local government officials             i
    •  give permit writers a clear understanding  of their legal authority to address  local
       concerns in state permits

Recommendation 25:  To prioritize their risk reduction efforts, states  should  identify areas
where there are concentrations of potential environmental hazards, or where disproportionately
high exposures to environmental contaminants may occur.
                                     f
Recommendation 26:  States should conduct environmental monitoring  to identify high risks
at regional and neighborhood levels.

Recommendation 27:   States should develop mobile monitoring stations or other  means to
investigate and respond to short-term or intermittent hazards in high-risk communities.
                                           10

-------
Recommendation 28:   States should ensure that conventional monitoring stations for water
quality, air  toxics, ambient air quality,  and bio-markers are dispersed throughout potential
high-risk communities,  allowing  the state to detect and respond to local hot spots in these
communities.

Recommendation  29:    Although  states  are developing  longer term plans  to  address
environmental justice issues, they should work on identifying and reducing the most obvious
hazards in high risk communities, thus  demonstrating that their programs produce concrete,
real-world changes.  Increased inspections and enforcement where there are concentrations of
pollution sources can demonstrate a state  agency's commitment to reducing health hazards.

Recommendation  30:   State  environmental  agencies  should  work with health  agencies to
determine  whether increased  access  to community  health  services  may  help to  address
environmental justice concerns.

Recommendation 31:  States should  commit  to improving their environmental enforcement
efforts in high-risk communities by:

    •  placing additional monitoring stations in these communities
    •  conducting  more  frequent and thorough inspections  of facilities near those
       communities
    •  taking  advantage  of community  knowledge  about  a facility's  day-to-day
       operations
    •  ensuring that violations are promptly addressed by enforcement actions
    •  choosing the type of enforcement action —  administrative, civil, or criminal —
       appropriate for the violation
    •  imposing monetary penalties that, to the extent permitted by law, reflect history
       of non-compliance and gravity  of the  offense, including  increased  pollution
       exposures in densely populated neighborhoods
    •  evaluating  enforcement  activities  to  ensure  they  address the  most  serious
       environmental hazards and effectively deter future violations

 Recommendation 32;  State environmental justice programs should go beyond permitting to
 address  other activities with important implications  for high-risk communities, such as standard
 setting,  enforcement,  technical  and  compliance  assistance,  research,  data gathering,  and
 financial assistance.

 Recommendation 33:  States should update existing rules and promulgate new rules where
 necessary to ensure that specific categories  of pollution sources concentrated  in high-risk
 communities employ the  latest,  most effective pollution controls, operation and maintenance
 practices, and pollution prevention techniques.

 Recommendation 34: When states seek to identify communities that may suffer high levels  of
 exposure to environmental hazards,  they should employ appropriate screening tools that:
                                             11

-------
    •   account for racial demographics and income
    •   use accurate and complete data                          "
    •   provide multi-media data covering pollution of air, groundwater, surface water i
        and drinking water, plus waste disposal — all threats facing communities
    •   accurately detect exposures using an adequate monitoring network

 Recommendation 35:  State agencies should Use the many proven practices for increasing
 public participation to ensure that citizens, especially those in communities with high exposures
 to pollution, understand decision-making processes, know when and how to participate, receive
 notice of actions  that may affect their neighborhoods, understand those notices, enjoy the
 opportunity to participate at convenient times and places, and have access to information to
 participate effectively.
                                             I

 Recommendation 36;  State agencies should train their staff to take  local  knowledge into
 account.  Proactive problem-solving approaches include using a community  liaison to work
 with high-risk communities or conducting town hall meetings. These techniques can help state
 agencies to identify and solve problems early,  save resources, and build better relationships
 between communities and government.
                                             i

 Recommendation 37:   To involve high-risk communities more frequently and effectively in
 their environmental justice programs, states also should:

    •   involve citizens early in the permitting process
    •   frequently interact with community leaders and organizations at times and places
       convenient to them                     |
    •   expand  public  participation  in  other programs  important  to   high-risk
       communities, including standard-setting, enforcement, technical and compliance
       assistance, research, and information-gathering; and provide financial assistance
       to help groups participate
                                             i
Recommendation  38;  States can enhance the effectiveness of environmental justice advisory
committees by ensuring that they:
                                             t
   •   have a clear mission and task            !
   •   have definite time lines for completing each work phase
   •   are large enough to represent all key interest groups
   •   have adequate funding to do the work, including travel and other expenses for
       some committee members if needed
   •   are clearly able to influence state policy
   •   meet at times and places convenient for all committee members
   •   include an evaluative component to assess the committee's productivity
                                          12

-------
Recommendation  39:   States  should consider using  brownfield programs  to  address
environmental justice concerns by providing communities with a strong voice in redevelopment
project  design  and  focusing  some  redevelopment  programs  on  reducing  pollution  in
communities with high exposure levels.
                                           13

-------
ENDNOTES
1 National Academy of Public Administration.  Environmental Justice in EPA Permitting: Reducing Pollution in
 Hlgh-Rlsk Communities is Integral to the Agency's Mission (December 2001).
2 Office of Environmental Justice, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance to Assessing and
 Addressing Allegations of Environmental Injustice.  Working Draft  (January 10, 2001) 7.
                                                 14

-------
                                   CHAPTER ONE

                                  INTRODUCTION

In October 2001, EPA's Office of Environmental Justice asked the Academy to study state
programs  that are designed to address  environmental justice  concerns.   This  project is  an
outgrowth of a prior Academy report for EPA, Environmental Justice  in EPA  Permitting:
Reducing Pollution in High Risk Communities Is Integral to the Agency's Mission, published in
December 2001.  That study  assessed how environmental justice  could be incorporated into
EPA's air, water, and waste permitting programs.  Also,  it contributed to EPA's five-step
strategy for developing practical ways  to integrate  environmental justice concerns into  its
permits.   The five  steps are  seeking  advice and  recommendations,  securing legal  and
administrative analyses, developing training, ensuring implementation, and assessing results.

The Academy's first report analyzed key public administration issues and focused on how EPA
addressed the widely recognized fact that  some low-income and people-of-color communities
are exposed  to  significantly  greater environmental and public  health  hazards than other
communities.  The Panel's recommendations for EPA focused on improving leadership and
accountability, permitting programs, priority setting, and public participation.  They were also
designed to help  community  residents and other stakeholders  gain a better understanding of
how they  can more effectively bring environmental justice concerns to  the attention of EPA's
permitting programs.

For the first report, EPA asked the Academy to focus on federal permitting alone, although it
recognized that most permits are prepared by state and local agencies through their delegated
programs. That said, the first study was important in determining whether and to  what extent
EPA has integrated environmental justice into its core operations, and in helping EPA serve as
a model for demonstrating how these concerns can be addressed effectively.

Along with  its request for the Academy review, the  Office  of  Environmental  Justice also
commissioned a study by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI).  ELI's report,  Opportunities
for Advancing Environmental Justice:   An Analysis of U.S. EPA, reviewed "the provisions
contained in the principal federal environmental  laws administered by EPA, in order to identify
authorities that potentially could be used to advance a variety of environmental justice goals in
the agency's programs."1 ELI found that,  "all of EPA's sources of authority — environmental
statutes, mission-expanding and cross cutting laws, and general discretion — give the agency
substantial and wide-ranging powers to pursue environmental justice."2

ELI's  study  also  provided an  important foundation for the  current  project by examining
existing federal statutes that offer legal authorities to address environmental justice concerns. It
found  that state environmental agencies may have considerable latitude  to respond to  these
issues  as  part of their delegated federal  programs.  The study also shed light on  potential
sources of state  agencies' legal authorities contained  in comparable state environmental or
administrative laws.  By focusing on state programs, this  Academy study expands the prior
                                           15

-------
analysis  of environmental justice and recognizes the key role that states play in protecting
public health and the environment.           j

In conducting this research,  the Panel documented the ways that Indiana, Florida, New Jersey,
and  California are addressing environmental justice and how these efforts  relate  to their
permitting programs.  The Panel  has then analyzed the states' programs using its four-element
framework.

This study stresses  setting goals, the need for achieving tangible  and clear results, and fully
integrating environmental justice  principles into core state  planning and permitting programs.
Environmental justice raises basic issues  about  health,   informed and meaningful  public
participation,  the  community's  right-to-know,  and  fairness.   A performance-based  public
administration  is best suited to  ensure that public health  and environmental
appropriately addressed.
                                                                               issues are
The seven-member Panel of Fellows that guided this study also prepared the Academy's first
environmental justice report.  The members  provided analysis and insights and developed
recommendations  based on the extensive research conducted  by the Academy's researchers
over a six-month  period.  The researchers collected and reviewed available  literature on the
legal, administrative, and other aspects of environmental justice and related issues. They also
conducted in-depth interviews  with state and county officials,  as well as with community and
business representatives.

For the purpose of this study, the Panel relied ;on EPA's definition of environmental justice:

       Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all
       people regardless of race, color, national origin, culture, education, or  income
       with  respect to  the  development,   implementation, and   enforcement  of
       environmental laws, regulations, and [policies.  Fair treatment means that no
       group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups, should bear
       a disproportionate share of the negative consequences resulting from industrial,
       municipal,  and commercial  operations^ or the execution of federal,  state, local,
       and tribal environmental programs and policies.  Meaningful involvement means
       that:  (1)   potentially   affected  community  residents  have  an  appropriate
       opportunity to participate in decisions about a proposed activity that will affect
       their environment and/or health;  (2) the public's contribution  can influence the
       regulatory  agency's decision;  (3) the concerns of  all participants involved will
       be considered in the decision-making process; and (4) the decision-makers seek
       out and facilitate the involvement of those potentially affected.3
Later this year, the Panel will prepare a third report, analyzing the impact of local-land use and
zoning practices on environmental justice problems.  This study, which will be conducted with
the International City and County Management Association, will research and document whether

-------
local-land use and zoning laws, policies, and, practices can play a role in creating, addressing, or
alleviating environmental justice concerns.

This report is organized in eight chapters.  Chapter Two provides a brief description of the
Panel's  four-element framework  used  to  analyze  the  state  programs.    Chapter Three
summarizes various legal authorities for addressing environmental justice, based primarily on
ELI's analysis of EPA's statutory authorities.  Using the framework outlined in Chapter Two,
Chapters Four, Five, Six, and Seven document and analyze the programs for Indiana, Florida,
New Jersey, and California, respectively.  Chapter Eight summarizes the lessons learned from
the four state programs and sets forth the Panel's findings and recommendations.
                                            17

-------
ENDNOTES
'Environmental Law Institute, Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice: An Analysis of U.S. EPA
 Statutory Authorities (November 2001).
2Ibld.
'Office of Environmental Justice, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance to Assessing and Addressing
 Allegations of Environmental Injustice, Working Draft  (January 10, 2001) 7.
                                                 18

-------
                                   CHAPTER TWO

               FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING STATE PROGRAMS

In 2001, the Academy studied EPA's air, water, and waste permitting programs in response to
a request from EPA's Office of Environmental Justice.   The goal was to determine how
environmental justice  could  be  incorporated as  a practical matter  into  EPA's  primary
permitting programs  by  improving the  agency's approach  to  public administration.  In
December 2001,  the Academy issued  Environmental Justice in EPA  Permitting:  Reducing
Pollution  in High-Risk Communities is Integral to the Agency's Mission.  In that study, the
Academy emphasized,  "reducing pollution burdens on the public is the heart of environmental
justice concerns..."1 and permits are one of the fundamental tools available for requiring
pollution reductions.

In  The Regulatory Craft, Malcolm Sparrow pointed out that the  essential  work of public
administrators is  "picking important problems and solving them."2   Although the idea seems
simple, government agencies tend to focus on completing tasks, not solving problems. For
many years,  EPA and state environmental agencies have focused on the number of permits
issued, not whether environmental risks have been reduced.

Over the last several years, the Academy has urged EPA to focus on  setting priorities and
measuring results.3  Implementing  this performance-based approach to governance  requires
important, but often scarce, elements to be in place:

    •  strong leaders who are willing to single out problems that need to  be solved
    •  clear performance and accountability measures that track progress in solving the
       problems
    •  innovative use of an agency's authority and procedures to get the job done
    •  a focus on priority setting and reducing risks
    •  better ways of working with all interested parties that can contribute to reducing
       pollution,  especially in communities with high exposures to pollution4

The Academy's report on Environmental Justice in EPA Permitting examined how EPA could
better address environmental justice through its permitting programs.   At the same time, it
recognized that EPA issues permits in only very limited circumstances because most are issued
by states  through their delegated programs.  The Academy's recommendations focused on four
key areas:

    •  Leadership and  Accountability:    In  order  to   integrate  environmental justice
       considerations into EPA's core mission,  sustained leadership,   clearer performance
       goals, improved outcome measures,  stronger accountability mechanisms, and better
       training all are necessary.
                                           19

-------
FIGURE 2.1: DETAILED SUMMARY OF PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS

 Leadership                         !      :

   •Clear and consistent message on environmental justice
   •Expectation that environmental justice will be integrated into programs
   •Expectation that environmental justice will be incorporated into strategic
    planning
   •Responsibility for environmental justice vested with senior level management

 Accountability

 •   Measurable objectives
 •   Performance outcome and accountability measures
 •   Program evaluation processes      '
 •   Public reporting requirements      i

 Permitting

 •   New rules to address identified risks
 •   Permit writers provided with practical tools
 •   Environmental justice training for staff
 •   Enforcement targeted to high risk areas

 Risk Reduction

 ป   Better monitoring and data collection
 •   High risk areas identified
 •   Cumulative risk analysis improved
 •   Clear risk reduction goals set

Public Participation
0
o
o
o
Better and earlier access to the permitting process
Improved community access to data
Improved communication with communities
Encourage dialogue among communities, project proposers, and agencies
Available and accessible technical assistance
                                   20

-------
   •  Permitting Procedures:   EPA should  make full  use of its existing  legal
      authorities  to  ensure  that  its  permitting - programs  effectively  address
      environmental justice concerns. Also, it should provide simple tools that enable
      permit  writers to t identify  and  address pollution ^exposures  in  high-risk
      communities,   expand  monitoring  to  provide  permit writers  with  better
      information, and focus  more enforcement resources on communities  that are
      disproportionately impacted by pollution.

   •  Priority Setting:  EPA and other appropriate agencies should identify high-risk
      communities and prioritize them for pollution reduction efforts using various
      tools, including the permitting process.

   •  Public  Participation:   Because  public  participation is a critical  element in
      determining appropriate permit conditions, EPA should devote more resources
      to encourage  involvement by historically under-represented groups and  create
      new opportunities for them to participate earlier in the permitting process.5

Figure 2.1 details these recommendations for EPA.

The  Panel  for this study  believes  that many of the  approaches recommended  for EPA are
appropriate  for  state  environmental justice  programs.    Yet,  state environmental justice
programs vary widely.  Most do not address all of the Panel's suggested elements of a fully
developed environmental justice program as set out above.  However, the framework  is useful
for reviewing what the states have .accomplished and what additional opportunities they may
have to address environmental justice.

-------
ENDNOTES
1 National Academy of Public Administration, Environmentaljustice in EPA Permitting: Reducing Pollution in
 High-Risk Communities is Integral to the Agency's Mission (December 2001)  15.
2 Malcolm K. Sparrow. The Regulatory Craft: Controlling Risks, Solving Problems, and Managing Compliance
 (Brookings Institute Press: 2000) 132.
3 National Academy of Public Administration,  Setting Priorities, Getting Results: A New Direction for EPA.
 (1995); National Academy of Public Administration, Ehyironment.gov: Transforming Environmental Protection
 for the 21st Century (November 2000).                i                   '                          .   "
4 See generally, The Regulatory Craft. 123-170.        '
5 Environmentaljustice in EPA Permitting, supra> at v-vU                                       ,   ,
                                                22

-------
                                 CHAPTER THREE

        LEGAL AUTHORITIES TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

Numerous reports and articles have analyzed whether federal law directs or authorizes federal
agencies  to address environmental justice.  To compile much of this legal analysis into  a
coherent  and  centralized starting point for further inquiry, the Environmental  Law  Institute
(ELI),  at the  request of EPA's Office of Environmental Justice,  prepared Opportunities for
Advancing Environmental Justice: An Analysis of U.S. EPA Statutory Authorities, issued in
November 2001.1  This seminal report identified  "authorities and opportunities afforded by
current federal environmental laws to address the disproportionate environmental harms and
risks faced by communities of color and  low-income communities."2   ELI  reviewed the
principal environmental laws  administered  by EPA because the  agency  is  "the central
government office  in the U.S.  charged with protecting public health and the environment ...
[with]  jurisdiction  over many  of the core  issues, especially  the prevention and control of
industrial pollution, that have given rise to the environmental justice movement."3

ELI measured federal statutory authorities administered by EPA against three goals frequently
articulated as  mechanisms for addressing environmental justice problems:

    1.  Identifying fully the impacts of agency actions on people-of-color and low-
       income communities.  In addition to analyzing water, air,  and land pollution,
       a comprehensive impact  analysis might consider cumulative and synergistic
       impacts;  heightened risks to sensitive  populations (e.g.,  asthmatics);  unique
       exposure pathways associated with cultural or social practices or economic
       circumstances; quality of life impairments due to noise, odor, and traffic; and
       economic impacts such  as reduced property values, lost wages, and medical
       bills.

    2.  Making   agency   decisions  aimed   at  remedying   and   preventing
       disproportionate impacts.  This would encompass the full range of agency
       actions   affecting  individual  communities:  standard-setting,   permitting,
       enforcement,   research,  monitoring,   reporting,   and financial  assistance
       decisions.

    3.  Ensuring affected communities have meaningful input hi  environmental
       decision-making.  This  would entail consulting with affected communities
       "early and  often" to obtain guidance  on identifying impacts, making decisions,
       and implementing environmental programs.4

ELI concluded that EPA has "substantial and wide-ranging powers to pursue environmental
justice,"5 even in situations where  consideration of these problems is "not directly compelled
by the underlying  statutes."6  The  report found four principal sources of EPA's general legal
authority for  addressing environmental justice:
                                          23

-------
    •  National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)7
    •  Title VI of the Civil Rights Act8
    •  Executive Order 128989
    •  general discretion of an administrative agency

 In  addition,  the  report  identified  relevant  authorities  and  opportunities  for addressing
 environmental justice in nine media-specific federal statutes, which  collectively "encompass
 most of EPA's mandate to protect public health and the environment."10  They are as follows:
                                             [
    •  Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act)"
    •  Clean Air Act12
    •  Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)13
    •  Comprehensive  Environmental Response,  Compensation,  and  Liability Act
       (Superfund)14
    •  Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)15
    •  Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act16
    •  Safe Drinking Water Act17
    •  Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)18
    ซ  Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act  (EPCRA)19

 Similarly,  state  authority to  address environmental justice  issues derives  from a parallel
 combination  of  state-adopted statutory and  administrative  requirements, as  well  as from
 relevant  provisions under applicable  state constitutions.  Indeed,  many state environmental
 laws, rules,  and policies contain provisions  derived from,  modeled  upon,  or adopted in
 response to federal environmental laws, regulations, policies, and guidance. Consequently, the
 analysis  contained in ELI's report suggested  the need  for states to review their numerous
 similar legal authorities.

 Only two of the  states examined for this study  -4 California and Florida — have enacted laws
 specifically designed to address environmental justice.  However, these states laws do not fully
 integrate  environmental justice concerns into its core environmental programs.

 Academy researchers conducted a cursory search for potential  sources of state legal authorities
 akin to general  ones identified in ELI's report:  NEPA, Title  VI, Executive  Order 12898,
 general administrative law,  Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act,  and Resource Conservation and
 Recovery Act.  These seven sources of legal authority  merit close examination  by state
 environmental agencies because they could strengthen the agencies'  application of state law to
address pollution problems in people-of-color or low-income communities.

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

ELI found NEPA to be  a  promising  tool  for  EPA and other  agencies  in  addressing
environmental justice.   It determined, "NEPA creates opportunities  for  federal agencies to
                                          24

-------
incorporate consideration of environmental justice into a vast range of their decision-making
processes."20

Sixteen states,  the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico  have environmental policy acts or
"little NEPAs."  Other states have limited environmental review requirements established by
statute, executive order,  or  other administrative directives.21  To  the  extent that these  state
statutes  or  authorities  resemble federal  provisions,  they  may  provide  comparable  legal
authority for individual  states  to incorporate  environmental justice  concerns  into  agency
decision-making.  Other legal authorities that fall into any of the three broad categories below
may be especially important:

    1.  provisions that authorize or direct agencies to analyze a broad range of potential
       impacts from agency decisions
    2.  provisions designed to  ensure meaningful involvement of affected communities
       in agency decisions
    3.  provisions that entrust  an agency with oversight of decisions by other state or
       local agencies

 Analyzing a Broad Range of Impacts

 The first authority,  authorizing or directing state agencies to analyze a broad range of impacts,
 may include language that:

    •   seeks to protect the health, safety, or environment of all individuals
    •   requires an impact analysis to be performed
    •   addresses a broad range of  impacts, including social, economic, aesthetic, or
        quality of life
    •   considers  a  multiplicity  of  stresses,  including  multiple,  cumulative,  or
        synergistic exposures
     •   encourages  a precautionary  approach to protection of public health,  safety,
        and/or the environment
     •   cautions against environmental  degradation, risks to health and safety, or other
        undesirable or unintended consequences
     •   requires identification or consideration of alternative courses of action
     •   recommends an interdisciplinary approach
     •   establishes the state  or a state agency as  a trustee of the environment22

  EPA has interpreted  NEPA language to warrant consideration of environmental justice issues:

         "In the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA),  Congress could not
         have been any clearer when it stated that it shall be the continuing responsibility
         of  the  Federal government to  assure  for  all  Americans  'safe,  healthful,
         productive and aesthetically  and culturally pleasing surroundings.
                                              25

-------
 The Council  on Environmental  Quality  (CEQ),  which oversees the federal government's
 compliance with NEPA, has used comparable language in NEPA as  the basis for guidance
 urging federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice into the NEPA process:

        Agencies should consider  the composition of the area affected by the proposed
        action to ascertain whether low-income populations, people of color, or Tribes
        are present.  If so, the agency should determine whether the action might result
        in disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on
        these populations.
                                             I
        Agencies should consider relevant public! health and industry data concerning the
        potential for  multiple exposures or cumulative  exposure to  human health or
        environmental hazards in the  affected  population, as well as historical patterns
        of  exposure  to environmental hazards, 'to the extent  that such information is
        reasonably available.

        Agencies  should  recognize  the  interrelated cultural,  social,  occupational,
        historical,  or  economic factors that  may amplify the natural and physical
        environmental effects of the proposed action.  These factors should include the
        physical sensitivity of the  community  ot population to particular impacts,  the
        effect of any disruption of the  community structure associated with the proposed
        action, and the nature and degree of the impact on the community's physical and
        social structure.24

 As a matter of administrative practice, some appeal boards have reversed or remanded  federal
 agency  decisions for  failure  to  interpret  cornparable  language  in NEPA as requiring
 consideration of environmental justice issues.25  f

 Meaningful Community Involvement in Decision-Making

 The second type of authority,  designed  to ensure meaningful involvement of affected
 communities in state decisions, may direct agencies to:

    •  provide public notice of hearings, meetings, or permits, or about the availability
       of environmental documents
    •  hold public hearings or meetings
    •  solicit public comment or information
    •  explain where the public can obtain information, reports, or other documents
    •  make materials available to the public

EPA and CEQ have interpreted similar provisions in NEPA to  require that  federal agencies
must encourage active community participation in environmental decision-making.  In addition,
they have  encouraged federal  agencies to overcome some of the potential  challenges to
                                          26

-------
community involvement, such as language barriers and difficulty in understanding scientifically
or technically complex issues.26

Effective Environmental Oversight

Some provisions of state law may entrust one state agency with oversight for decisions or the
activities of other state  or local agencies.  They may include language directing an agency to
plan with another agency or to review; approve; comment on;  evaluate; analyze; study;  or
report on the actions of  another agency.

Such requirements  may  provide  an  opportunity  for  an   oversight  agency to   address
environmental justice by directing it to determine whether another agency's proposed action is
satisfactory from the standpoint of public health, welfare, or the environment or complies with
other applicable laws (including civil rights laws).  ELI found that comparable language in the
federal Clean Air Act, requiring EPA to review the proposed actions of other federal agencies,
represents an important mechanism for promoting environmental justice.27

TITLE VI

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 196428  prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color,
or national origin in all programs or  activities that receive federal funding.  As  many state
environmental programs are at least  partly funded by EPA, Title VI directly relates  state
obligations  to  eliminate   discrimination  when  administering  programs  to  protect  the
environment and public health.

ELI did not examine the scope of EPA's  responsibility under  Title VI beyond noting that the
statute  provides  "another  potential source of authority to promote environmental justice.
Nonetheless, EPA has published two draft Title VI guidance documents30 — as well as a report
on the future direction  of federal, state, and local environmental justice  programs31 — that are
a starting point for states to analyze their legal obligations for implementing Title VI.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 12898

Executive Order  12898, issued in 1994, directs each federal agency to  "make achieving
environmental justice  part  of its  mission  by  identifying and  addressing,  as appropriate,
disproportionately  high and adverse human health or environmental  effects of its programs,
 policies, and activities  on minority and low-income populations."32 Although not a statute, the
 executive  order commits the federal executive branch, including EPA,  to use its discretion to
 further  environmental  justice goals "(t)o the greatest extent practicable and permitted by
 law."33  As federal agencies gain experience implementing the executive order, its application
 to specific  federal programs may assist states  in  interpreting similar  provisions  of state
 environmental law. Responding in part to the executive order, at least one state in this study
 — New Jersey  —  has  drafted a proposed  rule aimed at expanding opportunities for people-of-
 color and low-income communities to  participate in environmental permitting.34
                                            27

-------
 GENERAL DISCRETION OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY

 ELI found that EPA  may have the  authority to respond creatively  to  the  environmental
 concerns of people-of-color and low-income communities,  even in the absence of statutory
 language that explicitly mentions or compels EPA to address  environmental justice:
                                              i
        Apart from these explicit sources of authority, EPA also possesses general or
        implied  discretionary  authority,  which  administrative  agencies  commonly
        exercise in areas that are not specifically addressed by Congress.35

 Environmental statutes typically  grant freedom  for EPA to choose among possible courses of
 action, including issuing regulations, or taking other actions it deems necessary to carry out its
 functions under federal statutes.36 In conjunctiqn with more specific statutory objectives and
 programs, these provisions afford  EPA  "substantial and  wide-ranging powers to pursue
 environmental justice."37   States  with  laws' modeled upon federal  environmental
 administrative statutes may possess similar discretionary authority.
or
 FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT

 The Federal Water Pollution Control Act — commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act38 --
 establishes a federal-state partnership to restore and maintain the nation's waters. EPA retains
 a leadership role for specific standard-setting and oversight activities, but the Clean Water Act
 recognizes "the primary responsibilities and rights of states"39 to initiate and implement water
 pollution controls. Specifically, states have lead Responsibility for:

    •  planning the  development, use,  restoration, preservation, and enhancement of
       land and water resources40
    •  providing for, encouraging, and  assisting public participation in every aspect of
       the state program1"
    •  consulting with EPA on how to exercise state authority under the act42

 ELI identified  several of the Clean Water Act's most  important  standard-setting activities,
 carried out by  federal and state agencies, as opportunities to address environmental justice.43
 Those activities, largely the province of EPA, include identifying or listing toxic pollutants that
 warrant control and  setting a variety of minimum  pollution control requirements, such ais
 technology-based effluent limits for major industries, effluent limits  for toxics, and disposal
standards  for  sewage sludge.  Even  in these  Contexts,  states retain authority  to address
additional toxic pollutants or to set more stringent standards for federally regulated pollutants if
they so choose.44  States seeking to  utilize this authority may  find ELI's  discussion of
underlying concepts in the federal law — "public  health," "toxic pollutants" and  "margin of
safety" — useful in addressing environmental justice.45
                                           28

-------
Other key standard-setting obligations under the Clean Water Act belong, at least in the first
instance, to the states.  They include:

    •  designating the desired "uses" for state waters46
    •  developing water quality criteria to  protect those uses47
    •  establishing acceptable  pollutant loads   — total maximum  daily  loads  — for
       waters that cannot be adequately  cleaned by technology-based effluent limits
       alone48
    •  creating individual control strategies for impaired waters49
    •  setting public participation requirements for state programs50

ELI found that these  state-initiated activities provide opportunities to address  environmental
justice by obtaining and considering data  on disproportionate impacts, sensitive populations,
higher exposure rates  (e.g.,  among subsistence or traditional fishers), or  bioaccumulation due
to a geographic concentration of pollutant sources, or by fashioning ways to involve  affected
low-income communities in state decisions about water standards.51

Once standards are set,  the water discharge permit is the vehicle for applying them and other
Clean  Water Act  objectives to  individual  pollutant sources.52  Here  again, states play a lead
role, and 44 states and one territory have received delegated authority from EPA to write the
discharge permits for  their industries.  ELI found that permit-writers have broad discretion to
impose site-specific conditions that address environmental justice concerns related to  water
pollution.53    These   conditions might address aggregate  risks,  account for  higher  fish
consumption in certain  communities, require  a wide  array of reporting and monitoring,  or
build community enforcement capacities.

States also  have the  option to  increase their  water permitting  efforts  based  on sources of
concern in  low-income  or people-of-color communities.  As an example,  ELI cites animal
feeding  operations, which are often located in low-income, rural,  or tribal  communities.54
EPA regulations require concentrated animal feeding operations over a certain size to  obtain a
water  permit, but states  may designate additional facilities for permitting if they determine that
the facilities are "a significant contributor  of pollutants to the waters of the United States."55

Few states have  delegation to  write  dredge-and-fill  permits,56  but those that do have the
capacity to address environmental justice in ways that ELI identified for EPA-administered
programs.57  For example, they  may address cumulative or disproportionate impacts,  consider
siting  alternatives, or write permit conditions  on dredging permits to remedy  environmental
justice problems.

State  and federal agencies share  enforcement  responsibility under the Clean Water Act.
Although  ELI  did not directly  address state  enforcement  powers,  its  analysis  suggests
numerous ways that states could use their enforcement tools to advance environmental justice.
For example,  ELI found  that the  Clean  Water  Act, like other  federal statutes, gives broad
discretion to EPA to address environmental justice through enforcement decisions:58
                                            29

-------
       The enforcement tools and discretion entrusted to the Environmental Protection
       Agency are broad  enough for innovative  and imaginative application of the
       enforcement  process  to  environmental justice issues.   This  application  can
       significantly advance the  goal of ensuring fair and equal treatment for people of
       all races, cultures, and incomes regarding the development, implementation and
       enforcement of our environmental laws and  policies.59

Enforcement decisions  that present opportunities to address environmental justice  include
EPA's power  to  identify  and  target  problem  facilities, conduct inspections to determine
compliance, and set priorities for enforcement actions.  EPA decides on the type of sanction
(civil or criminal)  to be  applied to violators; and in determining the relief to seek,  EPA
considers the gravity of  the  offense and can adjust  the  size  of the penalty  or  allow for
compensatory or restorative sanctions.  EPA can involve the community in enforcement efforts
by notifying  the public  about an action, providing access to inspection reports and analytical
data, giving  the public  a  preview of settlement proposals, and  providing an opportunity for
comment on proposed  settlement agreements.60  If  a  situation presents  an  imminent and
substantial danger to public health because  of exposures  to dangerous levels of one  or  a
combination  of pollutants, EPA can also take emergency action to  protect a disadvantaged
community.61

The Clean Water Act  allows state  permit  programs the same powers as EPA to  inspect,
monitor, enter, and require reports from permitted  facilities as outlined in federal law,62 and to
abate violations through civil and criminal penalties and other means of enforcement.63  As  a
result, states  may find the same discretionary opportunities to address environmental justice by
exercising state enforcement authorities.

ELI found that EPA could use many of the Clean Water Act's grant programs to help ensure
that  environmental justice receives priority  attention.64 EPA's research  and  development
grants65  for  both general  purposes  and  for  research on  sewage  sludge66  can  support
environmental justice.   More importantly,  EPA  awards grants to  states  for implementing
various water  quality  programs67  including  'permitting  and  enforcement and controlling
nonpoint source pollution,68 and states can choose to use these resources for their own priority
needs, including environmental justice.         ,

THE CLEAN AIR ACT

The  Clean Air Act69 is based on the premise  that "the predominant part of the nation's
population is located in  its rapidly expanding metropolitan and other urban areas."70  As ELI
noted, those  areas are home to  disproportionate numbers of people who live  in low-income
and/or people-of-color communities.71  Congress found  that urban growth "has resulted in
mounting dangers to the public health and welfare,"72 dangers well documented in the scientific
literature.  ELI summarized the implications for environmental justice as:  "exposure to air
pollution [that]  may trigger or cause adverse health effects and may explain why respiratory
                                           30

-------
illnesses,  such as asthma and bronchitis, particularly affect  low-income  communities  and
communities of color."73

The Clean Air Act is the primary federal statute designed to promote public health and welfare
by preventing and controlling air pollution.  As with the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act
envisions  a  federal-state partnership to protect and enhance  the nation's air resources.  EPA
bears responsibility  for  setting and  overseeing implementation of  minimum national air
pollution  standards,  including the  national  ambient air  quality standards,  new source
performance standards (including standards for new solid waste incinerators), national emission
standards  for hazardous air pollutants,   mobile source standards, and urban area source
requirements.  States are free to adopt more stringent state standards74 or to petition EPA for
additional ones.75  To the extent that state laws have  provisions similar to those in the federal
act,  states may have the same authority that ELI identified in the federal  act  to  consider
pollutant  interactions;  cumulative  and  synergistic  impacts;  sensitive populations; unique
exposure  pathways;  protection  of communities that  are dependent upon or ecosystems  that
support subsistence hunting or fishing;  adverse effects on public welfare resulting from noise,
increased  traffic, or  psychological stress;  and margins of safety to resolve scientific  or factual
uncertainty in favor of protecting potentially affected communities.76

Under the Clean Air Act, air pollution prevention and control are "the primary responsibility
of states and local governments."77  States develop State Implementation Plans (SIPs)78 to attain
and maintain  the national ambient  air quality standards.   The SIP process  gives  states an
ongoing opportunity to address the full range  of air  pollution impacts on people-of-color and
low-income communities; make pertinent air quality  and emission information available to
communities; provide a meaningful forum for community involvement in government decision-
making; and ensure compliance with all applicable federal laws, including Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act.79

States also issue permits generally  to  individual sources of air pollution, including recently
implemented Title V operating permits.80 Title V combines into  one permit all requirements for
new  source   review,81  prevention  of  significant  deterioration,82   non-attainment   area
improvements,83  control  of  hazardous air pollutants,84  and acid deposition  control.85  This
unified permit creates opportunities for states to write permit conditions that address a wide
range of adverse impacts from  all  types  of  pollution,  generate or  disseminate valuable
information  to  community  organizations or  local  enforcement authorities  (such  as fire
departments), and increase community capacity to oversee compliance.86

In addition  to an air enforcement program,87 states must have  "adequate personnel, funding,
and authority"88 to  carry out their SIPs, including  authority  comparable to  EPA's to  take
emergency  action to protect communities from imminent  and substantial endangerment to
public health, welfare, or the environment.89  ELI found that the Clean Air Act's enforcement
provisions gave  EPA broad discretion to address  environmental justice;90 similar state air
enforcement provisions may convey the same discretion to state  agencies.
                                            31

-------
The Clean Air Act also empowers EPA to make planning and program grants available to
states.91  ELI suggests that EPA could use grant conditions as a way to get states to consider
cumulative impacts and demographics in carrying out the air program.  By implication, states
could urge EPA to administer the  grants with this emphasis.92 The Clean Air Act  further
requires  EPA  to  "encourage, cooperate  with,  and render  technical  services and  provide
financial  assistance"   to,  among  others,   "public or private agencies,  institutions,  and
organizations  and individuals"  interested in  the  prevention  or control of  air  pollution.93
Community organizations or their representatives  could use  this aid to collect information,
analyze test results, purchase air monitoring equipment, or otherwise plan for controlling and
reducing air pollution.94  Although EPA is responsible for administrating these grants, states
could assist community groups or individuals in applying for and obtaining such assistance.
                                           i
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)95 is the primary federal law governing
the  management and disposal of waste,  both hazardous and solid.   The  statute reflects
Congress' determinations that "disposal of solid waste and hazardous waste in or on the land
without careful  planning and management  can  present a danger  to human  health and the
environment,"96 and  that population concentrations in metropolitan and urban areas  present
these communities with "serious financial, management,  intergovernmental, and technical
problems"  in waste disposal.97 Because many disposal facilities tend to be located in  low-
income  or people-of-color communities,  it is important to  examine  RCRA  and its  state
counterparts for their potential to address environmental justice concerns.

As with the federal Clean Water and Clean Air Acts, RCRA is intended to establish "a viable
federal-state partnership."98  Congress envisioned  that "the  collection and  disposal of solid
wastes should continue to be primarily  the function of state,  regional, and local agencies,"99
with EPA providing technical and financial assistance and certain regulatory guidelines.

RCRA establishes separate  regulatory schemes  for hazardous and non-hazardous wastes.   For
hazardous wastes,  EPA bears the primary burden of developing regulations.  It must identify
the wastes deemed "hazardous"  and publish  minimum pollution  control requirements for
generators; transporters;  and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities.   States may impose
more stringent requirements,  including requirements pertaining to site selection.100  However,
courts have held that states must refrain from adopting additional requirements that unduly
burden interstate commerce.101

In any case, states play an important role in implementing RCRA. Most have EPA approval to
administer some or all of the RCRA program.102 To obtain approval, a state program must be
"equivalent to"  and  "consistent with"  federal requirements,103 providing public  access  to
information about treatment facilities and sites and about  storage and disposal of  hazardous
waste "in  substantially  the  same  manner,  and  to  the  same degree"  as  if EPA were
administering  the  program.104   ELI found  that  RCRA requirements offer  "visible and
immediate opportunities for addressing environmental justice."105 For example, permit writers
                                          32

-------
can rely on RCRA's omnibus authority over treatment, storage, and disposal facilities to draft
permit conditions that are "necessary to  protect human health and the environment."106  ELI
viewed this provision as authorizing consideration of sensitive populations, unique exposure
pathways, risk aggregation, and a "wide range of environmental justice measures."107

Likewise, applicants for state-issued land disposal permits must provide important information
about potential releases, such as "reasonably foreseeable potential releases from both normal
operations  and accidents," "the potential pathways of human exposure," and "the  potential
magnitude  and nature of the human exposure."108  With EPA concurrence,  states also may
request the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry to conduct a health
assessment whenever a landfill or surface impoundment "poses  a substantial risk to  human
health" due to the existence of releases, the magnitude of potential contamination, or the extent
of human  exposure.109  Such  health assessments must account for multiple  - indeed, all  -
contamination sources, multiple human exposure pathways "including ground or surface water
contamination, air emissions, and food chain  contamination," and the "potential susceptibility"
of  the affected community,  among other factors.110   ELI  notes  that  this information  is
"precisely the kind of data environmental justice advocates often seek."111

Under RCRA, states have an even greater role with respect to management of non-hazardous,
solid waste.  This authority has important implications for environmental justice because solid
waste  constitutes the greatest volume of wastes,  and because the program governs some wastes
that may, in fact, be quite hazardous, such as hazardous household wastes or those from small
quantity generators.112   RCRA  requires  states to  develop  and  implement a solid waste
management plan,  as well as a permit or  other approval  program  for  each solid waste
management  facility that  receives  hazardous waste  from  households  or small  quantity
generators.113   States with approved plans become eligible for federal financial assistance. "4
States have considerable  leeway with respect to the content of such plans and programs, but
ELI suggests that  EPA may  impose conditions on its  financial  assistance  hat require state
attention to environmental justice concerns.115

 RCRA also affords EPA "extensive enforcement powers."116 These include administrative,
 civil,   and  criminal  sanctions;117  emergency authority  for   imminent   and  substantial
 endangerment to health  or the environment;118 and  authority to mandate other corrective
 action.119  ELI found that many of these tools provide opportunities to address  environmental
justice.120 Hence, states with RCRA delegation or equivalent waste programs will have similar
 opportunities.
                                            33

-------
ENDNQTES
 1 Christine Todd Whitman. Administrator. U.S. EPA. Memorandum, EPA's Commitment to Environmental
  Justice (August 9. 2001): U.S. EPA Office of General Counsel. Memorandum, EPA Statutory and Regulatory
  Authorities Under Which Environmental Justice Issues May Be Addressed in Permitting, (December, &000);
  Report of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, Environmental Justice in the Permitting
  Process, (July 2000); Richard Lazarus and Stephanie Tai, "Integrating Environmental Justice Into EPA
  Permitting Authority." Ecology Law Quarterly (1999) 26: 617; U.S. EPA, The Environmental Protection
  Agency's Environmental Justice Strategy (April 3. 1995); and Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to
  Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (February 11, 1994).
 2 Environmental Law Institute, Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice: An Analysis of U.S. EPA
  Statutory Authorities (November 2001) ii, hereafter. Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice.
 3 Ibid., 1.
  Id., iii-iv.
 5 Id..3. See also id.. 67.
 6 Id. at 1.
 7 42 U.S.C. Sections  4321-4347.                     (
 8 42 U.S.C. Section 2000d to 2000d-7; see also 40 C.F.R. Part 7.
 9 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,
  (February 11. 1994).
 ^Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, iv. i
 11 33 U.S.C. Sections 1251-1387.
 12 42 U.S.C. Sections 7401-7671q.
 13 42 U.S.C. Sections 6901 et seq.
 14 42 U.S.C. Sections 9601-9675.
 15 7 U.S.C. Sections 136-136y.
 16 21 U.S.C. Sections 301-397.
 " 42 U.S.C. Sections 300f-300j-26.                   j
 1815 U.S.C. Sections 2601-2692.                     j
 19 42 U.S.C.  Sections  11001-11050.
 20 "Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice," 67.
 21 Nicholas C. Yost. NEPA Desk Book: Z1" Edition (Environmental Law Institute: Washington,  DC, 1995)
  42-43.
 22 Compare Section 101 and 102(2) (C) of NEPA,  42 U.SiC.  Section 4331 (a) and 4332(2)(C) and Opportunities
   for Advancing Environmental Justice: An Analysis of U.S.  EPA Statutory Authorities, 67-85.
 23 Christine Todd Whitman. Administrator, U.S. EPA, Memorandum, EPA's Commitment to Environmental
  Justice (Aug. 9.  2001); see also U.S. EPA Office of Federal Activities, Final Guidance for Incorporating
  Environmental Justice Concerns in EPA's NEPA Compliance Analyses (April, 1998) available at
  www.es.epa.gov/oeca/ofa/ejepa.html (last visited NovJ 9.  2001).
 24 Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Justice  Guidance under the National Environmental Policy
  Act (Dec. 10,  1997) available at www.ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/ej/ej.pdf (last visited Nov. 13, 2001).
  See, e.g.. In Re Louisiana Energy Services. 47 N.R.CJ 77(1998) (Atomic Safety and Licensing Board) and
  Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. 150 I.E.L.A. 158|(1999) (Bureau of Land Management).
26 See, e.g., U.S. EPA Office of Federal Activities, Final  Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice
  Concerns in EPA's NEPA Compliance Analyses (April,  1998) available at
  www.es.epa.gov/oeca/ofa/ejepa.html (last visited Nov. 9,  2001) and Council on Environmental Quality,
  Environmental Justice Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act (Dec. 10, 1997)  available at
  www.ceqeh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/ej/ej.pdf
   (last visited Nov. 13. 2001). See also, Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 67-73 and 79.
27  Section 309(a) of the Federal Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7609(a) and  Opportunities for Advancing
  Environmental Justice, 81-85.
28 42 U.S.C. Section 2000d to 2000d-7; see also 40 C.F.R. Part 7.
29 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice,  2.
25
                                                 34

-------
30 U.S. EPA, Draft Title VI Guidance for EPA Assistance Recipients Administering Environmental Permitting
 Programs (Draft Recipient Guidance) and Draft Revised Guidance for Investigating Title VI Administrative
 Complaints Challenging Permits (Draft Revised Investigation Guidance).  65 Fed. Res. 39650 et se^.
 (June 27, 2000).
31U.S. EPA National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology, .Report of the Title VI
 Implementation Advisory Committee: Next Steps for EPA State and Local Environmental Justice Programs,
 EPA Pub. 100-R-99-004 (April, 1999).
32 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
  (February 11, 1994) Section 1-101                                                            ".'..-.
33 Ibid.
34 34 N.J.R. 665-675 available at www.state.nj.us/dep/equity/eerule.pdf.
x Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 2.
36 Ibid., 1-5.
37 Id., 3.
38 33 U.S.C.  Sections 1251-1387.
39 Section 101 ((b), 33 U.S.C. Section 1251 (b).
40 Ibid.                                                                                   .            -.
41 Section 101(e), 33 U.S.C. Section 1251(e).
42 Section 101 (b), 33 U.S.C. Section 1251 (b).
43 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 88-95.
44 Section 510,  33 U.S.C. Section 1370.
45 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 87-95.
46 Section 303(c), 33 U.S.C. Section 1313(c).
47 Ibid.
48 Section 303(d), 33 U.S.C. Section 1313(d).
49 Section 304(1), 33  U.S.C. 1314(1).
50 Section 101(e), 33 U.S.C. Section 1251(e).
51 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 87-95.
52 Section 402.  33 U.S.C. Section 1342.
53 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 95-97.  .,..,
54 Ibid., 97-98.
55 40  C.F.R. 122.23  and App. B.
56 Section 404.  33 U.S.C. Section 1343.                                                     .      .
67 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 98-99.
58 Ibid., 27-37 and 101-102.
59 Id., 27.
60 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 27-37 and 101-102.
61 Section 504,  33 U.S.C. 1364.
62 Section 402(b)(2)(B), 33  U.S.C. Section 1342(b)(2)(B).
63 Section 402(b) (7), 33 U.S.C. Section 1342(b)(7).
64 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 104.'
65 Section 105,  33 U.S.C. 1255.
66 Section 405(g), 33 U.S.C. 1345(g).
67 Section 106,  33 U.S.C. 1256.
68 Section 319(h), 33 U.S.C. 1329(h).
69 42 U.S.C. Sections 7401-7671q.
70 Section 101 (a) (1). 42 U.S.C. 7401 (a) (1).
71 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 105.
72 Section 101 (a)(2), 42 U.S.C. 7401 (a)(2),
73 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 105.
74 Section 116, 42 U.S.C. Section 7416.
75 See, e.g., Section lll(g), 42 U.S.C. Section 741 l(g); Section 112(b)(3), 42 U.S.C. Section 7412(b)(3); and
 Section 302(e), 42 U.S.C. 7602(e).  See also Section 126(b), 42 U.S.C. Section 7426(b).
                                                   35

-------
 75 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 105-116.
 77 Section 101 (a)(3). 42 U.S.C. Section 7401 (a)(3).
 78 Section 110. 42 U.S.C. Section 7410.
 79 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 121-123.
 80 Sections 501 - 507, 42 U.S.C.  Sections 7661 - 7661f.
 81 Sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 173(a)(5). 42 U.S.C. Sections 7410(a)(2)(C) and 7503(a)(5).
 82 Sections 160-169. 42 U.S.C. Sections 7470-7479.
 "Sections 171-193, 42 U.S.C. Sections 7501-7515.
 84 Section 112. 42 U.S.C. Section 7412.
 85 Sections 401-416. 42 U.S.C. Sections 7641-7651o. •'.       '
 86 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, I'l 6-121.
 87 Section 110(a)(2)(C), 42 U.S.C. Section 7410(a)(2)(C).
 88 Section 110(a)(2)(E), 42 U.S.C. Section 7410(a)(2)(E).
 89 Section 110(a)(2)(G). 42 U.S.C. Section 7410(a)(2)(G).
 90 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 2?-37 and 123-124.
 91 Section 105. 42 U.S.C. Section 7405.
 92 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 1^8-129.
 93 Section 103(a)(2).  42 U.S.C. Section 7403(a)(2).
 94 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 128.
 35 42 U.S.C. Sections 6901 et seq.                    [
 96 Section 1001 (b)(2). 42 U.S.C. Section 6901 (b) (2).
 97 Section 1001(a)(3). 42 U.S.C. Section 6901(a)(3).
 98 Section 1003(a)(7); 42 U.S.C. Section 6902(a)(7).
 99 Section 1001 (a)(4). 42 U.S.C. Section 6901 (a)(4).
 100 Section 3009. 42 U.S.C. Section 6929.
 101 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 141.
 102 Ibid.
 103 Section 3006(b). 42  U.S.C. Section 6926(b).
 104 Section 3006(f). 42 U.S.C. Section 6926(f).         :
 105 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 138.
 106 Section 3005(c)(3). 42 U.S.C.  Section 6925(c)(3).
 107 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 138-139.
 108 Section 3019(a), 42  U.S.C. Section 6939a(a).
 109 Section 3019ft)). 42  U.S.C. Section 6939a(b).
 110 Section 3019(f).42 U.S.C. Section 6939a(f).                        ,            .
 111 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 139.
 112 Ibid..  136.                                        t
 113 Sections 4005 and 4006. 42 U.S.C. Sections 6945 and 6946.
 114 Section 4007. 42 U.S.C. Section 6947.              '-
115 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 142, 146-147.
116 Ibid, at 142.  See also id. at 143-146.
117 Section 3008. 42 U.S.C. Section 6928.
118 Section 7003, 42 U.S.C. Section 6973.
119 Section 3004, 42 U.S.C. Section 6924.
120 Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice, 142-146.
                                                  36

-------
                                  CHAPTER FOUR

                                      INDIANA
FINDINGS
Finding 1:   The Indiana Department of Environmental  Management  (IDEM)  has initiated
numerous activities to address environmental justice  and public participation, including a
strategic  plan, guidance,  training, and education.  Members of the public have viewed these
efforts as important and useful, but  would like to  see  more  emphasis  on improvements
associated with permitting, including the reduction of cumulative impacts and exposures to
pollution.

