iw''
\ ^
^ PRO^
Office of Environmental Justice
Region IV
Community Roundtable
on
Environmental Justice Issues
May 6,1994
Atlanta, Georgia
-------
BACKGROUND
1
REGION IV AND OEJ
DRAFT REGIONAL POLICY
PRESIDENT CLINTON'S
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12898
4
FEDERAL LEGISLATION,
REGULATIONS, EXEC. ORDERS
5
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE LEGISLATION
ENVIRONMENTAL
EQUITY/JUSTICE ISSUES
NOTES
-------
REGIONAL PURPOSE OF MEETING
ADDRESS/DISCUSS BROADLY STATED
ISSUES AND PROPOSED ACTIONS
IMPROVE REGION/COMMUNITY
COMMUNICATION (OPPORTUNITIES TO
HEAR, PRIORITIZE)
IDENTIFY SPECIFIC ACTIONS FOR
REGION AND COMMUNITY
ORGANIZATIONS
-------
EXPECTED OUTCOME
DEVELOP REGIONAL/COMMUNITY
OBJECTIVES FROM ISSUES PREVIOUSLY
IDENTIFIED (THROUGH FACILITATION)
DEVELOP AND IMPROVE PARTNERSHIPS
WITH ORGANIZATIONS THAT REPRESENT
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COMMUNITIES
DEVELOP ACTION AGENDA FOR REGION
AND COMMUNITIES (PRIORITIES,
RESOURCES, ETC.)
IDENTIFY APPROPRIATE NEXT STEPS
-------
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
NATIONAL
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12898
ADMINISTRATOR BROWNER'S MEETING
AGENCY'S PRIORITIES
0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
0 ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION
0 POLLUTION PREVENTION
0 STRONG SCIENCE AND DATA IN
DECISION MAKING
0 BUILDING BETTER PARTNERSHIPS
° REINVENTING EPA MANAGEMENT
REGIONAL
ESTABLISHMENT OF REGIONAL OFFICE
ESTABLISHMENT OF REGIONAL QUALITY
ACTION TEAM
ESTABLISHMENT OF REGIONAL ORDER
FUNDED PROJECTS
-------
p
Cardinal
-------
BACKGROUND
What Is the History of EPA's Use of the Term Environmental Equity?
The term Environmental Equity was popularized with the publication of
Robert Bullard's 1990 book entitled Dumping in Dixie. Chapter 4 of
Bullard's book, "The Environmental Equity Movement," presents the
results of Bullard's survey of minorities and the fairness or equity of
environmental policies.
Other terms, such as Environmental Justice and Environmental Racism,
are sometimes used to communicate concern about the fairness of
environmental policies. EPA definitions of the terms Environmental
Equity, Environmental Justice, and Environmental Racism are presented
later in this section.
Proposed legislation would change the name of the Office of
Environmental Equity to the Office of Environmental Justice.
What Is the Genesis of the Environmental Equity Movement?
The Environmental Equity movement crystallized in 1982 in opposition to
the proposed siting of a landfill for PCB-contaminated soil in Warren
County, North Carolina. The soil had become contaminated as the result
of the dumping of PCB-contaminated oil on North Carolina roadways.
North Carolina Governor James B. Hunt decided to locate the landfill in
Warren County's Afton community, which was more than 84 percent
African-American. At that time, African-Americans comprised 63.7
percent of the Warren County population and 24.2 percent of the State
population. Some scientists questioned the suitability of the Afton
location because of the high water table in the area (5-10 feet below the
surface) and because Afton residents obtained drinking water from local
wells. Large protest demonstrations, which resulted in the jailing of more
than 400 protesters, were not able to halt the construction and opening
of the landfill.
The 1982 demonstrations over the Warren County landfill prompted
District of Columbia Delegate Walter E. Fauntroy to initiate a General
Accounting Office (GAO) study of hazardous waste landfill siting in EPA
Region IV. The GAO study identified four offsite hazardous waste
landfills in the Region. African-Americans constituted the majority of the
population in three of the four communities where the landfills were
located. (African-Americans make up about one-fifth of the population in
EPA Region IV.)
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
2-1
-------
BACKGROUND
Subsequent protests and continuing concern about the fairness of facility
siting decisions influenced the decision of the United Church of Christ to
sponsor its 1987 landmark study showing a strong correlation between
minority status (e.g., African-American, Hispanic, or Native American) and
the presence of toxic waste in the community. The United Church of
Christheirt study showed that the racial composition of a community was
more strongly correlated with commercial hazardous waste management
activities than other variables, such as household income.
The papers given at the 1990 Conference on Race and the Incidence of
Environmental Hazards, held at the University of Michigan, raised a
variety of other types of Environmental Equity issues. The issues
included: the air pollution exposures of minorities; the adequacy of water
pollution discharge limits when minority subpopulations consume
relatively large amount of fish; the dumping of toxic waste in African
countries; the pesticide exposures of farmworkers; and the contamination
of Indian lands caused by uranium mining and milling.
Bullard's Dumping in Dixie, published in 1990, is a study of
environmentalism in the African-American community. It examines how
African-American residents in five southern communities confronted the
problem of facilities posing environmental and human health threats.
Bullard's study serves to challenge several popular beliefs about the
environmental movement in minority communities.
First, Bullard shows that in the majority of cases, minorities are not
forced to choose between polluting facilities and economic opportunities.