Finding 2:   IDEM's new compliance/enforcement planning  process has begun to integrate
environmental justice concerns into  the department's core programs by including toxic hot
spots and areas of concern as factors  for focusing its compliance/enforcement efforts.

BACKGROUND

According to the 2000 Census, Indiana is a medium-sized state with a population just under 6
million1, over 88 percent of whom are white.  Only two counties have populations of color that
exceed 13  percent:  Lake, which has 35 percent  (23 percent African-American and 12 percent
Hispanic) and includes the industrial cities of Gary and Hammond; and Marion, which  has 27
percent  (24 percent African-American and 3 percent Hispanic) and includes Indianapolis.2
Sixty-six of the state's 93 counties are more than 98  percent white.3  Indiana's demographics
are  quite different  from the other three states in this study, all  of which have much higher
people-of-color populations.

In the past four years, IDEM convened an Environmental Justice Advisory Council; developed
an environmental justice strategic plan; identified potentially hazardous sites in locations of
environmental  justice  concern; created a Guide for Citizen Participation; drafted  operating
 procedures for enhanced public participation in IDEM's decisions; conducted environmental
justice sensitivity training for staff;  and incorporated environmental justice as a factor in its
 new compliance/enforcement planning process.  A grant from EPA's Office of Environmental
 Justice funded a significant part of this work.4

 Those active in Indiana's environmental justice movement view IDEM's public participation
 and public education efforts as important and useful, but they favor more on-the-ground results
 that deal  clearly with new permits,  such  as addressing cumulative  impacts  and reducing
 environmental exposures in already burdened communities.5
                                            37

-------
 DEPARTMENT STRUCTURE

 Although IDEM implements state environmental programs, separate governor-appointed air,
 water, and waste boards have authority for issuing air, water, and solid waste rules.6  IDEM
 staff have indicated that this structure limits their ability to modify or adopt new, cross-cutting
 rules to  address environmental justice, either substantively or procedurally.  The boards have
 not addressed environmental justice  issues  thus far.  As a  result, IDEM  has  focused  on
 strategic planning, compliance/enforcement priority-setting, public participation, and training
 rather than on seeking rule changes.7

 IDEM  has  two  staff  assigned to work on environmental justice issues.   Although  the
 department's strategic plan calls for creating a senior level environmental justice ombudsman,
 IDEM has not yet done so for budgetary reasons. The department may soon fill the position,
 however.                                   !

 IDEM's ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PROGRAM

 IDEM's environmental justice  program  stemmed  from several factors.   Previously, the
 department had focused on pollution problems in northwest Indiana, an area with many people-
 of-color, or low-income communities and home to three of the nation's  largest steel mills.  In
 1996, EPA's Region  V designated northwest  Indiana as one of the "geographic initiatives" in
 its Agenda for Action.8  The agenda described the situation in Northwest Indiana:

       Northwest Indiana,  spanning the southern  shore  of  Lake  Michigan,  has
       experienced a century  of severe environmental degradation.  This is largely
       because of the steel and petroleum refining industries, because of alteration of
       the natural ecosystem by filling of dunes  and wetlands, and because of overall
       development.  Ozone and particulate  nonattainment,  10 million cubic yards of
       contaminated  sediments  in the  Indiana  Harbor Ship  Canal and  the Grand
       Calumet River,  millions  of gallons of free-floating petroleum products in the
       ground-water,  and  numerous sites contaminated  with  hazardous waste  —
       including 15 Superfund sites — are some of the  many environmental challenges
       facing the  area.9

Other motivations for the state's environmental justice work included IDEM's own mapping of
Superfund sites, which  showed  their  concentration  in  either  people-of-color or  low-income
communities; the  emergence of Title VI cases Nationwide; and the notoriety of the Shintech
case which involved the controversial siting and permitting of a vinyl chloride plant in a low-
income community of color near Baton Rouge, Louisiana.10  The  primary trigger for IDEM's
environmental justice  activities, however, was the EPA  environmental justice grant it received
in 1998."
                                          38

-------
Research  conducted by  the  Indianapolis Urban League's  Environmental Coalition further
motivated  IDEM  to  address  environmental justice  issues.   The  coalition  received  an
environmental justice "small  grant" from EPA to study the  relationship among race, income,
and toxic air releases.  The study was completed in May 2000 and concluded:

       Both low-income residents and black residents (who make up 90 percent of the
       minority population)  are  disproportionately  located near TRI  (toxic release
       inventory) facilities in Indianapolis, Indiana.  As a result, these populations may
       face greater health risks from hazardous air emissions.12

Because the research was carefully designed, using census block and TRI data, and the coalition
had diverse representation, the  study was widely accepted as credible.13 The Indiana Justice
Partnership in northwestern Indiana, funded by EPA's office of Environmental Justice in 1997,
also helped to  spur IDEM's environmental justice program.

Although IDEM had already begun to address environmental justice issues, their importance was
underscored by a Title VI civil rights complaint filed against the city of Indianapolis by EPA and
Improving Kids' Health, a small  nonprofit organization focusing on children's health issues.
The  complaint alleged that bypasses of the  city's  sewers occurred in areas that produced
disproportionate impacts on people-of-color communities.14

Strategic Plan

IDEM has developed a fairly detailed environmental justice strategic plan.  The plan focuses
on identifying areas of concern and  on public participation. It acknowledges the importance of
reducing risks and training IDEM staff to better understand environmental justice issues.
IDEM held public meetings on the plan in the state's largest population centers, but found that,
except for in Northwest Indiana,  community groups  had little  interest discussing the planning
document. IDEM also convened an Interim Environmental Justice Advisory Committee, but
found it hard  to maintain all the  members'  interest because some were more concerned with
working on specific steps to reduce exposures in high-risk areas.15

Following 18 months of development, IDEM adopted its  strategic plan  for environmental
justice in August 2001. The  plan describes IDEM's environmental justice mission as working
with Indiana communities to:

       Ensure that it  develops  and  implements  policies,  programs,  and
       procedures that:

           •   Inform, educate, and empower all people  in our State to have
              meaningful  participation   in  decisions   which affect  their
              environment;
           •   Reduce  any  cumulative  disparate   impact  of environmental
              burden, including burdens  from past practices, on people-of-color
              and/or low-income status; and
                                           39

-------
           •  Address IDEM's obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights
              Act of 1964.16                  |
                                             i
The plan's key implementation principles include:
                                             j
           •  Awareness and Sensitivity.   IDEM  will  ensure that all  staff
              involved   in   environmental   decision-making  are   educated
              regarding the nature of, and the cumulative environmental burden
              on the population affected by those decisions.
           •  Public Participation.  IDEM will continue to improve its efforts
              to put into place effective means for soliciting meaningful public
              input  and  providing  opportunities  to impact environmental
              decision-making.
           •  Inclusiveness.   IDEM will include all interested  parties and
              governmental   agencies  in  the  process   of  fashioning  and
              implementing an Environmental Justice Strategic Plan.
           •  Proactivity.   IDEM   will  actively   pursue  resolutions   to
              environmental justice disputes  by facilitating  or arranging for
              facilitation of those disputes between all of the interested parties.
           •  Communication and Education. IDEM's Environmental Justice
              Strategic Plan will have clear, concise, proactive, and accessible
              communication and education as integral components.
           •  Sustainability. The Environmental Justice Strategic Plan, devised
              in partnership  by  IDEM and  other stakeholders,  will include
              clear,  concise, and  proactive guidelines in order to  provide for
              the ongoing Sustainability of programs implemented  pursuant  to
              the strategy, including systematic evaluation measures.17

The plan includes seven goals:

           1.  identify geographic areas where there  are environmental justice
              concerns
           2.  educate communities about environmental issues, the public's role
              as a  participant in  environmental  decision-making   and the
              department's statutory roles and responsibilities
           3.  educate IDEM staff regarding  environmental justice issues and
              understand the relevance and applicability of those issues to their
              work
           4.  ensure all affected parties have the opportunity to communicate
              their concerns  to the department and to each other about decisions
              that involve environmental justice issues,  including permitting
              decisions
                                           40

-------
          5.  evaluate  the effectiveness and appropriateness of existing public
             processes   for   environmental   decision-making,   utilizing
             community input in the evaluation
          6.  seek out and involve other agencies in addressing issues related to
             environmental justice
          7.  implement an effective environmental justice Strategic  Plan for
             the department18

The  state's commitment to environmental justice is also  demonstrated by incorporating the
Environmental Justice  Strategic Plan into IDEM's Performance Partnership Agreement with
EPA's Region V.19  These agreements are negotiated between states and EPA Regional offices.
Typically, they include jointly developed goals  and objectives based on  an assessment of a
state's unique environmental conditions and program needs,  strategies  for meeting them, roles
and responsibilities  of each partner in carrying out the strategies, and the measures that will be
used to assess progress.  More than 30 states have negotiated these voluntary agreements with
EPA.20

Geographic Information Systems Mapping

IDEM has mapped areas throughout Indiana that contain double the statewide averages for
people-of-color population and incomes below the poverty level.  The maps also contain the
location of Superfund sites, combined sewers, major air and water permits, hazardous waste
facilities, and other related information.21  IDEM expects that the maps will encourage its staff
to pay closer attention to potential environmental justice issues in low-income  and people-of-
color communities.2E  For example, the areas of  concern identified on  the maps  can trigger the
use of IDEM's new Enhanced Public Participation Protocol, discussed below.

 Guide for Citizen  Participation

 Using its environmental justice grant from EPA, IDEM prepared a detailed, "plain English"
 Guide to Citizen  Participation.™   Available in  English  and Spanish,  the  guide  includes
 information on:

     •   getting involved in protecting the neighborhood environment
     •   Indiana's environmental rules and rulemaking process
     •   how  IDEM helps to protect the neighborhood and environment
     •   the public participation process
     •   how  IDEM's environmental permitting programs work
     •   opportunities for participating in IDEM's decisions on environmental cleanups
     •   specific public notice requirements and opportunities for public participation for
        IDEM's other, non-permit/non-cleanup related activities
     •  environmental issues  over which IDEM believes it has no authority,  such  as
        noise, odor, water wells, soil conservation, and publicly owned lands
     •  getting involved in IDEM's decision-making process
                                            41

-------
 The Interim Environmental Justice Advisory Committee believed that the 117-page guide was
 too complicated, while some IDEM program staff worried that the guide might oversimplify
 some procedures.24 The advisory committee's cbncerns led IDEM to develop a 12-page "mini-
 guide" that does not include the details for individual permitting programs.25

 IDEM also has published a brochure on How to Participate in Environmental Decision-Making
 for wide distribution and has begun to prepare "plain English" permit notices.   These notices
 will be written more like newspaper advertisements than legal notices.   For example, a recent
 notice about a proposed  incinerator was published as a  one-quarter page ad  in a Spanish
 language paper.26

 Enhanced Public Participation Procedures

 IDEM is  developing operating procedures  for enhanced public participation,  based on the
 premise that routine public notice and comment procedures often do not adequately  consider
 the limited ability of many citizens to obtain the necessary information to participate effectively
 in decisions affecting their environment.27 The enhanced procedures would be triggered for
 projects that:

    •   are located in close proximity to neighborhoods with high minority and/or low-
        income populations; program staff will utilize "environmental justice maps" to
        make this determination. IDEM notes that "in close proximity" is a subjective
        term but often refers to  an area within a reasonable distance from the project,
        usually a one-or-two mile radius
    •   are a major, new permitted source or  major modification of a permitted source
        of emissions or discharges into the environment
    •  result in significant environmental impact
    •  generate public interest ffl               |

If any of these conditions exist, IDEM expects its staff to:

    •  draft a public notice in easily understood language
    •  make the notice available in both English and Spanish,  depending on the  area's
       demographics
    •  distribute the  notice  to relevant  organizations  included   on   the  Enhanced
       Neighborhood Contact List, such as neighborhood associations, minority health
       coalitions, and other groups that  could facilitate more effective communication
       with communities29

IDEM  also  expects that  projects  meeting  the threshold criteria  will  be referred to its
environmental jistice coordinator  and community relations director to determine  whether a
site-specific public relations plan should be developed. Elements in  such a plan could include
                                           42

-------
follow-up phone calls to encourage attendance, fact sheets, radio announcements, community
interviews, facilitated meetings, and a series of shorter meetings held in multiple locations.30

IDEM has drafted a facilitation protocol for resolution of environmental justice disputes that is
designed to  "bring parties together and foster collaborative, solution-based discussions about
issues."31 The protocol is a policy document designed to inform IDEM staff about when and
how to  use  dispute  resolution to address  environmental justice concerns.   The protocol
anticipates that IDEM staff will serve as facilitators on occasion and that outside facilitators
will be used on other occasions.32

Staff Training

IDEM found  that its  staff had a low awareness  of environmental justice issues  and  little
personal experience with  them.  To remedy this situation,  IDEM  developed and delivered a
staff awareness training session to 80 percent of its 900-person staff.  IDEM based its training
on  programs created by the Environmental Justice Training Collaborative, a multi-stakeholder
group  that includes EPA; state, local, and tribal governments;  local environmental justice
groups; businesses and industry.  IDEM found that practical examples of environmental justice
issues  and success stories in  addressing  them are important to  the  sessions' effectiveness.33
IDEM plans  a second phase,  focusing on incorporating  environmental justice into  specific
department activities.34         ,

Compliance Planning

IDEM  recently  adopted a coordinated  planning process  for  prioritizing  compliance  and
enforcement activities across all of its programs.35 In the past, it planned these activities within
each of its waste, water,  and  air offices.  The new, cross-media process is designed  to focus
enforcement resources on the state's most  significant environmental problems, regardless of
the environmental medium affected.

The first phase of this planning process will be to develop an annual report, prepared by the
compliance/enforcement  team,  that  identifies  enforcement priorities.  IDEM's  team is
composed of branch and section chiefs from each of the media offices and staff from the Office
of Planning and Assessment.  The report will be based on:

    •  an inventory of IDEM's current enforcement and compliance activities
    •  research on a variety of factors, including compliance trends,  EPA compliance
       and  enforcement  initiatives,  use of  EPA's  on-line  enforcement  targeting
       database,  and new state laws and rules
    •  data  analysis,  including  complaints, toxic  release  inventory  information,
       enforcement history, and delineation of high-risk facilities
    •  list of facilities that staff feel should receive attention
                                            43

-------
        generation of a compliance/enforcement planning report. Among a list of 12
        priorities are  toxic  "hot spots"  and  the  environmental justice focus  areas
        identified in the Geographic Information Systems (CIS) mapping project36
 IDEM will  decide on department-wide compliance and enforcement priorities during  phase
 two, based  on information in the phase one report.  In phase three,  IDEM  will draft and
 implement a compliance action plan for each media office related to each of the 12 priorities.
 These compliance action plans then will allocate compliance resources and specific site visits
 based on:
        agency priorities
        office priorities
        potential for environmental harm
        compliance history of sector or segment of the regulated community
        EPA requirements
 Review and  assessment is the  fourth  and
 compliance/enforcement planning process is
new
final  phase of  the  process.37   Because the
 , IDEM has just begun to implement it.
 ANALYSIS OF THE INDIANA PROGRAM

 Leadership

 IDEM  staff initiated the environmental justice program  by applying for an EPA  grant  to
 convene  the Interim  Environmental  Justice  Advisory  Committee,  develop  the  state's
 environmental justice strategic plan, map areas of concern, and prepare the Guide for Public
 Participation.   IDEM  staff believe that they can take several  important  steps to address
 environmental justice issues without  legislation,  including  all of  the  activities  that the
 department  has  launched.38  Some public  interest community members believe that IDEM
 should focus more attention on permitting and risk reduction.

 To give environmental justice added emphasis, IDEM incorporated its environmental justice
 strategic plan into its Performance Partnership Agreement with EPA and also trained its staff
 on the issue.  It has an environmental justice  coordinator, but the position is not part of the
 department's senior management.   Unlike  California and  Florida, Indiana has no  legislation
 specifically  addressing environmental justice and IDEM staff believe it is  unlikely that the
 legislature will enact such  legislation in the near future.  Without legislation or a governor's
 order, the future of IDEM's environmental justice programs depends on the commissioner's
 and senior managers' continued interest and support.

Accountability

IDEM has not yet developed measurable objectives for the program.39  It has, however, told
department managers  that they will be held accountable in their  performance evaluations for
                                          44

-------
using the  enhanced public participation procedures when their programs engage in  activities
involving mapped communities of concern.  These requirements have not translated into formal
personnel  evaluation criteria to date.40 IDEM does not have any external environmental justice
reporting  requirements,  although it has  made several  commitments  in its  Performance
Partnership Agreement that reflect elements contained  in its environmental justice  strategic
plan.   Finally,  IDEM  recently  decided to establish a longer-term  Environmental Justice
Advisory Committee to provide additional emphasis on environmental justice.

Permitting Authority and Procedures

Most of IDEM's environmental justice  strategy focuses on  improving public participation.
Department managers believe that state law allows them significant latitude for work in this
area.41 IDEM's powers include the authority to "develop and implement a program  of public
awareness  and participation to assure  maximum  citizen  involvement in  the evolution and
continuation of the environmental programs of the state."42  Although managers do not believe
that the department has  similar latitude to  account for environmental justice in  permitting,
IDEM has not comprehensively analyzed its legal authority  to address environmental justice
         43
concerns.

The principal tools available to assist state permit writers are the maps that show environmental
justice areas of concern and the protocol for enhanced  public participation that applies  if a
project is proposed for one of these areas.

Priority Setting and Risk Reduction

IDEM's environmental justice strategic  plan provides for reducing  any cumulative disparate
impacts.  The department's main work related to cumulative impact has  been identifying
communities where  higher concentrations of potentially environmentally hazardous facilities
exist.   Most of  IDEM's focus has been on public participation, an area  that can help in
reducing risk over time, but does not directly do so.  Risk reduction likely will play a role in
the  new compliance/enforcement  planning process since toxic hot  spots  and environmental
justice  are  areas that the department's compliance and enforcement  planning team  must
consider when developing priorities.   For example, environmental justice considerations  will
be a factor in the department's implementation of an enforcement initiative on scrap yards. To
set priorities for  the scrap yard  enforcement initiative, IDEM intends to use CIS for mapping
overlays of scrap yards,  environmental  justice areas of concern, history of non-compliance,
and wellhead protection areas.44

Cumulative impacts are a significant environmental justice concern in  northwest  Indiana.45
However, IDEM believes that it lacks the capacity to conduct the substantial scientific research
needed to understand the complicated issues associated with cumulative impacts. Department
staff believe that EPA could provide valuable assistance  to the states for analyzing  cumulative
impacts.46
                                           45

-------
However, IDEM is pursuing initiatives to address two toxic pollutants: diesel emissions and
styrene.  The department's Northwest Indian^ Diesel Emissions initiative  was launched in
response to community concerns.  It is being carried out through a community-based work
group that includes representatives of local, state, and federal governments, transportation
planning agencies, industry, and environmental interests. 4? The initiative currently focuses on
the  concentrated,  long-term  idling  of heavy-duty diesel  vehicles.   Thus far,  they have
completed  a number of survey studies to explore this problem.48  The effort also  involves
technology-specific pilot projects funded by the EPA. 49

In 1997, Indiana's manufacturers of boats, recreational vehicles, bathtubs, showers, and other
reinforced plastic products emitted more than 2,000 tons of styrene, with 75 percent coming
from the northern part of the state.50  Styrene can affect the human nervous system and is a
highly reactive volatile organic compound that contributes to ozone formation.  In 1999, the
state  legislature required  Indiana's air pollution control board to promulgate rules limiting
styrene emissions.51 The styrene  rules,  adopted  in  2000,  focused  on  the open  molding
processes used in the reinforced plastic/composite fiberglass industry.52 IDEM managers noted
that the department has very limited resources to pursue emission reduction  projects,  such as
the diesel and styrene initiatives.53

Public Participation

IDEM has  focused on improved  public  participation by  producing  the  Guide  to  Citizen
Participation  for permit  and  non-permit programs,  drafting policies  on  enhanced  public
participation procedures,  and  facilitation  of environmental justice disputes.   Also,  it  has
developed a  training program  for  citizens on how to participate in  environmental decision-
making.

RECOMMENDATIONS

    •   The  Indiana  Department of  Environmental Management  (IDEM)  should establish
       measurable  program objectives  for environmental  justice,  develop accountability
       measures and procedures for achieving them, and issue regular public reports about its
       progress in addressing environmental justice concerns.

    •   Now that IDEM has identified localities of concern for special attention, the department
       should examine whether residents  of those  areas are  exposed to greater amounts of
       pollution than other  areas of the state.   Also,  it should develop programs to reduce
       hazards in any areas that are facing higher risks. This effort is consistent with IDEM's
       commitment contained in its strategic  plan to "reduce any cumulative  disparate impact
       of environmental burden."             ;

   •   IDEM should comprehensively examine  applicable  state constitutional provisions, as
       well as environmental, administrative, civil rights, and public health  laws, to identify
       legal authorities for addressing environmental justice  issues in its core environmental
                                           46

-------
   programs,  including enforcement.   Upon completion of this analysis, IDEM should
   communicate the results through an easily understood guidance document that can be
   Tcarried out by permit writers and other department staff in their daily work.

•  IDEM should develop  performance objectives to hold  managers accountable for its
   commitment to  using  the  department's  enhanced public participation procedures in
   communities of concern.

•  IDEM should add more databases to  the state's  CIS  mapping  of low-income and
   people-of-color communities and should include data on water discharges, air emissions
   and toxic releases, as well as ambient monitoring results, along with the demographic
   information and  location of Superfund sites already on current maps.

•  IDEM should undertake a second phase  of  staff  training on  environmental justice,
   focusing on how to  incorporate environmental justice concerns into  the department's
   specific core programs and daily activities.

•  IDEM should establish a permanent, broadly representative advisory committee through
   legislative or executive order to assist it in achieving its environmental justice goals.

•  IDEM should ensure that  its environmental justice coordinator reports directly to its
   commissioner.
                                       47

-------
ENDNOTES
1 www.stats. indiana. edu/web/county/race99. html
2 Fedstais at www.fedstats.gov/qf/ (2000).
3 Ibid.                                             f
4 5eewww.ln.gov/idem. The public can find information on IDEM's environmental justice program, including its
  strategic plan, and the Guide for Citizen Participation, on the department's web site by clicking on the "browse
  topics" prompt on the home page and then clicking on the "environmental justice" topic.
5 Mary Mulligan, Member, IDEM Interim Advisory Committee on Environmental Justice, Interview
  (March 27, 2002).
6 Barbara Goldblatt, David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and Keith Veal, Interview.
7 Ibid.
8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region V, Agenda for Action (1996)  18-19.
9 Ibid.. 18.
10 Barbara Goldblatt, David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and.Keith Veal, Interview.
" Ibid.; and Lori Kaplan, Commissioner, Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Interview,
  (April 9, 2002).                                   |
12  Indianapolis Urban League Environmental Coalition, \Race, Income and Toxic Air Releases in Indianapolis,
  Indiana (May 2000) 12.                            [
13 John Mundell, President, Mundell and Associates and Member of the Indianapolis Urban League
  Environmental Coalition, Interview (March 27, 2002).
14 Tom Neltner, President, Improving Kids' Environment, Interview (April 2,  2002).
15 Barbara Goldblatt, David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and Keith Veal, Interview;  Mary Mulligan, Interview.
16 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Environmental Justice Strategic Plan (September 2000) 1.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.. 1-3.
19 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Environmental Performance Partnership Agreement:
  A Strategic Partnership between U.S. EPA Region V and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management
  (2001-2003) 8.
20 National Academy of Public Administration, environment.gov: Transforming Environmental Protection for the
  21st Century (2000) 152, Figure 5-1.
21 E-mail from Keith Veal to Veronica Lenegan (May 17,2002).
22 Barbara Goldblatt. David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and Keith Veal, Interview.
23 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, IDEM's Guide for Citizen Participation: How to Make
  Your Voice Heard on Community Environmental Issues (2001).
  Available at www.in.gov/idem/guides/publicparticipation.
24 Barbara Goldblatt. David Parry, Felicia Robinson, andiKeith Veal, Interview.
25 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Getting Involved in Environmental Decision Making:
  Highlights from IDEM's Guide for Citizen Participation.
  Available at www.in.gov/idem/guides/public participation.
2S Barbara Goldblatt. David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and Keith Veal, Interview.
27 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Draft, Operating Procedures for Enhanced Public
  Participation.
28 Ibid.
29 Ibid.
30 Ibid.
31 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Facilitation Protocol, Draft  Resolution of Environmental
  Justice Disputes, Outline.
32 Ibid.
33 Barbara Goldblatt, David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and Keith Veal, Interview.
34 Ibid.
35 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Compliance/Enforcement Planning Process.
35 Ibid..  5.
                                                  48

-------
"Ibid., 3-7.
38 Barbara Goldblatt, David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and Keith Veal, Interview.
39 Lori Kaplan, Commissioner, Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Interview (April 9, 2002).
40 Barbara Goldblatt, David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and Keith Veal, Interview.
41 Ibid.
42 Indiana section 13-14-1-5 (In.  Stat. Ann.  2000).
43 Barbara Goldblatt, David Parry, Felicia Robinson, and Keith Veal, Interview.
44 Pamela O'Rourke, Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Interview (February 4, 2002).
45 Mary Mulligan, Interview.
46 Ibid.
47 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Clean Air Bulletin, Volume 3, Issue 1 (August 2000).
48 IDEM's Northwest Indiana Diesel Emissions Initiative - Interim Report (October 2001).
49 IDEM's Northwest Indiana Diesel Emissions Initiative - Current Status (May 2002).
50 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Clean Air Bulletin, (August 2000) 3:1.
51 Ibid.
52 Email from Keith Veal to Veronica Lenegan (May  17, 2002).
53 Barbara Goldblatt, David Parry, Felicia Robinson,  and Keith Veal, Interview.
                                                   49

-------
50

-------
                                   CHAPTER FIVE

                                      FLORIDA
FINDINGS
Finding 1:   Florida's university-based approach to  addressing environmental justice issues
can serve as a  useful model  for some states as it focuses on  scientific research and provides
technical resources to citizens and governmental units.

Finding 2:   As Florida has demonstrated, focusing on  public  health  issues can  generate
broader support for environmental justice initiatives.

Findings:   Florida's  brownfield  law,   which  requires   significant  public  input   into
redevelopment plans, can be a very useful tool for addressing environmental justice problems.

BACKGROUND

Florida has  more than  16 million people, more than 14 percent of whom are African-American
and  16  percent Hispanic.   Its  two  largest  counties  have  very  large  people-of-color
communities.   Miami-Dade County's population is more  than 20 percent  African-American
and 57 percent Hispanic.  Broward County's population is 20 percent African-American and
16 percent Hispanic.1

Florida is different from the other states studied because most environmental justice activity
occurs outside its environmental  agency.   Legislation requires the Florida Department of
Environmental  Protection  (DEP)  to  address  environmental justice issues  in its brownfield
program, but the agency does little other environmental justice work.  Florida is the only .state
in the study that launched its environmental justice  efforts based  on an in-depth 18-month
evaluation of the state's environmental justice problems.   A multi-stakeholder commission,
created by the legislature and supported by university researchers, led the study.

Florida's environmental justice  program  includes  research and community involvement
activities conducted by the Environmental  Sciences  Institute, the Center for Environmental
Equity and Justice,  the College of Pharmacy, the Institute  of Public Health at the Florida
Agricultural and Mechanical University  (FAMU),2 and the  Interdisciplinary Center  for
Brownfield  Rehabilitation Assistance  at the  University of South Florida.  These activities are
designed to  address problems in  communities that have significant health problems, limited
access to  health care,  and  a  high concentration of environmentally  hazardous facilities.
Environmental justice  issues  also play a role in the CERP, managed by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District.
                                            51

-------
 IMPETUS FOR THE PROGRAM

 Most  of  the  state's  environmental justice  initiatives  stem  from  two  sources.    State
 Representative Josephus Eggelletion became  aware  of  environmental  justice issues  from
 national news reports and a meeting of the National Conference of State Legislators.  With this
 information in hand and amid growing  complaints  from his  constituency,  he introduced
 legislation in  1994 to create an Environmental Equity and Justice Commission, charged with
 documenting  the actual  extent  of  environmental justice  problems in the state.3   With  a
 reputation as  a moderate interested in economic development and environmental protection,
 Eggelletion was able  to  facilitate  an  agreement  among  businesses,  government,  and
 environmental interests  concerning the commission's makeup and  goals.4    The  Florida
 Chamber of Commerce and the Florida Chemical  Manufacturers Association  participated in
 these negotiations. These interests called for industry representation on the commission.  They
 wanted the study to use a reasonable process  for gathering  facts about whether industrial
 facilities were concentrated in low-income neighborhoods and communities of color, and focus
 on preventing future problems rather than assigning responsibility for disproportionate impacts
 to particular facilities. They also wanted public hearings to be held throughout the state to give
 businesses an opportunity to comment.5       ;

 The Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation (LEAF),  a nonprofit advocacy group, played
 a  key role in advancing the legislation that created the  commission.  LEAF worked with
 several Florida communities on  hazardous waste incinerator siting and Superfund issues.  As a
 result of this work,  LEAF developed model legislation designed  to increase the availability of
 information on community health issues.  When the idea for the commission emerged, LEAF
 supported the proposal.6                     i

 FLORIDA ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY AND JUSTICE COMMISSION
                                           i
 The  Environmental  Equity  and  Justice Commission was  formed in  1995 and completed its
 work 18-months later. The legislation creating the commission tasked it:

       to   examine   and  determine the  possible  disproportionate and cumulative
       concentration of environmental hazards in  people of color and  low-income
       communities, to assess how  Florida can best address these inequities,  if any,
       with emphasis on  future  prevention, and to ensure that public benefits resulting
       from the work of Florida's  agencies will be fully and  equitably realized by
       communities of color and low income, taking into account the greater degree of
       risk to which such communities may be exposed.7

The  17-member commission included two members  each from the civil rights, environmental,
and business communities, two university representatives,  and one member each representing
the Florida DEP, the Department of Health,  a large public facility and a large  private  facility
regulated by the Florida DEP, city government,  county government, experts in environmental
risk, and each  house of the legislature.
                                          52

-------
The  legislation  required the commission  to  conduct a "scientific analysis, including case
studies, of 'targeted sites,'  using historical and  current demographic information,  including
health statistics of the surrounding population of each site."8  The law defined targeted sites as
"a representative sample of the sites both in minority and low-income neighborhoods, as well
as other  socioeconomic neighborhoods,  throughout the  state, but  to include only  those
businesses and facilities regulated by the Florida DEP, including government-owned facilities;
facilities regulated by the Florida DEP through delegation to any local  government or water
management districts; and the Superfund Sites  National Priorities List (NPL)."9

When examining targeted sites, the commission  was to review several  areas associated with
environmental justice:

   •  enforcement authority and actions as they affect targeted sites
   •  factors,  including  economic,  that may  have  caused targeted  sites  to  be
       concentrated in low-income and people-of-color communities
   •  the role  that land-use decision making plays in influencing  siting and land use
       decisions which could pose a potential risk to human health
   •  ways  that government  agencies might become  more aware of  neighborhood
       situations that pose a particularly high risk to human health
   •  communication methods used by the Florida DEP that could  better reach people-
       of-color  and low-income communities
   •  approaches to ensure consideration of environmental justice when formulating
       and implementing environmental policies arid legislation10 (see Figure 5.1)

The  commission conducted a  demographic  analysis to identify Florida's targeted sites  and
designated four subcommittees to address specific topics:

    •   Health Effects and Risks  Subcommittee: to assess the human  health impacts
        resulting from acute and chronic exposure to environmental pollutants
    •   Enforcement and  Evaluation  Subcommittee: to  examine  the content and
        application of  regulatory agency enforcement policies and determine if these
        policies  are fairly and equitably applied to all communities and facilities without
        respect to race or income
    •  Local Government Site Placement Subcommittee: to determine whether local
        governments  provide  opportunities  for  potentially affected  communities  to
        participate meaningfully in local siting decisions
    •  Rules Subcommittee: to review the influence that state entities,  particularly the
        Florida  DEP, have exerted or could have exerted on the siting of facilities that
        have the potential for affecting the health of adjacent communities11
                                            53

-------
                                      FIGURE 5.1
        FLORIDA ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY AND JUSTICE COMMISSION

  Highlights of the Commission's key legislative recommendations include:

  •   appropriate funds to establish a Center for Environmental Equity  and Justice at a
      historically black college or university to focus on research, and policy development

  •   develop  criteria for public  notice of violations or enforcement actions by  the Florida
      DEP, as well as proposed projects or enforcement actions by local governments

  •   define "environmentally overburdened  neighborhoods,"  and consider limiting future
      siting by local governments in these neighborhoods

  •   develop  education and  outreach  programs to  address and/or  provide  information on
      health  effects  from   exposure   within j communities,  and   build  awareness   and
      understanding of the comprehensive land; use  planning process, siting and permitting
      procedures, and environmental protection programs

  •   publicize public  hearings,  community  meetings,  workshops,  and seminars through
      churches, community organizations, civic groups, schools and neighborhoods
  •   consider environmental equity and justice  issues  in land  use planning and zoning
      decisions by local governments

  •   utilize fines collected by Florida DEP to address the problems  of affected communities
      directly,  e.g., studies  and analyses  that  examine health  effects  of exposure  to
      environmental pollution

  •   integrate environmental justice and equity into the functional plan of every state agency

  •   consider the  redevelopment  of  hazardous sites  only  after  questions relating  to
      environmental and health consequences have  been addressed and the site is no longer an
      environmental hazard

  Source: Florida Environmental Equity and Justice Commission.
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

Commission research staff — under the leadership of Dr. Richard Gragg of FAMU, and the
Florida DEP — conducted an extensive proximity and demographic analysis that mapped 3,287
facilities  in six categories: large quantity hazardous waste generators, Superfund NPL sites,
solid waste sites,  TRI reporters, hazardous waste transfer, storage and disposal sites, and
Florida's own list  of hazardous waste sites.  This study then compared the location of these
facilities  with population demographics at the census  block  level.  However,  there were
insufficient public  health  data for the researchers to overlay with the facility and demographic
                                          54

-------
information, or to determine whether communities near targeted facilities were exposed to a
disproportionate amount of environmental pollution from regulated facilities.12

The researchers also conducted a more in depth study of 571 facilities located in 15 counties to
examine the demographics of communities near environmentally hazardous sites within one-
half, one, and two miles.13 The results demonstrated that communities within two miles of
targeted sites  included disproportionately non-English speaking populations, minorities, and
renters,  and  that  nearby low-income populations  were  somewhat higher  than the  state
average.14  Based on this detailed  analysis, the commission concluded, "minority and  low-
income communities are disproportionately impacted by targeted environmental hazardous
sites" (see Figure 5.2).15

Three commission recommendations  have  been implemented: the  creation of the Center for
Environmental Equity and Justice, housed in  the FAMU  Environmental Sciences Institute;
establishment  of a birth-defects registry, housed in the FAMU Institute  of Public Health; and
the  establishment of the  Community Health Advisory Board to the Florida  Department of
Health.  Legislation outlining environmental justice requirements for brownfield projects was
already in place.   In addition, the commission's work led to pilot community health centers in
six communities that had a high incidence of health problems.16

CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY AND JUSTICE

In  1998, the  state legislature created  the Center for Environmental  Equity  and  Justice  in
FAMU's Environmental  Science Institute to "conduct research,  develop policies, and engage
in  education,  training,  and  community outreach  with respect to  environmental equity and
justice  issues."17   The  center receives annual state  funding  totaling  $670,000 as part of
FAMU's base budget.18  The  legislation authorized the center to enter into a memorandum of
understanding with the Florida DEP, the  Department of Community Affairs (which  has an
oversight role in  local land-use planning), and other relevant agencies to  address environmental
justice  issues.19  The center  attempted to  enter into a memorandum of agreement with the
Florida DEP, but the department managers did not believe an  agreement would accomplish
anything because, in their view, Florida DEP's current legal authorities did not allow them to
consider environmental justice issues.20

Focus of the  Center

The Center for Environmental Equity and Justice focuses on:

     •  examining issues  related to enforcement, evaluation, health effects and risks,
        and site placement
     •  providing  and facilitating education and training on environmental  equity and
       justice issues to students, citizens, and local and state government employees
     •  conducting research  to  elucidate and validate  contaminant  biomarkers  of
        exposure,  effect,  and susceptibility in human populations
                                            55

-------
  •   addressing environmental impacts on populations using geographic information
      systems and other technologies
  •   focusing on sampling  and analyzing environmental contaminants in impacted
      communities
  •   serving  as  a statewide resource for technical  and  public information on
      environmental justice21                 ;
                                    FIGURE 5.2
                             CLEARWATER, FLORIDA
 LINKING BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

    •  The  state of Florida  and the City of Clearwater have developed an "Environmental
       Justice Action Agenda" to address brownfield redevelopment.
    •  The  agenda was created in broad consultation with residents, city staff, and other
       stakeholders.
    •  The agenda is designed to:
          •   enhance awareness of brownfields
          •   improve the community's access to information
          •   ensure community participation in decision-making
          •   develop the economic base of the brownfield area neighborhoods
          •   create a healthy and safe environment in the Clearwater brownfield area
    •  The agenda is  "considered a 'living document' that builds upon existing local, state,
       and national efforts and programs to...provide fair and equal environmental protection
       to all citizens of Clearwater" affected by the redevelopment of brownfields.
    •  Florida Statute Chapter 376 codifies Florida's linkage between environmental justice
       issues  and  brownfield redevelopment:   The statue  reads, "Environmental justice
       considerations  should  be  inherent in meaningful  participation  elements  of  a
       brownfields redevelopment program."
    •  Additionally, the Center for Brownfields Rehabilitation Assistance  (CBRA) supports
       the City of Clearwater's Environmental  Justice Action Agenda.  Established in 1998
       at the  University of  South  Florida, the "center  seeks to conduct and disseminate
       research  on the  environmental  and health  effects  surrounding  Florida's  many
       brownfields sites."
    •  The  combination of clear  statutory   authority,  Clearwater's  dedication  to  the
       Environmental  Justice Agenda,  with the public support of the  CBRA,  give  the
       environmental justice policy all the legs it needs to stand.

Source: City of Clearwater Brownfields Area Environmental Justice Action Agenda,
approved by the City of Clearwater, FL, on September 7,  2001.
                                        56

-------
Activities of the Center

The center engages in a wide range of activities, including:

   •   training BS,  MS  and Ph.D. students  in  environmental sciences,  including
       environmental justice, environmental  ethics,  environmental  toxicology and
       human health, risk assessment, environmental  law, environmental policy and
       risk management, and environmental chemistry
   •   convening annual statewide environmental justice conferences
   •   helping to develop the Economic and Environmental Equity Plan for the CERP
   •   working  with  the City  of Clearwater,  the  University  of South  Florida
       Brownfields Resource Center, EPA, community members, and the International
       City and County  Managers' Association  (ICMA) to develop and implement an
       environmental justice action agenda for the City  of Clearwater, which the ICMA
       used as the basis for its national model for incorporating environmental justice
       concerns into brownfield redevelopment22
    •  consulting with community organizations on environmental justice issues23
    •  drafting   memoranda  of  understanding  with  state  agencies  to  address
       environmental justice issues, though the Florida DEP and the Department of
       Health have not entered into such agreements to  date24

 FAMU also maintains the state's birth-defects registry since its inception in 1998; thus, the
 university has a base of data that can be analyzed to determine whether patterns  exist related to
 birth defects.25

 The center's current projects are:

    •   drafting   memoranda of  understanding  with  state   agencies  to   address
        environmental justice issues
    •   conducting  scientific research on  such issues as  the  role of environmental
        contaminants as  a risk factor  for learning disabilities,  anti-social behavior in
        youth and the development of prostate cancer
    •   assisting, via a formal agreement, the South Florida Water Management District
        and  the  Army  Corps  of Engineers  to  implement  the Environmental and
        Economic Equity Program Management Plan for the CERP
     •   assessing atmospheric emissions  from Oakridge National Laboratory and their
        impacts on the community of Scarborough, Tennessee
     •  investigating environmental justice issues in coastal communities
     •  promoting environmental justice policies in major  environmental organizations
        such as the Audubon Society, the Nature Conservancy, and the National Council
        for Science and the Environment
     •  implementing Florida's Environmental Justice Action Agenda
     •  establishing partnerships  with various parties, including universities, the federal
        Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and the U.S. Department of
                                            57

-------
        the Interior, to develop strategies to address environmental stressors and socio-
        economic issues related to environmental justice                    •

 The center's director, Dr. Richard Gragg, also serves as a member  of EPA's National
 Environmental Justice Advisory Council.

 BROWNFIELD LEGISLATION            i

 As a result of the work of the Environmental Equity and Justice Commission, Florida's 1997
 brownfield legislation provides authority to address environmental justice.  The law states:

        According to  the statistical proximity ;study contained in the Environmental
        Equity  and Justice  Commission, minority and  low-income communities are
        disproportionately impacted by targeted I environmentally hazardous sites.   The
        results indicate the need for the health and risk exposure assessments of minority
        and  poverty  populations around environmentally hazardous sites in this state.
        Redevelopment  of  hazardous  sites  should  address  questions  related  to
        environmental and health consequences.26

 The law also provides that environmental justice considerations be incorporated  by offering
 meaningful public participation in all brownfield redevelopment plans.27

 When local governments want to designate an area as a brownfield site, they must provide
 "notice of  the proposed  rehabilitation of the  brownfield  area...to neighbors  and nearby
 residents of the proposed area to be designated."28  Those proposing brownfield  designation
 must afford an opportunity for comment and suggestions about rehabilitation by those receiving
 notice.29  In  addition, the local  government  or person responsible for rehabilitating  and
 redeveloping  a brownfield  site  must  form  an  advisory   committee  to  improve  public
 participation and receive public  comment on rehabilitation and redevelopment of the area,
 future land-uses,  local  employment opportunities,  community  safety,  and  environmental
justice.  The law further  requires that  the advisory committee include  local residents and
 review and comment on the proposed redevelopment agreement.30 In 2001,  Florida reported
 45 designated brownfield sites.31

 The environmental justice concepts contained in  Florida's brownfield legislation are perhaps
 most fully realized in the City of Clearwater's Brownfield Action Agenda.32  The agenda is a
 framework for Clearwater to work with  community residents and  others on cleaning arid
 redeveloping brownfield sites.   Clearwater is located  in Florida's  most densely populated
 county; it has 217  state or federally regulated waste sites with various levels of contamination.
An estimated 10,830 people live in Clearwater brownfield areas, with 59 percent being people
of color and 27 percent with incomes below the poverty line.33

Clearwater's agenda provides for  enhancing public  awareness of brownfield problems,
improving  the  community's access  to  information,  ensuring community  participation  in
                                           58

-------
decision-making, developing the economic base of brownfield areas, and creating a healthy and
safe  environment in the brownfield areas.34   Work on the agenda has stimulated efforts to
create a statewide organization whose mission would be to promote brownfield redevelopment
and environmental justice opportunities through a partnership of communities, industries, and
government.35

CENTER FOR BROWNFIELD REHABILITATION

In 1998,  the  Florida legislature  established the interdisciplinary  Center for Brownfield
Rehabilitation  Assistance  (CBRA) at  the University of  South Florida.36  The Center  is
responsible for research: (1) to identify innovative solutions for removing contamination from
brownfields and  reducing threats to drinking water supplies and other potential  public health
threats  from  contaminated sites,  and (2)  to  develop risk-based  corrective  actions  for
rehabilitating  brownfield  sites.37   The  CBRA  — together  with  FAMU's  Center  for
Environmental Equity and Justice, the City of Clearwater, the Greenwood Neighborhoods, and
ICMA —  helped facilitate the development of  Clearwater's Environmental Justice Action
Agenda.

COMMUNITY  ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS

State legislation established the Community Environmental Health  Program in  1999.   Its
primary purpose is "to ensure the availability of public health  services to members of low-
income communities that may be adversely affected by contaminated sites located in or near
the community."38    The  legislation also  required the Department  of Health to establish a
Community Health Advisory  Board,  with a majority of  low-income members, to identify
community health needs and the types of services that should be provided.39 However,  the
legislature  did not fund the advisory board's work for  Fiscal Year 2002 and the board has
stopped meeting.40

In 2000, the legislature funded a free health clinic in Clearwater and six other health clinics to
provide basic health  services for communities  located near contaminated sites.   A broad
coalition of legislators supported the clinics because they recognized the health problems in the
areas being served.41  The projects were funded  at  $100,000  the  first  year, $400,000  the,
second year, and in excess of $400,000 the third,  but  the annual funding has  been hard to
sustain due to  tight state budgets.42

EVERGLADES RESTORATION

The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)  is a 30-year,  $7.8 billion project
with more than  60 individual components designed to restore, preserve, and protect the South
Florida ecosystem and to meet the region's other key water needs.   Congress and the Florida
legislature approved  the effort  in the Water Resources Development Act of  2000, which
authorized  work to  "restore, preserve,  and protect  the South  Florida ecosystem  while
providing  for other  water-related needs  of the  region, including  water  supply and  flood
                                           59

-------
 protection."43   The Army Corps  of  Engineers  and the South Florida Water Management
 District jointly manage the project.44  CERP includes establishing aquifer storage and recovery
 wells,  constructing levees, and building reservoirs. Because  CERP is a joint  federal/state
 effort,  each separate  project  requires  analysis under NEPA,  which,  in  turn,  requires
 compliance  with  the environmental justice directives included in Executive Order  12898.45
 Also, the Water Resources Development Act requires the Secretary of the Army to "ensure
 that impacts on socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, including individuals with
 limited English proficiency, and communities are considered during implementation of the
 plan,  and  that  such  individuals have  opportunities  to  review  and  comment  on  its
 implementation."46

 CERP provides important opportunities to address environmental justice problems, particularly
 related to drinking water supplies in communities surrounding Lake  Okeechobee.47  The
 population at the south end of Lake Okeechobee includes large proportions of low-income and
 people-of-color communities.  The quality of their drinking water has long been an issue, and
 there is  concern  that planned  aquifer  recharge  and water recovery  wells may  aggravate
 drinking-water quality problems.  These communities also are concerned that CERP does not
 treat Lake Okeechobee as a natural resource and pays too little attention to improving waiter
 quality there.48

 To meet NEPA and Water Resources Development Act requirements, the Corps of Engineers
 and the South  Florida Water Management District have  developed an Environmental  and
 Economic Equity Plan and a Public Outreach Plan. One purpose is to: "institute the sensitivity
 for and  the  provision of environmental justice assessment procedures,  according to NEPA
 guidelines, for all  CERP project planning and decision making."49 Among the key tasks are:

    •  providing environmental justice training for CERP staff and managers    j
    •  providing environmental justice support for project managers
    •  constructing an environmental justice outreach capacity to affected communities
       of color and low-income communities
    •  working with FAMU  to ensure that  CERP addresses environmental  justice
       ,      en                                                             **
       issues

 FAMU's Center for Environmental Equity and Justice will help to design environmental justice
 analyses  so  that  CERP  projects  meet  NEPA  and Water  Resources Development  Act
 requirements. The Center also will advise CERP managers on  how to address environmental
justice issues and structure public meetings and other community interaction.  Further, it  will
 help to design health related data collection for CERP projects.51 The Public Outreach Plan
 includes  detailed  approaches  for outreach to "minority" communities and  "socially  and
 economically disadvantaged communities."52
CERP managers hope to use a proactive approach for environmental justice issues so they gain
an early understanding  of community  concerns, avoid late opposition and difficult redesign
problems,  maintain  good  relations with  the  communities involved,  and  avoid  litigation.53
                                          60

-------
ACTION (Active Citizens Improving Our Neighborhoods), a regional community organization
focused on Everglades restoration, views CERP primarily as a growth management plan for
South  Florida  that  does little  to  address people-of-color  and  low-income  communities.
ACTION has expressed concern that managers have made few efforts thus far to involve these
communities in CERP projects, to assess risks faced  by these communities, and to mitigate
problems  or  improve conditions.  ACTION  also is concerned  that  the  Army  Corps of
Engineers and Water Management District  do  not have adequate funding to provide technical
assistance to the affected communities.54

ANALYSIS OF THE FLORIDA PROGRAM

Leadership

In Florida, environmental justice leadership largely occurs outside the state's environmental
agency.  Legislators and public interest groups drove  the initial environmental justice efforts.
However,  term limits have  forced out at least one of the key legislators.   Nonetheless,
legislative  leadership continued for several years,  resulting in the Environmental Equity and
Justice Commission, the Center for Environmental Equity and Justice, brownfield legislation,
and  most recently  community health clinic funding.   Tight state budgets may limit  future
initiatives, such as the continued funding of community health clinics.  This makes it critically
important to ensure that community programs — such as the Governor's "Front Porch Florida"
program which is focused on "holistic community revitalization" — incorporate environmental
justice concerns.55 Public interest organizations, led by LEAF, continue to have a strong voice
on environmental justice  issues and  have played  a major role in obtaining passage of
environmental justice legislation.  LEAF continues to lobby the legislature and state agencies to
implement the commission's recommendations.

So far, several of the Environmental Equity and Justice Commission recommendations directed
toward the legislature,  the Florida DEP, the  Department of Health,  and the Department of
Community  Affairs (whose  responsibilities  include land-use  planning),  have  not been
implemented.  Although legislative leadership is important to  set dear policy direction and
fund new programs, it has been difficult for the legislature to ensure that the recommendations
are implemented over time. Executive branch leadership is important to sustain momentum on
issues like environmental justice that  require programmatic  changes  in public participation,
permitting, risk reduction efforts, and enforcement.

Should Florida DEP follow up on the commission's recommendations, one key step will be to
thoroughly review and  analyze Florida statutes that might form the legal authority to address
environmental justice.  This would pave the way for the department to take a leadership role,
make  environmental justice a clear  priority  in its  policies and actions, and enter  into a
memorandum of understanding with the Center for Environmental Equity and Justice  to take
advantage of its expertise and resources.56  As noted  earlier, ELI has identified  numerous
provisions  in federal   environmental  laws  that EPA potentially  could  use  to advance
environmental justice goals in a variety of programs.57  Similarly,  the Academy's cursory
                                           61

-------
 review of Florida's key environmental laws  regulating air  and water pollution, and  waste
 treatment and disposal has identified several state statutory authorities that the Florida DEP
 might interpret as applicable to environmental justice.58

 The  Center for Environmental  Equity and Jtistice  continues  to assume  a leadership role,
 organizing annual environmental justice conferences, having representation  on EPA's National
 Environmental Justice  Advisory  Council,  participating in such projects  as the  CERP  and
 Clear-water's  Brownfield Action  Agenda, and  working with the National Council on Science
 and  the  Environment.   The center can  play several  important leadership  roles  through
 developing  new data,  informing  and educating citizens, ensuring that environmental justice
 issues are brought to the attention of policy makers,  and educating students.   Yet, it cannot
 change the  way that state agencies make decisions unless it is invited to work directly with
 government agencies, as it has for the Everglades project.

 Accountability

 Florida  has  few avenues for ensuring public  accountability  for its environmental justice
 programs.  The Center for Environmental Equity and Justice reports annually to the state
 Board of Education  and is ultimately accountable to  the legislature.   It also works  with an
 advisory council.  However, its  role in resolving environmental justice  problems is  rather
 limited.

 NEPA applies  to  environmental justice  issues  for  projects  related to  restoration of  the
 Everglades, allowing some public participation and providing a potential legal remedy should
 environmental justice considerations not be taken into account for various CERP projects.   In
 addition, the Environmental and  Economic Equity Program Management Plan requires CEiRP
 to develop indicators and performance measures so it  can evaluate and assess socio-economic
 parameters, including environmental justice.59  It is too early to  tell whether these data will be
 gathered and used effectively in holding CERP  managers accountable.

 Clearwater's Brownfield Action  Agenda encourages a much more direct role for citizens in
 evaluating brownfield projects and making decisions on redevelopment. Because citizens  are
 direct participants, they may be able to obtain some level of city  accountability.60

 Permitting Authority and Procedures

 The CERP is the only environmental justice program in Florida that directly affects permitting.
 The plan is driven primarily by the need to meet federal NEPA requirements.  However, these
 requirements are focused largely on public participation,  not developing permit conditions.
 This study identified agencies in other states that have found ways to  consider environmental
justice in their permitting practices and procedures. Without Florida DEP's active leadership to
 address environmental justice, the state permitting authorities and procedures are not likely to
 change.
                                           62

-------
The Environmental  Equity and Justice  Commission recommended  that the Department of
Community Affairs "incorporate environmental equity in its training and procedures related to
the comprehensive  [land-use]  planning efforts that affect siting  decisions."61  Although this
recommendation has not been implemented, recognizing the importance  of local  land-use
decisions in creating or aggravating environmental justice issues is an important first step.  By
providing better information about environmental consequences of land-use decisions, and tools
to  help  local  governments  take  these  consequences  into  account, the  department could
encourage local officials to address environmental justice problems.

Setting Priorities and Reducing Risk

Florida's efforts to set priorities and reduce risks are limited to three areas.   First,  brownfield
projects must consider community  concerns in redevelopment  projects, including  clean-up
levels that  will apply to a brownfield site.   Remediation of these sites should reduce risk in
some communities.   However, Florida's brownfield clean-up priorities are currently driven by
private redevelopment proposals, not by the state government's risk evaluation.

Research by the Center for Environmental Equity and Justice also may lead to risk reduction.
For example, the center is examining possible environmental causes for prostate cancer, which
occurs more frequently among African-Americans.   This  research  eventually could yield
efforts to  reduce environmental  factors that may contribute to these high  cancer rates.
However, such efforts likely will not occur until many years in the future.   More immediate
risk reduction may result from the  work of the community health clinics established by the
legislature.   They can reduce individual risk through better  health  care,  but they are not
removing environmental risks that may contribute to broader health problems.

Unless state agencies,  such as Florida DEP and the Department of Health, use their mandates
for reducing risk and engage in environmental justice initiatives,  the state will have difficulty
producing  concrete  results.   The  Panel believes  that  improvements in reducing risk  and
addressing environmental justice  problems can only be achieved by meaningfully  integrating
these initiatives into the basic missions of appropriate state agencies.

Public Participation

Florida's brownfield program and the CERP include enhanced public participation procedures.
The Everglades program  is quite  new,  so  it is  too  early to  assess  how effective these
procedures  will  be  in  enhancing  involvement  among  people-of-color   and  low-income
communities.  Perhaps the most interesting advance in public participation procedures is in the
requirement to set up  community advisory panels for cleaning up brownfield sites, most fully
realized in Clearwater's brownfield action agenda.

RECOMMENDATIONS

    •  Florida   departments   with  environmental   justice  responsibility   should  establish
       measurable program objectives for  addressing  related issues, develop  accountability
                                           63

-------
    measures and procedures for achieving ;the objectives, and issue regular public reports
    about progress made.

•   Florida should track  data on pollution levels for communities in which residents are
    exposed to high levels  of pollution, and should ensure  that such hazards are being
    reduced.                             I

•   The  Department  of Environmental  Protection  should  conduct  a  comprehensive
    examination of applicable state  constitutional provisions, as well as  environmental,
    administrative, civil rights, and public health laws, to identify available authorities for
    addressing environmental justice hi core [environmental programs, including enforcement.
    Upon completion of  this legal analysis;  Florida DEP should communicate the results
    through a guidance document that can be easily understood and carried out by permit
    writers  and other department staff hi their daily work. Florida DEP also may be able to
    use  new  programs, such as the "Governor's Front Porch" initiative, to work with
    communities on addressing environmental justice problems.

•   Florida DEP and other appropriate  departments  should coordinate  with,  and build
    initiatives based on, research by the Center for Environmental Equity and Justice.

•   The  appropriate departments  and  institutions  in  Florida  should  implement  the
    recommendations of  the Environmental  Equity and  Justice Commission and consider
    implementing additional ones.   These include:  considering environmental equity and
   justice issues in land  use planning and zoning decisions by local governments; utilizing
    fines collected by the Florida DEP to address problems of affected communities; and
    integrating environmental justice into the functional" plan of every state agency.

•   Based on EPA and other states' experience, Florida DEP must become more proactive in
    incorporating environmental justice issues into its permitting and enforcement activities
    to ensure that progress is made in ameliorating problems.

•   The Everglades restoration project  should  ensure that the actual reduction of on-the-
    ground hazards — not just unproved pubh'c participation — is a key feature of its efforts
    to address environmental justice.

•   Florida  DEP should appoint a senior coordinator for administering environmental justice
   programs and ensure that this position reports to the department's secretary.
                                       64

-------
ENDNOTES
1 Fedstats at http: //www. fedstats. gov/qf/ (2000).
2 Florida A&M is a historically black university that has developed expertise in environmental justice and is
  highly respected for their relationship with local Florida communities. For more information visit
  www.famu.edu/future/visitor/history.html.
3 Florida Environmental Equity and Justice Commission, Final Report (introductory letter).
4 Suzi Ruhl, President, Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, Interview  (March 8, 2002).
5 Maribel Nicholson-Choice, Attorney for Greenberg Traurig, Representing the Florida Chamber of Commerce
  and the Florida  Chemical Manufacturers Association, Member, Environmental Equity and Justice Commission
  (April 1, 2002).
6 Suzi Ruhl, Interview.
7 Fla. Stat. Ann. Section 760.85(1) (1997).
8 Fla. Stat. Ann. Section 760.85(5) (1997).
9 Fla. Stat. Ann. Section 760.85(5) (a)  (1997).
10 Fla. Stat. Ann.  Section 760.85(5) (1997).  The Act contains a specific disclaimer that the "act is intended only
  to ensure equitable regulation and enforcement of environmental laws and rules and is not intended to, nor does
  it create any right, benefit, or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural,  enforceable at law or equity by any
  party against the businesses studied, or the State of Florida, including municipal and county governments, or
  their officers, directors, or employees.  This act shall not be construed to create any right to administrative or
  judicial review  involving the compliance or noncompliance of the businesses  studied, or the State of Florida,
  including municipal and county governments, or their agents, officers, directors, or employees. Fla. Stat.
  Section 760.85(3) (1997).
" Florida Environmental Equity and Justice Commission,  6-7.
12 Maribel Nicholson-Choice, Remarks, Florida Chamber of Commerce, Environmental Permitting Summer
  School (July  20, 2000).
13 Florida Environmental Equity and Justice  Commission,  9.
14 Ibid.,  23-36.
15 Ibid.,  36.
16 Suzi Ruhl, Interview.
17 Fla. Stat. Ann. Section 760.854(2)  (West Supp. 2002),.
18 Richard Gragg, Florida A&M University, Director, Center for Equity and Justice, Interview (March 7, 2002).
19 Fla. Stat. Ann. Section 760.854(4)  (West Supp. 2002).
20 Michael Owens, former Deputy Ombudsman, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Interview
   (March  11, 2002). See, however, footnote 57 and accompanying text.
21 www.famu.edu/acad/colleges/esi/CEEJ/mission.html.
22 International City County Managers Association, Righting the Wrong: A Model Plan for Environmental Justice
  in Brown fields Redevelopment (2001).
23 Center for Environmental Equity and Justice, 2000-2001 Annual Report to the Florida Board of Education
   at http://expertnet.org/bor/instdir.cfm.
 24 Richard Gragg, Interview
 25 Dr. C Perry Brown, Florida A&M University, Interview (March 7, 2002).
 26 Fla. Stat. Section 376.78(6) (West Supp. 2002).
 27 Fla. Stat. Section 376.78(7) (West Supp. 2002).
 28 Fla. Stat. Section 376.80(2) (b)(4) (West Supp. 2002).
 29 Ibid.
 30 Fla. Stat. Section 376.80(4) (West Supp. 2002).
 31 Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Brownfields Redevelopment Act 2001 Annual Report
   (January 31, 2002) 3.
 32 City of Clearwater Brownfields Program,  City ofClearwater Brownfields Area Environmental Justice Action
   Agenda (September 7, 2000).
 33 Ibid., 17.
 34 Ibid., 4-5.
                                                    65

-------
 35 Miles Ballogg, former Brownfields Coordinator for the City of Clearwater, Interview (April 11, 2002).
 36 Fla. Stat. Section 240.5321 (West Supp. 2002).
 37 Ibid.
 38 Fla. Stat. Section 381.1015(1) (West Supp. 2002).     :
 39 Fla. Stat. Section 381.1015(2) (West Supp. 2002).
 40 Suzi Ruhl, Interview.
 41 Ibid.                                                                                         .  ,
 "Ibid.
 "PL 106-541, Titie VI.
 44 U.S. Army of Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District, Comprehensive
   Everglades Restoration Plan: Environmental and Economic Equity Program Management Plan (August 2001)
   1-2.                                        .      '       .
 45 Executive Order 12898 (July 11. 1994).
 46 PL 106-541, Section 601 (A) (2).                     ;
 41 Cynthia Laramore, Executive Director, ACTION, South Florida, Interview (April 1, 2002).
 48 Cynthia Laramore, Interview.
 49 Environmental and Economic Equity Plan, 4.          i'
 50 Ibid., 27-30.                                       |
 51 Jerry Krenz. South Florida Water Management District,  Interview (March 11, 2002).
 K U.S. Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District, Public Outreach Program
   Management Plan (August 2001), 26-31.
 53 Ibid.
 54 Cynthia Laramore, Interview.
 55 www.myflorida.com/myflorida/government/governorinitiatives/frontporch/intro.html
 56 Richard Gragg, Interview.
 57 Environmental Law Institute, Opportunities For Advancing Environmental Justice: An Analysis of U.S. EPA
   Statutory Authority (November 2001).
 58 See for example, the Florida Air and Water Pollution  Cpntrol Act, Title 29, Chapter 403, Sections 403.021 (3),
   (5), (8) and (10), 403.087(4), 403.088(2)(c). and the Florida Waste Management Act, Title 29, Chapter 403,
  Sections 403.702(1) and (2), 403.704(16) and (17), and 403.707(1).
59 Environment and Economic Equity Program Management Plan, 36.
60 City of Clearwater Brownfields Area Environmental Justice Action Agenda,  4-5.
61 Florida Environmental Equity and Justice Commission, 127.
                                                  66

-------
                                    CHAPTER SIX

                                    NEW JERSEY

FINDINGS

Finding 1:    New Jersey views its environmental justice program as part of a broader state
plan to direct new development into decaying cities.

Finding 2:    The  New Jersey  Department  of Environmental  Protection has  developed a
proposed rule to establish an expanded public participation process for including environmental
justice in environmental permits.

Finding 3:    The  New Jersey  Department of Environmental Protection is  developing a
comprehensive state-community partnership  approach, using the resources of many state
agencies to respond simultaneously to  a community's environmental justice concerns.
 BACKGROUND

 New Jersey is the nation's most densely populated state with a population of more than 8
 million people:  13 percent of whom are African-American, 13 percent are Hispanic, and 72
 percent are White. For more than  a century, the state has been one of the nation's leading
 chemical  producers.   Because it was  common to build  housing  adjacent to  manufacturing
 facilities so that workers  lived nearby, many New Jersey communities border or overlap
 industrial zones.  As the automobile increased social mobility, wealthier residents  moved to
 suburbs and lower income residents occupied housing near industrial facilities.  Today, high
 population density near existing and  abandoned  industrial facilities  may disproportionately
 affect low income and people-of-color communities, giving rise to significant environmental
 justice concerns.'

 State officials have been aware of environmental justice concerns since the mid 1990s, when a
 siting controversy over a proposed sludge-composting project dramatized the issue.   The
 pervasive presence of older, industrialized cities has kept environmental justice concerns on the
 front burner, because New Jersey has more brownfield sites than any other state.  Also, it has
 a greater percentage of its land area occupied by people-of-color or low-income communities
 near industrial sites.   Experience with urban revitalization projects in several older cities —
 Trenton,  Newark, Perth Amboy, Elizabeth,  and New Brunswick  — has propelled  a broader
 state planning process and a search for "outside the box" approaches to solving environmental
 justice problems.   Also,  the former  commissioner  of  New Jersey's  Department  of
 Environmental  Protection (DEP)  gained  information to  develop the state's approach to
 addressing  environmental justice as  a member  of  EPA's National Environmental  Justice
 Advisory Committee (NEJAC)2 and its Tide VI Federal Advisory Committee.3
                                           67

-------
 OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAM

 New Jersey views its environmental justice program as part of a broader state plan to limit
 sprawl, purchase open space,  preserve agricultural lands, and redevelop older, industrialized
 cities and brownfield sites by directing new development into decaying cities.  Also, the state's
 aggressive brownfield law allows developers to; recoup a significant portion — 75 percent — of
 site clean-up costs from new tax revenues generated by the revitalized site. The state treasury
 tracks all tax revenues, including sales and corporate business taxes, after the sites are cleaned.
 This program appeals to developers,  and provides significant additional revenues for the state:
 about $4 million in its first two years  of operatibn.4

 At the  same time, New Jersey faces limits on  its ability to craft solutions to environmental
 justice  problems. On the one hand,  it wants to gather more information about contaminated
 sites but on the other, it also  wants to  avoid  "redlining" heavily  stressed communities  or
 otherwise discouraging developers  from reinvesting in older cities.  Indeed,  the proximity of
 other population centers in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Delaware makes it crucial
 for New Jersey to remain competitive when attracting development.5

 Against this backdrop, New Jersey has launched a series of environmental justice initiatives,
 ranging from informal solicitations  of advice to formal rulemaking.  This chapter describes the
 state's initiatives and outlines their strengths and  limitations.

 ADVISORY COUNCIL

 In May 1998, the New Jersey DEP  commissioner created an Environmental Equity Task Force
 to develop  policy and process recommendations for  addressing environmental justice.  In
 response to EPA's Title VI Interim Guidance on Environmental Justice as well as Executive
 Order 12898,  New Jersey's task force met for a six-month period.  Based on its findings, the
 commissioner issued  two administrative orders.  The first created an  Advisory Council on
 Environmental Equity6 to serve two  purposes:  '

   •  provide  advice,  guidance,  and  recommendations to the  Commissioner on
       strategies to promote environmental justice, and to build  partnerships  and trust
       with the state's many diverse communities
   •  assist the DEP as it implements an environmental justice policy and process, and
       thereafter serve as the  DEP's principal  advisory resource for  environmental
      justice

Established permanently, the council has demonstrated an increased commitment to leadership
on environmental justice.   Its diverse membership of 30 individuals includes representatives
from DEP,  grassroots community-based organizations,  academic and medical professionals,
environmental organizations, businesses, labor unions, and local officials.
                                          68

-------
In 1999, the commissioner used another administrative order to implement the task force's
recommendations. The order created an Office of Equal Opportunity, Contract Assistance and
Environmental Equity, charged with the development and implementation of an environmental
justice policy.7  Its director is a member of DEP's management team, which ensures clear and
direct reporting to the commissioner.8

STATE POLICY

In 2000, the DEP commissioner issued a'third administrative order, reflecting the  advisory
council's recommendations9 and setting forth ttie department's policy on environmental justice.
The policy defines environmental justice as:

       the fair and equitable treatment in environmental decision-making of the citizens
       of all New Jersey  communities regardless of race, color, income or national
       origin.  The  Department's  environmental justice policy is  to  support and
       advance, to the extent permitted by law, a proactive approach to environmental
       decision making that is sensitive to a community's environmental needs and life
       experiences,  while  at the same  time recognizing  the interests of the entities
       seeking permits.10

The policy serves as guidance to managers  and staff on environmental justice objectives and
strategies  for implementing the policy  in  the  context  of specific  decisions.  It begins by
reaffirming and formalizing the need for  the Advisory Council on Environmental Equity,
making the council  responsible for developing guidance documents on how to implement an
effective community outreach program for permit applicants.  The policy also  commits DEP to
incorporating environmental justice  considerations  into  its  decisions  through eight specific
 steps:

     •   identify mechanisms for community  notification of new, modified, or renewal
        permit applications  for  major facilities, as well as facilities about which a local
        community has expressed environmental justice  concerns "as  early as possible
        within the permit application review process"
     •   develop guidance for permit  applicants that addresses how to administer  an
        effective local community outreach process
     •   establish a mechanism for community outreach on environmental justice issues
        "at the earliest feasible  stage of the  permit application process," — such as at
        pre-application  conferences with the department and permit applicants — and
        have DEP staff advocate that applicants conduct voluntary community outreach
        and discuss environmental justice concerns with local groups
     •   utilize  appropriate  technical  screening  tools  (such as CIS,  Toxic  Release
        Inventory data, or other information resources)  at the earliest feasible stage of
        the process to enable applicants to identify potential environmental justice issues
                                            69

-------
    •   draft permit  conditions,  where  appropriate and  permitted by law, reflecting
        agreements between permit applicants! and local community stakeholders on
        environmental justice  issues,  which  means DEP  staff would participate in
        discussions among these parties       [
    •   facilitate  alternative dispute resolution; meetings among permit applicants  and
        local community stakeholders as a way to resolve disagreements identified in the
        course of environmental justice community outreach
    •   facilitate  local community access to technical and scientific  data,  such  as by
        increasing the availability and  transfer of data and making information easy to
        understand
    •   train department managers and staff,  within funding limits, on environmental
       justice issues11

 RULE-MAKING INITIATIVE

 In  February 2002, DEP proposed for public  comment a  rule  establishing an "Expanded
 Community  Participation Process  for Environmental Justice"  for environmental permits.12
 After receiving public comment on the proposed rule, DEP's current commissioner decided not
 to proceed, noting  concerns about the  proposed rule's complexity  and limited scope.  Instead,
 the commissioner favored a comprehensive state-community partnership approach, described
 later in this report.

 Nonetheless, the process of developing the proposed rule educated both business leaders and
 department staff to community concerns.  Some aspects  of the proposed rule, especially  the
 expanded community participation provision and the environmental justice screening  model,
 remain available to  DEP as  potential  tools for  tackling environmental  justice problems.
 Because the proposed rule and  DEP's new partnership  approach may provide useful insights to
 other states, this report discusses both approaches.

 Scope of the Proposed Rule

 The proposed rule was designed to resolve issues concerning the department's legal authority
 for imposing environmental justice requirements.13  DEP cited as legal authority  for this rule
 existing state statutes regarding public outreach and  community  participation in  permitting
 decisions.  In addition, the department noted that the proposed rule ensured compliance with
Title VI of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964J14

DEP's proposed rule  would have applied to applicants for new permits, permit renewals, and
major modifications to existing permits for major facilities.15 This definition was intended,  to
cover the  largest, most  complex,  and most regulated facilities  and encompassed sources of
water pollution and air pollution as well as solid  waste, medical waste, hazardous waste, and
recycling facilities.   DEP estimated that it typically issued  permits  for less than 50 major
facilities annually, and that approximately 25 ipercent of them  might be small  businesses.16
Other permit applicants could be covered based on petitions from affected community groups.17
                                           70

-------
The proposed rule would not have applied to land-use permits because New Jersey's land-use
regulations do not distinguish between "major" and "non-major" projects as well as because
DEP  must make  land-use permit  decisions within 90  days of determining that  a permit
application is complete.  DEP did not exclude the possibility that the rule might eventually
apply to land-use  permits,  but stated that the mandatory time-limit for making decisions on
such permits "presented coordination  issues which must be resolved  before the Department
will propose to make land-use permit applications subject to these rules"18 (see Appendix C).

Environmental Justice Screening

Under the proposed rule, once DEP became aware of an anticipated permit application, either
at or before the time of pre-application, DEP would conduct an environmental justice screening
using its computerized model which  relates census  and environmental exposure data for
individual geographic units.  DEP's model,  based on an  earlier one culled from government
and academic literature,19 functioned by multiplying the population of each race in each census
tract by the exposures in that tract.

The 1995 Census — the most recent  data available at the time the model was developed —
provided demographic figures for all 1,937 census tracts in New Jersey.  The model grouped
populations according to race or ethnicity in six categories: European, African, Latin, Asian,
Native, and  Other Americans.  Exposure  estimates were drawn from four data sources: the
National  Air Toxics  Inventory,  New Jersey's  ambient  ozone measurements, its ambient
particulate measurements for particles less  than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in size, and the
state's Known Contaminated Sites List.  New Jersey anticipated refining the model  over time
by adding more databases for other relevant variables.

The model used each data source to calculate the product of exposure and population producing
a "population emission ratio."  Ratios greater than 1 indicated greater exposures for that race
than the statewide population as a whole; ratios less than  1 indicated a lesser exposure for that
race  than the  statewide  population as a  whole.  Hence, 1  was  the threshold  value for
environmental justice screening (see Figure  6.1).'
20
 Requirement for Public Participation

 If the  screening  model calculated  a  threshold value exceeding  1  for  a major facility,  the
 proposed  rule  would  require  the permit  applicant to  conduct  an  expanded  community
 participation process for environmental justice.  Other permit applicants  would be encouraged,
 but not required, to follow the process as well.21  Permit applicants  would sign certification
 agreeing to follow the process when participation was required, and could elect or decline to
 follow it when  participation was voluntary.  The certification would be required for a permit
 application to be considered as complete and would remain on file as  part of Ihe public record
 for the application.22
                                            71

-------
                                     FIGURE 6.1
           DEP'S MODEL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY SCREENING

     •  Calculates  disproportionate sub-population (ethnic  group)  exposures  before or
        during the permitting process        -
     •  Utilizes census tract data for New Jersey to derive an aggregate exposure rate for
        each of six ethnic categories.
     •  Includes  four sources of "stressor" data: the National Air Toxics Inventory, New
        Jersey's  ozone  measurements,   New  Jersey's  2.5  urn   particulate  matter
        measurements, and New Jersey's Known Contaminated Sites List.

 The model uses  a weighted average to determine whether a subgroup in a census tract area
 is exposed to more or less pollution that thajt average resident of the  state. This ratio is
 determined for each of the six ethnic categories for each of the four sets of data stressors in
 each census tract.  Each census tract is assigned a unique Population Emission Ratio (PER)
 for each sub-population.

                             For each of six ethnic groups:
   (exposure rating) (census tract sub-population)
        (sub-population of the state)
 ฃ (exposure rating) (total census tract population)
        (total population of the state)
                                                  = Population Emission Ratio (PER)
                                                    assigned to each sub-population
 Outcomes:
    •  When the ratio is equal to "1," the sub-population has an exposure equal to  the
       total population of New Jersey.
    •  When the ratio is greater than "1," then the sub-population has a greater exposure
       than the state's total population, suggesting possible environmental justice issues.
    •  When the ratio is less than "1,"  then the sub-population has a lower exposure than
       the rest of the state.

 Local Sensitivity: to determine local sensitivity to a proposed facility, the exposure rating
 is increased by "1" and multiplied against the PER for the particular sub-group or groups
 of concern.  The two values are then subtracted creating a Delta or "change" value. The
 same calculation is  made for  each of the  four sources of stressors data.  This value
 describes the magnitude of change that would  occur if exposure were increased for each
 subpopulation in that census tract.

 Mapping: the Delta values make it possible to create a pin-point map by census tract, or a
 contour map  graphically representing areas that currently exposed to more pollution that
 would be worse off if pollution  increased in the! future (see Appendix D).

Source: available at http://www.state.nj.us/dep/equiry/eebnb.pdf
                                         72

-------
Expanded Public Participation Process

The  proposed rule sets  out  the steps that  would be  required  in  an expanded  community
participation process.

First, there would be a pre-application meeting between the permit  applicant and  DEP.23 The
meeting would serve to inform DEP of the project design, location, and schedule, and allow
the department to explain the expanded process to the applicant.

Second, the applicant would  plan and carry out a community outreach and  involvement plan
that included three components:

       1.  a fact sheet describing the project
       2.  an  outreach strategy evaluating who would  be impacted, what information
          would be provided, and  how the applicant would communicate with the
          community and resolve issues
       3.  a schedule identifying the timing and sequence  of permit filings, permit
          review, and community meetings.24

The  applicant would be required to submit a plan for DEP review  and distribute it to
key community leaders identified in consultation with the department.25

Third, the applicant would hold an initial  meeting in or near the affected  area with key
community representatives;26  local government officials; and DEP representatives,  who would
serve as moderators.  At the meeting, community members would receive a  description of the
proposed  project; information on potential health, environment, and quality of life impacts; and
an outline schedule for permit filings,  permit review,  and other  community meetings. In
addition,  local government officials would  have an opportunity to explain applicable  local
laws.27

Fourth, based on comments received from the community, the applicant  would revise the
public participation plan and  identify additional outreach  needed to reach consensus on
community concerns.28  To fulfill this requirement, applicants could  avail themselves of a DEP
community  needs  guidance   document, which would  advise  applicants  how   to  identify
community  members for outreach, what types of outreach would be appropriate for different
types of  projects, what methods of information exchange could  be  used,  and  what resources
would be available for community members  to evaluate potential impacts  from proposed
projects.29

Fifth,  at the conclusion of the outreach effort, DEP would determine whether the applicant had
made a good  faith effort to comply.   If DEP found the effort unacceptable,  it  would deny the
permit (for mandatory participants)  or  include an unacceptable finding in the  permit (for
                                           73

-------
voluntary participants).30  Sixth,  if the applicant and community reached agreement on some
issues, DEP would convert the agreement into enforceable permit conditions, unless the terras
of this agreement went beyond the department's legal enforcement authority.  For the latter,
the applicant and community could enter into a separate agreement outside the permit context.31

Seventh, if the applicant and community could not reach agreement on some  issues, they could
use DEP's alternative dispute resolution  process.   Here,  the  department's  office of dispute
resolution would attempt to mediate resolution of the remaining issues for incorporation into
the final permit.32
                                             [
Eighth, if controversy remained at the conclusion of the alternate dispute resolution process,
DEP would require the applicant to conduct an impact analysis, considering pollution sources
within a one-mile radius of the proposed facility,  community health  characteristics,  and the
facility's projected impact on the surrounding environment. Specific impacts to be considered
included air  pollution,  releases to  surface and  ground water, the  presence  of  already
contaminated sites, and other community-specific health or environmental data.   The impact
analysis then would generate additional permit conditions (see Figure 6.2).

Benefits of the Proposed Rule

DEP believed  the proposed rule offered strong environmental, economic,  and social benefits:

    •   Environmental Benefits: Although New Jersey published a list of known  contaminated
       sites in the state, information on human |exposure to hazardous contaminants remained
       ambiguous at the statewide  level.  However, local officials and residents living near
       industrial  facilities or contaminated sites had unique opportunities to  observe activities
       or hazards that might escape official  scrutiny, such as previously unknown sources of
       pollution,  locations  of susceptible  populations, or facility  activities that could require
       enforcement action. The  proposed rule invited communities and  local governments to
       bring this wealth of information to the attention of DEP permit  writers  so that steps
       could be taken to eliminate or mitigate impacts on health or environmental  impacts.33

    •   Economic  Benefits:   The rule would have fostered community involvement at  the
       earliest stages of the permitting process.  Communications at this stage could establish
       trust between applicants and affected  communities.  Project applicants could save time
       and money by incorporating project changes to address community concerns from the
       outset.  Project changes could include such pollution  prevention measures as redesigning
       industrial  processes  or substituting   less hazardous substances,  including additional
       pollution  controls,  obtaining  emission offsets from nearby sources,  or  modifying
       operating  practices. By working with the community, facilities might  save money on
       construction costs by eliminating the  need to rebuild, avoiding the expense of litigation
       and enforcement, reducing future tort  liability for hazards to health or the  environment,
       expediting the permit process, and discovering innovative or even cost-saving solutions
                                           74

-------





K
s
a
^J
5
H
Z,
1
P5
^^

y*
^j

ฃ5
w o
So Q
A . ^^ ^^
FIGURE 6.2
NEW JERSEY'S PROPC
TY PARTICIPATION P]
HH
g
0
u
w
H
O

fn

g
<<
PM
g





















e
o
•43
.ง
ex
<*-
Department becomes aware c


































e?

"1
2
U
CO
I
o
1
1
c
Q








































c!
t.
c.
j
1
<
























/


/



•r)
1
not excee
(cn
2

O
M
U

•— '


Pre-application meeting

4
/


















^
S



r


Review
4-1
g

U
Pi



























r


















utreach and involvement olan
a
g
'c
1
2
ฃ
C?
|

"c
c
<






•a
•a

0
g
1

1















'I'
CD
4J
ฃ>
'S
3
Q

•3,
g
.23
OJ
g
J-*

* **** -
u co
Q
CNJ




























c
ed
a.
c
a>
1
o
i
cd
i
o
1
i
ซ
.a
CO
c
cd

a.
Q-

co





J-s
CX i
S 2
o •>
CJ (^
fli
c o
S tf
"2 ^1
|l

— ^











/
\
B \
OJ 'Q-
cd cu
jz j=:
CJ -^J
ll
ฃ, 00
•g .""
11
0 3^
u ex
C Ql
QJ 5;
"3. S2
S *
n g
ง1
r3 cd
^. 0.
a. 
-------
       to eliminate  potential public,health and environmental hazards.   By building strong
       community relations, permit'applicants could achieve greater certainty with respect to
       regulatory requirements, catalyze adjacent economic development, increase property
       values,  and stabilize a .nearby workforce.  The new  rule would have created some
       short-term costs due to the time and effort involved in engaging in community dialogue
       and  additional  pollution  controls.  However, DEP  believed  "these shprt-term costs
       [were] likely to be offset by the long-term benefits."34

    •  Social Benefits:   Communities vary greatly, so solutions  that meet their  needs can
       differ from one location to the  next.  The  proposed rule encouraged  community
       involvement early in the  permitting process so that applicants could develop sites and
       project plans and proposed permit  conditions in response to the  cultural,  social, and
       economic needs.  This  process could help permit applicants  avoid destabilizing the
       adjacent  community, discouraging property  development, and devaluing land and
       personal  property.  In addition, the proposed rule would afford a mechanism for the
       applicants  to develop  partnership  agreements  with  communities that  went beyond
       narrow regulatory requirements.35
                                           • I ....
Critiques of the Proposed Rule

When the  rule  was proposed,  DEP received widespread  approval  for its effort to open
communications among regulators, permitted industries,  and disadvantaged community groups.
However, two principal groups criticized the proposed rule:  industry officials, some of whom
believed  the proposal  did not reflect their views despite their participation on the advisory
council,36 and some  communities that wanted relief from geographically clustered facilities.37
Comments on the proposed rule and suggestions for what the rule should contain prpvide
useful insights into the issues involved, even though DEP is  not pursuing development of a
final rule.