In most cases, the polluting facilities located in minority communities
employ small numbers of minorities from these communities and do not
provide the communities with substantial economic support in the form of
high tax payments or other benefits. Second, protests against these
facilities are organized and led by indigenous social groups. The role of
national environmental groups such as Greenpeace, the Citizens
Clearinghouse for Hazardous Waste, and the Sierra Club has been to
help indigenous grassroots organizations to focus media attention on
their problems.
The publication of the September 21, 1993, edition of the National Law
Journal raised new Environmental Equity concerns. In a special
investigative report entitled "Unequal Protection," a series of articles
presented data showing that penalties for violations of environmental
laws are much higher in White communities than in minority communities
and that the disparity occurs by race and not by income. The National
Law Journal also presented data showing that abandoned hazardous
waste sites in minority areas take 20 percent longer to be placed on the
2-2
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
-------
BACKGROUND
Superfund National Priority List than in White areas and that containment
rather than permanent treatment is more often the preferred cleanup
method in minority areas than in White areas.
In the last few years, many community groups comprised of large
numbers of minorities have formed to oppose the siting of hazardous
and solid waste treatment and disposal facilities in their neighborhoods
and to take action against existing polluting facilities. These groups often
have worked outside of established channels such as local zoning
boards, State environmental agencies, and mainstream environmental
organizations, which they believe have been unresponsive to their
concerns. For example, the Southwest Organizing Project in
Albuquerque, New Mexico, traced formaldehyde contamination in
drinking water to a particleboard plant. The organization was successful
in getting the company to agree to an urban groundwater reclamation
project. In another case, the Nashville Coalition for Environmental
Justice appealed to the U.S. Department of Justice to oppose the 2-year
extension of a municipal solid waste landfill permit in the Bordeaux area
of Nashville because members believed that local and State government
officials had failed to stop the facility from polluting in the past. More
recently, the Hispanic residents of Kettleman City, California, have
successfully blocked the construction of a hazardous waste incinerator in
their community.
Environmental Equity issues have recently been raised in newspaper and
magazine articles (including the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall
Street Journal, and Newsweek), television news programs, and talk
shows (MacNeill/Lehrer Report, ABC Nightly News with Peter Jennings,
and a talk show hosted by Jesse Jackson). Local and national
conferences and Congressional hearings have also been held to explore
Environmental Equity issues. Federal and State agencies have started to
respond to organizations and to individuals raising Environmental Equity
concerns and to the publicity these concerns have received.
What Is the History of EPA's Response to Environmental Equity
Concerns?
EPA responded to a 1987 appeal from the United Church of Christ to
address problems posed by the large number of hazardous waste
facilities in minority communities by pointing out that the Agency already
had a number of programs relating to minority concerns. These
programs included the Indian Task Force, the Office of Civil Rights, and
the faculty internship program with Historically Black Colleges and
Universities.
Environmental Equity Handbook • September 1993
2-3
-------
BACKGROUND
However, in response to an appeal from a group of scholars (known as
the Michigan Coalition) attending the 1990, Conference on Race and the
Incidence of Environmental Hazards that EPA address issues related to
environmental risks and minority and low-income communities, EPA
formed an Environmental Equity Workgroup. The Workgroup was
charged with investigating whether minority and low-income groups were
exposed to disproportionate environmental risks, and developing
methods of addressing the disproportionate risks that were found. One
of the recommendations made by the Workgroup was that EPA form an
Office of Environmental Equity to further study and address
disproportionate risks. The Office of Environmental Equity was formed
on November 1, 1992. It is the newest EPA program office.
The mission, activities, and functions of the Office of Environmental
Equity are currently based on Workgroup recommendations, findings
with respect to methods of identifying and addressing Environmental
Equity issues, and the policies of the new Administration. The mission,
activities, and functions of the Office may change as additional
Environmental Equity issues are identified through research studies and
as legislation and Executive Orders are issued.
What Is EPA's Position on Environmental Equity?
Environmental Equity is one of the key policy themes of EPA
Administrator Browner. On May 6, 1993, Administrator Browner testified
before the Government Operations Committee of the House of
Representatives in support of creating a Cabinet Department of the
Environment. Administrator Browner stated that EPA must do more to
weave Environmental Equity into ail aspects of the Agency's operations,
including rulemaking, permitting, enforcement, education, hiring, and
outreach.
In addition, under the Administrator's leadership, EPA has acted to
establish an interagency group to address Environmental Equity issues
germane to all Federal agencies.
How Does EPA Define Environmental Equity, Environmental Justice,
Environmental Racism, a Minority Community, and a Low-Income
Community?
The Office of Environmental Equity has proposed the following definitions
for Environmental Justice, Environmental Equity, Environmental Racism,
Minority Communities, and Low-Income Communities to the
Environmental Equity Workgroup.
2-4
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
-------
BACKGROUND
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE is the fair treatment of people of all races,
income, and cultures with respect to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair
treatment implies that no person or group of people should shoulder a
disproportionate share of the negative environmental impacts resulting
from the execution of this country's domestic and foreign policy
programs.
ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY is the equal environmental protection of all
individuals, groups, or communities regardless of race, ethnicity, or
economic status, from environmental hazards.
ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM is any environmental policy, practice, or
directive that, intentionally or unintentionally, differentially impacts or
disadvantages individuals, groups, or communities based on race, color,
or ethnicity. It also refers to exclusionary and restrictive practices that
limit the participation by people of color on decision-making boards,
commissions, and the staff of Government agencies with responsibilities
in the areas of environmental policies, programs, and permits.
MINORITY COMMUNITIES are communities whose composition is at
least 25% comprised of populations classified by the U.S. Census Bureau
as Black, Hispanic, Asian and Pacific Islander, American Indian, Eskimo,
Aleut, and other nonwhite persons.