Industry representatives lauded the constructive ^dialogue that had occurred within the advisory
council and recognized the need for extended stakeholder outreach.  At  the same time, they
were  concerned about implementing the  concepts of  communication and outreach  in the
proposed rule. Following are key points raised by industry representatives.

   •   The proposal places an additional burden on permitting, presenting yet another
       obstacle to development at brownfield sites and other needy areas.
   •   The rule  should not apply to permit renewals for existing facilities,  although it
       could address major new facilities and major modifications to  existing ones if
       the modifications significantly increase emissions.
   •   The screening tool should be scrapped and the same process should apply to all
       applicants, regardless of location.
   •   The  proposed certification  procedure for  electing or  declining to  utilize  the
       expanded community outreach process should not apply  to voluntary participants
       because companies that withhold consent would be stigmatized.
                                          76

-------
       DEP should  have a deadline for reviewing an applicant's outreach plan and
       review the plan  on behalf  of  the  community,  rather  than'have  a separate
      • stakeholder review.
       Solutions-reached with the  community should be memorialized in  a separate
       agreement, not in enforceable permit conditions.
       The rule should contain more specific criteria for determining what constitutes
       good faith efforts  to comply,  and should identify avenues of recourse if a permit
       applicant was deemed not to have proceeded in good faith.
       The rule should be more specific about impact analysis requirements.
       DEP should clarify its legal authority to issue  the rule.  '
   ป   The  advisory  council  should  be   expanded  to  include  more  business
       representatives,   brownfield   developers,  health  professionals,  and  urban
       planners,  recognizing  that community health  is  affected by such  factors as
       population density, transportation, employment, and industrial pollution.38

Some community groups contended that the proposed  rule  was not strong enough.
following are key concerns raised by community representatives.

   •   The proposed rule has "no  teeth" because it does not bar inappropriate siting
       decisions  that might endanger  public health  or the environment  or  create
       disproportionate impacts.                                          ,
   •,   The  proposal does not  equalize  a  disadvantaged community's  bargaining
       leverage  with resource-rich permit applicants.  The rule .should provide for
       technical and financial  assistance to communities so they can identify pollutants
       of concern, develop draft permit conditions, and hire their own technical and
       legal experts.                                        ...._..
   *   The  proposal over-emphasizes  permit  conditions  negotiated  between  the
       applicant  and  community   and  down-plays  DEP's  use   of statutory  or
       discretionary authority to  impose  conditions that protect  health  and  the
       environment.
   ซ   The  proposal lacks incentives  for permit  applicants  to  pay  for  resolving
       community concerns, so side agreements between the parties might only cover
       small concessions  to the community that could be difficult to enforce.
   •   The proposal covers too few sources because it applies only to "major" facilities
       that emitted "100  tons or more of a single pollutant," Meanwhile, facilities that
       emit lesser quantities of multiple pollutants might have greater adverse impacts
       but would not be subject to citizen petitions.
   •   Impact analyses should be required in all cases, not just when the community
       has  not reached  agreement  with the facilities.  Also, there should be  clear
       standards for  content and conduct of the analysis.
   •   The screening tool considers data on only four  stressors, yet some of those
       databases are neither complete nor accurate.  Emphasizing ambient pollution,
       not emissions, data relies too heavily on where monitoring stations are located,
       at least for  particulates and certain  other  pollutants.   Comparing  a  target
The
                                           77

-------
       population's exposure to that of the statewide population (including minorities)
       dilutes the potential to identify disparate impacts on minorities.
   •   The rule should spell out basic requirements for public participation, including
       the  need to translate materials  into  a language other than  English,  where
       appropriate.39

COMPREHENSIVE STATE-COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE

Under the direction of its current commissioner, DEP is now developing a new initiative for a
comprehensive state-community partnership to [address environmental justice problems.  The
objective of DEP's evolving partnership model is to pull together resources from a variety of
agencies to simultaneously address a  broad'range of  issues affecting public  health, the
environment, and overall quality of community life.

Camden, New Jersey, is an emerging example of this approach.  The city includes more than
100 known contaminated sites.  Its South Camden neighborhood,  an African-American and
Latino community with low-income residents, contains  a cluster of industrial facilities, tvo
Superfund sites,  a dozen other contaminated sites, a power plant, a trash incinerator, a sewage
treatment plant, and a cement-additive processor. Public concern over potential health impacts
has already produced two  lawsuits aimed at reducing South Camden's share of pollution.
Scores  of  community  residents  attended  a public hearing  on  DEP's   proposed  public
participation rule.40

Shortly after  taking  office, DEP's current  commissioner  accepted  an  invitation by the
community  to  tour South  Camden,  creating a  high-profile demonstration  of interest  in
environmental justice issues and raising hope .among South Camden's residents.41. Following
this visit,  the commissioner enlisted several state agencies  to  formulate  a comprehensive
response to the concerns of South Camden's community groups. Immediate and visible results
included targeted state police enforcement of truck traffic traveling through South Camden's
residential  streets,  stepped-up environmental  monitoring of  drinking water in schools and
homes, and action by the Department of Community Affairs to relocate residents bordering a
Superfund site.

In addition, the  governor's office has requested  $1.4  million  in  its  proposed budget for
community redevelopment  funds for South Camden.  DEP has applied for  a federal grant to
conduct neighborhood monitoring for air toxics, envisioning that South Camden residents will
participate  in scoping the issues, designing the risk analysis, and identifying risk reduction
strategies.   DEP  has begun discussions with the U.S.  Department of Health and Human
Services to expand an ongoing health effects study that is  examining potential impacts from
various additional environmental stressors.  Further, DEP  explored the creation of an urban
park in South Camden  and discussed potential educational  initiatives with the  Department of
Education.
                                           78

-------
ANALYSIS OF THE NEW JERSEY PROGRAM

Leadership

DEP has exercised leadership by articulating a clear commitment to environmental justice and
proving that commitment through specific initiatives:

   •   a state policy pledging "to support and advance, to the extent permitted by law,
       a proactive approach to environmental decision making that is sensitive to  a
       community's  environmental needs and life experiences,  while at the same time
       recognizing the interests of the entities seeking permits"                           ,
   •   two administrative structures  designed to  ensure full implementation  of the
       environmental justice policy.   The Office  of Equal  Opportunity,  Contract
       Assistance,  and  Environmental Equity  —  reporting  directly  to  DEP's
       commissioner — and an Advisory Council with diverse membership to provide
  ,   . . ongoing  advice   and strategic  direction;  industry,  local  government,  and
       community representatives praise the council for providing a  constructive forum
       to  explore environmental  justice  issues  with  differing  constituencies  and
       viewpoints42
   •   educating regulated facilities about the  need to consult with  key community
       leaders "early and often"  prior to obtaining  permits to construct, expand, or
       renew major polluting facilities
   •   a bipartisan  commitment  to solving  environmental justice  problems that
       transcends  political  parties.    The,•:, proposed  rule  expanding community
       participation in permitting was developed  under a Republican administration and
       the  comprehensive  state-community  partnership  model  was  done  under  a
       Democratic administration

At the same time, DEP  recognizes significant gaps in the scope of its environmental justice
initiatives.   Even the proposed rule's emphasis on negotiated  permit  conditions begged the
question of what DEP could or could not do under applicable state law to deny or condition
permits for facilities that endanger public health, threaten  the  environment, or create or
exacerbate a disproportionate adverse impact on  already stressed communities.  This question
is  pertinent to  the  new state-community partnership  approach.    In  response  to  these
uncertainties, the Panel encourages DEP to  engage in a comprehensive review of its applicable
environmental  and  administrative  laws,  and  to  identify   opportunities  for  addressing
environmental justice issues in its core programs.

Accountability

New Jersey's policy on environmental justice does not contain explicit objectives for measuring
progress on  environmental  justice  issues,  nor has  DEP adopted performance,  outcome,
                                           79

-------
accountability, or evaluation measures for integrating environmental justice into its day-to-day
operations.   Consequently, it  will be difficult to assess whether or  how  DEP's evolving
environmental justice initiatives improve public health,  environmental conditions, and overall
quality of life in heavily stressed people-of-color or low-income communities.

However, community leaders are pressing for immediate, visible changes to disadvantaged
neighborhoods.  Watching children complain of shortness of breath, play against the backdrop
of industrial  facilities, and witness the debilitating effects of cancer in  family members, they
want the  department to  help them "take back" their towns or communities, bar additional
polluting  sources from  relocating  in their midst, complete actual  'cleanups  of existing
contamination, and conduct community-wide health assessment studies.43

Residents question whether these changes will occur, and also how long  it will take for them to
happen.   DEP would be better suited to answer those questions  if it adopted more specific
performance, outcome, and accountability measures.

Permit Tools

Because New Jersey's comprehensive state-community partnership approach is evolving, its
implications for permitting remain unclear.  In the absence of the proposed rule, the Panel
encourages DEP to ensure that  expanded public participation in permitting takes place under
the new  approach.  If New Jersey expands public  participation,  as  it had envisioned when
embarking on the proposed rule, that approach would have the potential to improve the amount
and  quality  of information available  to  community groups and DEP's permit writers, thus
greatly enhancing the adequacy and effectiveness of the permits by:

   •  capturing the type of information commonly available to community  residents
       but frequently beyond  the  purview  of state officials, such  as violations of
       existing permit  conditions;  poor maintenance;  the presence of  unpermitted,
       underpermitted,  or  intermittently emitting facilities;  and the  prevalence  of
       potentially pollution-related health ailments
   •  capitalizing on the wealth of relevant information that local  government officials
       have
   •  inducing voluntary business responses to community concerns through improved
       operating practices,  maintenance, and pollution  prevention measures which, in
       turn, may enhance the benefits of technology-based pollution controls

Even if businesses and community groups reach negotiated agreements, DEP's permit writers
will  face  difficult  decisions about what is within and beyond  the  scope of their current legal
authority. If agreements are not reached, permit writers must decide  the extent to which they
can  or  must resolve controversies  through  agency-crafted  permit  conditions.    Without
guidance, permit writers — especially for  DEP programs with tight  time constraints, limited
resources, and large  workloads  — may revert to  traditional approaches rather than using
available legal authorities to compel or authorize permit conditions based on new information.
                                           80

-------
In short, DEP must ensure that its permit writers are cognizant of the full range of authority at
their disposal to address environmental justice concerns.

One key to permitting effectiveness will be the extent to which DEP can ensure that permits
are renewed  in  a timely manner.   Outdated permits should be  renewed  to  include better
pollution  control  requirements, information  on  community stresses,  pollution prevention
strategies successfully used by  others in the same industry, and  improvements to  existing
pollution  controls for maximum effectiveness.    Otherwise,  renewal backlogs  can prevent
surrounding communities from reaping the benefits of new  developments in law, science, or
technology.   Unfortunately,  backlogs  awaiting agency review, modification,  and renewal have
plagued many water  discharge programs for  decades.  To make significant progress', New
Jersey must  make a  high  priority  commitment  to  eliminate  backlogs in highly stressed,
disadvantaged communities.

Priority-Setting

In its comprehensive partnership approach, DEP  has made a promising start in crafting an
environmental justice  program .that assesses community needs and joins the respurc.es of many
state agencies to  achieve results.  The Panel  encourages the state tp'cpntinue this approach,
expand its use to communities beyond South Camden, and explore how all DEP programs can
be brought to bear on environmental justice problems.

In addition, DEP should track exposure trends for high risk communities, determine whether
on-the-ground measures of environmental quality — such as air, water and waste pollution —
are improving, and ascertain whether pollution-related public health effects — .such as cancer,
asthma,  school  attendance, and hospital admission  rates for respiratory ailments  — are
decreasing.   These and other appropriate performance measures can help  the department to
determine whether its environmental justice initiatives are achieving intended outcomes.

Public Participation

New Jersey has made major strides in educating its regulated entities and DEP's staff about the
importance  of expanded public participation in  permitting  programs,  other  than  land-use
permits.  It has encouraged early and frequent interaction with  community  leaders and makes
services of DEP's Office of Dispute Resolution available to business and communities alike.

Other  state  programs  have important implications for  environmental  justice,  including
standard-setting,   enforcement,  research,  information gathering,  and   financial  assistance.
Enforcement will be central to realizing the pollution control potential of New Jersey's existing
regulatory requirements.

The Panel encourages DEP to ensure that expanded public participation occurs in permitting,
and to provide expanded public participation in other programs as well.
                                            81

-------
RECOMMENDATIONS

     •   New Jersey DEP  should establish measurable program objectives  for  addressing
         environmental justice, develop accountability measures and  procedures,for achieving
         these objectives, and issue regular public reports  about its progress in  addressing
         environmental justice concerns.

     •   DEP should track exposure trends in communities with high  levels of pollution as one
         measure for evaluating the effectiveness of its environmental justice initiatives.

     •   DEP should clearly cover low-income as well as people-of-color communities in its
         environmental justice initiatives.

     •   DEP should conduct a  comprehensive examination of applicable state constitutional
         provisions,  as well as environmental,  administrative,  civil rights, and public health
         laws,  to   identify  authorities  for   addressing   environmental  justice  in   core
         environmental programs,  including enforcement. Upon completion of this analysis,
         DEP should communicate the results through a guidance document that can be easily
         understood  and  carried out by permit writers and  other agency staff in  their daily
         work.

     •   DEP should ensure  that  its  permitting  program  achieves  expanded  public
         participation, in  the absence of a rule| on the subject.   In addition, it should examine
         how  it  can improve public  participation in other  programs,  including land-use
         planning, permitting,  standard-setting,  enforcement, research,  compliance  and
         technical assistance, information gathering, and financial assistance.

     •  DEP should continue to develop its comprehensive state-community partnership for
        addressing  environmental  justice  problems,  expand  that   initiative   to  other
        communities,  and  explore  how  all  programs  —  permitting,  standard-setting,
        enforcement, research,  information gathering, compliance and technical  assistance,
        and financial assistance — can be used to solve environmental justice problems.
                                          82

-------
ENDNOTES
1 34 N.J.R. 665-675, Preamble, Social Impact.
2 Report of the Title VI Advisory Committee, Next Steps for EPA, State and Local Environmental Justice Programs
 (March 1, 1999).
3 Robert C. Shinn,  Jr., Commissioner, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Interview
 (January 7, 2002).
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.
6 Administrative Order No. 1998-15 (October 22, 1998).
7 Administrative Order No. 1999-05 (April 27, 1999).
8 Interview with Robert C. Shinn, Jr. (January 7, 2002).
9 Administrative Order 2000-01 (February 8, 2000).
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid.
12 34 N.J.R. 665 at www.state.nj.us/dep/equity/eerule.pdf.
13 Ibid, in Preamble, Summary.
14 Ibid.
15 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:1F-1.1.
16 34 N.J.R. 665, Preamble, Summary.
17 A community petition may identify a facility required to participate in the expanded outreach process or trigger
  an environmental justice screening.  If the latter indicates the facility is located in an area where the threshold
  value warranting participation has been exceeded, the facility will be required to participate.
18 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:IF.
19 Susan A. Perlin, et al.,  "Distribution of Industrial Air Emissions by Income and Race in the United States: An
  Approach Using the Toxic Release Inventory," Environmental Science and Technology (1995) 29:1.
20 A Basis and Background document for the environmental justice screening model is available to the public and
  can be obtained by contacting Melinda Dower,  Office of Pollution Prevention  and Coordination, P.  0. Box
  423, Trenton, NJ 08625-0423.
21 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:lF-2.2.
22 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:lF-2.4.
23 This meeting is  intended to  occur "as early in the application planning process as possible prior to submission
  of a permit application.  Applicants for permit renewals shall request such pre-application meeting at least 6
  months prior to expiration of the permit."  Proposed New Rules  N.J.A.C. Section 7:1F-2.1.
24 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:1F-2.5.
25 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:1F-2.6.
26  "Key community representatives" may include  local residents, local businesses,  neighborhood associations,
  school  representatives,  religious  groups,  civic   organizations,  environmental  organizations,  other  non-
  governmental organizations, health care  providers,  local  government  officials,  officials responsible for
  emergency response, and labor unions.  See Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:IF-1.3.
27 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:lF-2.7.
28 Ibid.
29 Guide to Administering an Effective  Environmental Justice Process available through Pamela Lyons, Director,
  Equal Opportunity, Contract Assistance and Environmental Justice, P. 0. Box 402.  506 East State Street,
  Floor 2,  Trenton, NJ 08625-0402.
30 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:1F-2.10.
31 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:lF-2.8.
32 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:lF-2.9.
33 Proposed New Rules N.J.A.C. Section 7:1F-2.11.
34 34 N.J.R. 665, Preamble, Economic Impact.
35 Ibid,  Social Impact.
36 Donald McCloskey, Public Service Enterprise, Inc.,  Interview (April 3, 2002).
                                                   83

-------
37 Bonnie Sanders, President, South Camden Citizens in Action, Interview (March 15, 2002); and Olga Poinar,
  Camden Regional Legal Services Attorney, Interview (March 14, 2002).
38 Donald McCloskey, Interview.               *       '
39 Valorle Caffee, Director of Organizing, New Jersey Work and Environment Council, Interview
  (Januarys, 2002); Bonnie Sanders; Olga Pomar.     ;
40 Olga Pomar, Interview.                             !
41 Interview with Bonnie Sanders.                      ;
42 Donald McCloskey; Fred Martin, Director, Division of Planning for the City of Camden, New Jerse, interview
  (January 8, 2002); and  Valorie Caffee.  Indeed, to the extent there is criticism of the Council, it reflects the
  view  that the Council should expand its membership or focus.  Industry  representatives recommend  more
  business leaders,  health professionals, and urban planners (Interview with Donald  McCloskey, supra); others
  suggest more labor representation (Interview with Valorie Caffee, supra).  Some community representatives, on
  the other hand, question the relevance of the Council's deliberations to communities in dire need of immediate
  cleanups.  Reverend Al  Stewar, Interview (January 8, 2002).
43 Reverend Al Stewart; Bonnie Sanders, Interview.
                                                  84

-------
                                  CHAPTER SEVEN

                                    CALIFORNIA
FINDINGS
Finding 1:    California  has  enacted  significant  environmental  justice  legislation  that
established a strong state  policy to  address environmental justice problems.  The six statutes
are largely procedural,  as they require strategic planning, studies  of gaps in authority, and
guidelines for local land-use  plans.

Finding 2:    California intends to link environmental justice and  local land-use issues in a
practical way through land-use guidelines, consultations between state environmental agencies
and local land-use authorities, and city policies and plans.

Finding 3:    California's  state  and  regional ! agencies  are  rapidly  developing   their
environmental justice initiatives.  Two of these agencies, the Air Resources Board and tie
South Coast Air Quality Management District,  have programs  that include leadership and
accountability, integration  into  permits,  priority setting  and  risk reduction, and public
participation.  The Panel believes these features are key to an effective program.

Finding 4:    Comprehensive monitoring data gathered for the Multiple Air  Toxics Exposure
Study (MATES II)  have been critically important  to understanding  environmental justice
problems in  California.  They have provided the basis for new state and regional programs to
address these issues and reduce pollution.

Finding 5:    The  South Coast Air  Quality  Management District's and  the Air  Resources
Board's Town  Hall meetings,  as well as  the, Department  of Toxic Substances Control
community liaisons,  are  excellent ways  to  improve communications between  agencies and
people-of-color or low-income communities.      :

BACKGROUND

 More than 40 percent  of California's diverse population of 34 million people  are people of
 color. Major ethnic groups  include Hispanic (32.4 percent), Asian (10.9 percent) and African-
 American (6.7  percent).   Los Angeles  County, the center of many environmental justice
 concerns, is almost 60 percent non-white.1

 California agencies have faced environmental justice issues for a long  time  due to the state's
 large urban population with many  people-of-color and low-income  communities, high level of
 economic activity,  and serious  problems  with  air  pollution and  waste disposal.   The
 Department of Toxic Substances Control and the South Coast Air Quality Management District
 began environmental justice efforts several  years ago.   Both the South Coast Air Quality
 Management District and the California Air Resources Board have integrated  environmental
 justice issues into their substantive requirements,  allocation of grant funds,  and  decision-
                                            85:

-------
 making criteria for development permits. Other California agencies remain largely focused on
 procedural issues related to  environmental justice,  like  strategic planning  and  public
 participation. Still, a flurry of recent activity has stemmed from six environmental justice laws
 enacted in the last three years and the increased attention paid to environmental justice at the
 federal level, such as the issuance of Executive Order 12898.

 AGENCY STRUCTURE

 The structure of California's  environmental agencies is complex.  The California legislature
 did not create a cabinet-level environmental agency until 1991.2 That agency,  the California
 Environmental  Protection Agency  (Cal/EPA),  became  the  umbrella agency under  which
 several previously independent environmental boards and offices now operate (see Figure 7.1).

 The Air Resources Board and the  Department of Toxic  Substances  Control are very  large
 agencies with nearly 1,000 employees each, making them similar in size to many states' entire
 environmental agencies.

 Cal/EPA's  strategic  plan notes that the unique  organizational structure  of California's
 environmental programs separates the six boards, departments, and offices into  programs that
 are largely independent of the secretary of Cal/EPA because the secretary does not direct their
 policies and decisions on a daily basis. As an Officer of the governor's cabinet, the secretary
 provides the overall vision and leadership that focuses these entities' efforts on the goals of the
 governor.3  The secretary also approves the budgets for  the six agencies, but the agencies
 promulgate their own rules and implement programs within their jurisdiction.   Cal/EPA sets
 the basic  environmental justice policy  and strategy,  but the  agencies develop their  own
 environmental justice mission  statements,  strategies, and implementation approaches.  As a
 result, California does not have a single environmental justice  program, but several,  all under
 Cal/EPA's environmental justice initiative.

 A further complexity is that regional agencies carry out much of the program implementation
 work.   For  example,  California's  35 Air Quality Management  Districts  have their  own
 authority to adopt rules and manage  programs.   The largest, the South Coast Air Quality
Management District, has 800 employees,  a $100 million budget, and geographic coverage that
encompasses  a  population representing  between four and five  percent  of  the entire  U.S.
population.4

This study has focused on five environmental justice programs in California:

    •   the  governor's  Office  of  Planning  and  Research,   which  coordinates
       environmental justice  issues  and  provides guidance to  local governments on
       land-use planning
    •   Cal/EPA, responsible  for environmental justice  strategic  planning  and  for
       overseeing the state's environmental boards, departments, and offices
                                          86

-------
il 1H I ISO

-------
     •  the Department of Toxic Substances Control, which had early involvement with
        environmental justice controversies arising from disputes over siting of waste
        management facilities in the early 1990s
     •  the Air Resources  Board,  which recently adopted a policy on  environmental
        justice
     •  the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which has worked  on the
        Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES II), and launched efforts to respond
        to the results

 IMPETUS FOR THE PROGRAMS
                                             i
 The motivating impetus for these  programs hap been a combination of  strong public interest
 involvement,  significant  legislative interest,  controversial  agency decisions  that  spurred
 rethinking  about public involvement,  federal environmental justice activity, and  leadership
 from key agency officials.

 California's public interest community began to focus on environmental justice during the early
 1990s. Waste facility siting decisions in Los  Angeles spawned the "Mothers of East L.A.," a
 group that  remained an active force for environmental justice issues throughout the decade.5
 Other  public interest  organizations  investigated  and  documented environmental justice
 concerns.6  For example, a Communities for a Better Environment study noted that:

        Southeast Los  Angeles  (SELA), the  industrial  heart of L.A.,  is a striking
        example of environmental injustice.  The area contains the three most densely
        populated cities in the county.  Its residents are disenfranchised politically and
        economically. Fifty-eight percent of SELA adults are not citizens  and per capita
        income is 45 percent of that  of the county.

       In addition to socioeconomic hardships, residents of SELA must face the burden
       of exposure to toxic chemicals.  Covering less  than one percent of the county's
       area, SELA accounts for  18 percent of toxic air emissions. Manufacturers are
       eight times more concentrated  in SELA than in the county as a whole.7

 Due in part to California's term limits,  a new generation of state legislators took office in the
 1990s, coming from districts with significant environmental justice concerns.  These legislators
 began introducing environmental justice initiatives to address constituent  concerns.  The  state
 legislature passed  several  environmental justice bills, but  Governor  Wilson vetoed this
 legislation.8  In 1999,  Governor Davis  assumed office and signed six environmental justice
 bills into law.

 The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) became more aware of environmental
justice issues  through the intense opposition  led by Mothers of East L.A.  to  a new waste
 facility in the early 1990s.  Their opposition ultimately caused the project proposer to withdraw
 the project.   As  a result of this experience,  DTSC  conducted the  Vernon Community
 Assessment, which examined more than  40 sites tin a small area that involved the department in
                                           88

-------
some way. In 1993, Communities for a Better Environment conducted a training session for
DTSC  staff.  Given this growing awareness of environmental justice issues, the  department
included a new  community involvement policy in  its 1993  public  participation  manual,
addressing language, culture, information  dissemination, and ways to work with  community
leaders.9

The state derived its definition of environmental justice from EPA's.10  Further, legislation has
directed the governor's Office of Planning  and Research  to coordinate the state's activities and
share information about environmental justice programs with the Council on Environmental
Quality, EPA, the  General  Accounting Office, the Office  of Management and Budget, and
other federal agencies.  Finally, it has required the Office of Planning and Research to "review
and evaluate any information  from  federal  agencies that is  obtained  as  a result  of their
respective regulatory activities under federal Executive Order 12898.""

The chairs of California's  two most prominent  boards, the  Air Resources Board and the
Governing Board for the South  Coast Air  Quality Management District,  also spearheaded
increased attention on environmental justice at their organizations.  Dr. Alan Lloyd arrived at
the Air Resources Board with a strong interest in community health and led  the board to focus
on environmental justice.12 Shortly  after becoming chair of the Governing Board for the South
Coast  Air Quality Management District, William Burke proposed a  set of  guiding principles
and environmental justice initiatives that were adopted in 1997.13

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE LEGISLATION

The state legislature first addressed environmental justice more than a decade ago. Beginning
in 1991,  the legislature passed five environmental justice  bills, all  of which were vetoed.14
With  a new governor in  1999,  however,  environmental justice  found  a more  receptive
audience. Governor Davis signed six bills directly addressing environmental justice, and one
dealing with the closely associated issue of clean-up levels for brownfield sites.

The first of these laws,  Senate  Bill 115,15 was  passed in  1999  and   defines  the term
 "environmental justice," gives the Office  of Planning  and Research a coordinating role related
 to environmental justice, and requires that Cal/EPA consider it when designing and operating
 its own programs and those of its boards, departments, and office.16

 In its  original form, Senate  Bill 115 reintroduced previous legislation  that placed environmental
justice considerations into the environmental requirements of the California Environmental
 Quality Act (CEQA).  This approach faced opposition from, among others,  California Council
 for Environmental  and Economic Balance (CCEEB), an organization that includes many of the
 state's largest businesses, labor unions, and public officials.  CCEEB argued that state agencies
 should first have  a  clear  strategy for addressing environmental justice  issues  rather  than
 approaching it  on a  permit-by-permit  basis.17   The revised  bill  excluded  the  CEQA
 provisions,18 and CCEEB dropped its opposition after these changes were made.19  Meanwhile,
 community and environmental organizations remained supportive of Senate Bill 115, even
 without the CEQA requirements.20
                                            89

-------
 The law defines  environmental justice  as  "the fiir treatment of people of all races, cultures,
 and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of
 environmental laws, regulations,  and policies.1;21  It also requires the Office of Planning and
 Research to serve as coordinator and central information repository for environmental justice
 information.   Specifically, the office was directed to:

     •  consult with the Secretaries of the California Environmental Protection Agency;
        the  Resources Agency; the Trade  and ^Commerce  Agency;  and the Business,
        Transportation  and Housing Agency;  the  Working Group  on Environmental
        Justice; any other appropriate state agencies; and all  other interested members of
        the public  and private sectors in the state
     •  coordinate  the office's efforts and  sharfe information regarding environmental
       justice programs with the Council on Environmental Quality,  the United States
        Environmental Protection Agency, the General Accounting Office, the Office of
        Management and Budget, and other federal agencies
     •  review and evaluate any information from federal agencies obtained as a result
        of their respective regulatory activities under Executive Order 12898, and from
        the Working Group on Environmental Justice22

 The law directs  Cal/EPA  to  adhere  to  five specific  environmental justice  principles in
 designing its mission, programs, policies, and standards:

    •  conduct its programs, policies,  and activities that  substantially  affect  human
       health or the environment in a manner  that  ensures the fair treatment of people
       of all  races, cultures, and  income levels, including minority populations  and
       low-income populations of the state
    •  promote enforcement  of  all  health and   environmental  statutes  within  its
       jurisdiction in a manner that ensures  fair  treatment of people of all  races,
       cultures, and income levels, including minority populations  and low-income
       populations in the state  ,
    •  ensure greater public participation in the agency's development, adoption,  and
       implementation of environmental  regulations and policies
    •  improve research and data collection for programs within the agency related to
       the health  of, and environment of,  people  of  all races, cultures, and income
       levels, including minority populations and low-income populations in the state
    •  identify differential patterns of consumption of natural resources among people
       of different socioeconomic classifications for programs within the agency23

Although this law does not include substantive permitting standards,  it provides clear policy
direction  for  Cal/EPA  to  consider  environmental justice in all  its  activities,  including
permitting.

The second environmental justice  law,  Senate Bill 89,24 was signed in  2000.   It  requires
Cal/EPA to convene an interagency working group and advisory  council on  environmental

                                           90

-------
justice to provide information and recommendations to the working group.25  The makeup and
mission of the Working Group and Advisory Council are outlined in Figure 7.2.

The third law, Assembly Bill 1390, enacted in 2001, is based on findings by the South Coast
Air Quality Management District from MATES II, completed in 1999.  The study showed that
diesel exhaust emissions  are the overwhelming health hazard faced by district residents.  Bill
1390 requires that not less than 50 percent of the funding appropriated through the year 2007
for  three  diesel  mitigation  programs be  spent "in  a  manner  that directly reduces  air
contaminants or the public health risk associated with air contaminants,  in communities with
the  most significant exposure  to  air  contaminants  or localized air  contaminants, or both,
including communities of minority  populations or low-income populations,  or both."26  This
requirement applies only to air districts with populations  in excess of one million people, but
other  air  districts are  encouraged  to follow a  similar  funding  approach.   The business
community was particularly interested in ensuring that the law  use a performance standard,
rather than specify the technology to  be used to qualify  for funding.  This  approach allows
grants to be spent for low-emission diesel buses instead of just alternative fuel buses.27

The fourth law, Assembly Bill 1553,28 also passed in 2001, focuses on local land-use issues.
The Office of Planning and Research develops guidelines  for general plans, the basic land-use
planning documents used throughout the state.  These guidelines are not mandatory but provide
policy direction to local  land-use agencies.  This law requires  the office to include guidelines
for addressing  environmental justice  matters in city and  county general plants in its  next
edition,  but no  later than July 1, 2003.  The guidelines must recommend planning, zoning, and
siting provisions that accomplish the following:

    •  equitable distribution  of new  public facilities and  services that increase and
       enhance quality  of life throughout the community, given the  fiscal  and legal
       constraints that restrict the siting of these facilities
    •  location, if any, of industrial facilities and uses that, even with  the best available
       technology,  will  contain  or produce material  that, because   of  its quantity,
       concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant hazard
       to human health and safety, in a manner that seeks to avoid over-concentrating
       these uses in proximity to schools or residential dwellings
     •  location of new schools and residential dwellings in a manner that seeks to avoid
        locating these  uses in proximity to industrial facilities and uses that will contain
        or produce material that because of its quantity,  concentration, or physical or
        chemical characteristics, poses  a significant hazard to human health or safety
     •   more livable  communities  by  expanding   opportunities  for transit-oriented
        development  so  that  residents minimize traffic  and  pollution  impacts  from
        traveling for purposes of work, shopping, schools, and recreation29
                                             91

-------
     OT CD
   V)
   CU
<4_


CD
   a) C (O
   B 4J -
                           ^ "S
                           r—> tj
                           CO CO   JT?
                           •t! o o> 33
                           ง cq ซ ^ ซ=•
                           .lgS*1
                           liiis
                           S OJ CO ฃg ^
                           •s* &S f
                                ฃ-F
SJ'ff
[ . ^ t.	
                           CO O O $ O
      QQ

-------
 California's fifth law, Senate Bill 32, passed in 2001, relates to clean-up levels at brownfield
 rehabilitation projects.30  It requires Gal/EPA to develop a peer-review rating system to screen
 brownfield sites, but these numbers are to be considered "solely as a reference value that may
 be used by citizen groups,  community  organizations, property owners, developers,  and local
 government officials to  estimate the degree of effort that may be  necessary to remediate a
.contaminated  property."31 Although the screening numbers do not  have a regulatory effect,
 Cal/EPA is to develop separate screening levels for unrestricted land uses and restricted, non-
 residential land uses.32 Following publication of the screening numbers, the agency is required
 to conduct three public  workshops in various  parts of the state  tb  explain them and receive
 public  comments.   It must "actively seek out participation in  the workshops from citizen
 groups,  environmental   organizations,   community Abased  organizations  that  restore and
 redevelop contaminated  properties for  park, school, residential, Commercial, open-space or
 other community purposes, property owners,  developers, and local government officials."ffl
 On or before January 1,  2003, Cal/EPA must publish an information document to assist citizen
 groups,  community-based   organizations,  interested  laypersons,  property  owners,  local
 government officials, developers, environmental organizations, and  environmental consultants
 in understanding the factors to be taken into account  — and the procedures that should be
 •followed — when making site-investigation and remediation decisions.34

 The sixth law, Senate Bill 828, enacted in 2001, sets a January 1, 2002 deadline for Cal/EPA
 to convene the interagency Working Group and Advisory Council on Environmental  Justice,
 and it requires the agency to develop an agency-wide strategy for "identifying and addressing
 any gaps  in existing programs,  policies, or activities that may impede the achievement of-
 environmental  justice."35    Once  the  agency-wide  strategy  is  developed,  each  board,
 department,  and office  under Cal/EPA must develop its own environmental justice strategy
 using the same approach.  Further, the law mandates that Cal/EPA report to the legislature
 every three years  on implementation of these strategies.36   Deadlines are set for each step,
 ithough  it remains to be seen whether these efforts will produce  changes in the  agencies'
 .programs.
 *                •                                 ••             *
 In a recent law review article,  a senior lawyer  in the California  Attorney General's  office
 observed, "California's  state administrative agencies should consider whether they could, or
 possibly must, include environmental justice in their permitting and planning review activities
 as a result of California's environmental justice statutes.   These  statutes manifest a public
 policy  that governmental activities,  that substantially affect human health or the environment,
 be conducted in a manner that ensures environmental justice."37

 AGENCY PROGRAMS

 Office of Planning and Research

 The Office of Planning  and Research (OPR) has responsibility for government-wide oversight
 of environmental justice programs and for developing environmental justice guidelines for local
 land-use plans.   OPR  is  a part of the governor's  office, and its specific duties  include
                                            93

-------
comprehensive statewide planning, interagency coordination, local agency planning assistance,
and  managing  the  state  environmental  review  process  under  CEQA.    Giving  OPR
responsibility for interagency coordination on environmental justice issues and for reviewing
and evaluating federal and state information, Senate Bill 115 helps to ensure that environmental
justice is included in the governor's agenda.

OPR focuses on three  environmental justice functions: surveying state agencies to identify
whether they are involved in activities with environmental justice implications and providing
training for  affected agencies;  convening a  steering  committee of  state agencies  and
departments  that meets  biweekly  to identify  how best to  address  environmental justice
concerns; and preparing environmental justicb guidelines for local  governments'  land-use
general plans.38  Two OPR staff work on these areas.

OPR surveyed 130 state agencies.  Of the  64 agencies that responded, 24 percent make or fund
land-use decisions,  19 percent make permitting decisions,  24  percent write  or  produce
regulations,  and 29 percent make  other decisions  that  may  have  environmental justice
implications.  Only 2 percent had a written environmental justice policy, and only 29 percent
thought they were  covered under Title  VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.   OPR has
concluded, "There is a clear lack of knowledge about what environmental justice means, why
it is important, and  the ways in which environmental justice issues arise."39 As a result, it has
initiated a series of one-day  workshops to  teach state agencies about environmental justice, and
how to address it in day-to-day work.   OPR plans to follow these  workshops with more
specialized and  technical  training sessions for;state agencies,  as well as programs  for  local
agency personnel.40                          |

OPR recently held four environmental justice forums designed to create a statewide network of
contacts at the  community,  bcal,  state,  and federal government levels.  OPR also  plans to
evaluate recent state efforts  to increase public involvement in agency processes, and to hold a
formal  public hearing as part of its obligation to prepare the guidelines for local  land-use
general plans.41  Appendix E has a forum announcement that provides a useful example of how
a government process can be explained in a way that the public can easily understand

California EPA

California EPA (Cal/EPA)  has taken several steps to integrate environmental justice into its
work,   such  as appointing  an  assistant  secretary  for  environmental  justice;   making
environmental justice a strategic goal; adopting an environmental justice mission statement;
coordinating an  interagency  environmental justice workgroup, and  developing a  training
program for  agency  staff and employees of its boards, departments, and office.  Cal/EPA also
has begun to analyze the  legal authority of its boards, departments,  and office for integrating
environmental justice concerns into their work.

At a legislative oversight hearing in September 2000, Cal/EPA announced that it would create
the post of assistant secretary for  environmental justice  to serve  as  a  focal point for

-------
environmental justice activities in the agency.
March 2001.42

Strategic Vision
That position was filled by Romel Pascual in
In July 2000,  Cal/EPA issued its strategic vision which identifies eight goals designed to help
the agency achieve  "a California that enjoys a clean,  healthy, sustainable environment that
enhances the quality of life for current and future generations, and protects our diverse natural
resources."43  Goal 5 is specifically directed to environmental justice; it calls for Cal/EPA to
"reduce or eliminate the disproportionate impacts of pollution on low-income and minority
populations."44 The strategic vision sets out four objectives to achieve this goal:

    1.  minimize the public health and environmental impacts of existing facilities
    2.  assist OPR and local land-use authorities in developing model  local land-use
       ordinances  that  address  siting  of  future   hazardous  materials,   waste,
       transportation, or handling facilities and activities
    3.  reduce the impacts of pollution from  existing hazardous materials, hazardous
       waste,  waste transportation and handling facilities, or other activities
   "4.  assist the California Department of Education in developing model school siting
       policies to  avoid exposing children to pollution45

Mission Statement and Environmental Justice  Plans

Cal/EPA  prepared  the  following  draft  mission  statement  for  its  environmental  justice
programs:

       The  mission of the Environmental Justice Program  is to  accord the  highest
       respect and value  to   every  individual and  community.   The  California
       Environmental  Protection Agency  and  its  boards,  departments and  offices
       (BDOs)  shall   conduct their  public  health  and  environmental  protection
       programs,  policies and activities  in  a manner that is designed to  promote
       equality and afford  fair  treatment,   full  access and full  protection to  all
       Californians, including low-income and minority populations.46

Cal/EPA identified seven program elements that it expects each board, department, and office
to include in its individual environmental justice plans:

    1.  provide communities easy and  full access to information
    2.  solicit  community participation in decision-making
    3.  evaluate the current legal, regulatory, and policy frameworks and address gaps
    4.  develop timely resolution processes
    5.  identify and address data gaps
    6.  identify options for implementing mitigation
    7.  establish training programs47
                                            95

-------
 Interagency Working Group

 Cal/EPA manages an interagency working group on environmental justice that is responsible
 for identifying gaps in board, department, or office programs that must be filled to improve the
 state's response to environmental justice issues.  The working group also coordinates input
 from the Advisory Committee on Environmental Justice,  whose first meeting was held on May
 17-18, 2002, and ensures that each board, department, and office  adopts  an environmental
justice   mission  statement and   strategic  plan  consistent with  the  advisory  committee
 recommendations.

 Training                                   [

 Cal/EPA conducts a half-day environmental justice training  program monthly for its staff, but
 it must increase the frequency to  train all of  its staff and to meet training needs for the Air
 Board's  staff. The Air Board has  committed to training its staff by June 2003. Environmental
justice also is included in Cal/EPA's  inspecto|r training. The agency plans  future training,
 including an environmental justice element fcr its employee training packet and a program to
 develop  environmental justice champions in the boards, departments/and offices.48
                                            i'
 Other Cal/EPA Activities                    :

 Cal/EPA publishes an "Accomplishments and Priorities"  report every six months, covering the
 activities of the agency and its boards,  departments,  and  offices.49 There is no requirement to
 report on environmental justice issues, but many reports have included this information. The
 biannual report provides an opportunity for  the  public to track the agency's  progress on
 environmental justice issues.  Cal/EPA's  budget appropriation also requires it  to  submit
 quarterly reports to the legislature  on its environmental justice programs.50

 One of Cal/EPA's goals over the next year is to  develop a legal strategy for environmental
justice.    This work will  include examining the specific  legal authorities  of  each  board,
 department, and office to determine action that can be taken under existing law and to identify
 legal barriers that pose  obstacles to  addressing eivironmental justice concerns.  A draft
 analysis  of the legal authorities for the Department of Pesticides Regulation has been completed
 and is under internal review.51

Air Resources Board

The  California  Air  Resources Board  (ARE)  recently adopted what  may be  the most
comprehensive environmental justice plan in the country.  It  based the plan on the results of its
Neighborhood Assessment Work  Plan,  prepared  in  2000 to  help  the  board respond to
environmental health concerns at the neighborhood level.
                                           96

-------
ARE has  11  members appointed by the governor and has responsibility for all statewide air
policy  issues.   It has rulemaking authority and  conducts some inspections, but regional air
districts manage most of the day-to-day permitting, inspection, and enforcement  activities.
The board has about 1,000 staff in Sacramento and laboratories in Los  Angeles, with the
equivalent of six full-time positions assigned to environmental justice work.

Neighborhood Assessment Work Plan

Beginning in early 2000, the incoming  ARE chair,  Dr. Alan Lloyd, directed his community
health  advisor  to evaluate  neighborhood impacts from air toxics.   Following external and
internal consultations, ARE staff developed a Neighborhood Assessment Work Plan52 in June
2000.  ARE viewed  the plan as a way to develop the policies and tools needed to address the
findings from the South Coast  Air  Quality Management District's MATES II study, and to
start to implement the Board's new responsibilities under Senate Bill 115.   The work plan has
seven main tasks:

    1.  Program Development: investigate whether cumulative air pollution impacts
       differ among neighborhoods in a designated region.  The program focuses on
       developing  guidelines  that  ARE and  other  stakeholders  use   to  evaluate
       cumulative impacts in a neighborhood.  ARE plans to use maps created through
       a Geographic Information System to identify areas  where cumulative impacts
       may be significant53
    2.  Cumulative-Impact Assessment Methodology: develop source-receptor-based
       cumulative   impact/risk   assessment  methodologies  suitable for  evaluating
       neighborhood air pollution impacts from all nearby sources,  including mobile
       sources, and for comparing neighborhood scale exposures within a region
    3.  Barrio Logan Pilot Study: develop an understanding of cumulative exposures
       and the mechanics of neighborhood-scale monitoring and impact evaluations
    4.  Supplemental Neighborhood Monitoring and Impacts Evaluations: refine the
       methodologies developed under task three using a second phase of neighborhood
       testing in two other  areas of the state
    5.  Health Evaluation Efforts: review the  information and methodologies available
       to evaluate cumulative impacts at the neighborhood level, initiate research to fill
       data gaps, and evaluate health impacts in neighborhoods that were monitored
       during Fall 2000
    6.  Risk  Reduction Strategies:  address in the near-term significant high-exposure
       or high-risk situations that may  be identified by neighborhood monitoring and
       modeling, and evaluate long-term approaches that ARE, local air districts, and
       other public agencies can employ for adverse impacts at the neighborhood level
    7.  Evaluation  Guidelines:  develop guidelines  — including  technical protocols
       methodologies, and definitions of key terms  — that can be used  to develop  a
       consistent, scientifically justifiable basis for determining whether the cumulative
       impacts of air  pollutants at the neighborhood  level  are unusually high  for
       particular communities54
                                           97

-------
Environmental Justice Policies and Action Items
——                                    _    .
                                            I
ARB's neighborhood assessment work plan  led it to  approve a detailed set of policies and
action items  designed  to  address  environmental justice  concerns.55    Community and
environmental groups strongly approved the document;  more than 30 groups signed a joint
letter of support.56   The letter sets out steps they considered were  necessary to ensure that
ARB's policies would be effective, including swift action to ensure successful start-up, ongoing
progress of the environmental justice programs,  a staffing  and funding plan, and making
pollution prevention central to the programs.57

One controversial element  of the  document was whether ARB's policies  and actions for
reducing  exposures  to  air  toxics  should  merely  "include"  low-income  and  minority
communities, or be targeted "especially" for them.  Business interests favored the former, and
community  groups  strongly urged the latter!   ARE  ultimately  approved the document,
including the "especially" language, at a public meeting where several community groups and
key legislators urged the board to retain the more targeted wording.58

Given the precedent-setting nature  of the  ARB document, the complete  text is included  as
Appendix F.  The policies and some key action items include:

   •  Integrating environmental justice into programs: It shall be the ARB's policy
      to integrate  environmental  justice  into all  of  our  programs, policies, and
      regulations.
          •  add an explicit discussion of whether proposed major programs, policies,
             and  regulations treat fairly  people  of all  races, cultures, geographic
             areas,  and   income  levels,  especially   low-income   and   minority
             communities
          •  develop and incorporate an environmental justice program element into
             our employee-training curriculum
          •  conduct   special   air-monitoring   studies  in   communities  where
             environmental justice or other air-quality concerns exist, with the goal of
             assessing public health risk

   •  Improving outreach: It shall be the ARB's policy to strengthen our outreach and
      education  efforts in all  communities,; especially low-income  and minority
      communities, so that  all Californians can rally participate in our public processes
      and share in the air quality benefits of our programs.
          •  hold meetings in communities  affected by our programs, policies, and
             regulations at times and in places that encourage  public participation,
             such as evenings and weekends at centrally located community meeting
             rooms, libraries, and schools
          •  in coordination  with  local air  districts,  make staff available  to attend
             meetings  with community organizations and neighborhood groups  to
             listen and where appropriate,  act upon community concerns
                                          98

-------
       •  develop and maintain a web-site that provides access to the best available
          information about sources of air pollution in neighborhoods
       •  create and distribute a simple,  easy-to-read, and understandable public
          participation handbook

•  Reducing  health risks: It shall be the ARB's policy  to work with  local air
   districts to meet health-based air quality standards and reduce health risks from
   toxic air  pollutants in  all communities,  especially low-income and  minority
   communities, through the  adoption of control  measures and the promotion of
   pollution prevention programs.
       •  prioritize  toxic air pollutant  control,  including  the  ARE Diesel Risk
          Reduction Program,  by  targeting measures that  provide immediate  and
          achievable air-quality benefits,  such as emissions reductions from transit
          buses, refuse trucks, and tanker trucks
       •  develop new  control measures that  will reduce exposure to  toxic air
          pollutants  across the state;   this analysis will include consideration of
          proximity of sources to sensitive populations

•  Strengthening enforcement: It shall  be the ARB's policy  to  work with the
   local air  districts in our respective  regulatory jurisdictions  to strengthen
   enforcement activities at the community level across the state.
       •  in  coordination  with local air districts  and  considering  input from
          stakeholders,  prioritize   field  inspection  audits to  address   statewide
          categories of  facilities that may have significant localized impacts  and
          make those audit reports easily accessible to the public
       •  work with local air  districts to develop enhanced complaint-resolution
          processes  for   addressing  environmental  justice   issues,    including
          procedures

•  Reducing cumulative impact: It shall be the ARB's policy to address,  consider,
   and reduce cumulative emissions, exposures, and health risks when  developing
   and implementing our programs.
       •  develop   technical  tools for  performing  assessments  of  cumulative
          emissions, exposure, and  health  risk on  a neighborhood  scale  and
          provide maps showing the results at the neighborhood level
       •  conduct   field  studies  to  support  air quality  modeling  efforts in
          communities throughout the state,  including  low-income and minority
          communities
       •  identify necessary  ARB risk reduction and research priorities  based on
          the results of the neighborhood assessments and other information

•  Working  with local governments: It shall be the  ARB's policy to work with
   local land-use agencies, transportation agencies, and air districts to develop
   ways to  assess,   consider, and  reduce cumulative emissions, exposures,  and
                                        99

-------
       health risks from air pollution through general plans, permitting, and other local
       actions.
           •  provide  education  and outreach to local agencies on  the use of the
              technical tools and guidance in land-use decisions
           •  work with  local air districts to provide  technical guidance  to  local
              agencies on measures  that could be  used to reduce or eliminate air
              quality impacts from specific types of sources

    •  Supporting  research and data collection:  It shall be the ARB's policy to
       support research and  data collection needed to reduce cumulative emissions,
       exposure, and health risks, as appropriate, in all communities,  especially low-
       income and minority communities.
           •  investigate non-cancer health effects associated with acute, peak-pollutant
              episodes  and long-term, low-level exposures that may trigger increases in
              the incidence of respiratory problems  and neurological,  developmental,
              and reproductive disorders
           •  characterize near-source dispersion patterns for toxic air pollutants from
              selected point sources, areas sources, and roadways
           •  identify  biomarkers for air pollutants and  assess individual exposures
              within specific communities
           •  develop SIS for assessing health-based information within communities,
              and  correlating that  information  to air pollution  and  socioeconomic
              factors59

ARE staff have  identified several factors  that have played an important role in achieving
adoption of the environmental justice policy.  First, community  and environmental  groups
coordinated their comments, allowing them to assume a major role in negotiating with business
groups and local air districts.  Second, these groups told ARE to act quickly so it could ensure
successful start-up and ongoing progress related to environmental justice.  These organizations
urged ARE to:

   •   develop an annual work plan, to start in July 2002
   •   issue a land-use  guidance document to assist local air quality districts and land-
       use agencies in evaluating the air quality impacts of proposed projects
   •   issue a complaint resolution guidance; document  as a means  to establish a
       process for resolving community complaints about air pollution sources
   •   issue a guidance document on assessing and reducing  cumulative emissions,
       exposures, and impacts to  assist local air districts in evaluating  and reducing
       cumulative  emissions  exposures  and  health   risks  at  neighborhood  and
       community levels
   •   develop a  plan  for allocating ARE  staff and  funding to demonstrate  how
       environmental justice policies and actions will be successfully accomplished
   •   make pollution prevention central to environmental justice programs60
                                           100

-------
Third,  ARE  developed its  policy  by  focusing  on  public  health  issues and doing  field
community  assessments to  develop facts  about  community exposures  that  are hard  to
contradict, thereby reducing concerns often expressed  by some businesses  that environmental
justice  is more perception than reality.   Because diesel  emissions overwhelmed all other
sources of air risks for urban areas, ARB has decided to focus on addressing that problem.61

Other ARE Activities

ARB began its work assuming that it had the legal authority to deal with environmental justice
issues if it could establish that there are real adverse impacts on community health.  The board
already had identified diesel  as a toxic air contaminant; the MATES II research study found
diesel emissions to be the chief risk factor.  Building on  this finding, ARB established new
regulatory  programs  to limit  diesel  emissions.62    ARB  also  will  start  preparing  an
environmental justice analysis for all rulemaking packages under its general authority.83

In addition,  ARB is  doing CIS mapping to identify areas  with  high cumulative risks, and is
integrating  environmental justice issues into  all of  its programs.    This effort includes a
commitment to provide  environmental justice awareness training to  all ARB staff within one
year.  ARB also has considerable discretion to direct its monitoring and enforcement efforts to
priority locations because it has ample flexibility to allocate its resources.64

Environmental justice concerns have created some interesting tradeoffs between ARB  and  the
regional air districts.  For example,  some community groups have objected to the attention  and
resources paid to zero  emissions  vehicles.    These groups believe that the vehicles  are
 unaffordable for low-income people  and that the time and money could be better  spent on other
 risk reduction efforts that return more immediate benefits to  people-of-color  and low-income
 communities.65

 Department of Toxic Substances Control

 The Department  of Toxic Substance Control  (DTSC)  manages  the state's solid waste  and
 hazardous  waste,  Superfund,  brownfield clean-up,  and pollution  prevention  programs.    It
 employs about 1,000 people and has an annual budget  of $150 million.

 Public Participation

 DTSC  became involved  with environmental justice issues  in the  early 1990s  due  to its
 responsibility for  issuing permits to waste facilities.  As  a result,  DTSC developed  a public
 participation manual in 1993.*  The mission of DTSC's public participation program is "...to
 ensure that the public is informed and involved early;  that  their issues are  heard; and that their
 comments are considered prior to final decisions by DTSC staff and management."    DTSC's
 vision statement for the program provides:

        We recognize that all members of the  public have  a stake in our decisions, and
        they should have the opportunity and are encouraged to participate  in developing
                                            101

-------
        solutions to site cleanup and facility corrective action, determining the adequacy
        of permitting  proposals,  and  encouraging  reduction  of  hazardous  waste
        generation.                            '

        We actively promote the tenets of public participation within DTSC;  we advise
        technical staff;  and  we  provide  the  community's  perspective during  the
        managerial decision-making process.

        Culture  and  economic diversity  is  considered during our  planning,  decision-
        making,  and in our outreach efforts.   We recognize that all  Californians  are
        varied in their backgrounds, beliefs, and cultures, and we are  sensitive to their
        needs.68

 DTSC's public  participation  manual contains the following statement on coordinating with
 other government agencies to address cumulative impacts:

        Communities are demanding that DTSG  consider environmental justice  in its
        allocation  of  resources  and its decision-making  processes.   Often  these
        communities  raise  the  issue of  "cumulative impacts"  (multiple sources or
        multiple  chemicals),  which refers  to  the  health and  other social impacts of
        numerous  industrial  facilities  (within  and  without  DTSC's jurisdiction),
        hazardous waste sites, and other potential sources  of pollution.   In fact, often the
        concern includes "multiple sources"  many  of which may not be under DTSC's
        regulatory  control.    These issues are complex and  often inter-related, and
        require the interaction of several government agencies at all levels.  It makes
       good  sense for DTSC, in its community  assessment,  to consider  this and
        determine the necessary level of  involvement from other agencies, not just in
        terms of DTSC's decision-making, but also in terms of questions and concerns
        that will be raised by community members.69

The manual concludes  by reminding DTSC staff about individual and community rights:

       Remember: all  Californians are entitled to a clean  environment,  and have a right
       to information concerning decisions that affect their health and their community.
       DTSC recognizes that all Californians have a  stake in the  outcome  of  its
       decisions, and therefore shall take all necessary steps to ensure that communities
       have the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process. DTSC shall
       make  decisions that take into account the  concerns  of all  communities, and its
       decisions shall be non-discriminatory.70

DTSC employs 32 staff who  work on public participation issues.  One is assigned to every
major waste site, and all are trained facilitators.;  The department encourages its staff to hold
conversations with small groups from affected communities.
                                          102

-------
Environmental Justice Policy

DTSC recently issued a draft environmental justice policy and expects to issue the final policy
in mid-2002.   The policy makes ten commitments for DTSC:

    1.  ensure that,  to the extent feasible,  its decisions,  actions and rulemaking avoid
       adding to disproportionate  environmental  and/or health impacts  on affected
       communities  and  reduce disproportionate  environmental  and  related  health
       impacts on such communities
    2.  promote investigation/cleanup of contaminated sites  in areas with minority and
       low-income  populations  using  voluntary  and enforcement  tools,  allocating
       limited  Orphan Site State funds in a fair manner and  prioritizing active  and
       backlog projects in order that public health and the environment are  protected
    3.  continue regional efforts to remediate brownfields so that that they  are returned
       to productive use
    4.  allocate its  permitting,  enforcement,  and cleanup  resources,  to the  extent
       feasible, so as  to  reduce  disproportionate  environmental and  related health
       impacts on ethnic minority and low-income communities
    5.  explore available mitigation measures whenever  the department's  decision has
       the  potential  to  adversely  affect  any  community   already  experiencing
       disproportionate environmental and/or health impacts
    6.  consider regional impacts of the department's decisions  and activities,  utilizing
       Geographic  Information System, census, and demographic data to more fully
       characterize  areas   surrounding sites and  facilities,   specifically  indicating
       sensitive receptors  and other facilities and sites that may have an impact on
       community health
    7.  participate in area studies dealing with health, sensitive  receptors,  family data,
       demographics,  or  other  pertinent issues  to ensure that permitting and site
       remediation   decisions   within   targeted   communities  fully   incorporate
       environmental  justice  concerns;   and evaluate  the  need  to   initiate  permit
       modifications or consider modifications to remediation plans to address disparate
       impacts that are identified as part of the area studies
    8.  work with Cal/EPA and its  boards,  departments,  and  office,  and within the
       department, to promote implementation of policies  and  procedures that  ensure
       that low-income and/or communities with minority populations  have access  to
       environmental  and  health-related  information;  this  will include conducting
       assessments to determine language and cultural needs of a specific community,
       providing information  in appropriate  languages,  and  encouraging early and
       continuous public involvement;  and will include  a commitment that site-related
       public participation documents are made available on the department's web site
       in appropriate languages
    9. work with Cal/EPA's External  Advisory Committee for Environmental  Justice
       to develop cross-media and  cross-agency approaches to community  concerns
                                            103

-------
    10. provide ongoing training for the department staff and management regarding this
       policy  and  other   fundamentals  of   environmental   justice,   emphasize
       environmental  justice  is  the  responsibility  of all  programs,   and  ensure
       implementation of this policy is incorporated into  performance evaluations71

 Other DTSC Activities

 DISC  recently  hired an environmental  justice  coordinator  whose responsibility  includes
 auditing DTSC's progress in implementing its environmental justice policy once it has been
 adopted.  The department expects to provide basic environmental justice training for its staff
 using the program developed at Cal/EPA.72

 Finally,  DTSC  is  doing area-wide  community assessments in five communities, including
 Southeast Los Angeles,  East  Los Angeles, and Richmond,  that use CIS  mapping to identify
 demographic characteristics and facility locations.  Among other  things,  the  assessments are
 looking  at the location  of sensitive receptors such  as  schools.   Project  managers will  be
 expected to take this information into account whenever they are working on a waste permit in
 the mapped communities.73

 Southern California Air Quality Management District

 Air quality-related  environmental justice  concerns  have long been a high priority  in Los
 Angeles  because of its  heavy industrial  base, large communities  of people-of-color,  and
 geography.  The South  Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) began to focus on
 these  issues in 1997 with the adoption of guiding principles and initiatives.  AQMD then
 conducted  one of the most extensive air toxics istudies in the United States, which formed the
 basis for an air toxics control plan that includes several new regulations.

 Guiding Principles and Initiatives

AQMD based its environmental justice program on the  guiding principles and initiatives
adopted by its governing  board in 1997.  These principles hold that:

   •   All  Basin residents  have the right to live and work in an environment of clean
       air,  free from airborne health  threats.
   •   Government is obligated to protect the public health.
   •   The public and private sectors have the right to  be  informed of the scientific
       findings concerning hazardous and  toxi(p emission levels, and to participate in
       the  development and implementation of adequate environmental regulations in
       their community.
   ซ   The governing  board is to uphold the  civic  expectation  that the  public  and
       private sectors of  the Basin will  engage in practices that contribute to a healthy
       economy and truly livable environment.74
                                          104

-------
AQMD established environmental justice initiatives based on these principles.  Key initiatives
include:

   •   monthly town hall meetings to enable residents to participate more effectively in
       the district's policy-making process; these meetings have been a key source of
       information that have helped the district target the use of its mobile monitoring
       equipment
   •   improved ambient  monitoring of air toxics  — the  MATES II study included
       fixed  monitoring  stations and new  portable toxics  monitoring  equipment
       developed from this initiative
   •   community response teams to allow rapid deployment of AQMD personnel for
       emergencies related to airborne emissions, such as leaks or spills
   •   upgraded field inspection technology,  such  as better  hand-held  monitoring
       equipment,  to improve the inspection and enforcement process
   •   changes  in  the   permitting program   for  portable  equipment  to  address
       neighborhood  problems  caused by temporary  placement  of portable  diesel
       generators or other similar equipment
    •   development of a new source review regulation for facilities that emit air toxics
       and strengthen the existing rule  for facility-wide limits on toxic air contaminants
       to require that certain types of  facilities apply best available control technology
       for toxic emissions75

 AQMD  also  created a 27-member environmental  justice task force  that reported to the
 governing board in August 1999. The  task force recommended that:

    •  town hall meetings continue  to give high priority to residents' complaints
    *  AQMD use mobile monitoring platforms developed for MATES II to conduct
        neighborhood monitoring on a prioritized basis and to implement the other
        elements of the original environmental justice initiative
     •  AQMD  examine its   trading  programs,  emissions  inventory,  and  other
        information to determine whether  any  hot spots  are  occurring or being
        aggravated by AQMD trading  programs
     •  AQMD develop a voluntary compact on environmental justice for consideration
        by local agencies, businesses, and community organizations76

 A copy  of the compact developed  pursuant  to  this last  recommendation is provided as
 Appendix G.

 Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study

 In 1998, AQMD  launched  its second  Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES  II).
 MATES II was critical to AQMD's environmental justice efforts because businesses wanted
 assurance that real pollution problems were identified using appropriate scientific techniques.77
 MATES II is one of the most comprehensive studies ever conducted in an urban environment,
                                            105

-------
 costing more than78   $750,000,  using a  network  of 10  fixed  monitoring stations,  and
 conducting micro-scale monitoring in 14 locations.  Of the 24  monitoring locations,  15 were in
 Los Angeles County, and three each were located in Orange County, Riverside County and
 San Bernadino County, all part of the Greater Los Angeles area.

 AQMD carried  out the micro-scale monitoring using three mobile monitoring platforms in
 overseas shipping containers that  were built specifically for  the study and could easily be
 moved  to  targeted neighborhoods.   The district  typically  stationed this equipment  in a
 neighborhood for 30 days.  More than 30 contaminants were measured, with more than 4,500
 samples  taken.   The  fixed  network was designed  to  identify  area-wide exposure to air
 pollutants, while the micro-scale monitoring was used to determine whether localized emission
 sources caused a significant increase in the concentration of certain toxic  air contaminants. A
 technical review group, composed of representatives  from  academia,  environmental  groups,
 industry, and public agencies provided scientific guidance for the project (see Figure 7.3).79

 MATES II found that diesel emissions  were by far the greatest  health risk for the region,
 although significant risk was also attributed to benzene and 1,3 butadiene, both  constituents of
 regular gasoline.  AQMD calculated the overall cancer risk in  the South Coast Air Basin using
standard EPA protocols and determined that the risk for the region averaged 1,400 in a million
 (see Figure 7.4).
                                      FIGURE 7.3

                   MATES II: AIR QUALITY CHARACTERIZATION
                          ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL

      •  The second  Multiple  Air Toxics  Exposure Study  (MATES II)  monitored and
         evaluated air pollution in California's South Coast Air Basin.
      •  MATES II was the result of environmental justice initiatives adopted by the South
         Coast Air Quality Management District's Governing Board in October 1997.
      •  The study characterized air quality  on the neighborhood level using a combination
         of fixed and  mobile monitors—sampling for more than 30 air pollutants, including
         both gases and particulates—augmented by an air-modeling program.

  The MATES II study of the South Coast Air Basin concluded:
      •  Accurate air quality analysis on a neighborhood level is possible.
      •  Localized pollution "hot spots" can be detected.
      •  Mobile  pollution sources have the strongest impact on local air toxics levels.
      •  The strongest concentration of air toxics can occur at the fence line of an  emitting
         facility.
      •  Overall,  risk  from  air toxics  has  continued  to  decrease   with  noticeable
         improvements for hexavalent chromium, benzene, and butadiene.

  The MATES II study proved that it  is possible to characterize neighborhood air quality
  accurately.  Also, it validated an experimental design that can be used for future air quality
  characterization, both within and beyond the context  of environmental justice.

                                         106

-------
                                       FIGURE 7.4
               DISTRIBUTION OF TOXIC AIR POLLUTANTS IN THE SOUTH
                                    COAST AIR BASIN
                          Other
                           11%
               1,3 Butadiene
                    8%

               Carbonyls
                  3%
                Benzene
                  7%
                                                           Diesel
                                                         Particulate
                                                           71%
   Source: Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study, ES-1. Available at www.aqmd.ca.gov
The  micro-scale monitoring  did not identify any  toxic air emissions that  exceeded health
standards at most of  the  14 locations  evaluated.   However,  the study identified styrene
emission levels at one location that exceeded health  standards, indicating that local "hot spots"
may exist.80

AQMD took several actions in response to the results of MATES II, including:

     •   focusing even more on reducing diesel emissions
     •   adopting a new source review program for sources of air toxics
     •   developing an  air toxics control plan  that is likely  to use existing legal
        authorities to adopt a series  of new rules addressing dry cleaning solvents, the
        film cleaning industry, and methylene chloride emissions
     •   initiating a program that will assess  cumulative risks  at  large facilities and
        require them to go on an "air toxics diet" if their total health risks exceed 25 in
        1,000,000s1

Air Toxics Control Plan

MATES II  prompted AQMD to develop an air toxics control plan for the South Coast Basin.
Before its adoption in  2000,  the plan was presented to the public for review and comment in a
                                           107

-------
 series of four public consultations.  The plan is designed to reduce air toxics by an additional
 31 percent beyond what would be  expected by 2010 under  existing local, state, and federal
 control programs (see Figure 7.5). The plan relies on a wide range of initiatives, such as:

     •  implementing  the  proposed  new source  review program  for  toxics  and
        strengthening the facility-wide permitting program for toxic air contaminants
     •  developing new rules  to control  air toxics from  chrome plating and  dry
        cleaning, and new permitting guidelines for stationary source diesel generators
     •  increasing controls  of toxic air emissions from consumer products
     •  developing a bus fleet rule that will encourage transit operations to retire dirtier
        buses or purchase alternative fuel buses
     •  developing more stringent emissions standards for new bus engines82
                                      FIGURE 7.5
          ESTIMATED AVERAGE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN RISK LEVELS
                      1998
 2010 Air Quality
Management Plan
2010 Air Toxics Control!
        Plan
Other AOMD Activities

AQMD uses the MATES II mobile monitoring platforms to respond to community concerns
about air pollution hot spots. The district has along list of communities that want the monitors
deployed in their areas; the list grows based on concerns raised during town hall meetings held
by AQMD.83
                                         108

-------
The importance  of the neighborhood monitoring capability is seen in  the case of petroleum
coke shipments at the ports of Los Angeles.  Communities complained about wind-blown coke-
dust coming from open storage at the ports, and neighborhood sampling detected high levels.
The  ability to document these  emissions provided the basis  for AQMD to adopt a new
regulation requiring covers for storage piles and trucks that transport coke.84

Given the environmental  issues involved, AQMD is considering whether to change the way it
performs its functions under CEQA.  The district is  responsible for identifying air emission
levels that might be deemed "significant" for purposes of environmental review.   To facilitate
this process, AQMD created a handbook that establishes threshold levels for air emissions that
may produce  significant adverse impacts.   Agencies can use  these  levels  when preparing
environmental review documents to determine whether emissions might produce significant
adverse impacts, but they are not regulatory thresholds. Currently, they are based only on new
emissions from a proposed facility, but the  district is considering  changing the calculation to
include new emissions and background  levels so the significance determination will be  based
on cumulative emissions.  This proposal is quite controversial.85

A new  chairwoman, Norma Glover,  has  recently assumed leadership  of AQMD's  governing
board.   Among her  "clear  air  initiatives"  is  the  creation  of a  "strategic  alliance on
environmental justice."   Most of the details of this alliance are not yet  available, but the
initiative will include developing an annual environmental justice work plan.86

ANALYSIS OF THE CALIFORNIA PROGRAM
Leadership

California's environmental justice leadership begins with the state legislature.
laws enacted over the past three years that:
In total,  six
       set out clear expectations for Cal/EPA to "conduct its programs in a manner that
       ensures the  fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and income levels,
       including minority populations and low-income populations in the state"87
       require Cal/EPA and its boards, departments,  and offices to develop a strategy
       for "identifying and addressing gaps in existing programs, policies, or activities
       that may impede the achievement of environmental justice" ffl
       give the Office of Planning and Research responsibility for environmental justice
       coordination, and increase the attention of the governor's office on these issues
       fund grants to reduce direct diesel  emissions focused on people-of-color and
       low-income communities
       mandate an open, public process to develop screening for brownfield clean-up
       levels
       direct agencies to provide better guidance to local governments on how to take
       environmental justice into account when making land-use decisions
                                           109

-------
 California's laws are largely process-oriented, requiring strategic planning,  assessing program
 gaps, and setting up work groups.  As such, they do not mandate agencies to take specific steps
 to resolve environmental justice issues.  However, they do provide a clear policy basis for state
 agencies to  focus on  environmental justice issues and for state agency  champions to initiate
 related programs.  At the same time, the vetoes of several environmental justice bills prior to
 1999 and an uncertain political climate raise the issue of whether adequate  bipartisan support
 exists to maintain the momentum for addressing environmental justice.

 Community and environmental  organizations played  an  important  role  in  California's
 environmental justice  legislation and in the final approval of ARB's policies and actions  for
 environmental justice.

 State and regional agencies also have exercised leadership on environmental justice for several
 years.    Cal/EPA created  an assistant secretary  for environmental justice  and  conducts
 environmental justice awareness training for its staff and those of its boards, departments, and
 office.  Cal/EPA is integrating the issue into inspector training curriculum; is developing an
 agency-wide environmental justice strategy; and has included environmental justice as one  of
 the eight goals in its strategic  vision.   Most  recently, Cal/EPA reaffirmed its commitment to
 environmental justice in a 2002 memo issued by its secretary (see Appendix H).

 Further, the Department of Toxic Substances Control developed enhanced public participation
 procedures  in response to  environmental  justice issues  raised  in the  waste facility  siting
 process;  trained its public participation staff to act  as facilitators; hired an  environmental
justice coordinator; and recently issued a draft environmental justice policy.

 ARB's Neighborhood  Assessment  Work Plan  has  begun  to  focus  on  how  to understand
 neighborhood scale  environmental problems, and its policies and actions for  environmental
justice  are  perhaps  the  most  comprehensive approach  in  the   nation  for addressing
 environmental justice issues.  ARE also assigned staff to work on such issues and has focused
 on specific methods for reducing air pollution in high-risk areas, starting with reducing diesel
 emissions.

 The  South  Coast AQMD's MATES  II study has  yielded detailed  data  on  regional and
 neighborhood toxic exposures, and  has enabled the district  to adopt new regulations limiting
 toxic emissions.   Its air toxics control plan provides a road map for further toxics reduction
 over  the next several  years,  and town hall meetings provide a  continual opportunity for
 communities to express concerns and  give feedback.   The ongoing  micro-scale monitoring
 program enables  the district to  respond to community concerns about air pollution hot spots.

Accountability

 California's agencies do not have specific evaluation processes built into their environmental
justice programs, but  there  are several accountability mechanisms.   State  law  requires the
secretary for environmental protection  to prepare  and  submit  to   the governor  and the
                                           110

-------
legislature a report on state environmental justice program implementation, starting on January
1, 2004. ^ Budget bill language requires quarterly reports to the legislature on the progress of
environmental justice  programs,  although  this  mandate only extends through Fiscal Year
2002.90  Cal/EPA's new advisory committee  on environmental justice may serve as another
mechanism to hold state agencies  accountable because it is  responsible for identifying agency
gaps that limit the ability to achieve environmental justice.  In addition, the Office of Planning
and Research has a coordination role and could work to hold state agencies accountable in that
capacity.

Other accountability mechanisms include ARB's request that staff report on their progress in
implementing its policies and actions for environmental justice  six  months following their
adoption and  periodically  thereafter.91   The  new board chair for  the South Coast AQMD
requested that staff conduct a 90-day review of the district's  environmental justice program and
proposed that tie review occur annually in the future.92  Some state  agencies have  begun to
discuss  how to translate environmental justice into expectations and factors for evaluating staff
performance, but this process is not yet in place.

Permitting Authority and Procedures

Of all the  California  agencies, the  South Coast AQMD has taken the  most direct steps to
integrate environmental justice into permitting work.  It has  proposed new regulations based on
health-risk data and has examined  how it can use existing authorities and responsibilities under
CEQA  to address environmental justice  concerns. As a result of the information generated by
MATES II, the district proposed  a new source review regulation for air toxics.   Its facility-
wide risk regulation requires facilities with total health risk  levels higher than 25 in 1,000,000
to adopt an air toxics "diet."  The district is considering a series of regulations that would limit
air toxics emissions from  dry cleaners, film  cleaning operations, and  methylene chloride
emissions.  AQMD also is considering an expanded approach to its advisory role under CEQA
to evaluate  background and new emissions when calculating threshold air  emissions  levels
considered significant  for purposes of environmental review.93

Although regional air districts conduct  most  of California's  permitting work, ARB plays an
important role as it adopts many  of the statewide rules that regional  air districts must  use in
their permits. ARB recently adopted a policy to  "integrate environmental justice into all  of our
programs,  policies  and regulations."94   Implementation includes  an explicit discussion of
whether proposed major programs, policies,  and regulations fairly treat people of all  races,
cultures,  geographic  areas,  and  income  levels,  especially  low-income  and  minority
communities.  ARB is working with stakeholders to review the board's current programs for
addressing potential environmental justice  problems, and  to add new or modified elements
consistent with ARB's environmental justice  policies where  program gaps exist.95  It also is
preparing  additional  diesel emissions restrictions to address high risks often concentrated in
these communities.
                                           Ill

-------
 ARE staff are aware that communities often are most concerned with acute exposures, yet it is
 difficult for air  districts to deal with  these situations.96  ARB's neighborhood assessment
 process has helped to develop techniques for; identifying  neighborhood scale problems and
 ways to address them.   ARE  and DTSC both noted that their  agencies have authority to
 exercise their discretion in  recalling permits for reevaluation if  circumstances indicate that
 existing permits  are  not adequately protective.   However,  neither agency  has ever used this
 authority.97

 DTSC  has not yet directly  accounted  for environmental justice in its permitting processes.
 However,  its draft  environmental justice policy directs the department to do so by:

    •   ensuring  that  its  decisions,  actions!  and   rulemaking avoid  adding  to
        disproportionate impact, and reduce disproportionate impact where possible
    •   promoting site investigations and cleanup in areas with minority and  low-income
        populations
    •   allocating its permitting,  enforcement,  and  cleanup  resources to the  extent
        feasible, to  reduce disproportionate impact
    •   exploring mitigation measures when the( department's decision has the potential
        to adversely affect a community already experiencing disproportionate impact98

 As stated previously, Cal/EPA does not have a: role in program implementation, but one of its
 tasks is to help its boards, departments, and offices to identify program gaps that may limit
 their ability to achieve environmental justice. Part of this work is an analysis now underway to
 examine the legal authority for each board, department,  and office to address environmental
justice through permitting and other activities.99

 Priority Setting and Risk Reduction

 ARE and AQMD focus on priority setting, risk reduction, and  cumulative impacts. Developed
 as part  of AQMD's environmental justice initiative, MATES II identified the region's highest
 risk pollutants and established a  mobile monitoring  capability  that  could  be deployed in
 suspected hot spots.  It also led to several new air toxics regulations. AQMD managers believe
 that the data and sound scientific base generated by MATES II  were essential in supporting the
 new regulations and muting opposition for risk reduction efforts. 10ฐ

 Based largely on  MATES II, AQMD adopted a ten-year air toxics control plan in March 2000.
 The plan targets a 31  percent reduction of residual  risk by 2010,  utilizing strategies for
 stationary and mobile sources.101  AQMD also uses its town hall meetings to identify areas that
 are appropriate for additional monitoring, and it deploys mobile  monitoring  stations there to
 determine whether there  are hot spots requiring additional attention.

 ARE designed its  neighborhood assessment process to identify high-risk areas and ways to
 address those risks.  The board's new environmental justice policies include commitments to:
                                           112

-------
   •   reduce health risks from toxic air pollutants in all communities, especially low-
       income and minority communities, through adoption of control measures and the
       promotion of pollution prevention programs102
   •   assess, consider, and reduce cumulative emissions, exposures, and health risks
       when developing and implementing programs103
   ซ   work with local land-use agencies, transportation agencies, and air districts to
       develop ways to assess, consider, and reduce cumulative emissions, exposures,
       and health risks from air pollution through general plans,  permitting, and other
       local actions104
   •   support research and data collection needed to reduce cumulative emissions,
       exposure, and health risks,  as appropriate,  in all communities, especially low-
       income and minority communities105

In the early  1990s, DTSC conducted the Vernon Community Assessment, which found that
waste facilities can be very concentrated in some neighborhoods.  This work was useful in
developing the department's public participation manual.  Although DTSC has focused its
environmental justice work mostly on public participation issues,  its new draft environmental
justice policy provides that the  department should "ensure  that, to the  extent  feasible, its
decisions, actions and rulemaking avoid adding to disproportionate environmental and/or health
impacts on affected communities  and reduce disproportionate environmental and health related
impacts on such communities."106

Because Cal/EPA does not directly implement environmental programs, its initiatives have not
focused  on priority setting  and  risk reduction,  except for  efforts to identify  gaps  in  the
programs of its boards, departments, and offices.

Public Participation

DTSC's public participation manual provides detailed guidance for working with communities
on developing public participation  plans, drafting fact sheets, preparing mailing lists, holding
public meetings, responding to public  comments,  and  making information available  through
web sites and other means.   DTSC recently revised this  manual  to reflect, more directly,
environmental justice concerns.

ARB's policies and actions for  environmental justice  call on the  board to "strengthen  our
outreach and  education  efforts   in  all  communities,  especially low-income  and minority
communities, so that  all Californians can fully participate in our public processes and share in
the air  quality  benefits  of our  programs."107  Actions identified under  this policy include
holding  meetings in  communities  affected by  ARB's programs  at  times and places  that
encourage public participation; making staff available to attend community meetings; preparing
and distributing fact sheets describing ARB's  environmental justice and community health
programs; promoting  community access to the  best available air quality  data; creating  and
distributing an easy-to-read public participation manual; and reducing fees charged for copying
materials.m
                                           113

-------
AQMD holds monthly town hall meetings to elicit community concerns.  These meetings have
identified numerous air quality concerns and have served as a basis for  deciding where  to
locate  mobile  monitoring  equipment.    The  district  also  convened a multi-stakeholder
environmental justice task force which provided recommendations on how AQMD can address
environmental justice concerns.  Although the task force disbanded after completing its work,
AQMD will  continue  to report on the progress of its environmental justice initiatives via  its
web site until the tasks are completed.109

California does not have funding to pay for technical assistance for community  groups. The
non-profit Communities for a Better Environment  (CBE)  has staff scientists who provide
independent  technical  advice  to community \ organizations.   CBE  believes  that  technical
assistance received from groups is more trusted than assistance provided through  the state.
However, its scientists are  limited in the  number of communities they  can assist.110  For
communities  not  serviced by CBE, the questions  of where and how to obtain  technical
assistance remain a significant dilemma that  Cal/EPA's program has yet to address.

RECOMMENDATIONS

   •   California's boards,  offices, and departments should establish measurable  program
       objectives for addressing environmental justice, develop accountability measures and
       procedures  for achieving those objectives, and issue  regular public  reports about their
       progress in  addressing environmental justice concerns.

   •   California's boards, offices, and departments should  expand their efforts to locate and
       prioritize communities with high exposure to pollution  by building upon programs like
       DTSC's Vernon County assessment and iAQMD's MATES II study.

   •   California's boards, offices, and departments-should use the findings from Cal/EPA's
       examination of existing state legal authorities to advise their  staff about the legal options
       available to address  environmental justice.  Those findings should be communicated
       through  a guidance document that can be easily understood and carried out by permit
       writers and  other agency staff in their day-to-day work.  Staff should use this  document
       to  determine  whether existing  state  permits adequately protect health  and the
       environment in people-of-color and low-income communities.

   •   California's boards, offices, and departments should  take full advantage of Cal/EPA's
       office's coordinating authority so  they can share experiences and best practices among
       all the entities under Cal/EPA and thereby  more effectively address environmental
      justice concerns.                      ;
                                         114

-------
ENDNOTES
1 www.census.gov.
2 California Environmental Protection Agency, The History of the California Environmental Protection Agency
  available at www.calepa.ca.gov/about/historyol/calepa.htm.
3 The California Environmental Protection Agency, Strategic Vision  (July 2000) 5.
4 Barry Wallerstein, Operating Executive, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Interview
 (March 26, 2002).
5 Jim Marxen, Public Participation Chief, Department of Toxic Substances Control, and Vanessa Byrd, Chief,
 Education and Outreach Unit. Department of Toxic Substances Control, Interview (February 15, 2002).
6 Environmental Health Coalition, Communities at Risk (April 1993). Focusing on Barrio Logan in San Diego;
 Communities for a Better Environment, Holding Our Breath: Environmental Injustice Exposed in Southeast
 Los Angeles (July 1998).
7 Holding Our Breath, 5.
8 Romel Pascual, Remarks before the Academy Panel (February 12, 200).  See Assembly Bill 937 (1991),
  Assembly Bill 3024 (1992), Senate Bill 451 (1997), Senate Bill 1113 (1997) and Assembly Bill 2237  (1998),  -
9 Jim Marxen and Vanessa Byrd, Interview.
10 Romel Pascual, Remarks.
11 Cal. Gov't Code section 65040.12 (West Supp. 2001).
12 Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer, California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resource Board,
  Interview (February 15. 2002).                                                                        -
13 South Coast Air Quality Management District Governing Board Meeting, Environmental Justice Task Force
  Final Report (August 13, 1997).  Atwww.aqmd.gov/hb/990824a.html.
14 See Ellen Peter,  "Implementing Environmental Justice: The New Agenda for California State Agencies" Golden
  Gate University Law Review (Spring 2000)  31: 8:543-54.  Discussion of the history of the vetoed legislation
  including excerpts from some of the veto messages.  These bills included:
     •   Assembly Bill 937 (1991) that would have amended California's permit streamlining Act to require
        submission of project race and income demographics for high-impact development projects.  Failure to
        submit the data required the permit denial, however agencies could not use the race and demographic
        data as a factor in their decisions                       ..   .
     •   Assembly Bill 3024 (1992) that was similar to AB 937
     •   Senate Bill 451 (1997) that would have integrated environmental justice into the land use element of the
        state's general plan for land use, establish long range planning mechanisms to ensure equitable
        distribution in the location of future waste facilities and avoid concentrating facilities near schools and
        residential neighborhoods
     •  Senate Bill 1113 (1997) that would have amended the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (the
        California analogue to the National Environmental Policy Act) to require the CEQA analysis to include
        identification and mitigation of adverse impacts on minority and low-income populations
     •  Assembly Bill 2237 (1998) that would have directed certain loans and grants to ameliorate high and
        adverse effects on human health and the environment.
15 California Statutes 1999, Chapter 115.
16 Cal. Gov't Code section 65040.12 (West Supp. 2001);  Cal. Pub. Res. Code section 72000 (West Supp. 2001).
17 Cindy Tuck, General Counsel, Interview (February 15, 2002). After reviewing and commenting on U.S.
  EPA's draft guidance for Title VI, Californians for Environmental and Economic Balance decided to develop a
  policy on Environmental Justice. That policy was adopted in 1999 and is available at
  http://www.cceeb.org/documents/ej99.html. More information on CCEEB and the environmental justice policy
  are available at www.cceeb.org. Pacific Gas & Electric, one of CCEEB's member organizations,  adopted a
  detailed environmental justice policy in September 2001.  Pacific Gas & Electric Company, Environmental
  Justice Procedure (September 2001).
 18 See Implementing Environmental Justice, 550-54, for a discussion of the complex legislative history of SB 115.
 19 Cindy Tuck, Interview.
20 Carlos Porras, Executive Director, Communities for a Better Environment and Joe Lyou. Director of
  Programs, League of Conservation Voters, Interview (March 4, 2002).
                                                   115

-------
21 Cal. Gov't Code section 65040.12(c)  (West Supp. 2001).
22 Cal. Gov't Code section 65040.12 (b) (West Supp. 2001).
23 Cal. Pub. Res. Code section 72000 (West Supp. 2001).
24 California Statutes 2000. Chapter 728.
25 Cal. Pub. Res. Code sections 72001.5. 72002. and 72003 (West Supp. 2001).
28 California Statutes 2001. Chapter 763.
27 Cynthia McClain-Hill. McClain-Hill Associates, Attorneys at Law, Small Business Representative on
Cal/EPA's Environmental Justice Advisory Council, Interview (March 5, 2002).
28 California Statutes, Chapter 762.                   i
29 Cal. Gov't Code section 65040.12(d)  (West Supp. 2001).
30 California Statutes 2001, Chapter 764.
31 Cal. Health and Safety Code section 57008(a)(3) (West Supp. 2001).
32 Ibid.. section 57008(b) (2).                         ;
33 Ibid., section 57008(c)(2).
34 California Health and Safety Code section 57010(a) (West Supp. 2001).
35 California Statues 2001, Chapter 765.
38 Ibid.
37 Implementing Environmental Justice, 585.
38 Available at www.opr.ca.gov/ejustice/overview.shtml
39 Ibid.
40 Ibid.
41 www.opr.ca.gov, click on 2002 EJ Forums.
42 Implementing Environmental Justice, 563.
43 California Environmental Protection Agency,  Strategic Vision, 9.
44 Ibid.. 22.
45 Ibid.
46 California Environmental Protection Agency,  Environmental Justice Program Fact Sheet.
47 California Environmental Protection Agency,  Memorandum on Environmental Justice Mission Statement and
   Program Elements.
48 Malinda Hall, Special Assistant for Environmental Justice and Carol Monahan, Assistant General Counsel,
   California Environmental Protection Agency,  Interview (February 15,  2002).
49 See e.g.. California Environmental Protection Agency, Accomplishments and Priorities
   (January thru June 2001) 5,  15, 80.
50 Romel Pascual. Interview.
51 Malinda Hall and Carol Monahan,  Interview.         |
52 California Air Resources Board. Neighborhood Assessment Work Plan (June 30, 2000). At
  www.ai-b.ca.gov/ch/napworkplan.htm.
53 Lynn Terry, Remarks before the Academy Panel (February 12, 2002).
54 ibid.                                             ;
55 California Air Resources Board, Policies and Actions for Environmental Justice (December 13, 2001).
At www.arb.ca.gov.
56 Letter from numerous community and environmental organizations to Chairman Alan Lloyd and Members of
   the Air Resources Board (December 6, 2001).
57 Ibid.
58 Romel Pascual, Interview.
59 Policies and Actions for Environmental Justice.
60 Letter from numerous community and environmental organization to Chairman Alan Lloyd and Members of the
  Air Resources Board  (December 6, 2001).
61 Lynn Terry, Remarks.
62 Lynn Terry, Remarks.
63 Ibid.
64 Ibid.
                                                  116

-------
65 Romel Pascual, Interview.
66 Jim Marxen and Vanessa Byrd, Interview.
67 Department of Toxic Substances Control, Public Participation Manual (October 2001) iv.
  At www.dtsc.ca.gov/lawsregulationspolicies/index.html click on "policies and procedures."
68 Ibid.
69 Ibid., Chapters 2, 4.
70 Ibid.
71 Department of Toxic Substances Control, Draft Environmental Justice Policy at www.dtsc.ca.gov.
72 Jim Marxen and Vanessa Byrd, Interview.
73 Ibid.
74 South Coast Air Quality Management District, An Air Toxics Control Plan for the Next Ten Years,
  (March 2000)  Appendix B. Atwww.aqmd.gov/aqmp/atcp.html.
75 Ibid.
76 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Board meeting materials from August 13, 1999, available at
  www.aqmd.gov/hb/990824a.html.
77 Barry Wallerstein, Interview.
78 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study ES-1.
  At www.aqmd.ca.gov. AQMD conducted a less ambitious air toxics assessment in 1987.  Key differences
  between MATES  II and MATES I were that diesel emissions are now identified as a toxic  emission and the
  AQMD had much better monitoring capabilities. Barry Wallerstein, Interview.
79 Ibid.
80 Ibid.
81 Barry Wallerstein, Interview.
82 An Air Toxics Control Plan for the Next Ten Years.
83 Ibid.
84 Barry Wallerstein, Interview.
85 Ibid.  The  City of Los Angeles is also revising its CEQA threshold guide to include environmental justice
  considerations. The new Guide, still in draft form, notes that city policy in its General Plan Framework
  element and in its proposed Transportation Element "is to 'assure fair treatment of people  of all races, cultures,
  incomes and education levels with respect to development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental
  laws, regulations, and policies,  including affirmative efforts to inform and involve environmental groups,
  especially environmental justice groups, in early planning stages through notification and two-way
  communication.'  This assurance may involve efforts to identify and reach affected populations, including low-
  income and minority populations [in the CEQA process]." City of Los Angeles, L.A.  CQA Threshold Guide.
  Draft (May 14, 1998). Renee Brandt, Environmental Supervisor, Air Quality Division, City of Los Angeles,
  Interview (March 5, 2002).
86 South Coast Air Quality Management District, AQMD Adopts Work Plan for Chairman's Clean Air Initiative
   (February  1,  2002). At www.aqmd.gov/newsl/governing_board/2002/bs2_01_02.htm.
87 Cal. Pub. Res. Code section 7200  (West Supp. 2001).
88 California Statutes 2001,  Chapter 765.
89 Cal. Pub. Res. Code section 7115  (West Supp. 2001).
90 E-mail from Romel Pascual to Veronica Lenegan, (April 4, 2002).
91 E-mail from Lynn Terry  to Veronica Lenegan, (April 4, 2002).
92 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Eight Strategic Alliance Initiatives  (February 1, 2002).
   At www.aqmd.gov/newsl/strategic_alliance_initiatives.htm
93 Barry Wallerstein, Interview.
94 Policies and Actions for Environmental Justice, 3.
 95 Ibid.
 96 Lynn Terry,  Remarks.
 97 Lynn Terry and Ed Lowry, Remarks.
 98 Draft Environmental Justice Policy.
 99 Romel Pascual, Interview.
                                                   117

-------
100 Barry Wallerstein, Interview.
101 An Air Toxics Control Plan for the Next Ten Years,   j
102 Policies and Actions for Environmental Justice, 6.
103 Ibid., 9.
1W Ibid., 10.
105 Ibid., 11.
106 Environmental Justice Policy, Draft.
107 Policies and Plans for Environmental Justice,  4.
108 Ibid., 5-6.
109 See Environmental Justice Task Force, Final Report to Governing Board (August 13, 1999).
   At www.aqmd.gov/hb/990824a.html.                '
110 Carlos Porras, Interview.
                                                  118

-------
                                  CHAPTER EIGHT

                                 LESSONS LEARNED
The following "lessons learned" are organized according to the major themes drawn from the
Panel's earlier work on environmental justice: leadership and accountability, setting priorities
to reduce risk  and pollution,  permitting,  and  public   participation.    A  fully  formed
environmental justice program incorporates all  four  themes.  At the same time,  the Panel
recognizes that such programs likely will develop incrementally.  To  demonstrate  the state's
commitment  and build public trust, the Panel recommends that states take some  immediate
actions to address community concerns - focusing on achieving results from the very start.
The range of recommendations presented in this report allows states and other stakeholders to
choose options that best fit individual circumstances  and still provides states with the larger
picture of the elements needed to address environmental justice.