LOW-INCOME COMMUNITIES are communities with an aggregated
mean income level for a family of four that correlates to $13,359 (which
can be adjusted through the poverty index of the U.S. Census Bureau by
using a standard of living percentage change where applicable for
different geographical regions of the country).
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
2-5
-------
^tosw
.
vSE;
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
345COURTLANOSTREET NE
ATLANTA GEORGIA 30365
MEMORANDUM
DATE : J „ _
>^t
33
SUBJECT: Office of Environmental Justice
FROM:
Patrick M. Tobin
Acting Regional Administrator
TO: Division/Office Directors
Recently, I established the Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ)
and appointed Vivian Malone Jones as Director. This office will
have primary responsibility for developing and coordinating a
program for achieving environmental justice within the Region.
The OEJ will be responsible for coordinating communication,
outreach, education and training on equity issues and concerns.
The Director will serve as the principal advisor to Senior
Managers on the impacts of environmental risks, programs,
regulations and legislation on racial minority and low-income
populations.
I am designating the Enforcement Decision Team to be responsible
for making recommendations to me on policies, guidelines, and
Regional initiatives with respect to their impacts on minority
and poor communities.
Furthermore, I am asking each Division Director to designate two
employees to serve on a Quality Action Team to develop effective
short and long range strategies for implementing Environmental
Justice within the Region. The persons selected should have a
keen understanding of your program's objectives, policies and
procedures and their applicability to the Environmental Justice
objectives. Your nominees should be able to spend the time
required to develop the programmatic plan for Justice.
The Quality Action Team will focus on developing protocol for
intraregional communications and coordination; examining existing
policies and procedures; recommending where environmental
justice initiatives can best be incorporated and reviewing
current processes to ensure that the outcomes from environmental
programs do not have disproportionate impacts on racial minority
and low income populations.
-------
- 2 -
Region IV is taking a leadership role in this vital program and
I am confident that each of you will do your part to ensure that
justice is achieved in all facets of our environmental programs.
It is important that all programs take an active and continuing
role in the process. It is equally important to maintain
constant coordination and communication with the Office of
Environmental Justice concerning all environmental justice
activities and programs within the region.
Listed below are the target dates for developing the Regional
Plan for achieving Environmental Justice as well as a Fact Sheet
for your information. Your nominations to serve on the QAT
should be submitted to the Director, Office of Environmental
Justice by August 4, 1993.
TARGET DATES FOR
THE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
August 4th Designation of Quality Action Team
August 9th Briefing of Senior Management Team
Briefing for Enforcement Decision Team
August 11th Orientation for Quality Action Team
September 15th Broad Outline of Program Presentation to DRA
October 30th Final Draft of Regional Order on Environmental
Justice (Public Comment)
November 15th Review/comments from Enforcement Decision Team
November 30th Regional Order Presented to DRA for Signature
December 1st Issuance of Regional Order
-------
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IV
Fact Sheet) for Office of Environmental Justice
BACKGROUND
Environmental Justice, or fairness, has emerged as a serious public concern - among equity leaders,
grassroots organizations, academia, affected communities, and members of Congress. EPA began officially
addressing the issue of environmental equity after receiving a letter from an organization called the "Michigan
Coalition" in early 1990. To address these concerns, the Administrator of the EPA formed the Environmental
Equity Workgroup in June 1990, to review information on the relative risks borne by racial minority and low-
income communities and also to review the evidence that racial minority and low-income populations bear a higher
environmental risk burden than the general population. The Workgroup was also asked to consider what EPA
could do to address any identified disparities. The Workgroup later published a report entitled, Environmental
Equity: Reducing Risks for all Communities, which contained multiple and diverse recommendations.
Later The Office of Environmental Equity was established to deal with environmental impacts on racial
minority and low-income communities. Two programs form the core of the Office's functions: The Environmental
Equity Program and the Minority Academic Institutions Programs.
Environmental Justice Region IV
In July 1993, Vivian Malone Jones was selected as the Director of Region IV's Office of Environmental
Tustice (OEJ). Jones' experience and expertise in the Civil Rights arena, will be utilized to develop a Regional
'rogram to address any environmental initiatives, laws, and regulations that disproportionately adversely impact
minority and/or economically disadvantaged communities.
OEJ will have primary responsibility for developing and coordinating a comprehensive plan for achieving
environmental justice in the Region. OEJ will also be responsible for coordinating communication, outreach,
education and training on equity issues and concerns and will serve as the principal advisor to the Regional
Administrator and Deputy Regional Administrator on impacts of environmental risks, programs, regulations and
legislation on racial minority and low-income populations.
What is Environmental Justice ?
Environmental Justice refers to the principle that all persons should be treated equally under
environmental laws and that environmental policies should be enforced in an equitable manner without
discrimination due to race, ethnicity, culture, economic status, etc.
Whv Environmental Justice?
Reports have suggested that environmental inequalities may exist - that people of color and low-income
communities may not be equally protected. Residents in low-income people of color communities face higher
exposure to environmental hazards if they:
Live near Landfills, incinerators, or hazardous waste sites;
are exposed to lead, asbestos, or radon in old, poorly maintained urban residential buildings;
live on reservations that are used as dump site for solid or hazardous wastes; or
are poisoned by unprotected exposure to pesticides in farm fields.
Live near areas where water resources are improperly managed.