LEADERSHIP AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Despite persistent and seemingly intractable  environmental justice  problems,  the  Panel has
uncovered heartening evidence of leadership to  address  them on the part of state legislators,
agency managers  and  staff,  universities,  businesses,  community  residents,  and  local
governments. Each type of leader offers a distinct perspective, provides unique resources, and
produces  different solutions and results.   Our  study of four states demonstrates  that to be
successful, environmental justice efforts can benefit from leadership by all six types.

Legislative Leadership

Finding  1:  Although states may have untapped legal  authorities  to address environmental
justice issues, additional legislation can propel  reluctant agencies forward, lend support and
credence  to  the  efforts of willing administrators, and  launch activities that involve external
parties.

Legislative  leadership  spurred  new  and significant  environmental justice  initiatives  in
California and  Florida.   The principal  author  of Florida's  legislation  credited  a forum
sponsored by  the  National  Conference of  State Legislators  for  sparking his  interest in
environmental justice issues,1 demonstrating the importance of education in stimulating interest
to enact environmental justice laws.

Recommendation 1:  State environmental agencies and other interested organizations should
support and encourage programs designed to provide better information to  state legislators
about environmental justice issues, including information about:

    •   the existence of disproportionately high concentrations of industrial facilities
        and contaminated sites in or near people-of-color and low-income communities
                                           119

-------
    •   the potential adverse health and environmental effects that could result from
        such siting practices
    •   the status of ongoing efforts to address environmental justice concerns in their
        respective states
    •   models of innovative, creative approaches for solving similar problems in other
        states

 Recommendation  2;  State legislators  should examine environmental justice issues in their
 jurisdictions,  as well as environmental justice legislation adopted by other states. They should
 consider  legislation  establishing  clear  legal authority  to  address and resolve their states'
 environmental justice problems.

 Agency Leadership

 Finding 2:   Champions  are important  for  leading  environmental justice initiatives because
 these programs require state agencies to  change their traditional ways and adopt new strategies
 for doing business.

 High-level  executive leadership  has  been  critical  for  developing  environmental justice
 programs in several  states.  For  example, the|chair of the California Air  Resources Board
 came  to his position with a strong  interest in: community health, championed the board's
 neighborhood assessment process, and led the board's  adoption of its environmental justice
 policies and actions in December, 2001. Similarly,  the chair of the governing board for the
 South  Coast Air Quality  Management District played a major role in pushing the  district to
 adopt  environmental justice guiding principles and initiatives, launching the district's MATES
 II study, and encouraging new rules to address findings from MATES II.

 Cal/EPA has  an  assistant commissioner  for environmental justice,  and the state's Department
 of Toxic  Substances  Control and Air  Resources  Board both have full-time environmental
justice staff.

 In Indiana,  the Department of Environmental "Management's commissioner and other senior
 staff identified environmental justice as an important concern  for their state, obtained EPA
 funding to develop an environmental justice plan, and supported staff efforts to improve  the
 state's public participation process.

 Similarly, the former commissioner of New Jersey's  Department of Environmental Protection
 credits his  participation  in  EPA's National Environmental Justice Advisory  Council for
 inspiring,  at least in part, his leadership in  publishing New  Jersey's  environmental justice
 policy, creating an environmental equity  office and advisory council, and developing  the state's
 proposed rule to expand public participation in permitting.2

 The value of getting policymakers out into the community is demonstrated by what happened
 in New Jersey. After New Jersey's current environmental commissioner toured South Camden
                                           120

-------
neighborhoods,  he  initiated  the  comprehensive  state-community  partnership  program.3
California's South Coast  Air Quality Management  District holds its  monthly town hall
meetings in people-of-color and low-income communities.   Such visits provide a  learning
experience to  policymakers and  signal the importance of environmental justice  concerns to
agency staff. Community members gain much-needed access and hope that their problems will
be addressed.

Recommendation 3:   States'  highest-level executives, such as the  governor,  commissioner,
and other agency heads, should articulate a clear commitment to environmental justice.

Recommendation 4;  States should formalize their commitment to environmental justice in  a
written document that clearly establishes principles for state and local agencies to follow.  This
document  could  be  an  executive order,  state policy, administrative  order,  or similar
pronouncement.

Recommendation 5:  States should ensure that their commitment is supported  by  an adequate
administrative  structure  and  allocation  of  resources  to   achieve  full  implementation of
environmental justice policies.   This  structure might include  an office or staff devoted to
environmental justice.   Agency officials  with environmental justice responsibilities should
report directly to the commissioner or department head.

Recommendation 6:  States  should ensure that their environmental justice policies produce
actual results  by fully  integrating  the policies into  core agency missions  —  including state
planning mechanisms — so they  can permeate programs and govern day-to-day staff functions
and activities.  The program results should be regularly evaluated and reported to the public.

University Leadership

Finding 3: University-based programs can play  an important role  in developing solutions to
environmental justice concerns.

A significant part of Florida's  environmental justice program is  based at  its  universities,
especially Florida A&M and  South  Florida University.    Compared with  state  agencies,
university-based programs may be:

    •  somewhat more insulated from political change, and  thereby provide continuity
       to environmental justice programs
    ซ  better positioned to provide credible and trusted advice to citizens
    •  capable of conducting  more extensive scientific research than state agencies
    •  effective intermediaries among  competing interests
    •  strong advocates for citizens
                                            121

-------
 Thus, university-based environmental justice programs can be a  valuable addition to state
 programs, even though universities cannot directly address environmental justice concerns in
 the same way that regulatory agencies can through permitting or enforcement decisions.

 Recommendation  7;   State leaders should examine the role that universities  can play in
 addressing environmental justice issues.  However,  university-based programs should not
 replace environmental justice programs at state regulatory agencies.

 Community Leadership

 Finding 4:   An  active,  informed  citizenry  is critical  to  the  success  of  every  state's
 environmental justice initiatives.

 For each of the four states studied, Academy researchers found that community leaders played
 key roles as catalysts for developing environmental justice programs.  For example, the Legal
 Environmental Assistance  Foundation  was  a idriving  force  behind legislation  establishing
 Florida's Environmental Equity and Justice Commission. Organizations, such as Communities
 for a Better Environment and the League of Conservation Voters, helped to propel  forward
 several California environmental justice laws.   Along  with dozens of other community and
 environmental groups, they also supported tie Air Resources Board's policies and actions for
 environmental justice. The Indianapolis Urban League's Environmental Coalition studied the
 relationships among race, income, and air toxics and  helped to build support for Indiana's
 environmental justice policies.  In New Jersey, the South Camden Citizens in Action and other
 community groups  highlighted  the environmental justice problems  of  that neighborhood and
 forced the clean-up of its sewage treatment plant.

Recommendation 8:  States should cultivate an active, informed citizenry on environmental
issues,  especially  for those  living in people-pf-color  and low-income communities where
poverty, loose organization, lack of political  power,  or limited access  to resources may limit
citizen involvement.  State  agencies should  use a variety of tools for achieving this  goal,
including:

   •   providing financial assistance to community organizations in the form of direct
       state funding or, where such funding is not available, such indirect assistance as
       educating community  leaders about the  availability of federal,  state,  or  other
       grant programs, helping  community groups apply for such grants, and providing
       community leaders with written descriptions of environmental problems and
       needs which can be used to prepare grant applications
   •   providing technical assistance to community organizations, like EPA's technical
       assistance  grants and Technical Outreach Services to Communities4 and the
       community outreach services provided  by  Florida A&M University
   •   establishing community or field liaisons,;  such as EPA's Superfund community
       liaison program which has been particularly helpful in working with New Jersey
       neighborhoods
                                          122

-------
   •   promoting and facilitating interaction between communities and businesses

Most  importantly, state  leaders should  maintain  an atmosphere  that welcomes community
involvement.

Business Leadership

Finding  5:  Some businesses and business organizations have recognized the importance of
environmental justice, adopted  environmental justice policies,  and supported  their states'
environmental justice initiatives.

Finding 6:  Business  leaders have significant opportunities to improve their relationships with
neighboring communities by moving beyond  meeting minimum  environmental requirements
and responding directly to community concerns.

Businesses in all four states  have  been involved in  environmental justice advisory panels or
commissions. , In Florida, the Chamber of Commerce has conducted training  sessions to help
businesses develop better ways of working with people-of-color and low-income communities.

In California, Pacific Gas & Electric Company adopted  a  corporate environmental justice
policy, as did the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance, an  industry
organization. The former contains  the following findings:

   •   The  environmental justice  movement  has  become  an important force in the
       protection of both urban and rural (including tribal) environments.
   •   As a matter of  sound business strategy, adherence  to environmental justice
       principles can  expedite regulatory approvals by enabling regulators to make the
       case  we [PG&E] have honored environmental justice principles.
   •   As  a  matter  of sound   and responsible  corporate  conduct,   adhering  to
       environmental justice principles is simply the right thing to  do.
   •   If handled improperly, environmental  justice conflicts can lead to  significant
       delays, costs, and negative public opinion. Therefore, avoiding environmental
       justice challenges in the first place can  help maintain confidence of our investor
       community.
   •   Pacific Gas &  Electric has  been, and will continue to be, a strong proponent of
       environmental justice as a civil rights issue.5

The policy then sets forth details on implementation:

       Pacific Gas & Electric Corporation will conduct its operations in a manner that
       is  consistent  with and promotes  environmental justice  principles.   We are
       committed to:
          A.  Comply with  the letter and spirit  of environmental justice laws and
              regulations in our operation.
                                           123

-------
          B.  Set  high  standards  of  environmental   performance   to   minimize
              environmental impacts from our operations.
          C.  Work diligently to address all environmental justice issues,
          D. Incorporate  environmental justice considerations  in the  purchase of
              existing facilities and the planning and development of new facilities.
          E.  Work with stakeholders to ensure that future  development around our
              facilities is compatible with existing and planned facility use.
          F.  Maintain open and responsive communications with all stakeholders.
          G. Communicate and reinforce our environmental justice values within the
              corporation.
          H. Accept  responsibility for  our  operations,  and  in  so   doing  work
              collaboratively with our neighbors and surrounding communities.6

Pacific  Gas  & Electric  is  implementing its policy by  conducting staff training, placing
environmental  justice  into  the  operating  plans  of all  its  departments,  and including
environmental justice requirements  in its contract specifications.7

Businesses can take many steps to alleviate environmental justice concerns by going beyond the
minimum requirements imposed by federal and  state regulatory standards.  For instance, they
can  redesign  a site,  replace old  equipment,  reduce use  of hazardous  substances,  install
additional pollution controls, obtain emission offsets, develop better operating and maintenance
procedures,  adopt pollution  prevention measures, collect appropriate data, conduct  studies,
monitor truck traffic, install noise or dust controls, and deploy monitoring stations in locations
that are generating community concerns. Often, businesses decide to undertake one or more of
these measures in response to regulatory controls.  Yet, they may benefit  in other ways  by
responding to community concerns:  saving costs, avoiding litigation, reducing tort liability,
expediting decision-making,  achieving  certainty  with  respect   to  applicable regulatory
requirements,  avoiding labor disputes, building stronger community and worker relations,
maintaining property values, stabilizing the adjacent neighborhood, and enhancing the quality
of life for their workers.  Before many of  these non-regulatory motivating factors can come
into play, however, businesses must be aware of community concerns.

Recommendation 9:  State  agencies should encourage business leadership in responding to
environmental justice concerns by:

   *   providing  information to  help businesses understand environmental  justice
       concerns
   •   developing environmental justice and/or community outreach  guidance for
       business leaders and permit  applicants   ;
   •   using  brownfield restoration as a  mechanism to address environmental justice
       concerns                              I
                                           124

-------
Local Government Leadership

Finding 7:  Local governments have many powers to address the environmental concerns of
disadvantaged communities because local agencies decide on land-uses, geographic locations of
industrial facilities and  residential areas, site  designs, distribution of public services and
facilities, road construction, access to housing and pubic transit, and school siting.

Local land-use decisions  can play an important role in aggravating or mitigating environmental
justice concerns.  California law requires the state to develop guidance for land-use planners
that informs, but does not bind, local governments. Similarly, Florida's brownfield legislation
requires that local governments which designate  land for the program must obtain the views of
affected community members on proposed redevelopment projects. These laws demonstrate
practical ways for state agencies to work with local land-use officials on mitigating or avoiding
environmental justice problems.

Some state  agencies are taking the  initiative to coordinate with local governments.   For
example, the  policies   and actions  of  California's  Air  Resources  Board recognize  the
importance of local land-use decisions.  They commit the board to working with local land-use
officials by  incorporating cumulative impact analyses into procedures and providing technical
tools  and guidance to avoid  decisions that aggravate environmental justice problems.

Even without state agency  guidance, some local governments have developed procedures to
ensure that polluting facilities are not disproportionately sited in people-of-color or low-income
communities.  These procedures also are designed so that these communities reap at least some
of the economic and employment benefits of industrial  and  commercial development within
their  neighborhoods.   Contra  Costa  County in California  has adopted an   innovative
"neighborhood first" hiring requirement as part of its  land-use  plan and permits  for facility
siting.  Approved facilities are required to go through local programs for training and  filling
positions so that the benefits of new or  expanded  facilities  go directly  to the affected
communities.8

Still,  the disproportionate  proximity of low-income and people-of-color communities near
industrial sources — as evidenced by the studies outlined in this report  — suggests there is an
urgent need for additional guidance so that local governments can use their powers  to address
environmental justice problems.

Recommendation 10: States should assist local  governments in understanding:

    •   the extent to which they have authority to address environmental justice issues
    •   the data  available  on  the health,  environment, and quality  of life  of  local
       residents in high-risk communities
    •   various approaches that are available to solve environmental justice concerns
                                           125

-------
Recommendation  11:   States  should ensure that  all local  agencies  with jurisdiction  over
potential  environmental justice problems  are provided with  training,  guidance documents,
and/or educational materials prepared for  local officials.   States also should ensure that local
governments have the necessary technical tools to use their legal authority wisely.

Recommendation  12;   Each state should ensure that innovative, successful  environmental
justice best practices adopted by local governments within the  state are reported to other local
officials with similar responsibilities throughout the state.

Accountability

Finding  8:   None of the states in  this  study  has adopted  performance, outcome,  or
accountability measures for integrating environmental justice concerns into the daily operations
of its environmental agencies. Without such measures, it will be difficult:

    •  for agency staff to know how to change their  activities
    •  for agency managers,  legislators,  businesses, and communities to determine
       whether  or how states'  environmental justice initiatives are improving public
       health, environmental conditions, or overall quality of life in the communities to
       which they apply                      .
                                             i
Finding 9:  California has  required reports  to the legislature that might help the public to
assess the progress that state  agencies have made in implementing environmental justice
programs.

The California  legislature has required Gal/EPA to report every three months on progress
made implementing the state's  strategic planning requirements.  This reporting requirement is
contained in appropriation language, which means the reports may  only be prepared during the
current fiscal year.   State law  also requires Cal/EPA to  prepare  annual  reports to the
legislature on the  agency's environmental justice programs,  beginning in 2004. Individual
environmental boards,  such as the Air Resources Board,  also require  periodic reports on
environmental justice programs from the regional air districts.

Recommendation 13:  States should ensure that their environmental justice programs produce
results by:

    •  establishing clearly defined outcomes
    •  translating desired outcomes into  clear performance goals
    •  evaluating program effectiveness at regular intervals, such as annual reports
    •  holding  program  managers  and   staff  accountable   for achieving  desired
       performance goals
    •  tracking  pollution levels in high-risk communities to determine if environmental
       problems, such as air and water pollution and waste disposal, are being solved
                                           126

-------
   •   tracking  public health  effects  in  high-risk  communities  to  learn  whether
       pollution-related problems are decreasing, such as tracking key health indicators
       like cancer, asthma, school attendance levels, and hospital admissions

PERMITTING

Legal Authorities

Finding 10:  Only two of the states studied — California and Florida  — have enacted laws
specifically designed to address environmental justice, but none of these laws fully integrates
environmental justice concerns into core environmental programs or  permitting requirements.

Finding 11:  A close review of state constitutions and state environmental, civil rights,  public
health,  and other related  laws may reveal that existing state laws provide legal authority to
address environmental justice concerns.

The recent study by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) found that federal laws give EPA
"substantial and  wide-ranging powers  to  pursue environmental justice,"  even in situations
where  consideration is "not directly compelled by the  underlying  statutes."9  EPA's  legal
authority to address environmental justice emanates from the  National  Environmental Policy
Act; Title VI of the Civil  Rights Act; Executive Order 12898; general administrative authority
to exercise agency discretion; and media-specific environmental laws, such as the federal Clean
Air and Clean Water Acts and hazardous and solid waste laws.

Because many state laws, rules, and policies  are  derived from, modeled on, or adopted in
response to federal laws,  regulations, policies, and guidance — including those examined by
ELI — states may have substantial, untapped legal  authorities to address environmental justice
concerns. Hence, states should examine federal sources of legal authority and ELI's discussion
of these sources to learn  how this analysis can inform their own interpretation of applicable
state laws.

Of the four states in this study, only California has committed to a comprehensive examination
of existing state  legal authority for addressing environmental justice.   That effort responds at
least in part  to legislation requiring that state agencies identify legal requirements that may
pose barriers to alleviating environmental justice problems. California's  legal staff believe that
this  review  will  reveal  state  agencies  already have significant   authority  to  address
environmental justice.

Recommendation 14:  Each state should undertake a comprehensive analysis of existing legal
authorities to address environmental justice, including whether:

   •   there  is legal authority to address environmental justice  in state constitutions or state
       public health, civil rights, administrative, and environmental laws
   •   they are required to address environmental justice
                                           127

-------
    •  they have  discretion to address environmental justice  in  the  absence of an
       explicit statutory directive
    •  there are legal barriers to addressing environmental justice

Recommendation 15:  In analyzing their existing legal authorities, states should pay special
attention to provisions of state law derived from, modeled on, or adopted in response to federal
laws.  When integrating such provisions, states should consider ELI's analysis of comparable
federal laws.

Recommendation 16:  States should ensure that their legal analysis clarifies the authority of
permit writers to deny, condition, or require additional conditions or controls on permits for all
regulated facilities located in or near high-risk communities.

Recommendation 17:  States  should communicate the results of their legal analysis to their
agencies' staff in terms that can be easily understood and incorporated into day-to-day work by
program personnel, such as permit writers.

Training

Finding 12: Agency staff may have limited experience with environmental justice problems,
including how to address these issues in their daily work.

Although  some  state   officials  have  endeavored   to   initiate  programs  for  addressing
environmental justice, many with jurisdiction over decisions affecting health and environmental
conditions  in high-risk  communities could benefit  from  a  deeper understanding  of  those
concerns and how to respond  to them.  Officials in  California, Indiana, and New Jersey  all
emphasized the importance of environmental justice training for their agencies' staffs.

The need to educate state managers and staff; on environmental justice is demonstrated by a
130-agency survey conducted by California's Office of Planning and Research.  It  revealed
that, among the 64  agencies responding,  24 percent made or funded  land-use decisions,  19
percent made permitting decisions, 24 percent  wrote  or produced regulations, and 29 percent
made other decisions that may have  environmental justice implications.  Yet, only 2 percent of
the agencies had written environmental justice .policies, and only 29 percent thought that they
needed to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

In both the California and Indiana agencies, there was low staff awareness of environmental
justice issues and how they can be addressed, a further indication that training is important for
effectively dealing with  environmental justice.1  State training programs  may include at least
three elements:   (1) awareness of the nature of environmental justice problems, such  as
concentration of facilities or emissions  in people-of-color and low-income communities;  (2)
examples of actions that agency staff can take to address these issues as  part of their work;  and
(3) more focused  training on how staff can incorporate environmental justice considerations
into specific activities, such as issuing permits,  monitoring pollution, or conducting inspections
                                           128

-------
Recommendation 18:  State agencies should commit to train, within a set period of time, all
of their employees and managers on environmental justice.  These training courses should
address:

       how to identify potential environmental justice problems
       why solutions to environmental injustice are important
       what approaches can be used to solve environmental justice concerns
       when and how to coordinate solutions with federal and local agencies
       how to utilize non-agency —  community,  academic,  and public health  —
       resources to expand the range of available options
    •   how to  improve  public participation  in   environmental  decision-making,
       especially in high-risk communities
    •   what types  of additional information are needed to address environmental justice
       more fully and what can be done to improve such information gathering
    •   how to ensure  that state enforcement adequately targets pollution problems in
       high-risk communities

Permitting Tools

Finding 13:  States have  developed  very few tools to help permit writers take environmental
justice issues into consideration.

Thus far,  Indiana and New Jersey  environmental justice programs have focused  on public
participation, rather than on the content of permits.  The only tools that Indiana has provided
its permit writers are awareness training and  a map of environmental justice areas of concern.
Similarly,  Cal/EPA  and  the California  Department of  Toxic  Substances Control  have
conducted  strategic planning, training, and  public participation initiatives fir environmental
justice, but have not yet developed permitting tools.

However,  California's Air Resources Board and the South Coast Air Quality Management
District have implemented several steps that can directly assist permit writers in addressing
environmental justice.  These include developing new rules to address diesel and other toxic air
emissions,   increasing air   toxic  monitoring,   installing  mobile  monitors  in  specific
neighborhoods,  and convening  monthly neighborhood town hall meetings to identify other
ongoing community concerns.

Recommendation  19: States should develop practical tools to help permit writers  consider
environmental justice in their day-to-day activities.

Recommendation 20:  States should have mechanisms in place to ensure that permit writers
have  access to and use information commonly available to community residents but frequently
unknown   to  regulatory  officials, such as eyewitness accounts  of permit violations;  poor
maintenance  practices; odors; spills;  illegal dumping;  fish kills; presence of unpermitted,
                                           129

-------
under-permitted, or intermittently polluting facilities; and high levels of potentially pollution-
related health problems like asthma or cancer.

Recommendation 21:  Permit writers should be trained to seek and respond appropriately to
information from communities facing  higher risks where further research or investigation is
warranted.  This might require them to request additional information from permit applicants,
insist on a site-specific study, coordinate with local  government or public health officials, or
refer potential violations to enforcement officials for further investigation.

Recommendation 22;    Permit writers  should be trained to incorporate the  results of
investigations  into permitting decisions through appropriately crafted pollution limits, permit
terms, permit  conditions,  and monitoring and reporting  requirements, and to deny issuance of
permits where warranted. Also, they will need clear instructions about their legal authority to
address environmental justice problems, as well as adequate time and resources to respond to
community concerns.

Eliminating Permit Backlogs

Finding 14: Permit backlogs create barriers to addressing environmental justice issues.

Some new environmental justice state policies  may not be implemented until current state
permits for existing  facilities expire.  Those permits may be renegotiated to determine the
revised conditions that will apply during new permit periods.  In such situations, timeliness is
critical to the  efficacy of the programs.  However, backlogs of expired and outdated permits
awaiting review,  modification, and renewal have long plagued many states' water permitting
programs.                                    >

Recommendation 23:  State agencies should eliminate any backlogs of permit renewals and
commit to reviewing and modifying any expired permits on a timely basis.  Permit renewals
provide  an  opportunity for  agencies to  incorporate newly  adopted  pollution  control
requirements,  account for  new  information  on environmental  stresses,  mandate pollution
prevention, reflect current  operating  and maintenance practices,  and  consider community
concerns.

State Coordination with Local Governments

Finding 15:  State agencies are finding ways  to coordinate their efforts with local land-use
authorities.  Together, they can provide better responses to environmental justice concerns.

Finding 16: Local governments may  hold jurisdiction over solutions to environmental justice
problems, and may have information that statesman use to craft solutions, such as information
relevant to permit writers.                     ''        .
                                           130,

-------
Also, states have begun to experiment with increasing coordination with local governments on
permit issuance.

Recommendation  24:  When preparing permits for new and existing facilities, states should
coordinate with local governments at the pre-application stage to:

    •   develop mechanisms to ensure permit writers obtain relevant information from
       local government officials
    •   give permit writers a clear understanding of their legal authority to address local
       concerns in state permits.

SETTING PRIORITIES TO REDUCE POLLUTION

Data on Concentrations of Facilities

Finding 17:   States have found that data on the concentration of environmentally hazardous
facilities — often presented in map form — are important tools to overcome skepticism about
whether environmental justice is a real problem.

Florida's Commission of Environmental Equity and Justice,  the  Indianapolis Urban League,
Indiana's DEM, Communities for a Better Environment, and California's Air Resources Board
all have compiled and mapped data demonstrating that many potential environmental hazards
or releases are concentrated in  people-of-color and low-income communities.  These data and
maps formed the basis for Florida legislation establishing the Center for Environmental Equity
and Justice, and they answered industry concerns in Indianapolis  about environmental justice.
They also  have allowed Indiana OEM's permit staff to identify areas for additional attention,
and provided support for  the  California  Air Board's policies and actions on  environmental
justice.

Recommendation 25:  To prioritize their risk reduction efforts,  states should identify areas
where there are concentrations  of potential environmental haizards, or where disproportionately
high exposures to environmental contaminants may occur.

Importance of Monitoring to Reduce Pollution

Finding 18:  Ambient monitoring data greatly facilitate better state targeting of resources and
provide important support for new strategies to reduce hazardous exposures.                  ,

The  South Coast Air Quality Management District's MATES II study is one of the most
 comprehensive studies of its kind.  Using fixed and mobile monitoring, the district developed
 detailed data on area-wide levels of air toxics and neighborhood-specific exposures.  Because
 data  demonstrated that diesel emissions were the highest toxic hazard  in the region,  the study
 has driven California to focus significant efforts on reducing diesel emissions, and to target
 state grants to  neighborhoods  where emissions are highest — primarily people-of-color and
                                           131

-------
 low-income  communities.   The data also have provided the technical basis  for California's
 proposed rules regulating film developing and dry cleaning operations.  Further, they have
 demonstrated  that localized  "hot spots" occur  and have  illustrated the value  of mobile
 monitoring stations for responding to neighborhood complaints about excess air pollution.

 Recommendation 26:  States should conduct environmental monitoring to identify high risks
 at regional and neighborhood levels.

 Recommendation 27:  States should develop mobile monitoring stations or other means to
 investigate and respond to short-term or intermittent hazards in high-risk communities.

 Recommendation 28:  States should  ensure  that conventional monitoring stations for water
 quality,  air toxics, ambient air quality,  and  bio-markers  are dispersed throughout potential
 high-risk communities, allowing the state to  detect and respond  to local hot spots  in these
 communities.

 Need for Early and Visible Initiatives to Reduce Pollution
                                            (

 Finding 19:   Community members, neighborhood organizations, and other advocates may
 grow frustrated if state environmental justice programs do not include early and visible efforts
 to reduce health risks from pollution.

 Thus far, most of these  state programs have emphasized strategic planning and improved
 public participation.  These steps  are important for building environmental justice programs,
 but they can cause understandable frustration among residents with  high exposures to pollution.
 Because they are frustrated by the lack of state action, some individuals and community groups
 are unwilling to participate in developing state environmental justice programs.  Rather than
just  holding  public meetings, they want states to undertake early, concrete, on-the-ground
 activities to reduce pollution.

 Recommendation  29:   Although  states  are developing  longer term plans  to  address
 environmental justice issues, they  should work on identifying and reducing the most  obvious
 hazards  in high risk communities, thus demonstrating that their programs produce concrete,
 real-world changes.  Increased inspections and enforcement where there are concentrations of
 pollution sources can demonstrate a state agency's commitment to reducing health hazards.

 Linking Environmental Justice and Community Health

 Finding 20:  Using state environmental justice programs to address community health concerns
 may broaden support for these initiatives.

 Florida linked its environmental justice  program  to community health  concerns after  the
 Environmental Equity and Justice  Commission found  that  a  disproportionate number of
 environmentally  hazardous facilities were located  near  people-of-color  and  low-income
                                          132

-------
communities.  The commission also determined that many residents located there had frequent
health problems and lacked adequate health care  facilities.  Although the commission did not
have  data directly linking health problems to these facilities,  advocates focused on health
concerns and obtained broad support for locating new health clinics in these communities.

Recommendation 30:   State environmental agencies should work with health agencies to
determine whether  increased access  to  community  health  services  may  help to  address
environmental justice concerns.

Enforcement

Finding 21;  Enforcement of environmental laws holds the key to producing benefits from the
pollution control requirements that are part of an  environmental justice program or are already
embedded in existing state rules and permit conditions.

Until now,  many environmental justice  activities have sought to evaluate concerns  about
concentrations of industrial facilities and other pollution  sources in residential neighborhoods.
These at-risk communities are  also  frequently  concerned about whether  federal  and state
agencies effectively  enforce the pollution control requirements applicable to nearby facilities.
Put simply,  polluting facilities could be causing health  and environmental problems in adjacent
communities, either  because current environmental laws and permits are too weak to protect
public health or because  they  are not being  correctly applied and effectively enforced  in
communities that may lack political or legal power.  Indiana has begun to address these issues
by including environmental justice as a key element in  its compliance and enforcement plan.

Recommendation 31:   States should  commit to improving their environmental enforcement
efforts in high-risk communities  by:

    •  placing additional monitoring stations in these communities
    •  conducting more frequent  and thorough  inspections of facilities near those
       communities
    ซ  taking  advantage  of  community knowledge  about a facility's  day-to-day
       operations
    •  ensuring that violations are promptly addressed  by enforcement actions
    •  choosing the type of enforcement  action — administrative, civil, or criminal —
       appropriate for the violation
    •  imposing monetary penalties that,  to the extent permitted by law, reflect history
       of non-compliance and  gravity of  the offense,  including  increased pollution
       exposures in densely populated neighborhoods
    •  evaluating enforcement   activities to  ensure  they address the most  serious
       environmental hazards and effectively deter future violations
                                           133

-------
Targeting Efforts to Protect Communities of Concern

Finding 22:  States should develop practical ways to target their efforts on communities with
high exposures to pollution.

Some  state  agencies,  including those  in  Indiana  and  New Jersey,   have  approached
environmental  justice  by identifying  and  focusing on people-of-color and low-income
communities,  located near concentrations of industrial facilities and contaminated sites, that
suffer  adverse impacts.  These states  are  experimenting with  screening tools  to  identify
communities of concern.  Other state agencies, like the California Air  Board,  have bypassed
the thorny problems  of identifying specific communities  of concern and worked  directly  on
reducing emissions from specific types of pollution, such  as diesel emissions, concentrated in
high-risk  communities.   Both  approaches are valid ways to address  environmental justice
concerns,  provided they are  based on  adequate  data,  are effectively  implemented, and
periodically evaluated.

Recommendation 32:  State environmental justice programs should go beyond permitting to
address other activities with important implications for high-risk communities, such as standard
setting, enforcement, technical and  compliance assistance, research,  data gathering, and
financial assistance.

Recommendation 33:  States should update existing rules and promulgate new rules where
necessary to ensure  that specific categories  of  pollution sources  concentrated in high-risk
communities  employ  the latest, most effective pollution controls, operation and maintenance
practices, and pollution  prevention techniques.

Recommendation 34: When states seek to identify communities that may suffer high levels of
exposure to environmental hazards, they should employ appropriate screening tools that:

   •   account for racial demographics and income
   •   use accurate and complete data
   •   provide multi-media data covering pollution of air,  groundwater,  surface water,
       and drinking water, plus waste disposal — all threats facing communities
   •   accurately detect exposures using an adequate monitoring network

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
                                            i.
Programs to Expand Public Participation

Finding  23:   States  have implemented a broiad range of public participation initiatives  to
address environmental justice concerns.   The!four  states in this study have taken steps  to
enhance public participation, such as:

   •   developing guides to help citizens understand agency processes
                                          134

-------
   •  training citizens about how to participate effectively in agency decisions
   •  training agency staff about the value of community expertise and the need to
      listen to community concerns
   •  issuing public notices earlier in the agency decision-making process
   •  providing notices in more than one language
   •  writing easily understood notices, fact-sheets, and other documents
   •  publishing notices as advertisements rather than legal notices
   •  distributing notices to local institutions, such as community centers and churches
   •  building user-friendly web sites
   •  maintaining lists of community contacts
   •  holding meetings  during the evening or weekends so it is easier for citizens to
      attend
   •  convening small groups, not large public meetings
   •  facilitating dialogues
   •  using community liaisons to establish closer ties with community leaders

The South Coast Air Quality Management District's monthly town hall meetings have further
enhanced public  participation  by enabling district  staff to meet with community members
beyond  the context of specific  projects.   The  meetings have  helped to build connections
between the district and the community, and have provided essential information for directing
some of the district's activities, such as deciding where to install mobile air toxic monitors.

Recommendation 35:  State agencies  should use the many proven practices for increasing
public participation to ensure that citizens, especially those in communities with high exposures
to pollution, understand decision-making processes, know when and how to participate, receive
notice of actions that may affect their neighborhoods, understand  those notices, enjoy  the
opportunity to participate at convenient times and places,  and have access to information to
participate effectively.

Recommendation  36:   State agencies should train their staff to take local knowledge into
account.  Proactive problem-solving approaches  include using a community liaison  to  work
with  high-risk communities  — based on the successful approach developed for the federal
Superfund program — or conducting town hall meetings like  the  South Coast Air  Quality
Management  District's.    These techniques can help  state  agencies to identify and  solve
problems early,  save resources, and  build  better  relationships between  communities and
government.

Recommendation  37:  To involve  high-risk communities more  frequently and effectively in
their environmental justice programs, states also should:

    •   involve citizens early in the permitting process
    •   frequently interact with community leaders and organizations at times and places
        convenient to them
                                            135

-------
    •  expand  public  participation  in  other  programs  important  to  high-risk
       communities,  including standard-setting,- enforcement,  technical and compliance
       assistance, research, and information-gathering; and provide financial assistance
       to help groups participate

Advisory Committees

Finding 24:   Broadly representative advisory committees,  given clear tasks,  can play an
important role in assisting states to develop environmental justice programs.

The four states studied have convened environmental justice advisory committees or councils,
with varying degrees of success. The size, mission,  authority, funding, and life-span of these
bodies have differed significantly,  but  such groups can provide a  constructive forum  for
exploring environmental justice issues among diverse constituencies.  For state agencies, these
committees also  offer an avenue to gather  information and  advice  about possible problem-
solving approaches.   For example, New Jersey iDEP  developed its proposed rule on expanded
public participation following  extensive discussion with  its advisory council. Indiana DEM
used  an  advisory committee to help in developing  its environmental justice strategic plan.
Business leaders have found such dialogues constructive.

Business representatives on New Jersey's council decided to  participate in a  second phase of
deliberations  and recommended expanding  the  council's membership  to  a  wider circle of
business leaders. However, community groups are more uncertain about the value of advisory
committees.  One state studied encountered difficulty in maintaining the interest of community
representatives.  In another, local community groups  sometimes decided not to participate.  In
a third,  a prominent community representative declared such councils to be  "a  waste of
time."10

These different perspectives stem largely  from the time required to build trust, develop an
operating style, shape an agenda, deliberate, and reach consensus — or agree to disagree. This
time commitment often contrasts with the sense of urgency experienced by community leaders
who want rapid relief from substantial ongoing health or environmental hazards.  Yet, states
have  some leeway to merge these differing  perspectives;  for example, they  can ensure  that
their  advisory committees have clear  tasks and  are adequately  staffed,  well  run,  and
productive.

If states  choose to establish advisory committees, they should use them to generate wide and
diverse input for developing and improving environmental justice programs.  However, states
should recognize that committees have limited ability to provide prompt relief  for hard-pressed
community groups. Therefore, they  are no substitute  for direct, immediate agency actions that
respond to the concerns of disadvantaged communities.

Recommendation 38: States can enhance the effectiveness of environmental justice advisory
committees by ensuring that they:
                                           136

-------
   •  have a clear mission and task
   •  have definite time lines for completing each work phase
   •  are large enough to represent all key interest groups
   •  have adequate funding to  do the work, including travel and other expenses for
      some committee members  if needed
   •  are clearly able to influence state policy
   •  meet at times and places convenient for all committee members
   •  include an evaluative component to assess the committee's productivity

Using Brownfield Programs to Address Environmental Justice Concerns

Finding  25:    Well-designed  state  brownfield  redevelopment programs  can  provide
opportunities  for communities to collaborate with state and local agencies on redevelopment
projects.  They can contribute significantly to alleviating environmental justice problems.

Florida's  brownfield  law  requires  community involvement  in designing  redevelopment
projects.   Clearwater's brownfield  action agenda also  identifies  ways to increase community
awareness of  brownfields; improve  community access  to information;  ensure  community
participation h decisions  about brownfield redevelopment;  develop the economic base of the
brownfield neighborhoods; and create a healthy and safe environment there.

Recommendation 39:    States  should  consider  using   brownfield  programs  to address
environmental justice concerns by providing communities with a strong voice in redevelopment
project  design  and focusing some redevelopment  programs  on  reducing  pollution   in
communities with high exposure levels.
                                          137

-------
ENDNOTES
1 Josephus Eggelletion, Jr.. Commissioner, Broward County, Florida, Interview (March 12, 2002).
2 The former New Jersey DEP commissioner was Mr. Robert Shinn.
3 The current New Jersey DEP commissioner is Mr. Brad Campbell.
4 For a discussion of these programs, see National Academy of Public Administration, Environmental Justice in
 EPA Permitting: Reducing Pollution in High-Risk Communities is Integral to the Agency's Mission
 (December 2001) 68.
5 Pacific Gas & Electric Company, PG&E's Environmentaljustice Procedure (September 2001) 4
6 Ibid.. 19.                                       !
7 Robert Harris, Vice  President, Environmental Affairs, Pacific Gas & Electric Company, Interview
 (February 14. 2002).
8 James Kennedy, Deputy Director for Redevelopment, Contra Costa County Development Department, Interview
 (February 13. 2002).
9 ELI Report, 1.
10 Luke Cole, Director, Center for Race, Poverty and Environment,  Interview (February 13, 2002).
                                                138

-------
APPENDICES
    139

-------
140

-------
                                   APPENDIX A
                             LIST OF INTERVIEWEES
CALIFORNIA
      Renee Brandt, Air Quality, City of Los Angeles, California
      Luke Cole, Center for Race, Poverty and Environment
      Michael Dorsey, Department of Environmental Health, San Diego County
      Malinda Hall, California Environmental Protection Agency
      Robert Harris, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E)
      James Kennedy, Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency
      Edward Lowry, Department of Toxic Substance Control
      Joseph Lyou, California League of Conservation Voters Education Fund
      Cynthia McClain-Hill, McClain-Hill Associates
      Carol Monahan, California Environmental Protection Agency
      Romel PascuaL, California Environmental Protection Agency
      Carlos Porras, Communities for a Better Environment
      Lynn Terry, California Air Resources Board
      Cindy Tuck, California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance
      Barry Waflerstein, South Coast Air Quality Management District
      Holly Welles, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E)
FLORIDA
      Miles Ballogg, City of Clearwater, Florida
      Marybel Nicholson Choice, Greenberg Traurig, P.A.
      Josephus Eggelletion, Jr., Broward County, District 9
      Richard Gragg, Florida A & M, Center for Environmental Equity and Justice
      Richard Harvey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4, South Florida Office
      Jerry Krenz, South Florida Water Management District
      Cynthia Laramore, South Florida Action
      Michael Owens, Florida Department of Environmental Protection
      Roger Register, Florida Department of Environmental Protection
      Larry Robinson, Florida A & M, Environmental Sciences Institute
      Jan Rogers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, South Florida Office
      Suzi Ruhl, Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation
INDIANA
      Barbara Goldblati, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
      Diane Henshel, School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University
      Lori Kaplan, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
      Mary Mulligan, City of Gary, Office of Environmental Affairs
                                        141

-------
      John Mundell, Mundell and Associates
      Tom Neltner, Improving Kids' Environment
      Pamela O'Rourke, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
      David Parry, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
      Felicia Robinson, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
      Keith Veal, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
NEW JERSEY
      Valorie Caffee, New Jersey Work Environment Council, Environmental and Economic
      Justice Alliance
      Marlen Dooley, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
      Pamela Lyons, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
      Frederick Martin, Jr., City of Camden, New Jersey
      Donald McCloskey, Public Service Enterprise, Inc.
      Bonnie Sanders, South Camden Citizens in Action
      Olga Pomar, Attorney representing Bonnie Sanders, South Camden Citizens in
                   Action
      Robert C. Shinh Jr., New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
      Rev. Al Steward, Waterfront South Neighborhood Partnership
      Gary Sondermeyer, New Jersey Departrrient of Environmental Protection
                                        142

-------
                                   APPENDIX B

                        PANEL AND STAFF BIOGRAPHIES
PANEL
Philip J. Rutledge, Chair - Professor Emeritus, School of Public and Environmental Affairs
and  former Special Assistant  to  the  President, Indiana  University.   Former  Director,
Department of Human Resources, District of Columbia; Professor of Public Administration,
Howard  University; Director  of Policy Analysis,  National  League  of  Cities  and  U.S.
Conference  of  Mayors;  Deputy  Administrator, Social and  Rehabilitation  Service,  U.S.
Department  of  Health,  Education and  Welfare; Deputy  Manpower  Administrator,  U.S.
Department of Labor.