16 JULY 1993
-------
APR 14 1994
SUBJECT:
FROM:
TO:
Environmental Justice Meeting
John Hankinson
Regional Admin.or
Community Group's Participants
The purpose of this letter is to invite you to participate
at the Environmental Justice meeting scheduled May 6, 1994, in
Atlanta, Georgia.
BACKGROUND
As you know, the President signed the Environmental Justice
Executive Order on February 11, 1994. This Administration
believes that minority and low-income communities often, and
unfairly, bear a disproportionate share of the pollution burden
in this country. The Order states that Federal agencies shall
provide minority populations and low-income populations the
opportunity to comment on the development and design of
strategies undertaken pursuant to this order. Your participation
at the upcoming meeting will greatly assist EPA, Region IV in
meeting the objectives of the Executive Order.
The meeting will be held at the Radisson Hotel, 165
Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The Radisson
Hotel phone number is (404)659-6500. The meeting will be held
from 12:30 PM to 5:30 PM on Friday, May 6, 1994.
At the May 6th meeting we will be meeting with community
member representatives from across the Southeast. It will be the
representatives' responsibility to determine agenda items and
issues for future communities meeting. Please list the issues
that you feel are essential to be discussed at the planning
meeting in May. Your feedback regarding these issues will be
expected at the meeting. These issues may be, but are not
limited to, process, procedure, and policy. Also, a copy of the
Draft Regional Policy is attached for your review. Your feedback
is essential regarding this draft policy, and we will consider
your comments as we finalize our Regional Policy. We want to
build a partnership with communities.
MEETING
PURPOSE
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
ACTION
Please complete the attached forms as your acceptance to
participate at the May 6th meeting, and list your agenda issues
in priority order. Please return these forms by April 22, 1994,
to the address listed belowj
Ms. Vivian Malone Jones, Director
Office of Environmental Justice
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Your participation and feedback during this meeting is
essential to the success of our Environmental Justice Program. If
you have any questions, please call Vivian Jones or Brian Thomas
on (404)347-4294. Thank you for your attention and continued
support of Environmental Justice.
-------
RESPONSE TO INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE
IN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE MEETING
MAY 6, 1994
RADISSON HOTEL
165 COURTLAND STREET, N.E.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM BEFORE APRIL 22. 1994
To Ms. Vivian Malone Jones, Director
Office of Environmental Justice
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE (DAY)
I WILL BE ATTENDING THE MEETING AT THE RADISSON HOTEL ON MAY 6
YES NO
I WILL BE STAYING AT THE RADISSON HOTEL
YES ON NIGHT OF MAY 5TH ,
OR YES ON NIGHT OF MAY 6TH
WILL NOT BE STAYING OVER NIGHT
I WILL NEED FUNDING TO PAY FOR MY ROOM (ONLY 1 NIGHT)
YES NO
I WILL NEED FUNDING TO PAY FOR MY TRAVEL
FROM TO ATLANTA. GEORGIA
MODE OF TRANSPORTATION
-------
ISSUES THAT SHOULD BE DISCUSSED AT THE MEETING
MAY 6, 1994
RADISSON HOTEL
1.
2.
3.
4.
6.
-------
DRAFT
EPA
TRANSMITTAL
Environmental Justice Policy
1. PURPOSE; This transmittal establishes the Regional Order on
Environmental Justice implementation Procedure.
2. EXPLANATION: EPA Regional Order R1 - Environmental
Justice Policy has been developed to ensure that policies and
procedures are incorporated into Regional operational procedures.
3. FILLING INSTRUCTIONS: File the attached material in a three-
ring, binder established for the Region IV Directives Systems.
-------
DRAFT
DRAFT REGIONAL ORDER
Environmental Justice Policy
I. Purpose
This order establishes the regional policy,
responsibilities, and procedures to ensure that environmental
justice issues are incorporated into Region IV's operational
procedures and to ensure that environmental justice issues are
addressed appropriately.
II. References
III. Background
Environmental Justice, or fairness, has emerged as a
serious public concern among equity leaders, grassroots
organizations, academia, affected communities, and members of
Congress. EPA began officially addressing the issue of
environmental equity after receiving a letter from an organization
called the "Michigan Coalition" in early 1990; To address these
concerns, the Administrator of the EPA formed the Environmental
Workgroup in June 1990, to review information on the relative risks
borne by racial minority and low-income communities and also to
review the evidence that racial minority and low-income populations
bear a higher environmental risk burden than the general
population. The Workgroup was also asked to consider what EPA
could do to address^any identified disparities. The Workgroup
later published a report entitled, Environmental Eoruitv: Reducing
Risks for all Communities, which contained multiple and diverse
recommendations.
Later the Office of Environmental Equity was established
to deal with environmental impacts on racial minority and low-
income communities. Two programs form the core of the office's
functions: The Environmental Equity Program and the Minority
Academic Institutions Program.
Region IV created the Office of Environmental
Justice in July 1993 to develop the regional program to address
any environmental initiatives, laws, and regulations that
disproportionately have an adverse impact on minority and or
economically disadvantaged communities.
IV. Definitions
Environmental Justice is defined as the principle that
all persons should be treated equally under environmental laws and
that environmental policies should be enforced in an equitable
manner without discrimination due to race, ethnicity, culture or
economic status.
-------
DRAFT
V. Organ!zation and Responsibilities
A. Regional Administrator
The Regional Administrator is responsible to the
Administrator for the execution of the Agency's environmental
justice program within the boundaries of the region.. The Regional
Administrator is responsible for accomplishing the national
environmental justice program objectives within the region.