A. James Barnes - Professor and former Dean, School of Public and Environmental Affairs,
and  Professor,  School  of Law,  Indiana University.   Former positions with  the  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency: Deputy Administrator; General Counsel;  Special Assistant
to Administrator/Chief of Staff.  Former General Counsel, U.S. Department of Agriculture;
Partner,  Beveridge  &  Diamond; Campaign  Manager,  Governor William  G.   Milliken
(Michigan); Assistant to  Deputy Attorney General arid Special Assistant/Trial Attorney,  U.S.
Department of Justice.

Jonathan B. Howes - Special Assistant to the Chancellor  and Professor  of Planning and
Policy,  University  of North Carolina  at  Chapel Hill.  Former  Secretary, Department  of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR),  State of North Carolina;  Research
Professor and Director,  Center for Urban and Regional  Planning,  University  of North
Carolina; Mayor, Town of Chapel Hill; Director, Urban Policy Center, Urban America,  Inc.;
Director,  State  and Local  Planning Assistance, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development.

Valerie Lemmie -  City Manager,  City  of Dayton, Ohio.   Former City Manager, City  of
Petersburg, Virginia; Director, Department of Environmental Services, City  or Arlington,
Virginia; Assistant  Professor,  Howard  University. Former positions with  the  Washington,
D.C. Government:  Deputy Director, Department of Consumer/Regulatory Affairs; Assistant
to the  Director, Department of Consumer/Regulatory Affairs;  Project Director,  Minority
Business Development Services, One America, Inc; Special Assistant, Office of Business and
Economic Development;  Financial Policy Analyst/Course Manager, Office of Comptroller,
Labor Department (on assignment from Kansas City, Missouri).

David  Mora - City Manager, Salinas, California. Former City Manager, Oxnard, California;
Manager, Los  Gatos,  California.  Increasingly responsible positions  with Santa  Barbara,
California, including: Director, Community Relations; Assistant to City Administrator; Deputy
City Administrator.

James  Murley  -  Director, Joint  Center for  Environmental  and Urban  Problems, Florida
Atlantic University.  Former  Secretary and Director, Division of Resource  Planning and
Management, Department of Community Affairs, State of Florida; Executive Director,  1000
Friends  of  Florida.    Former positions  with  the   National  Oceanic and  Atmospheric
Administration,  U.S. Department of Commerce: Director, Coastal Program  Office, Office of
Coastal Zone Management  (OCZM); Congressional Officer; Gulf Coast Regional Manager,
OCZM.
                                         143

-------
Eddie Williams - President, Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Fortner Vice
President for Public Affairs and Director,  Center for Policy Study, The University of Chicago;
Foreign Service Reserve Officer,  U.S. Department  of State;  Staff Assistant, U.S.  Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations.

STAFF

Suellen Terrill Reiner - Director, Center for the Economy and the Environment, National
Academy  of Public Administration.  Former  Senior Attorney and  Director,  Program  on
Environment, Governance  and Management, the Environmental Law Institute; Director  of
Litigation,  the  Environmental Policy Institute;   Assistant Solicitor and  Deputy  Assistant
Secretary  for  Energy and Minerals, U.S.,  Department  of  Interior;  Natural  Resources
Consultant, Council of State Planning Agencies; Attorney representing environmental and civil
rights groups in citizen suits.                '

William P. Shields - Director of Communications,  Office of Communications, National
Academy  of Public Administration; Adjunct  Professor in Government, American University.
Former Program Coordinator and Research Assistant, American University; Mayoral Writer,
Exe.cti|ive Office of the Mayor of Providence,  Rhode Island.

Frances Dubrowski - Senior Consultant, Private attorney and Adjunct Faculty, University of
Maryland School of Public Affairs.   Former Chair  or Environmental  Justice Committee,
American Bar Association; Co-chair, D.C. Coalition on Environmental Justice; Director of the
Clean Air, Clean Water, Regulatory  Reforms Projects, Natural  Resources  Defense Council;
Assistant Attorney General, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources.

Ann E. Goode - Senior  Consultant, Center for the Economy and  Environment, National
Academy  of Public  Administration;  Environmental  Protection Agency:  Acting  Deputy
Administrator,  Office of Air and Radiation;  Director, Office of Civil Rights;  Chief of Staff,
Office of Air and Radiation; Assistant Director for Regional Affairs, Office of Atmospheric
Programs.  Special  Assistant  to  the  Director,  U.S.  Commission  on  Civil  Rights;  Staff
Associate, National Research Council.

LeRoy  (Lee) Paddock - Senior Consultant,  Principal, Paddock Environmental Research and
Consulting; Visiting Scholar, Environmental Law  Institute.  Former Director of Environmental
Policy,  Minnesota  Attorney  General's  Office;   Senior  Environmental  Counsel, National
Association of Attorneys General;  Assistant Attorney General, Minnesota Attorney General's
Office.

Mark Hertko  -  Research  Assistant,  Center for the Economy and Environment, National
Academy of Public Administration.          !

Stacey Keaton - Research Assistant, Center for the Economy and Environment, National
Academy of Public Administration.

Veronica L. Lenegan - Research Assistant;  Center  for the Economy and Environment,
National Academy of Public Administration.

Charlene Walsh  - Administrative Assistant!  Center  for the Economy and Environment,
National Academy of Public Administration.  '•
                                          144

-------
Megan Bonner - Intern, Center for the Economy and Environment, National Academy of
Public Administration.

Anne Emory - Intern, Center for the Economy and Environment, National Academy of Public
Administration.

The Academy gratefully acknowledges additional legal research performed by Anna Chesser
and Xiao Yan Yang from the University of Virginia School of Law.
                                         145

-------
146

-------
                                    APPENDIX C

                  New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
                            Proposed Rule NJ. A.C. 7:IF

SUBCHAPTER 1.  GENERAL PROVISIONS

7:1F-1.1 Scope and Applicability

(a) This chapter  establishes the  components and requirements of the Department's expanded
community participation process by which permit applicants and communities will consider
potential Environmental Equity  concerns prior to the issuance by the Department of a new,
renewed or modified permit or approval.

(b)  This chapter shall apply to applicants for new permits,  permit renewals, and major
modifications to existing permits for major facilities as defined at N.J.A.C. 7:1F-1.3.

(c) This chapter shall also apply to applicants for other Department issued permits or approvals
where the permit applicant or a community requests that the Department initiate the Expanded
Community Participation Process for Environmental Equity. These  permits and  approvals
include  those issued pursuant to the New Jersey Water Pollution  Control Act,  N.J.S.A.
58-.10A-1  et seq.,  and  its implementing  regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:14A; the New Jersey Air
Pollution Control Act, N.J.S.A.  26:2C-1 et seq., and its implementing regulations at N.J.A.C.
7:27; the New  Jersey Solid Waste Management Act,  N.J.S.A.  13:1E-1 et seq.  and its
implementing regulations at N.J.A.C.  7:26A,  N.J.A.C.  7:26 and N.J.A.C. 7:26G;  the New
Jersey Pollution Prevention  Act, N.J.S.A. 13:lD-35 et seq. and its implementing regulations at
N.J.A.C. 7:1K.

(d) The requirements of this chapter apply in addition to applicable permit review and issuance
requirements established under the statutes and rules identified in (c) above.

(e) As further outlined in 2.1 below, the Department will identify and require certain applicants
to participate in  the Expanded Community Participation Process for  Environmental Equity at
N.J.A.C.  7:lF-2. As further described in NJ.A.C.7:lF-2.4 below, a community may petition
the Department to request that an applicant complete the Expanded Community Participation
Process for Environmental Equity at N.J.A.C.  7:lF-2.

7:1F-1.2 Severability

If any  section,  subsection, provision, clause  or  portion of this chapter  is  adjudged
unconstitutional  or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this chapter
shall not be affected thereby.
                                          147

-------
 7:1F-1.3 Definitions

 The following words and terms, when used in' this chapter, shall have the following meanings
 unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:  :

 "Alternative Dispute Resolution" means  an  alternative to litigation where permit applicants,
 community  representatives and local government representatives  may negotiate, with the
 Department acting as mediator, to  find provisions under applicable regulatory authorities that
 can be included in draft permits or approvals.

 "Community" means one or more person(s)  living in a geographic area of New Jersey that is
 likely to be impacted by the proposed project that is the subject of an application or approval to
 which this chapter applies.

 "Department" means the Department of Environmental Protection.

 "Environmental  Equity" means the fair  and equitable treatment in environmental decision-
 making of the citizens of all New Jersey communities regardless of race, color, income or
 national origin.

 "Environmental  Equity  Advisory  Council"  means  the   New  Jersey   Department  of
 Environmental Protection's Advisory Council;on Environmental Equity established  by New
Jersey Department  of  Environmental Protection Commissioner's Administrative Order No.
 1998-15, as  supplemented by Administrative Order No. 2000-01.

 "Environmental  Equity  certification  form",  "EE  certification  form",   "DEP-EE01  or
 DEPEE02" means a form stating that a permit applicant has been informed by the Department
 of the  Expanded Community  Participation Process for Environmental Equity and a signature
by a permit applicant  indicating whether the applicant intends  to  complete the Expanded
 Community Participation Process for Environmental Equity.

 "Environmental  Equity Screening  Model" means a computer program  established  by the
Department that relates census data to environmental exposure data for  individual geographic
units of appropriate scale such as census tracts.

 "Guide  to  Administering  an Effective Environmental Equity Process"  means a guidance
document developed by the Department that  is available to assist the regulated  community in
complying with  outreach  to  a community pursuant to N.J.A.C.  7:lF-2.5. The Guide to
Administering an Effective Environmental Equity Process is intended to provide  information to
permit applicants on issues such as how to identify community members for outreach activities,
what kinds of outreach activities are appropriate for various types of projects, what methods of
information exchange can be used, and what resources are available to community members to
evaluate potential impacts from proposed projects.
                                         148

-------
"Impact  Analysis"  means  an analysis  of  pollution sources for existing community health
characteristics and  the  projected  impact of the  facility on  the surrounding  environment,
including, but not limited to:  air monitoring data such as ozone,  air toxics, particulate matter,
carbon monoxide, lead,  nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds;  releases
to surface and ground water; existence  of New Jersey Known Contaminated Sites; and other
community-specific  health or  environmental data.

"Key Community Leaders" means a group of individuals identified by a permit applicant, in
consultation with the Department,  to participate  in  development and  implementation of a
Community Outreach and  Involvement  Plan. These individuals  may represent,  for example,
local  residents, local  businesses, neighborhood associations, school representatives, religious
groups,   civic   organizations,   environmental   organizations,   other   non-governmental
organizations, health care providers, local government officials, officials responsible for
emergency response, and labor unions.

"Major facility" means  any facility regulated by the New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act,
N.J.S.A. 58:10A-1  et. seq. and meeting the criteria for a major facility at N.J.A.C.  7:14A-
1.2; any facility regulated by the New Jersey Air Pollution Control Act, N.J.S.A. 26:2C-1 et.
seq. and meeting the criteria  for a major facility at N.J.A.C. 7:27-22.1;  any facility regulated
by the New Jersey  Solid Waste Management Act,  N.J.S.A.  13:1E-1 et. seq. and meeting the
criteria for a solid waste  facility  at  N.J.A.C. 7:26-1.4; any facility regulated by the New
Jersey Solid Waste  Management Act, N.J.S.A. 13:1E-1 et. seq.  and meeting the criteria for a
recycling center that handles  Class B, C, or D recyclable materials at N.J.A.C.7:26A-1.3; any
facility regulated by the New Jersey Solid Waste Management Act, N.J.S.A. 13:1E-1 et.  seq.
and meeting the criteria for a medical waste facility defined as both a commercial facility and a
destination facility at N.J.A.C. 7:26- 3A.5; or any facility regulated by the New Jersey Solid
Waste Management Act, N.J.S.A.  13:1E-1 et. seq. and meeting the criteria for a hazardous
waste facility subject to permitting under N.J.A.C. 7:26G-1 and 40 CFR 270.l(c).

 "Major modification" means any change in activity at an existing permitted facility regulated
by the New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act, N.J.S.A. 58:10A-1 et seq. that meets the criteria
at N.J.A.C. 7:14A-16.4; any change in activity at an existing permitted facility regulated by the
New Jersey Solid Waste Management Act, N.J.S.A. 13:1B-1 et. seq. that meets the criteria at
N.J.A.C. 7:26-2.6(a)4i;  any change in activity at an existing  permitted facility regulated by the
New Jersey  Air Ibllution  Control Act,  N.J.S.A. 26-.2C-1 et. seq. that meets the criteria for a
"significant modification"  at N.J.A.C. 7:27- 22.24; or any change in activity at an existing
permitted facility regulated by the New  Jersey Solid Waste Management Act, N.J.S.A. 13:1E-1
 et. seq. that meets the criteria for a hazardous waste Class 3 permit modification pursuant to 40
 CFR 270.42.

 "One Stop"  means an  administrative process of the Department whereby projects requiring
 permits or approvals from two or more media programs are coordinated by a team leader who
 helps the permit applicant identify all necessary Department permits, identifies which permits
 affect the timing and sequence of an  applicant's project,  and coordinates the activities of
                                           149

-------
various permitting programs to  ensure  a  coordinated  application  and  permit issuance
procedure.  "Threshold value" means the result of the Environmental Equity screening model
that indicates whether a community may be disproportionately impacted when compared to a
statewide average for a given racial or ethnic group. This result is equal to an increase in the
deviation from a score of 1 in the Environmental Equity screening model.

SUBCHAPTER 2. REQUIREMENTS OF THE EXPANDED COMMUNITY
PARTICIPATION PROCESS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY

7:1F 2.1 Pre-application Meeting

(a) Applicants for a new permit, permit renewal, or major modification to existing permits for
major facilities as defined at N.J.A.C. 7:1F-1.3 are required to participate in  a pre-application
meeting with  the Department. Applicants shall make a request for such pre-application meeting
to the Department as early in the application planning process as possible prior to submission
of a permit  application.  Applicants  for permit renewals shall request such  pre-application
meeting at least 6 months prior to expiration of the permit.

(b) An applicant for one or more permit(s)  issued by a single regulatory program shall  make a
request to arrange a pre-application meeting directly to that regulatory program. An applicant
for permits from two or more regulatory programs shall  make a request for  a pre-application
meeting to  the Office of Pollution  Prevention  and Permit Coordination so that the applicant
may take advantage of the Department's One Stop process.

 (c)  For purposes of this chapter,  the permit applicant shall provide the following  to the
Department at or before the pre-application  meeting:

1. A description of the  project including background information on the  facility  or project,
including history,  products, processes,  number of employees, size of facility and hours of
operation;
                                            i
2. Project design and location  information; and  '

3. An estimated schedule for the project.

(d)  The Department will inform the applicant of the Expanded Community Participation
Process for Environmental Equity  as  set forth in N.J.A.C.  7:lF-2  at  the preapplication
meeting. The Department shall also provide a copy of the Guide to Administering an Effective
Environmental Equity Process.

7:lF-2.2 Department Screening Process For Permit Applicants
                                         150

-------
(a)At or before the pre-application for a new permit, permit renewal, or major modification to
existing permits  for  major facilities  as defined at N.J.A.C. 7:1F-1.3, the Department shall
conduct an environmental equity screening using the Environmental Equity Screening Model.

(b) The Department  shall  notify  the applicant, in writing,  of the results of the screening and
provide the applicant with a certification form for signature pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.4.
below.

(c) If the Department determines, based on the screening model, that the facility is located in
an area where the threshold value has been exceeded, the applicant is required to complete the
steps outlined in  section 2.5-2.7 below.

(d) If the Department determines, based on the screening model, that the facility is located in
an area where the threshold value has not been exceeded,  the Department will encourage the
permit applicant  to follow  the steps in section 2.5 - 2.7 below.

7:lF-2.3  Community  Petitions for  Expanded Community Participation  Process  for
Environmental Equity

(a) A community may petition the Department in writing to request that an applicant for any of
the. following  permits or approvals  complete the  Expanded Community Participation Process
for Environmental Equity: the New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act, N.J.S.A. 58:10A-1 et
seq., and its  implementing regulations at  N.J.A.C.  7:14A; the New  Jersey  Air Pollution
Control Act, N.J.S.A.  26:2C-1 et seq., and its implementing regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:27; the
New Jersey Solid Waste  Management Act, N.J.S.A.  13:1E-1  et seq. and its implementing
regulations at N.J.A.C.  7:26A, N.J.A.C.  7:26  and   N.J.A.C. 7:26G; or the New Jersey
Pollution  Prevention Act, N.J.S.A. 13:lD-35 et seq.  and its implementing regulations at
N.J.A.C.  7: IK.  Such petition shall be submitted in writing to the Office of Equal Opportunity,
Contract Assistance  and  Environmental  Equity,  New Jersey Department  of  Environmental
Protection, P.O. Box 402, Trenton,  New Jersey,  08625-0402.

(b) Upon  receipt of a petition identified in (a) above, the Department shall  determine whether
the application is for a new permit, permit renewal, or major modification  to existing permits
for major facilities subject to the requirements  of N.J.A.C. 7:1F-2.1  (a). The Department
shall report the  results of the  Environmental Equity screening  conducted in accordance  with
N.J.A.C.  7:lF-2.2 to  the petitioner and the status of any ongoing outreach activities or the
status of the permit.

(c)  If the permit applicant is not  subject to  N.J.A.C.  7:lF-2.1(a), the Department  shall
determine the status  of the application. The Department shall notify the applicant of the petition
and  inform the applicant of the Expanded Community Participation Process for Environmental
Equity N.J.A.C. 7:IF.  The  Department shall also provide  a  copy  of  the Guide to
Administering an Effective Environmental Equity Process.
                                           151

-------
 (d)  The Department shall conduct an  environmental  equity  screening  in  accordance with
 N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.2.

 (e) The Department shall notify the applicant and the petitioner, in writing, of the results of the
 screening  and provide  the applicant  with an  Environmental Equity certification  form for
 signature pursuant to N.J.A.C. 2.4 below.

 1. If the Department determines, based on  the model, that the  facility is located in an area
 where the  threshold value  has been exceeded, Department shall notify the permit applicant, in
 writing,  it  is required to complete the steps in N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.5 through 2.7.
                                             i
 2. If the Department determines, based on the model, that the facility is located in an area
 where the  threshold value  has not been exceeded,  the Department shall notify the  applicant in
 writing of the result,  and shall  encourage the applicant  to  complete the requirements of
 N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.5 through 2.7.

 (f) The applicant shall follow the steps of the certification process outlined at N.J.A.C. 7:1F-
 2.4 below.

 (g) If the  applicant fails  to  complete the certification  process at N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.4, the
 Department shall either:

 1. Deem the application administratively incomplete and return the application; or

 2. In instances where  a petition is received  following the Department's determination that a
 application is administratively complete, the Department shall not issue a final permit until and
 unless the applicant completes the certification process at N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.4.

 (h)  Upon  receipt of the signed  certification,  the Department shall notify the petitioner  in
 writing of the applicant's decision whether to participate.

 7.-1F-2.4 Applicant Acknowledgement/Certification of Decision

 (a) Pursuant to the application process at N.J.A.C.  7:lF-2.2(b) above or the petition process at
 N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.3 (e) above, the Department shall provide the applicant with a DEP-EE01 or
 DEP-EE02 certification form by certified mail.

 (b) All applicants are required to submit a  completed EE certification form within 14 days of
 receiving the form from  the Department,  (c) Applicants who are required by the Department
 to conduct  outreach pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.2(c) above or pursuant to the petition process
 at NJ.A.C.7:lF-2.3(e)labove, shall complete an EE01 certification form and certify that:

 1. They were informed of  the Expanded Community Participation Process for Environmental
Equity at N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2 and;
                                          152

-------
2. They  understand  that their permit application will not be considered complete until the
Department receives the EE01 certification form stating that the applicant agrees to begin the
Expanded Community Participation Process at N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.

(d) Applicants who are not required by the Department to conduct outreach pursuant to section
2.2(d)  or pursuant to the petition process at 2.3(e) 2 , shall complete an EE02 certification
form and state that:

1. They were informed of the Expanded Community Participation Process for Environmental
Equity at N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2 and;

2. They elect or decline to participate in the Expanded Community Participation Process for
Environmental Equity at N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.

(e) All EE certification forms shall be signed by  the highest ranking official  in charge of
operations in  New Jersey.

(f) The Department will keep the EE certification form in its file as part of the  public record
for the permit application.

(g)  Any  applicant who participates  in  the  Expanded Community Participation Process for
Environmental Equity at N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2 must complete all of the steps outlined in N.J.A.C.
7:lF-2.5   through 2.7  in  order to  receive  a Finding of  Completion from the Department
pursuant  to N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.8.

(h)  An application  for a new permit, permit renewal, or rmjor modification to an  existing
permit for a major facility, or any other permit application for which the Department  receives
a petition pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.3 will not be considered administratively complete until
a signed  EE certification form is received by the Department.

(i) If an applicant who is required by the Department to conduct outreach pursuant to N.J.A.C.
7:lF-2.2(c), fails to complete an EE01  certification form or refuses to conduct the outreach
process,  the Department shall deem the  application  administratively incomplete and return the
application.

2.5 Preparation of Community Outreach and Involvement Plan

(a) A permit  applicant who participates  in the Expanded Community Participation Process for
Environmental Equity shall prepare a Community Outreach and Involvement Plan.

(b) At a minimum, a Community Outreach and Involvement Plan shall include:

i. A Fact Sheet, including a brief description of the project including background information
on the facility or project, including history, products, processes, number of employees, size of
facility and hours of operation;
                                           153

-------
ii. An Outreach Strategy, including a brief description of who in a community will be impacted
by  the  proposed  project,  what information  will  be provided  to  potentially  impacted
communities,  and how the applicant intends to  communicate with a community and  resolve
issues; and

iii.  A critical  path  schedule, using the information submitted by the permit  applicant in
N.J.A.C. 7:1F-2.1 above. The schedule shall  include an  identification  of the timing  and
sequence of permit applications and associated permit review timeframes, and a schedule with
the initial meeting and additional outreach activities described in N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.7.

7:lF-2.6 Submittal of Community Outreach and Involvement Plan

(a)  Once a draft  Community Outreach and  Involvement Plan has been prepared, it shall be
submitted to the Department. The Department shall make a determination as to whether the
draft Community  Outreach and Involvement Plan meets the minimum requirements specified at
NJ.A.C. 7:lF-2.5.

(b)  A permit applicant shall submit a copy of the draft Community Outreach and Involvement
Plan to the Key Community Leaders identified by the permit  applicant, in consultation with the
Department.

7:lF-2.7 Implementation of Community Outreach and Involvement Plan

a) The Department shall lead an Initial Meeting with Key  Community Leaders, the  permit
applicant, and  local government representatives  at the beginning of the  permit application
process.  Representatives  of local governments will  be   invited  to  participate with  the
Department to provide guidance as necessary about allowable activities pursuant to applicable
laws and regulations. At the Initial Meeting, the permit applicant shall:

1. Describe the parameters of the proposed project;

2. Provide information to community members about how the proposed project will affect the
health, environment and quality of life in the  community;

3. Present the critical path schedule developed under N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.5(b)iii;  and

4. Take  comment from attendees. Unless the applicant has  provided a stenographer to take
minutes  of the meeting, any comments suggesting changes to the plan or permit shall  be
submitted by the attendee in writing within 5  business days of the meeting.

(b)  Following the initial meeting, a permit applicant shall  revise the  Community Outreach
Strategy  and the critical path schedule, as appropriate, and based on comments received at the
initial meeting, to include additional outreach activities with Key Community Leaders or other
community representatives to attempt to reach consensus on any concerns related  to facility
                                          154

-------
operations  and  impacts  on  the  community  and the environment.  The  Department shall
participate in such additional outreach activities. A permit applicant shall submit the revised
Community  Outreach Strategy and  revised critical path  schedule to the Department and  the
key community leaders within 20 working days of the Initial Meeting.

(c)  If  a permit applicant  conducts additional outreach  activities  described in (b)  above,
applicants should refer to  the  Guide  to Administering  an Effective Environmental Equity
Process for additional information.

7:lF-2.8 Incorporating areas of agreement into the permit or voluntary agreement

(a)  Each  area of agreement related  to  facility  operations will be  incorporated  into  the
applicant's draft or final permit or approval, as applicable. Such areas of agreement are  limited
to those that are enforceable under the applicable statutes and implementing rules.

(b)  Areas of agreement between community members and the permit applicant that are  not
enforceable under applicable statutes and implementing rules may be included in an agreement
between the parties that will be maintained in the Department's public records.

7:lF-2.9 Alternative Dispute Resolution
(a)  If,  at the  conclusion  of the outreach  process,  specific, identifiable  issues  remain in
controversy, the permit applicant and the community may voluntarily avail themselves of the
Department's Alternative Dispute Resolution process.

1. Requests for Alternate Dispute Resolution shall be made in writing and be directed to the
Office of Dispute Resolution, P.O. Box 402, Trenton, N.J. 08625-0402. If the Department
determines that  the  matter  is suitable for mediation,  it shall notify the permit applicant and
community,  and inform them of the procedures and schedule for mediation.

2. Any areas of agreement regarding enforceable  permit conditions  that result  from  the
Alternative Dispute Resolution process shall be incorporated into the  permit applicant's draft or
final permit or approval.

7:1F-2.10 Finding of Completion

(a)  An applicant may request a review by the Department of the process undertaken and the
identifiable  issues that remain  in  controversy at  any  time following  completion  of  the
requirements of N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.5 through 2.7.

(b)  If, based on its review, the Department determines that the  permit  applicant has made a
good faith effort to comply  with the requirements described in N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.5 through 2.7,
the applicant will be considered to have  completed the  Expanded  Community  Participation
Process for  Environmental  Equity.  The Department  shall provide the applicant a Finding of
Completion in writing and shall include a finding that an applicant has made a good faith effort
to comply with the  requirements of  N.J.A.C. 7:lF-2.5 through 2.7 in the draft permit or
                                          155

-------
approval, permit  renewal,  major modification  to  and existing  permit or final  permit  as
applicable.

(c) If the Department determines that the applicant has not made a good faith effort to comply
with the requirements of NJ.A.C. 7:lF-2.5  through  2.7,  and the  applicant is required to
conduct the Expanded Community Participation  Process pursuant to  NJ.A.C. 7:lF-2.2(c) or
2.3, the Department will not issue a permit, renewal  or major modification as applicable.

(d) If the Department determines that the applicant has not made a good faith effort to comply
with the  requirements of NJ.A.C. 7:lF-2.5 through 2.7, and the applicant is not required to
conduct the Expanded Community Participation Process pursuant to NJ.A.C.  7:lF-2.2(d) or
2.3(e)(2), the Department will include  a finding  that the applicant  did not  complete the
requirements of NJ.A.C. 7: IF- 2.5 through 2.7  in  the  draft permit or approval, permit
renewal,  major modification to and existing permit or final permit as applicable.

7:1F-2.11 Requirement to Conduct Impact Analysis

(a) If at the conclusion of the outreach process or at the conclusion of the Alternative Dispute
Resolution process specific, relevant, identifiable issues remain  in controversy and the facility
is required to conduct outreach pursuant to section 2.2(c)  above or pursuant  to the petition
process at 2.3(e)l above, the Department shall require  the  facility to conduct an Impact
Analysis. The specific content of the analysis will  be defined  on a case  by case  basis in a
meeting with the Department and the applicant.  The impact analysis shall include an analysis
of pollution sources to determine existing community health characteristics and the projected
impact of  the facility on  the  surrounding environment, including,  but not limited  to: air
monitoring data such  as ozone, air toxics, particulate matter, carbon monoxide,  lead, nitrogen
dioxide, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds; releases to surface and  ground water;
existence of New  Jersey Known Contaminated Sites; and other community-specific health or
environmental data. Upon completion of the  Impact Analysis, the  Department may,  in  its
discretion, impose  permit conditions consistent with applicable law.

7:1F-2.12 Permit Review and Issuance

(a)  Any  draft or final permit or approval into  which the  Department has incorporated the
finding of the completion of the Expanded Community Participation Process for Environmental
Equity pursuant to NJ.A.C.  7:lF-2.8 shall be subject to the applicable procedures for permit
review and issuance under the New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act, N J.S.A. 58:10A-1 et
seq.,  and its  implementing regulations  at NJ.A.C. 7:14A; the New  Jersey Air  Pollution
Control Act, N.J.S.A. 26:2C-1  et seq., and its implementing regulations at NJ.A.C. 7:27; the
New Jersey Solid  Waste Management Act, N.J.S.A. 13:1E-1  et seq. and its  implementing
regulations at NJ.A.C. 7:26A,  NJ.A.C. 7:26  and NJ.A.C. 7:26G; or  the New Jersey
Pollution Prevention  Act,  N.J.S.A.  13:lD-35 et seq. and its implementing  regulations at
NJ.A.C. 7:1K.
                                          156

-------
(b) For permit applications where the Department has discretion in determining the need for a
public  meeting,  the  Department  will consider an applicant's completion  of the Expanded
Community Participation  Process for Environmental  Equity in  determining the  need for a
public  hearing and in determining the length of time required for public comment on draft
permit  actions.
                                          157

-------
158

-------
                                     APPENDIX D

                             BASIS AND BACKGROUND
                 NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
           PROTECTION ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY SCREENING MODEL
                                    February 4, 2002
 OVERVIEW

 This document represents the technical basis and background for the New Jersey Department
 of Environmental Protection Environmental Equity Screening Model.  This model relates
 census and exposure data so that a threshold value can be determined.

 Among the uses of New Jersey's Environmental Equity modeling evaluation are screening
 permit  applications and responding to petitions from communities  regarding  any permit
 covered by the scope of N.J.A.C. 7:1F-1 et. seq.  These objectives are not well served by the
 previous technical work in this field.  Most existing guidance and methodologies for addressing
 Environmental Equity concerns fall into one of two categories.  The first is exemplified by the
 USEPA guidance (1) which provides a detailed analysis scheme developed after a case comes
 to the attention of a regulatory agency due to a complaint.  The EPA approach provides many
 alternatives  for  the analytic strategy such as the use of ambient monitoring data, modeled
 exposures, known releases or stored pollutants.  While the New Jersey approach is consistent
 with the EPA guidance, it was necessary to choose  a  particular path and select among the
 alternatives because of the need to develop a proactive screening.  The second category, which
 is found  in the technical literature,  documents broad environmental  equity  trends  with
 statistical analysis but no clear mechanism for a site-specific analysis (2,3,4,5).

 New Jersey's goals require a system, which can accomplish both the site specific analysis and
 statewide coverage within one framework of analysis.  This is due to the fact that many permit
 applications will be analyzed in the absence of a complaint (i.e., DEP prefers to conduct an
 "upfront analysis" prior to permit issuance) and applications may appear for consideration at
 any location in  the state at any time.   Therefore, for a timely and consistent response to
 permitting applications the Department must make many of the  choices which  might,  in a
 complaint driven system,  be  directed by community concerns.  These  choices include the
 geographic boundaries of the analytic subunits such as census tracts and the type and number
 of stressors to  be considered.   Stressors are  defined as those factors that may adversely affect
 the population.

To satisfy these goals the Department has constructed a model which evaluates census data and
exposure data  from various stressors such  as air  pollutants and  hazardous  sites, which  are
summarized at the  census tract level.   These  data are  combined and  analyzed  so  that a
statewide ethnic specific ratio can be determined.  A ratio of greater than 1 indicates the ethnic
group (subpopulation) under consideration is receiving more than the statewide average effect
                                         159

-------
from the stressors and a ratio of less than 1 indicates less than the average statewide effect.  A
ratio of 1 means that the subpopulation has exactly the same  exposure as the population as a
whole.  A ratio (score) of 1 will be used as the threshold value against which potential changes
in exposure by race or ethnicity caused by new facilities will be evaluated.

The screening described in this  procedure is  based entirely  on preexisting  conditions of
exposure  and demographics.    All databases  used  in the construction of this model  are
continually changing and will only be updated at intervals determined  by the nature  of the
database.  For example,  the census data is updated every five years. Other databases may be
updated yearly or quarterly.
                                            I
METHODS

DATA QUALITY

In the U.S. EPA July 2000 "Draft Revised Guidance for Investigating Title VI Administrative
Complaints Challenging  Permits"   (1) it is stated that data will  be evaluated  for  sufficient
"scope, completeness, and accuracy."  These are desirable attributes of data in any context but
particularly for  an  environmental equity analysis  because  of the  very large number  and
variability of potential data sources.  At its root an equity analysis involves a comparison of
populations which differ by race  and exposure and live in different places.  For  screening
purposes, detailed  data  about  a single location has  little to no value because there is  no
possibility of comparison.  Therefore the scope of the data is a very important  limiting factor
in an environmental equity analysis. Sufficient scope in the New Jersey context means that any
data must be  available for as wide and uniform a geographic coverage as possible throughout
the State.

Data completeness implies that there are a sufficient number of entries for there to be a fair
representation of information across race and ethnic categories.  A few widely scattered data
elements in the state would not be enough to capture any trend by race, location, and exposure.
Data accuracy means that normal standard methods of collection and quality assurance have
been applied to the data set. Also, accuracy requires that measurements or modeled estimates
are sufficiently resolved so that if significant variations in a given parameter exist in different
regions they will be detected.

DATA TYPES

 Census

The United States  1995 census update was used for the implementation of the current model
because it is the most recent  census data available.  The model can  be  revised when  new
 census data becomes available. The race and ethnicity categories are European, African, Latin,
Asian,  Native and Other Americans.  Census data for model implementation was resolved at
the census tract level. There were 1,937 census tracts in New Jersey in 1995.
                                            160

-------
 Stressors

 New Jersey  has  chosen to  initially  evaluate four stressors  because the  data have  sufficient
 scope, completeness, and accuracy.  Three of them are descriptions of air pollution and one is
 a list of contaminated sites.  The air pollution stressors may represent chemical exposure to the
 population while the proximity to contaminated sites may  or may  not result  in  increased
 exposures to chemicals.  The exposure estimates from the air pollutants are in some cases the
 result of measurements from several locations in the state,  and in one  case  (air toxics)  is a
 modeled estimate based on point source emissions data.  The contaminated site data are simply
 a count by census tract.

 The four categories of data that comprise the exposure portion of the analysis are: the National
 Air Toxics Inventory (NTI), New Jersey ozone measurements, New Jersey 2.5 micrometer and
 below particulate matter in  air  measurements  (PM  2.5),  and  the  New Jersey Known
 Contaminated Sites List (KCSL).  Each data set was analyzed with the equity screening model
 whereby the  location and magnitude of the effect and census  tract specific demographics were
 analyzed as the relevant variables.

 The atmospheric dispersion of toxic chemicals  from sources identified in the NTI were
 modeled  with the U.S.  EPA approved ISCST3 model  (6).  Concentrations of each chemical
 from each source were estimated at  the center  of each census tract.   Each toxic  chemical
 concentration result was used as input to a cumulative exposure and human health risk method
 using EPA protocols (7) in each of the 1,937 census  tracts.  The NTI data are updated every
 three years by the U.S. EPA's Emissions  Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG)  within the Office
 of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS).

 Ozone measurements were examined at all  15 New Jersey stations and the number of days
 above the 8 hour  standard determined. The number of days over the standard was used as the
 data element  for the analysis. These data are  collected by the NJDEP  and are updated
 quarterly.

Analysis  of impact from particulate  matter below 2.5  micrometers was  used from the year
2000 from measurements at 19 stations throughout New Jersey.  These data are  collected by
the NJDEP and are updated quarterly.

The  New Jersey KCSL  up to the end of the year 2000 contained 7,053  entries.  The spatial
coordinates of each entry were identified  as belonging to a census tract.  The  number of sites
in each census tract was determined and was one of the bases  of the threshold analysis.  These
data  are collected by the NJDEP and are updated annually.
                                          161

-------
DATA ANALYSIS

Equity

The screening model has been developed based on modification of previous work by Susan
Perlin, which was published in an article in the journal Environmental Science and Technology
(8).  The model functions by multiplying the population of each ethnicity in each census tract
by the exposure in that census tract.   This  is repeated for each of the four exposure related
databases (air toxics, ozone, PM2.5, and the KCSL list).  For each database the products in all
census tracts are added up to produce a sum of products for each ethnicity. The sum of the
products is divided by the total number of  people of that ethnicity in the state to produce a
fraction. That ethnic specific fraction is divided by.a similarly derived fraction based on the
total population in each census  tract  to produce a population emission ratio for a particular
subpopulation (PERs). The PERs is an expression of on average how much the specific ethnic
group  is exposed compared to the total population. If the PERs is above 1,  it means  that that
group  receives a greater than average exposure, if this value is below 1, it  receives less than
average exposure.

For example,  to evaluate potential   exposures by  race, a weighted average for  African
Americans and non-African Americans can be calculated for all census tracts in the state. The
weighted average for African Americans can be calculated  by  multiplying  the  amount  of
exposure in each tract by the number of African Americans in each tract, summing this product
across census tracts and then dividing by the total number of African Americans. A weighted
average  can be calculated for the whole  population the  same way. Finally,  the ratio of the
weighted average for African Americans to  the weighted average for the whole population can
be calculated to find where the score falls in relation to the ratio of 1.

Equation (1) was derived  from  Perlin  (8) and describes the mathematical relationship among
the variables evaluated for the screening threshold determination.

              ?  Rs
      PERs= ? Rw
               W
 Where:

 PERs =
 R-
 s =
 S-
 w —
 W =
 Population Emissions Ratio for sub-population s (ethnicity)
rating
number of people in sub-population in census tract
number of people in sub-population in state
number of people in census tract..
number of people in state
                                            162

-------
One PERs was determined for each  of the  6 race or ethnicity census categories for each
stressor.  Each census category is  considered  a subpopulation.  A PERs can be considered a
score whereby  1 means that the subpopulation has exactly the same exposure as the population
as a whole for whatever stressor is being considered.  Each stressor is considered separately
and any  stressor with a score  greater than 1 for any ethnicity undergoes  further analysis to
determine the threshold  value.

The rating (R)  term in  the equation is different for each of the four stressors (PM 2.5 etc).
Each stressor has an independently derived rating for each of the  1,937  census tracts. For
example, for the KCSL the rating is the number of sites in a particular census tract. For air
toxics, it is the  risk from the combined effects of all the point sources included in the NTI data,
which would affect a particular census tract.  For ozone and PM2.5, it is the  number of days
there were exceedances of the  air standard in the census tract where the measurements were
taken.

The ?  Rs  term means that for each census tract the risk, or whatever is the appropriate
       5
summary for a  particular stressor,  is multiplied  by the  census tract specific  sub-population
count in  that tract  (i.e., number of Asian Americans).  This product is added up  for all the
1,937 census tracts.  The sum of the products is  divided by the total number of that sub-
population  (Asian  Americans)  in  the state.  This results in the weighted average risk for
everyone of that sub-population in the state. The same procedure is carried out for the  whole
(W) population in  the state regardless  of race or ethnicity using the ?  Rw   term in the
                                                                     W
denominator.  The  equity equation divides the weighted sub-population rating by the weighted
whole population rating  to obtain the ratio or score.

Locational Sensitivity Analysis                                                            .

The PERs score is statewide and  does not measure any actual or potential impacts from any
individual local proposed permit activities. The purpose of the screening is to  provide specific
advice based on the location  of  a proposed new  facility.   Therefore, another  analysis is
necessary to assess  the sensitivity of any location to environmental equity concerns through a
simulation procedure.

The locational sensitivity analysis  is accomplished by adding a percentage increase in rating to
each census tract in turn and then recalculating the score.  This can be seen .with equation 1 as
follows:  the rating  (R)  is increased in only one census tract. The new R is multiplied by the
subpopulation (s) and total population (w) counts for that census tract.  A new score (PERs) is
calculated.  The original score is subtracted from the new score. The change in score is called
the delta. The change  in R for that census tract is returned back to its original value and the
same procedure is carried out again with a different census tract.
                                           163

-------
That second census tract now also has its own delta. This procedure is repeated 1,937 times
with the result that each of the  1,937 census tracts has its own delta.  These deltas vary  in
magnitude and can be either positive or negative. If the delta is  positive,  it means that the
change caused an increase in the score and  if negative, a decrease in score.  A positive delta
would, therefore, raise impact concerns for the area, since the score would get further away
from 1 in a positive direction.  Any increase in an area of negative delta would decrease impact
concern because  the score would get further from  1 in a negative direction.  The result of this
process (calculating a delta) is an upfront determination  of the effect of an increase in exposure
to the local population for each census tract.  It is a statewide simulation of the effect of adding
emissions at any location before they happen so  that any future proposal may be  evaluated
quickly and comprehensively.

Threshold Value  Determination

There  are four steps in the determination of the threshold value using the environmental equity
screening model. The first step is to determine the statewide  score for each ethnic  group  for
each stressor.  The second step  is to find the deltas.  The third step is to  carry out a spatial
analysis with results of the locational sensitivity analyses (deltas). The fourth step is to find the
boundary of transition between  positive and negative  deltas.  This  boundary  is the spatial
interpretation of the threshold value.

The first step  in the  screening  is to calculate an overall statewide  score  for  each race  or
ethnicity for each stressor using equation 1  as described in the equity data  analysis section.
There  are 6 census categories and 4 stressors, which result in 24 different scores (PERs). All
of the  24 scores are either above or below 1.   ,

The second step  is only carried out for those ethnic/stressor combinations for which scores are
above  1.  Scores below 1 indicate that the weight of existing conditions is already favorable for
environmental equity for that ethnic group/stressor combination.

In the  third step, the individual deltas of different magnitude and sign (as have been determined
in the  locational sensitivity analysis simulation procedure for all the census tracts) are now used
for a spatial analysis.  The spatial analysis allows estimation  (interpolation) between deltas of
different magnitude.  The  larger positive  deltas indicate a greater potential in those census
tracts to an increase in impact than those census tracts with smaller positive deltas.  All census
tracts  with negative deltas of any magnitude are at no risk of increased equity impact.  The
purpose of the spatial analysis is to interpolate between the census tract specific delta data so
that the best estimate E made  of potential  impact areas.  A procedure  known as "inverse
distance squared weighting"  is  used in  the equity model. All the census  tract deltas, both
positive and negative, are analyzed. This analysis is repeated for each of the 24 possible scores
found  to be above 1. The  spatial analysis  produces boundaries  which demarcate areas  of
identical potential impact through interpolation.
                                            164

-------
In the fourth step, the boundary of transition between positive and negative is found.  This
boundary will pass through census tracts as a result of the interpolation mechanism (inverse
squared weighting).   All those locations within the boundary on the positive side (areas with
more overall impact) will be considered to have exceeded the threshold value.

REFERENCES

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Draft Revised Guidance For Investigating Title VI
  Administrative Complaints Challenging Permits July 2000.

2. A.  Szasz  and M. Meuser,  "Unintended,  Inexorable: The Production  of Environmental
  Inequalities in Santa Clara County, California", American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 43 No.
  4 January 2000 602-632

3. R. Zimmerman, "Social Equity and Environmental Risk", Risk Analysis, Vol. 13 No. 6,
   1993 649-666.

4. M. Greenberg and M.  Cidon,  "Broadening the Definition of Environmental Equity: A
  Framework for States and Local Governments",  Population Research and Policy Review,
  Vol.  16 1997 397-413.

5. G. Mills and K.Niuhauser, "Quantitative Methods for Environmental Justice Assessment of
  Transportation", Risk Analysis, Vol. 20 No.3 2000 377-384.

6. 40 CFR Ch.I Appendix W to Part 51 Guideline on Air Quality Models

7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
   Human Health Risk Assessment Protocol  for Hazardous Waste  Combustion Facilities, July
   1998.

8. S. Perlin, R. Setzer, J. Creason, and K.  Sexton,  "Distribution of Industrial Air Emissions
   by Income and  Race  in The  United  States: An Approach Using the Toxic  Release
   Inventory", Environ. Sci.  Technol., Vol. 29 No. 1 1995 69-80.
                                          165

-------
166

-------
                                           APPENDIX E
                     CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE FORUMS 2002
                          Hosted by the Governor's Office of Planning & Research
Tuesday. January 20. 2002
1:00 p.m.— 7:00 p.m.
Salinas Community Center
940 N. Main Street
Salinas, CA

Saturday. February 23. 2002
l:00p.m. — 7:00 p.m.
Dunsmuir Community Center Building
4841 Dunsmuir Avenue
Dunsmuir, CA
                        Tuesday. February 12. 2002
                        1:00 p.m. — 7:00 p.m.
                        Ronald Reagan Building
                        300 South Spring Street
                        Los Angeles, CA

                        Tuesday. February 26. 2002
                        1:00 p.m. — 7:00 p.m.
                        San Francisco Civic Center Complex
                        455 Golden Gate Avenue
                        San Francisco, CA
What is Environmental Justice?
According to California law, environmental justice (EJ) is the "the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and
incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws and
policies."

 Goals and Objectives of the Forums
     •   Create a network o f EJ contacts at the community and local, state, and federal government levels
     •   Evaluate recent efforts to increase meaningful public involvement in governmental processes
     •   Hold a public hearing on EJ Guidelines for local general plans

Public Hearing: General Plan Environmental Justice Guidelines — begins 4:00 p.m. at each Forum Assembly Bill
1553 (Keeley, Chapter 762, Statutes of 2001) requires the Governor's Office of Planning and Research to prepare
guidelines for addressing environmental justice matters in city and county general plans. As part of each EJ Forum,
OPR will hold a public hearing to receive input prior to the preparation of the draft guidelines. There is no need for
you to R.S.V.P. if you are only coming to the public hearing portion of the day, but please R.S.V.P. below for
planning purposes, if you will be attending the other segments of the Forum. See attachment for more information.

Discussion Panel: There will be a panel at each Forum intended to engage everyone in a discussion regarding
meaningful public involvement in governmental decision making. Panelists will include a range of experts on public
participation who will provide their insights and evaluations of recent governmental agency public participation
efforts.

Networking and Information Sharing; Organizations and agencies are encouraged to set up an informational
booth regarding their EJ related activities. These booths are intended to educate others about your agency or
organization and its role relating to EJ. There will be designated times during the forums for participants to visit the
booths. If you are interested in having a booth, please fill out the appropriate portion of this form and return it no
later than 2 weeks before the date of the foru m you wish to attend.

Please R.S.V.P. bv returning the attached form to:                            Or fax to:
Governor's Office of Planning & Research; C/O: Environmental Justice         (916) 323-2675
Forum; P.O. Box 3044, Room 200; Sacramento, CA 95812-3044

Questions? Please contact: Bonnie Chiu at (916) 323-9033 or Bonnie.Chiu@opr.ca.gov
(Please do not R.S.V.P. by phone)
 Name	
 Address.
 Phone	
   Organization/Agency_
                             City.
Fax.
E-mail.
 Location (please check all that apply) San Francisco_ Salinas_ Los Angeles _ Dunsmuir _
 I am planning to attend panel/booths: Yes _ No _ Will your organization/agency need a booth? Yes _ No _
 If you need special accommodations or translation, please contact Bonnie Chiu at (916) 323-9033 at least 10
 working days prior to the Forum you wish to attend.
                                                  167

-------
168

-------
                                     APPENDIX F

            POLICIES AND ACTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
                            Approved on December 13, 2001
                AIR RESOURCES BOARD POLICIES AND ACTIONS
                          FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

Introduction

The California Air Resources Board (ARB/Board) is committed to making the achievement of
environmental justice an integral part of its activities.  State law defines environmental justice
as  the fair  treatment of  people  of all  races, cultures,  and  incomes with  respect to the
development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations,
and policies.1 The Board approved these Environmental Justice Policies and Actions (Policies)
on  December 13, 2001, to establish a framework for incorporating environmental justice into
the ARB's programs consistent with the  directives of State law.  These Policies apply to all
communities in California, but recognize that environmental justice issues have been raised
more in the context of low-income and minority communities.  A number of specific actions
support each Policy.

While these Policies focus on ARE as an organization, they also reflect the need for the local
air  pollution control and  air quality management districts (local air districts) and other local
agencies  to  play  their part.   The  local air  districts are most directly responsible  for the
regulation of air pollution from businesses  and industries  in California.   Local land-use
agencies  are directly responsible  for the siting of new air pollution sources, and local  air
districts also play an important role by issuing permits for new sources of air pollution.  We
are committed to working as partners with these agencies to improve the available information
that local agencies use to make planning and permitting decisions. We are also  committed to
continuing our aggressive program to control  motor  vehicle pollution, the principal source of
air  toxics and other emissions leading to the violation of clean air standards.  By working
together to  improve  siting and mitigation practices, and further controlling sources within
ARB's jurisdiction, we can help address  environmental justice  issues  at the  community level
throughout California.

Over the past twenty years, ARB,  local air districts, and federal air pollution control programs
have made substantial progress towards  achieving  federal  and  State air quality standards.
These achievements have  reduced the  exposures of California's residents to air pollution.
Remarkably, during this same period, the State population has increased almost 45 percent and
the  daily number of vehicle miles traveled in the State has increased almost 90 percent.
                                         169

-------
                      REDUCTIONS IN AIR POLLUTANTS *
                                     1980 - 1999
             Ozone
             Carbon Monoxide +
             Particulate Matter -
-53%
-35%
-21%
             * Ambient air quality standards exist for these air pollutants;
             statewide average, as measured by air monitoring stations.

             + State ambient air quality standard achieved in all but a portion of
             Los Angeles County and the City of Calexico.

             - 1988 - 1999, non-desert areas.
Despite this progress, many areas in California still exceed health-based air quality standards
for ozone and particulate matter.  Air monitoring shows that over 90 percent of Californians
breathe unhealthy levels of one or both of these air pollutants during some  part of the year.
Attaining the health-based standards  for ozone and particulate matter is essential to protect the
health of all Californians.

Statewide health risk from the  most  widespread toxic air pollutants has also  been substantially
reduced through the combined efforts of ARE and local air district actions.  Nevertheless,
there is a general consensus that the  statewide health risk posed by toxic air pollutants remains
too high.  In addition, some communities experience higher exposures than others as a result of
the cumulative impacts of air pollution from multiple mobile, commercial, industrial,  and other
sources.

The Board shall dedicate resources and work with local air districts to develop narrowly
tailored remedies to reduce emissions, exposures, and health risks in communities.  The ARB's
Diesel Risk Reduction Program is our most important priority for reducing toxic air pollutants
because particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines accounts for 70 percent of the known
cancer risk in communities that is attributed to exposure to toxic air pollutants.  This Program
alone is designed to achieve a  75 percent reduction in the emissions and associated health risk
by 2010.  However, other control efforts will be necessary to address the health risks posed by
toxic air pollutants.  We will continue to prioritize our efforts to  reduce cumulative emissions
of toxic air  pollutants by considering he public exposure to, and the health risk  caused by,
those toxic air pollutants.
                                           170

-------
 Underlying these Policies is  a recognition that we need  to engage community members in a
 meaningful way as we carry out  our activities.    People  should have  the best possible
 information about the air  they breathe and what is being  done to reduce  unhealthful  air
 pollution in their communities. In particular, we will work to make information related to air
 pollution and community health more accessible to the residents of low-income and minority
 communities so that they can take a more active role in decisions affecting air pollution in their
 communities.  We are also committed to working with local air districts to enhance existing
 complaint-resolution processes,  and to listen to and, as appropriate, act upon community
 concerns.
                                REDUCTIONS IN TOXIC
                                  AIR POLLUTANTS *
                                        1990 - 1999
              Lead +
              Benzene -
              Hexavalent Chromium
              Perchloroethylene
              1,3-Butadiene
              Diesel Particulate
              Methylene Chloride
-95%
- 67%
- 59%
- 59%
- 45%
- 40%
- 39%
                     Identified by the Board as cancer-causing toxic air contaminants;
                     statewide average, as measured by air monitoring stations.

                     1980-1999
These Policies are intended to promote the fair treatment of all Californians and cover the full
spectrum of ARE activities.  While our primary focus is meeting ambient air quality standards
and reducing health risks from toxic air pollutants, efforts such as air monitoring and research
are needed to better understand the connections between air pollution and health.  Effective
enforcement  of air  pollution control  requirements  in all  communities  is  also  critical to
achieving  environmental justice.  Education and outreach complete the picture in terms of
providing  the opportunity for the full participation of all communities.  Finally, we recognize
our obligation to work closely with all stakeholders—communities,  environmental and public
health  organizations,  industry,  business owners,  other agencies,  and  all  other interested
parties—to successfully implement our Environmental Justice Policies.

ARE Policies and Actions for Environmental Justice
                                          171

-------
I.      It shall be the ARB's policy to integrate environmental justice into all of our
       programs, policies, and regulations.

       As an organization, we  will  make  environmental justice considerations a  standard
       practice in  the way we do business.   Our programs are comprehensive  and include
       adopting regulations,  funding  clean  air  projects  through  incentive  programs, and
       conducting  air monitoring, emissions  assessments,  employee training, enforcement,
       research, public outreach, and  education. In each program area, we will  keep an
       environmental justice perspective as we set priorities, identify program gaps, and assess
       the benefits and adverse impacts of our programs, policies, and regulations.

       Specific actions include the following:

       •  Add an  explicit discussion of whether proposed major programs, policies, and
          regulations treat fairly people of all races, cultures, geographic areas, and income
          levels, especially low-income and minority communities.

       •  Work with local air districts and stakeholders to address, as appropriate, community
          concerns  about air pollution emissions, exposures, and health  risks,  including
          enhanced public outreach.

       •  Work with stakeholders to  review current  ARE  programs to address  potential
          environmental justice  implications  and add  new or modified  elements consistent
          with these Policies where there are program gaps.

       •  Develop  and incorporate  an environmental justice  program element  into  our
          employee-training curriculum.

       •  Annually provide a staff briefing to the Board at a public  meeting regarding ongoing
          and planned activities. Issue a written annual status report identifying action items
          accomplished and a proposed work plan outlining the action items for the next year.
          The work plan shall include quantitative goals for emissions reductions  and promote
          the use of pollution-prevention strategies by ARE to achieve those goals.

       •  Conduct special air-monitoring studies in communities where environmental justice
          or other air-quality concerns exist, with the goal of assessing public  health risks.
          Compare  that information to relevant regional data.   Current studies  include
          Oakland, Barrio Logan (San Diego), Boyle Heights, and Wilmington.

       •   Work with local air districts to develop guidelines for implementation of AB 1390
          (Firebaugh, 2001.)  (This  new law provides that not less than 50 percent  of the
          funds for certain  mobile source programs,  such as the Carl  Moyer Air Quality
          Standards Attainment Program and programs for the purchase of reduced-emissions
                                           172

-------
           school buses, are expended in communities with the most significant exposure to air
           contaminants, including, but not limited to, low-income and minority communities.)

 II.    It shall be the ARB's policy to strengthen our outreach and education efforts in all
       communities,  especially  low-income  and  minority   communities,  so  that  all
       Californians  can fully participate in our public processes and share in the air
       quality benefits of our programs.

       We want to enhance the participation of the public  in State and local decisionmaking
       processes.  To accomplish  this,  we will solicit input   from  communities,  develop
       additional information on  air  quality  in  communities, make this information more
       accessible,  and educate communities on the public process used to make State and local
       decisions.  In  partnership  with local  air districts,  we  will provide  communities,
       including low-income and minority communities, the opportunity to participate in the
       decision-making processes.

       Specific actions include the following:

       •  Hold meetings in communities affected by our programs, policies, and regulations
          at times and in places  that encourage  public participation, such as evenings and
          weekends at centrally located community meeting rooms,  libraries, and schools.

       •  Assess the  need for and provide translation services at public meetings.

       •  Hold community meetings  to  update  residents  on the results of any  special air
          monitoring programs conducted in their neighborhood.

       •  In coordination with local  air districts, make staff available  to attend meetings of
.  !        community organizations  and  neighborhood groups  to  listen  to and,  where
          appropriate, act upon community concerns.

       •  Establish within the Chairman's Office of  Community  Health  a specific contact
          person for environmental justice issues.

       •  Increase public awareness of ARB's actions  in protecting public health through the
          K-12 education system and through outreach  opportunities at the community level.

       •  Make air-quality and regulatory information  available  to communities in an easily
          understood and useful format, including fact sheets, mailings, brochures, and web
          pages, in English and other languages

       •  Distribute fact sheets in English, and  other languages,  regarding the  Children's
          Environmental  Health  Program, the  Community  Health  Program,  and our
          Environmental Justice Policies.
                                          173

-------
m.
•  Develop and maintain a web site  dedicated  to  community health that  includes
   information  on  children's  health issues,  neighborhood air monitoring results,
   pollution prevention, risk reduction,  and environmental justice activities.

•  Develop and  maintain  a web  site that provides  access  to  the  best  available
   information about sources of air pollution in neighborhoods. Include on  the web-
   site ongoing  activities to improve  the quality of the information, and  note  the
   limitations and uncertainties associated with that information.

•  Allow, encourage, and promote community access to the best available information
   in our databases on air quality, emission inventory, and other information archives.

•  Distribute information in multiple  languages,  as needed,  on how  to contact the
   Chairman's  Office of Community  Health and our  Public  Information Office to
   obtain  information and assistance regarding the  Board's EJ programs,  including
   how to participate in public processes.

•  Create and distribute a simple, easy-to-read, and understandable public participation
   handbook.

•   Consistent with  State statutes, minimize,  reduce, and  where practicable,  eliminate
   fees for public information and  enhance  access to that information, and encourage
    local air districts to do the same.

It shall be the ARB's policy to work with local air  districts to meet health  based air
quality standards  and  reduce  health risks  from  toxic  air  pollutants in all
communities,   especially  low-income and  minority  communities,  through   the
adoption of control measures and the promotion of pollution prevention programs.

 Preventing and reducing air pollution is the Board's highest priority. In doing so, we
 are  committed to achieving environmental justice.  The  public health framework of our
 efforts to  reduce air pollution is the attainment of State  and federal ambient air quality
 standards  and reduction  of health  risks from toxic air  pollutants.  The framework
 includes a variety of measures  that must be adopted at  the local, State,  and federal
 level.  As part of these efforts, we must focus on both the  regional and neighborhood
 levels.

 In reducing statewide emissions of toxic air  pollutants, we will prioritize our efforts by
 focusing on those pollutants contributing the majority of the exposure and public health
 risk, including those pollutants identified by  the Office of  Environmental Health Hazard
 Assessment  under  the  Children's Environmental Health  Protection  Program  as
 potentially causing infants  and children  to be more susceptible  to  illness.  In the
                                           174

-------
 prioritization process,  we  will consider  ARE  and  local  air district  air  quality
 assessments and other available data.

 Specific actions include the following:
    Develop the ARE Clean Air Plan to assist in the achievement of federal and State
    ambient  air  quality  standards  and  to  reduce  health  risks  posed  by toxic
    pollutants.
air
 •   Prioritize  toxic air pollutant  control  efforts,  including  the  ARE Diesel  Risk
    Reduction Program, by targeting measures that provide immediate and achievable
    air-quality benefits, such as emissions reductions from transit buses, refuse trucks,
    and tanker trucks.

 •   Develop control measures for other mobile sources of diesel paniculate matter.

 •   Work with local air districts to develop control measures to reduce diesel particulate
    matter from stationary, portable, and marine diesel engines.

 •   Review, revise, and develop, as appropriate,  modeling tools and control measures
    for sources of toxic air pollutants  that may present significant near-source risks to
    residents and are common to communities across the State,  including consideration
    of proximity. For  example, ARE  is reviewing the control measure to reduce
    hexavalent    chromium   from   plating   facilities   and   evaluating  additional
    perchloroethylene emission reduction opportunities from dry-cleaning facilities.

 •   Review  existing  and  evaluate new  or  revised  control measures  for  toxic air
    pollutants  identified  by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
    (OEHHA)  under the  Children's  Environmental Health  Protection Program  as
    potentially causing infants and children  to be more susceptible to illness. These
    toxic  air pollutants  include lead,   acrolein,  diesel  particulate matter, polycyclic
    organic matter,  and dioxins.

•   Develop new control measures that will reduce exposure  to  toxic  air pollutants
    across the State. This analysis will include the  consideration of proximity of sources
    to sensitive  populations.  Currently under  development is an air toxics control
    measure (ATCM)  for formaldehyde from composite wood products. These  products
    are often used in portable buildings and manufactured housing and are of concern
    due to public exposure and health impacts to children.

•   As part of our pollution-prevention efforts, promote  and  encourage the deployment
    of zero- and near-zero emissions  technologies in  communities,  especially  low-
    income and minority communities.  These technologies include alternate power units
    for trucks and ZEVs [zero emissions vehicles].
                                    175

-------
      •   Work with the local air districts to implement incentive programs in communities,
          especially  low-income  and  minority  communities,  with  the  most  significant
          exposure to air pollution, consistent with AB 1390 (Firebaugh).

      •   Work with local air districts  to  establish a pilot  pollution-prevention  outreach
          program for auto body refinishers to minimize emissions from spray applications.

      •   Conduct special ambient dioxins monitoring and stationary sourcetesting study in
          California.

      •   Work with the Bureau of Automotive Repair to conduct additional low income
          vehicle  repair and  assistance programs and promote the Smog  Check Consumer
          Assistance Program in low-income and minority communities.

IV.   It shall be the ARB's policy to work with  the  local air districts in our respective
      regulatory jurisdictions to strengthen enforcement activities at the community level
      across the State.

      The ARE will work with local air districts to improve statewide compliance with all
      applicable air quality requirements for air pollution sources, whether under ARB or
      local  air district jurisdiction.  We want to  assure  that all  complaints are  promptly
       investigated and feedback is provided to the public on actions taken in response to those
       complaints.  We will review our own enforcement activities and redirect efforts where
       we can achieve a more direct community benefit and will incorporate an environmental
      justice element into our enforcement training curriculum.

       Specific actions include the following:

       *  In coordination with local air  districts and considering input from stakeholders,
          prioritize field  inspection audits to address statewide categories of facilities that may
          have significant localized impacts  and make those audit reports easily accessible to
          the public.                        !

       •  Conduct  roadside inspections  of heavy-duty  diesel vehicles in  all regions of the
          State, especially in low-income and minority communities.

       •  Develop  and  incorporate  an  environmental-justice awareness  element  into  our
          enforcement-training curriculum to promote fair enforcement for all communities.

       •  Support local air district efforts to ensure that when there is facility noncompliance,
          the air-pollution-reduction projects or mitigation fees imposed in  lieu of penalties
          will benefit the air quality of the impacted communities.
                                            176

-------
       •  Work with the local air districts to develop enhanced complaint resolution processes
          for addressing environmental justice issues,  including procedures that ARE staff
          will follow when complaints are made to the ARE.

       •  Work with the local air districts to  improve accessibility of information regarding
          enforcement  activities  and  actions,  including  notices  of  violations,  monetary
          penalties, and other settlements of those violations.

       •  Assist local air districts on specific issues of community concern.

V.     It shall be the ARB's policy to assess, consider, and reduce cumulative emissions,
       exposures, and health risks when developing and implementing our programs.

       While  health risks occur  from exposures to cumulative emissions  from all sources,
       motor vehicles are the single, largest contributor on a statewide  basis.   Current ARE
       air-quality  programs—diesel risk  reduction,  ozone  attainment,  particulate  matter
       attainment, zero- or low-emission  motor vehicles,  air toxics control measures,  and
       consumer products—all  help  to improve the air quality and  reduce  cumulative health
       risks statewide.  Nevertheless, current State and federal air  quality  standards are still
       exceeded in  many areas  of California, and there  is  a  general consensus that the
       statewide health  risk posed by toxic air pollutants remains  too high.  In addition, some
       communities  experience higher exposures than others  as  a  result of the cumulative
       impacts of air pollution from multiple sources—cars,  trucks, trains, ships,  off-road
       equipment, industrial and commercial facilities, paints, household products, and others.
       We will continue  to work with local air districts to  reduce emissions  as needed to
       achieve and maintain State and federal air quality standards.  For air toxics, we  will
       continue to assess emissions and the associated public exposure and health risk. We will
       look for new opportunities to reduce cumulative health risk in all communities  and to
       achieve emissions reductions  where such reductions are shown to benefit public health,
       consistent with existing statutory authorities.

       We must improve our ability to understand the cumulative  public health  impacts of air
       pollution by better assessing emissions, exposures, and health  risks within communities.
       The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment will help us define the health
       risks for potentially significant toxic air pollutants, and we will reduce emissions where
       such emissions reductions are shown to benefit public  health.  We will provide  this
       information publicly in an easily understood way.  As many of these  activities are
       dependent  upon  data available at  the local level, we will work very closely with the
       local air districts to prioritize and focus resources on those activities that will provide
       the greatest public health benefit.
                                          177

-------
VI.
Specific actions include the following:    \

•  Publicly release  and place on the ARE  web-site maps showing estimated cancer
   health risks on a regional basis, using the best available scientific methodologies arid
   noting the limitations and uncertainty associated with the data and methodologies.

•  Develop  and place on  the  ARE web-site local  and regional maps showing air
   pollution emissions sources using the ARE emission inventory database.

•  Develop  technical tools  for  performing  assessments  of  cumulative  emissions,
   exposure, and health risk  on a neighborhood scale and provide maps showing the
   results at the neighborhood level.  Such  tools will be validated and peer-reviewed
   prior to use as a regulatory tool.

•  Conduct  field studies to support the  air quality  modeling efforts in communities
   throughout the State, including  low-income  and minority communities.  Current
   studies underway include  Barrio Logan in San Diego County and Wilmington in
   Los Angeles County.   ,

•  Update mapping data on an ongoing basis.

•   Identify necessary ARE risk reduction and research priorities based on the results of
    the neighborhood assessments and other information.

It shall be the ARB's policy to work with local land-use agencies, transportation
agencies,  and  air  districts to develop ways to assess,  consider, and reduce
cumulative  emissions,  exposures,  and  health risks from air  pollution through
general plans, permitting, and other local actions.

We recognize that local agencies have a primary role  in decisions affecting land use,
 community health, and  welfare.  Local land-use agencies and transportation agencies
 are  directly responsible for the  planning and  siting  of new air pollution sources, and
 local  air districts also play an  important role by issuing  permits for new industrial
 sources of air pollution.  As such, we are committed to working as partners with these
 agencies and other stakeholders to develop the technical tools and guidance necessary to
 consider the cumulative impacts of local sources of air pollution.  The technical tools
 and guidance are intended to assist the local agencies in their planning and permitting
 actions, including the consideration of siting alternatives and air pollution mitigation
 measures, and shall be peer reviewed and technically valid.

 We  will  develop  these  technical tools and guidance to  address,  as appropriate,
 cumulative  emissions, exposures, and health  risks  from sources of air pollution. We
 will follow ARB's existing science-based approach of evaluating public health impacts.
 This  approach  will ensure  that issues  are addressed from  a broad, programmatic
                                           178

-------
VII.
 perspective and provide  certainty  to local agencies, the business community, and  the
 public that decisions regarding cumulative impacts are addressed fairly and consistently.
 Once the technical tools and guidance are jointly developed and peer-reviewed, we will
 work with local agencies to best  incorporate them into their existing permitting and
 land-use processes.

 Specific actions include the following:

 •   Conduct joint programs with local air districts, land-use  agencies (i.e., cities and
    counties),  school districts,  transportation agencies,  and  other stakeholders  to
    understand  local  issues  and  develop  ways   to  incorporate  cumulative-impacts
    analyses into local air district and land use agency processes.

 •   Provide education and outreach to  local agencies on the use of the technical tools
    and guidance in land-use decisions.

 •   Work with the local air districts to provide technical guidance to local agencies on
    measures that could be used to reduce or eliminate air quality impacts for specific
    types of sources.

 •   Work with the local air districts and others to maintain and compile a list of possible
    mitigation measures to reduce air pollution impacts for specific types of projects and
    the siting of sensitive receptors  (e.g.,  schools).

 •   Work with Cal/EPA  and  the  Office  of Planning  and Research to  address
    environmental justice matters in city  and county general plans, as required by AB
    1553 (Keeley. 2001).

 It  shall be  the ARB's policy to support research and data collection needed  to
 reduce cumulative emissions, exposure, and health risks, as appropriate, in all
 communities, especially low-income and minority communities.

The ARB's health  research  program continues to advance our ability to identify and
 understand air pollution's health effects.  California's communities have a diversity of
sensitive populations,  and the health research  program  is hcreasing our understanding
 of  the  health effects of  air  pollution  on  those populations,  including children,
asthmatics, those with heart and lung disease, elderly, and other groups that may have a
special  sensitivity to  air  pollution.    However,  more research is needed to better
characterize the variety of potential air  pollution exposures  within specific communities
and people's health status  as it relates to air pollution.
                                           179

-------
      Specific actions include the following:

      •   Investigate non-cancer health effects associated with acute,  peak pollutant episodes
          and long-term,  low-level exposures that may trigger increases in the incidence of
          respiratory problems and neurological, developmental, and reproductive disorders.

      •   Characterize near-source dispersion patterns for toxic air pollutants, from selected
          point sources, area sources, and roadways.

      •   Develop  better methods  to monitor  community  exposures  through controlled
          scientific studies. To support this effort, develop continuous monitoring systems and
          miniaturized monitoring technologies.

      •   Identify biomarkers for air pollutants and assess individual exposures within specific
          communities.

      •   Develop   geographic-based  information  systems  for  assessing  health  based
          information within  communities,  and correlating  that information to air pollution
          and socioeconomic factors.

      •   Conduct  periodic  surveys  to establish a baseline  and to  measure  progress  in
          reducing air pollution-related health concerns, with initial emphasis in low-income
          and minority communities.

      •   Refine models  to estimate cumulative emissions, exposures, and health risks at the
          neighborhood level, compare those risks to the risk at the regional level, and  have
          those models peer-reviewed.

CONCLUSION

The ARE is committed to integrating environmental justice into  all of its programs, policies,
and  regulations.    We will  continue to  improve  our outreach  efforts  in all  California
communities, ensuring that everyone has an opportunity to participate fully in the development
and implementation of those programs, policies and regulations. As an oversight agency and
partner with local air districts, and as an advisory agency to land-use agencies, we will work
with these and other stakeholders to jointly develop the technical tools and guidance necessary
to consider the cumulative air pollution  impacts of  local sources  of air pollution.  We will
participate in  the Cal/EPA Environmental Justice Working Group as  environmental justice
policies are developed for the entire agency.  Even while  this work is being done, we are
taking steps today to reduce exposure and health  risks in communities.  Our goal is to ensure
that all Californians, especially children and the elderly, can live,  work, learn, and play in a
healthful environment.
                                           180

-------
ENDNOTE
1 Senate Bill 115, Soils, 1999; California Government Code ง 65040.12ฎ.
                                          181

-------
182

-------
                                    APPENDIX G

           ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE - CALIFORNIA
                     ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COMPACT
Whereas, human health and quality of life are dependent upon a healthful environment; and

Whereas, no individual or community should bear a disproportionate burden of environmental
pollution; and

Whereas, all people are entitled to  clean  air, land,  water and  food;  to uncontaminated
neighborhoods and work places; and to public open space and recreation; and

Whereas, all people regardless of income, race or ethnicity are entitled to a clean,  healthful
environment; and

Whereas, all individuals, businesses, communities and levels of government must collaborate,
communicate and cooperate on environmental issues of mutual concern; and the environmental
agenda must reflect the priorities of all communities in the region including the priorities of low-
income communities, communities of color and indigenous peoples;  and

Whereas, the education, nurturing and development of youth must be a central concern in the
formulation of sustainable policies into the future; and

Whereas, it is imperative to have a strong economy, a healthful environment and a just society;
environmental values and protection of public health must be an integral part of economic and
social policy; and

Whereas, individuals, communities,  businesses and government must be accountable for the
environmental consequences of their policies and practices; and

Whereas, a healthful environment encompasses clean  air, clean  water  and clean land, and
problems cannot be shifted from one environmental medium to another; and

Whereas, all individuals and  communities must be equal partners in  the development and
implementation  of public policy and public decision-making on issues affecting them, including
environmental needs assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement and evaluation; and

Whereas, information and resources must be made available to neighborhoods and communities
to evaluate projects and policies that affect them; and

June 3, 1999
                                         183

-------
Whereas, policy-making bodies,  such as boards, commissions  and councils, should fairly
represent the demographic diversity of the region as well as afford community groups the same
status and treatment as business or government entities who have matters before that body; arid

Whereas, all workers are entitled to a safe and healthful work environment, free of significant
environmental hazards  or unlawful risks, without being forced to choose between an unsafe
workplace and unemployment; and           I

Whereas, employees have a right to know about environmental dangers from  the workplace;
and

Whereas, by adopting principles of environmental justice it is affirmed that actions and policies
must be based on mutual respect and justice for all; and

Whereas, Environmental Justice policies and programs must be founded on sound science; and

Whereas, pollution prevention must be a priority; and

Whereas,  environmental justice  is a  cornerstone for  a sustainable urban environment  for
current and future generations.
Therefore, we the  frame of organization)  agree  to include environmental equity sind
justice as a policy of our organization.

Approved this	day of	year.
Signature
Title
 Available at 

 June3.1999
                                          184

-------
                                    APPENDIX H

                                   MEMORANDUM

 TO:          All Cal/EPA Employees
 FRQM:       Winston H. Hickox
              Agency Secretary

 DATE:       March 29, 2002
 SUBJECT:    CAL/EPA'S COMMITMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
 California  has  long  been a pioneer in taking initiative  to reduce environmental and public
 health risks posed by air and water pollution, solid and hazardous  waste  management, and
 pesticide application.  In this tradition, our Golden State stands as one of the nation's leaders
 on the issue of environmental justice, being one of the first states in the Nation to have passed
 legislation  to codify environmental justice in state statute; in fact, Governor Davis signed six
 bills related to environmental justice since 1999.                              i

 Cal/EPA is firmly committed to the achievement of environmental justice.
 Environmental justice for all Californians is an Agency priority.

 Accordingly, we must  continue to seek opportunities to implement  environmental justice
 principles,  especially those with a concerted, cross-media approach to ensure the integration
 of environmental justice into  all programs, policies,  and  activities within our  Boards,
 Departments, and Office (BDOs).

 Our environmental justice mission reflects the Agency's commitment to this issue:

       "To accord the highest respect and value to every individual and community,  the
       Cal/EPA and its BDOs shall  conduct our public health and environmental
       protection programs, policies and activities in a manner that is designed to
       promote equality and afford fair treatment, Ml access and full protection to all
       Californians, including low income and minority populations. "

As I've stated before, "Protecting human health  and  the environment is a  job that is never
done"  and  indeed, the  opportunities  for analysis  and action for environmental justice in
California  are  varied and great.   The Goal of  our mission will be attained  when  all
Californians, regardless of race, culture, or income, enjoy the same degree of protection from
environmental and health hazards and equal access to our decision making processes.

Environmental justice is  defined in statute as, "The  fair treatment  of people of all races,
cultures,  and  incomes  with  respect  to the development,  adoption, implementation,  and
                                         185

-------
enforcement  of environmental laws, regulations  and policies."  (Government Code Section
65040.12)              ;                  ... v-       ,    „   ;  t  ..   .  ..

Statute obligates the Agency and its BDOs to do the following:

    •   Conduct aU programs, policies, and .activities within  Cal/EPA and it's BDOs in a
       manner that ensures the fair treatment 
-------
      • •  In light  of our State's current ecdnorhic situation, we must  be-more Vigilant itf
          ensuring environmental justice remains  a priority  and resources continue  to  be
          directed this key issue.

 I have asked each of the Boards, Departments, and Office to incorporate environmental justice
 into their overall strategic plans.  This  has  been accomplished and now, we need to move
 forward in earnest to implement those plans;  To assist in our efforts, there are a number of
 resources I recommend you become familiar witfr arid-take: advantage of;as follows:

    •  The  Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice  (IWG):  I  chair this
  f     group along with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research Director/including
       all the heads  of the  Boards, Departments,  and  Office  within  Cal/EPA1.   IWG  is
       responsible for guiding programmatic and policy development related to environmental
       justice;
    *  The  External Cal/EPA  Advisory  Committee  on  Environmental  Justice:  This
       Committee  is  made   up  of various  EJ  stakeholders  from  community  groups,
       environmental  organizations,  business, local/regional planning agencies, air districts,
       and  Certified  Unified Program-Agencies  to  provide  advice and  consultation  on
       environmental justice to Cal/EPA;                r   -                    -1 !
    •  The Cal/EPA  Environmental Justice Website
       (www.calepa.ca.gov/EnvJustice/):  The website contains the most'current information
       on environmental justice  concerns including a Calendar of Events on  environmental
       justice occurring throughout the State.
    •  Cal/EPA Environmental Justice Fundamentals Training Program           /.
      • (http://epanet/EnvJustice/training): The training is offered at various times throughout
       the year to bring greater awareness of environmental justice-issues" within Cal/EPA.

Let's continue to work in  this spirit  to ensure environmental justice is not a series  of paper
exercises,  but is  a tangible goal attained for and by all Californians, The Assistant Secretary
for  Environmental Justice, Romel Pascual, and his staff are available to assistyou.
 ^appreciate yout continued support in this matter.
                                         187

-------
188

-------
                               BIBLIOGRAPHY
 Ballogg, Miles.  City of Clearwater, Brownfields Coordinator.  Interview, April 11
       2002.

 Brandt, Renee.  City of Los Angeles, Air Quality Division, Environmental Supervisor.
       Interview, March 5, 2002.

 Brown, Dr. C Perry.  Florida A & M University. Interview, March 7, 2002.

 Byrd, Vanessa.  California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic
       Substances Control, Education and Outreach Unit, Chief.  Interview,
       February 15, 2002.

 Caffee, Valorie. New Jersey Work Environment Council, Environmental and
       Economic Justice Alliance, Director of Organizing. Interview, January 8, 2002.

 California Air Resources Board.  Neighborhood Assessment Work Plan.  June, 2000.
       Available at www.arb.ca.gov/ch/napworkplan.htm.

 California Air Resources Board.  Policies and Actions for Environmental Justice.
       December 13, 2001. Available at www.arb.ca.gov.

 California Environmental Protection Agency.  Accomplishments and Priorities.
       January thru June, 2001.

 California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control.
       Public Participation Manual.  October, 2001.  Available at
       www.dtsc.ca.gov/lawsregulationspolicies/index.html.

 California Environmental Protection Agency.  Memorandum: Environmental Justice
       Mission Statement and Program Elements. Undated.

 California Environmental Protection Agency.  Strategic Vision.  July 2000.

California Environmental Protection Agency. The History of the California
       Environmental Protection Agency.  Available at
       www. calepa. ca. gov/about/historyo 1/calepa. htm.

City of Clearwater Brownfields Program.  City of Clearwater Brownfields Area
       Environmental Justice Action Agenda.  September 7, 2000,
                                      189

-------
Cole, Luke.  Center for Race, Poverty and the Environment, Director. Interview,
       February 13, 2002.

Communities for a Better Environment.  Holding Our Breathe:  Environmental Injustice
       Exposed in Southeast Los Angeles.  July 1998.

Dooley, Marlen. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,          • .: ,
       General Counsel. Interview, January 7, 2002.             ,

Dorsey, Michael.  Department of Environmental Health, San Diego County, Chief.
       Interview. February 14, 2002;                      ,.'"•••'•

Eggelletion.  Jr., Josephus. Broward County, District 9, Commissioner.  Interview,.
       March 12, 2002.

Environmental Health Coalition.  Communities at Risk.  April 1993.

Environmental Law Institute.  Opportunities For Advancing Environmental Justice:
       An Analysis of U.S. EPA Statutory Authority.  November 2001.

Executive Order 12898. Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
       Populations and Low Income Populations. 1994.

Florida A&M University Environmental Sciences Institute, Center for Environmental  .
       Equity and Justice. tHomepage available at http www.famu.edu/acad/colleges/.
 Florida Department of Environmental Protection.  Florida Brownfields Redevelopment
       Act 2001 Annual,Report. 'January 31, 2002.                           -

 Florida Environmental Equity and Justice Commission Final Report.

 Goldblatt, Barbara. Indiana Department of Environmental Management,
       Environmental Justice Program,  Program Facilitator.  Interview, February 4,
       2002.                                 .

 Gragg, Richard.  Florida A&M, Center for Environmental Equity and Justice,
       Director.  Interview, March 7, 2002.                '

 Hall, Malinda. California Environmental Protection Agency, Office  of the Secretary,
        Policy and Intergovernmental Relations. Interview, February 15,  2002.

 Harvey, Richard.  U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency Region 4,
        South Florida Office, Director.  Interview. March 11, 2002.
                                       190

-------
Harris, Robert.  Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Vice President of
       Environmental Affairs.  Interview, February 14, 2002.   '-•:.-

Indiana Department of Environmental Management. Clean Air Bulletin.  Volume 3,
       Issue 1, August 2000.         ,   ;                 •        ,   s.    ,
                                       .• ,  -'••        '          I :      ,
Indiana Department of'Environmental Management. Compliance/Enforcement
       Planning Process.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management. Draft Facilitation Protocol'.
       (outline) for Resolution of Environmental Justice Disputes.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management. Draft Operating Procedures for
       Enhanced Public Participation.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management. Environmental Performance
       Partnership Agreement: A Strategic Partnership between  U.S. EPA Region V
       and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management. 2001-2003.  ;.  .  "

Indiana Department of Environmental Management. Getting Involved in Environmental
       Decision Making: Highlights from IDEM's  Guide for Citizen Participation.
       Undated.  Available at www.in.gov/idem/guides/publicparticipation.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management. ••, IDEM's .Guide for Citizen :   ',
       Participation:  How to Make Your Voice Heard on Community Environmental
       Issues. 2001.  Available atwww.in.gov/idem/guides/publicparticipation.

Indianapolis Urban League Environmental Coalition.  Race,  Income and Toxic Air
       Releases in Indianapolis, Indiana.  May 2000.
                           *'..••           '          -    ' ' -.' -.'.'  '.""*   f,
International City County Managers Association.  Righting the Wrong: A Model Plan
       for Environmental Justice in Brownfields Redevelopment.  2001.

Kaplan, Lori. Indiana Department of Environmental Management,  Commissioner.
       Interview, April 9, 2002.                                             ;

Kennedy, James. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency,  Redevelopment
       Director.  Interview, February 13, 2002.

Krenz, Jerry. South Florida Water Management District. Interview, March  11, 2002.

Laramore, Cynthia.  South Florida Action, Executive Director.  Interview; April 1,
       2002.              ;           ,
                                     191

-------
Lowry, Edwin F. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Toxic
      Substances Control, Executive Office, Director.  Interview, February 11, 2002.

Lyons, Pamela.  New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Equal
      Opportunity, Contract Assistance and Environmental Equity,  Director.
      Interview, January 7, 2002.

Lyou, Joseph. California League of Conservation Voters Education  Fund, Director of
      Programs. Interview, March 4, 20021

Martin, Jr., Frederick.  City of Camden, Division of Planning, Director.  Interview,
      January 8, 2002.

Marxen, Jim.  California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic
      Substances Control, Public Participation, Chief.  Interview, February 15, 2002.

McClain-Hill, Cynthia.  McClain-Hill Associates, Attorney.  Interview, March 5,
      2002.

McCloskey, Donald. Public Service Enterprise, Inc.  Interview, April 3, 2002.

Monahan, Carol.  California Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the
      Secretary, Law Enforcement and Counsel.  Interview, February 15, 2002.

Mulligan, Mary. Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Interim
      Advisory Committee on Environmental Justice, Member.  Interview,  March 27,
      2002.

Mundell, John. Mundell and Associates, President.  Interview, March 27, 2002.

National Academy of Public Administration, environment.gov:
      Transferring Environmental Protection for the 21st Century. November 2000.

National Academy of Public Administration.. Environmental Justice  in EPA  Permitting:
      Reducing Pollution in High-Risk Communities is Integral to the Agency's
      Mission.  December 2001.

National Academy of Public Administartion. Setting Priorities, Getting Results:
      A New Direction for EPA.  1995.

National Advisory Council on Environmental Policy  and Technology.  Next  Steps for
      EPA, State and Local Environmental Justice Programs. March 1, 1999.

Neltner, Tom. Improving Kids'  Environment, Executive Director.  Interview, April 2,
                                      192

-------
      2002.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  Administrative Order No.
      1998-15.  October 22, 1998.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  Administrative Order No.
      1999-05.  April 27, 1999.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  Administrative Order No. 2001-
      01.  February 8, 2000.

Nicholson Choice, Marybel. Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Shareholder. Interview, April
      1, 2002.

O'Rourke, Pamela.  Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Senior
      Environmental Manager.  Interview,  February 4, 2002.

Owens, Michael.  Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Deputy
      Ombudsman. Interview, March 11, 2002.

Pacific Gas & Electric Company.  Environmentaljustice Procedure. September 2001.

Parry, David.  Indiana Department of Environmental Management,  Environmental
      Permit Coordinator^  Interview,  February 4, 2002.

Pascual, Romel.  California Environmental Protection Agency,  Environmental Justice
      Program, Assistant Secretary. Interview, February 12,  2002.

Perlin, Susan A., et al.  "Distribution of Industrial Air Emissions by Income and Race
      in the United States:  An Approach Using the Toxic Release Inventory,"
      Environmental Science and Technology, Vo. 29, no. 1,  1995.

Peter, Ellen.  "Implementing Environmental Justice:  The New Agenda for California
      State Agencies," Golden Gate University Law Review, 2000.

Pomar, Olga.  Camden  Regional Legal  Services, Attorney.  Interview, March 14,
      2002.

Porras, Carlos.  Communities for a Better Environment, Executive  Director.
      Interview, March 4,  2002.

Register, Roger. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Brownfields
      Liaison.  Interview, March 8, 2002.
                                      193

-------
Robinson, Felicia.  Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Legal Affairs,
       Deputy Commissioner.  Interview,  March 4, 2002.

Robinson, Larry.  Florida A & M, Environmental Sciences Institute, Director.
       Interview, March 7, 2002.

Rogers, Jan.  U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency Region 4, South Florida Office,
       Waste Programs Coordinator.  Interview, March 11, 2002.

Ruhl, Suzi.  Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, President. Interview,
       March 8, 2002.

Sanders, Bonnie. South Camden Citizens in Action, President.  Interview,
       March 15, 2002.

Shinn, Robert C. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,
       Commissioner. Interview, January 7, 2002.

Sondermeyer, Gary.  New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Chief of
       Staff.  Interview, January 7, 2002.

Sparrow, Malcolm K. The Regulatory Craft:  Controlling Risks, Solving Problems,
       and Managing Compliance.  Brookings Institute Press, 2000.

Steward, Rev. Al.  Waterfront South Neighborhood Partnership, Executive Director.
       Interview, January 8, 2002.

South Coast Air Quality Management District;  An Air Toxics Control Plan for the Next
       Ten Years.  March 2000. Available at www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/atcp.html.

South Coast Air Quality Management District.  Eight Strategic Alliance Initatives.
       February 1, 2002.  Available at
       www. aqmd. go v/news l/strategic_alliance_inita tives. htm.

South Coast Air Quality Management District  Environmental Justice Task Force Final
       Report.  August 13, 1999. Available at
       http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/990824a.html.

South Coast Air Quality Management District.  Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study.
       Undated. Available at  www.aqmd.ca.gov.

Terry, Lynn. California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board,
                                      194

-------
      Executive Office, Deputy Executive Officer.  Interview, February 11, 2002.
Tuck, Cindy.  California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance (CCEEB),
       General Counsel.  Interview, February 15, 2002.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the South Florida Water Management District.
       Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan: Environmental and Economic
       Equity Program Management Plan. August 2001.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the South Florida Water Management District.
       Public Outreach Program Management Plan.  August 2001.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V.  Agenda for Action.  1996.

Veal, Keith. Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Environmental
       Justice Director.  Interview, February 4, 2002.

Wallerstein, Barry R. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Operating
       Executive. Interview, March 26, 2002.

Welles, Holly. Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Environmental Policy Specialist.
       Interview, February 14, 2002.
                                      195

-------
196

-------