B. Policy Board
The Environmental Justice Policy Board will be composed
of the Office Directors and Division Directors in Region IV. The
responsibility of the Policy Board shall be to acccomplish the
objectives of the Region IV Environmental Justice Implementation
Procedures [Attached]. In order to attain this goal, the Policy
Board shall :
1. Review policies, procedures, regulations and
programs to determine whether they are consistent
with achieving environmental justice and making
recommendations to the Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator for changes;
2. Ensure that Risk Assessments are incorporated
into regional policy decisions;
3. Ensure that public participation, communication
and education programs are established;
4. Include. technical assistance for community
organizations;
5. Ensure that a complaints procedure is administered
through the Office of Environmental Justice; and
6. Ensure that all program issues that impact on
environmental justice are channeled through the
Office of Environmental Justice.
C. Office of Environmental Justice
The Office of Environmental Justice will have primary
responsibility for developing and coordinating a comprehensive plan
for achieving environmental justice in the Region. The Office of
Environmental Justice will also be responsible for coordinating
communication, outreach, education and training on environmental
justice issues and concerns and will serve as the principal advisor
to the Regional Administrator and Deputy Regional Administrator on
impacts of environmental risks, programs, regulations and
-2-
-------
DRAFT
legislation on racial minority and low-income populations.
D. Divisions
Each Division will develop and implement a protocol which
will accomplish the goals and objectives established by the
Environmental Justice Policy Board. Procedures should be developed
and implemented by a date to be determined by the Environmental
Justice Policy Board.
VI. Attachment
Region IV Environmental Justice Implementation Procedures
-3-
-------
DRAFT
REGION IV QUALITY ACTION TEAM RECOMMENDED
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 1982 demonstration against the siting of a
polycholorinated biphenyl (PCB) landfill in Warren County, North
Carolina, was a watershed event in the environmental equity
movement. In response to the protests in this predominantly Black'
county, Delegate Walter Fauntroy requested that the General
Accounting Office (GAO) investigate siting issues with respect to
race and income.
To expand the GAO, study the United Church of Christ
Commission for Racial Justice examined the statistical relationship
between hazardous waste site location and the racial/ socioeconomic
composition of host communities nationwide. They later published
Toxic Waste and Race in the United States; this was the first study
to address issues of race, class and the environment at the
national level.
In 1990, the University of Michigan held a conference which
identified serious concerns about the impact of environmental
decision making and governmental regulation on low income and
minority populations in this country. This study found that low
income and minority communities bear a higher environmental risk
burden than middle and high income majority communities. It also
raised questions with regard to the role of governmental agencies,
local, state and federal, in addressing these concerns. The
results of this 'study designated the areas of concern as
"Environmental Equity1::. issues.
EPA responded to the coalition's letter by forming an
Environmental Equity Workgroup composed of representatives from EPA
Headquarters and all of the Regions. The Workgroup was directed to
assess the validity of the conclusions in the study and to identify
avenues EPA might pursue to address any identified disparities.
The Workgroup issued its findings and recommendations in a
report, Environmental Equity - Reducing Risk For All Communities,
dated June 1992 [Attachment 1]. The Workgroup concluded that,
among other things, low income and minority populations experienced
"higher than average exposures to selected air pollutants,
hazardous waste facilities, contaminated fish and agricultural
pesticides ..." and that these high exposures and possible
chronic effects were a "clear cause for concern". The Workgroup
concluded that EPA and other governmental agencies were capable of
improving the delivery of information regarding environmental
problems to these communities and were "well suited to address
equity concerns". The Workgroup recommended, in part, that EPA
"increase the priority that it gives to issues of environmental
equity", "establish and maintain information which provides an
objective basis for assessment of risks by income and race",
-------
DRAFT
"identify and target opportunities to reduce high concentrations of
risk to specific population groups", consider equity issues in
matters of rulemaking, permitting, grants, monitoring and
enforcement, improve communications with minority and low income
communities and incorporate environmental equity into its "long-
term planning and operations".
In response to the Workgroup's report, EPA Headquarters
created an Office of Environmental Equity to address environmental
impacts on the targeted populations. In July 1993, Region IV
established the Office of Environmental Justice to serve the same
purpose. The Environmental Justice Quality Action Team (QAT) was
established soon thereafter. The QAT was given the task of
developing recommendations for procedures which would enable the
Region to adequately address Environmental Justice issues.
This report contains a summary of the deliberations of the
QAT. The purpose of this report is to provide recommendations for
standard procedures for Region IV personnel to follow when
implementing the Regional Order for Environmental Justice.
Adherence to the procedures set for£h in this guidance will ensure
regional compliance with Headquarters mandates for Environmental
Justice.
It is recommended that this guidance be intended solely for
the use of Region IV personnel. Nothing in this guidance is
intended to be nor should be relied upon to create either
substantive or procedural rights, enforceable by any party in
litigation with the United States. Region IV reserves the right to
act at variance with this guidance and to change it at any time
without notice.
-------
02/14/94 113:2(3 Q202 2G0 0186 FRESS DIVISION REGION 4 ®002/006
THE WHITE HOUSE
OFFICE OF THE PRESS SECRETARY
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: 202/456-7035
FRIDAY, Febnuiy 11,1994
PRESIDENT CLINTON SIGNS
EXECUTIVE ORDER ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Fulfilling & commitment ha made on Earth Day 1993 to address the problem of
environmental inequity and discrimination. President Clinton today signed an Executive Order
on Environmental Justice to protect Americans — particularly those who can least afford it —
from pollution and to help provide safe, clean communities.
The Executive Order rall^ on federal agencies to encourage environmental fairness by
developing individual agency strategies to prevent disproportionate environmental inequities
and directing agencies to collect and analyze information and provide assessments of
environmental and human risk. The Executive Order will increase public participation in the
environmental decision-making process.
"All Americans have a right to be protected from pollution— not just those who can
afford to live in the cleanest, safest communities. Today, we direct Federal agencies to make
environmental justice a part of all that they do," said President Clinton.
The executive order is expected to have a sweeping impact on lead removal in public
housing, pollution control in urban rivers, and exposure of farm workers to dangerous
pesticides. The order will require environmental justice strategies from each federal agency
thar conducts programs substantially affecting human health and the environment
Vice President Gore said, "Every community must be included in making decisions
about their health and their environment Under today's executive order, we will ensure that
disadvantaged populations have an opportunity to participate folly in making health and
environmental decisions."
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol M. Browner said, "For too long,
low-income and minority communities have bome a disproportionate burden of modem
industrial life. Today's Executive Order seeks to bring justice to these communities."
EPA will lead an interagency effort to cany out the executive order, which requires
Federal agencies to:
-Develop strategies for identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects on low income and minority populations of their
programs, policies or activities.
-------
1)2/14/94 lis 215 •Q'202 200 0186 PRESS DIVISION ---• REGION 4 @003/000
-Ensure minority and low income populations have access to public Information related
to human health and the environment.
-Conduct activities relared to human health and the environment in a manner thai does
not discriminate or have the effect of discriminating against 'ow-income and minority
populations.
-Consider disproportionately high and adverse human health effects of environmental
hazards on minority and low income populations in conducting research and data collection
related to human health or the environment
S#
-------
H2-U/9J lli
*3202 2CO 01813
PRESS DIVISION REGION 4
0006/006
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
Statement of Carol M. Browner
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection. Agency
OFFICE OF
COMMUWCATIONS. EDUCATION AND
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Environmaitai Justice Executive Onto:
February 11, 1994
For too long, low-income communities and minority communities have borne a
disproportionate burden of modem industrial life. Today's Executive Order seeks to bring
justice to these communities.
All Americans deserve to be protected from pollution — not just those who can afford
to live in the cleanest, safest communities. All Americans deserve clean air, pure water,
land that is safe to live on, food that is safe to eat
Last April, on Earth Day, President Clinton called on federal agencies to ensure equal
environmental protection to all Americans. Today's Executive Order means that federal
agencies will address environmental injustice - past, present, and future.
We will develop strategies to bring justice to Americans who are suffering
disproportionately — farm workers who are exposed to high-risk pesticides, children who are
exposed to lead paint in old buildings, people who fish in polluted waters, those who live
near hazardous waste incinerators.
We will develop strategies to ensure that low-income and minority communities have
access to information about their environment — and that they have an opportunity to
participate in shaping government policies that affect their health and their environment.
The Clinton Administration's proposal to reform our Superfund law speaks to these
concerns — by increasing public participation in Superfund decision-making.
The President has asked me to convene an interagency working group to begin to
implement the Executive Order. I look forward to working with my colleagues in this
Administration to ensure that all Americans have a safe and healthy environment.
-30-
R»cyei«d/T?»qrdtbt«
7"X <\ ntra»a wnn SOfiCKXM u*onp«fl«f 0*
cooeaimaMtttinncjaaafltar
-------
2--14-94 ¦ OEN
(No. 29) E - 1
EXECUTIVE ORDER ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
SIGNED BY PRESIDENT CLINTON FEB. 11
(TEXT)
EXECUTIVE ORDER
FEDERAL ACTIONS TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE IN MINORITY POPULATIONS
AND LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Consti-
tution and the laws of the United States of America, it is
hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1-1. Implementation.
1-101. Agency Responsibilities. To the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, and consistent with the
principles set forth in the report on the National Perform-
ance Review, each Federal agency shall make achieving
environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and ad-
verse human health or environmental effects of its pro-
grams, policies, and activities on minority populations and
low-income populations in the United States and its territor-
ies and possessions, the District of Columbia, the Common-
wealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the
Mariana Islands.
1-102. Creation of an Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice, (a) Within 3 months of the date of
this order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency ("Administrator") or the Administrator's desig-
nee shall convene an interagency Federal Working Group on
Environmental Justice ("Working Group"). The Working
Group shall comprise the heads of the following executive
agencies and offices, or their designees: (a) Department of
Defense; (b) Department of Health and Human Services; (c)
Department of Housing and Urban Development; (d) Depart-
ment of Labor, (e) Department of Agriculture; (0 Depart-
ment of Transportation; (g) Department of Justice; (h)
Department of the Interior, (i) Department of Commerce; (j)
Department of Energy, (k) Environmental Protection Agen-
cy, (1) Office of Management and Budget; (m) Office of
Science and Technology Policy; (n) Office of the Deputy
Assistant to the President for Environmental Policy, (o)
Office of the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy,
(p) National Economic Council; (q) Council of Economic
Advisers; and (r) such other Government officials as the
President may designate. The Working Group shall report to
the President through the Deputy Assistant to the President
for Environmental Policy and the Assistant to the President
for Domestic Policy.
(b) The Working Group shall: (1) provide guidance to
Federal agencies on criteria for identifying disproportion-
ately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations and low-income
populations;
(2) coordinate with, provide guidance to, and serve as a
clearinghouse for, each Federal agency as it develops an
environmental justice strategy as required by section
1-103 of this order, in order to ensure that the administra-
tion, interpretation and enforcement of programs, activi-
ties and policies are undertaken in a consistent manner;
(3) assist in coordinating research by, and gHmnl»Hng
cooperation among, the Environmental Protection Agen-
cy, the Department of Health and Human Services, the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, and
other agencies conducting research or other activities in
accordance with section 3-3 of this order;
(4) assist in coordinating data collection, required by
this order,
(5) examine existing data and studies on environmental
justice;
(6) hold public meetings as required in section 5-502(d)
of this order; and
(7) develop interagency model projects on environmen-
tal justice that evidence cooperation among Federal
agencies.
1-103. Development of Agency Strategies, (a) Except
as provided in section 6-60S of this order, each Federal
agency shall develop an agency-wide environmental justice
strategy, as set forth in subsections (bHe) of this section that
identifies and addresses disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects of its programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-
income populations. The environmental justice strategy
shall list programs, policies, planning and public participa-
tion processes, enforcement, and/or rulemakings related to
human health or the environment that should be revised to,
at a minimum: (1) promote enforcement of all health and
environmental statutes in areas with minority populations
and low-income populations; (2) ensure greater public par-
ticipation; (3) improve research and data collection relating
to the health of and environment of minority populations
and low-income populations; and (4) identify differential
patterns of consumption of natural resources among minor-
ity populations and low-income populations. In addition, the
environmental justice strategy shall include, where appro-
priate, a timetable for undertaking identified revisions and
consideration of economic and social implications of the
revisions.
(b) Within 4 months of the date of this order, each Federal
agency shall identify an internal administrative process for
developing its environmental justice strategy, and shall
inform the Working Group of the process.
(c) Within 6 months of the date of this order, each Federal
agency shall provide the Working Group with an outline of
its proposed environmental justice strategy.
(d) Within 10 months of the date of this order, each
Federal agency shall provide the Working Group with its
proposed environmental justice strategy.
(e) Within 12 months of the date of this order, each
Federal agency shall finalize its environmental justice strat-
egy and provide a copy and written description of its
strategy to the Working Group. During the 12 month period
Copyright © 1994 by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC., Washington, D.C. 20037
1060-2976/94/S0+S1.O0
-------
E - 2 (No. 29)
TEXT
OEN ¦ 2-14-94
from the date of this order, each Federal agency, as part of
environmental justice strategy, shall identify several
:ific projects that can be promptly undertaken to ad-
tss particular concerns identified during the development
of the proposed environmental justice strategy, and a sched-
ule for implementing those projects.
(f) Within 24 months of the date of this order, each
Federal agency shall report to the Working Group on its
progress in implementing its agency-wide environmental
justice strategy.
(g) Federal agencies shall provide additional periodic
reports to the Working Group as requested by the Working
Group.
1-104. Reports to the President Within 14 months of the
date of this order, the Working Group shall submit to the
President, through the Office of the Deputy Assistant to the
President for Environmental Policy and the Office of the
Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, a report that
describes the implementation of this order, and includes the
final environmental justice strategies described in section
1-103(e) of this order.
Sec. 2-2. Federal Agency Responsibilities for Federal
Programs. Each Federal agency shall conduct its pro-
grams, policies, and activities that substantially affect hu-
man health or the environment, in a manner that ensures
that such programs, policies, and activities do not have the
effect of excluding persons (including populations) from
participation in, denying persons (including populations) the
benefits of, or subjecting persons (including populations) to
discrimination under, such programs, policies, and activi-
ties, because of their race, color, or national origin.
Sec. 3-3. Research, Data Collection, and Analysis.
"-301. Human Health and Environmental Research
. Analysis, (a) Environmental human health research,
«nenever practicable and appropriate, shall include diverse
segments of the population in epidemiological and clinical
studies, including segments at high risk from environmental
hazards, such as minority populations, low-income popula-
tions and workers who may be exposed to substantial envi-
ronmental hazards.
(b) Environmental human health analyses, whenever prac-
ticable and appropriate, shall identify multiple and cumula-
tive exposures.
(c) Federal agencies shall provide minority populations
and low-income populations the opportunity to comment on
the development and design of research strategies undertak-
en pursuant to this order.
3-302. Human Health and Environmental Data Col-
lection and Analysis. To the extent permitted by existing
law, including the Privacy Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. section
552a): (a) each Federal agency, whenever practicable and
appropriate, shall collect, maintain, and analyze informa-
tion assessing and comparing environmental and human
health risks borne by populations identified by race, national
origin, or income. To the extent practical and appropriate.
Federal agencies shall use this information to determine
whether their programs, policies, and activities have dispro-
portionately high and adverse human health or environmen-
tal effects on minority populations and low-income
populations;
(b) In connection with the development and implementa-
tion of agency strategies in section 1-103 of this order, each
Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate,
1 collect, maintain and analyze information on the race,
jnal origin, income level, and other readily accessible
and appropriate information for areas surrounding facilities
or sites expected to have a substantial environmental, hu-
man health, or economic effect on the surrounding popula-
tions, when such facilities or sites become the subject of a
substantial Federal environmental administrative or judici-
al action. Such information shall be made available to the
public, unless prohibited by law; and
(c) Each Federal agency, whenever practicable and ap-
propriate, shall collect, maintain, and analyze information
on the race, national origin, income level, and other readily
accessible and appropriate information for areas surround-
ing Federal facilities that are: (1) subject to the reporting
requirements under the Emergency Planning and Communi-
ty Right-to-Know Act, 42 U.S.C. section 11001-11050 as
mandated in Executive Order No. 1285$ and (2) expected to
have a substantial environmental, human health, or econom-
ic effect on surrounding populations. Such information *hnli
be made available to the public, unless prohibited by law.
(d) In carrying out the responsibilities in this section, each
Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate,
shall share information and eliminate unnecessary duplica-
tion of efforts through the use of existing data systems and
cooperative agreements among Federal agencies and with
States, local, and tribal governments.
Sec. 4-4. Subsistence Consumption of Fish and
Wildlife.
4-401. Consumption Patterns. In order to assist in
identifying the need for ensuring protection of populations
witli differential patterns of subsistence consumption of fish
and wildlife. Federal agencies, whenever practicable and
appropriate, shall collect, maintain, and analyze informa-
tion on the consumption patterns of populations who princi-
pally rely on fish and/or wildlife for subsistence. Federal
agencies shall communicate to the public the risks of those
consumption patterns.
4-402. Guidance. Federal agencies, whenever practica-
ble and appropriate, shall work in a coordinated manner to
publish guidance reflecting the latest scientific information
available concerning methods for evaluating the human
health risks associated with the consumption of pollutant-
bearing fish or wildlife. Agencies shall consider such guid-
ance in developing their policies and rules.
Sec. 5-5. Public Participation and Access to
Information.
(a) The public may submit recommendations to Federal
agencies relating to the incorporation of environmental
justice principles into Federal agency programs or policies.
Each Federal agency shall convey such recommendations to
the Working Group.
(b) Each Federal agency may, whenever practicable and
appropriate, translate crucial public documents, notices,
and hearings relating to human health or the environment
for limited English speaking populations.
(c) Each Federal agency shall work to ensure that public
documents, notices, and hearings relating to human health
or the environment are concise, understandable, and readily
accessible to the public.
(d) The Working Group shall hold public meetings, as
appropriate, for the purpose of fact-finding, receiving public
comments, and conducting inquiries concerning environ-
mental justice. The Working Group shall prepare for public
review a summary of the comments and recommendations
discussed at the public meetings.
Sec. 6-6. General Provisions.
6-601. Responsibility for Agency Implementation. The
head of each Federal agency shall be responsible for ensur-
ing compliance with this order. Each Federal agency shall
conduct internal reviews and take such other steps as may
be necessary to monitor compliance with this order.
Copyright © 1994 by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. Wasn.ngton, O C. 20037
1060-2976/91/SO+S1.00
-------
2«-14-94 -DEN-
6-602. Executive Order No. 12250. This Executive order
is intended to supplement but not supersede Executive
Order No. 122S0, which requires consistent and effective
implementation of various laws prohibiting discriminatory
practices in programs receiving Federal financial assist-
ance. Nothing herein shall limit the effect or mandate of
Executive Order No. 12250.
6-603. Executive Order No. 12875. This Executive order
is not intended to limit the effect or mandate of Executive
Order No. 12875.
6-^04. Scope. For purposes of this order, Federal agency
means any agency on the Working Group, and such other
agencies as may be designated by the President, that con-
ducts any Federal program or activity that substantially
affects human health or the environment. Independent agen-
cies are requested to comply with the provisions of this
order.
6-605. Petitions for Exemptions. The head of a Federal
agency may petition the President for an exemption from
the requirements of this order on the grounds that all or
some of the petitioning agency's programs or activities
should not be subject to the requirements of this order.
6-606. Native American Programs. Each Federal
agency responsibility set forth under this order shall apply
equally to Native American programs. In addition, the
(No. 29) E - 3
Department of the Interior, in coordination with the Work-
ing Group, and, after consultation with tribal leaders, shall
coordinate steps to be taken pursuant to this order that
address Federally-recognized Indian Tribes.
6-607. Costs. Unless otherwise provided by law, Federal
agencies shall assume the financial costs of complying with
this order.
6-608. GeneraL Federal agencies shall implement this
order consistent with, and to the extent permitted by, exist-
ing law.
6-609. Judicial Review. This order is intended only to
improve the internal management of the executive branch
and is not intended to, nor does it create any right, benefit,
or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforce*
able at law or equity by party against the United States, its
agencies, its officers, or any person. This order shall not be
construed to create any right to judicial review Involving
the compliance or noncompliance of the United States, its
agencies, its officers, or any other person with this order.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON
THE WHITE HOUSE.
February 11, 1994.
TEXT
End of Text
End of Section
Copyright © 1994 by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. Washington D C 20037
1060-2976^94/SO-1 Si 00
-------
EXECUTIVE ORDER ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Environmental Justice Strategies
Each Federal agency must develop within one year an environmental Justice strategy that
identifies and addresses disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority and low income populations.
• Enforcement
The environmental justice strategy shall list programs, policies, planning and public participation
processes, enforcement, and/ or rulemaking related to human health or the environment that
should be revised to, at a minimum: promote enforcement of all health and environmental statutes
in areas with minority populations and low-income populations.
Public Participation and Access to Information
To ensure adequate public participation and access to information, Federal agencies must:
• Solicit public recommendations in developing and implementing environmental justice
strategies;
• Use public documents that are concise and understandable;
• Promote a better public understanding of risks associated with principally relying on fish or
wildlife for subsistence;
• Translate appropriate public documents for limited-English speaking populations;
• Allow public participation in the development of certain research strategies.
Interagency Working Group
The executive order creates an interagency working group chaired by the EPA Administrator and
composed of other agency heads.
The working group will:
• Provide guidance, coordinate, and review the Federal government's implementation of the
executive order;
• Hold public meeting for fact-finding, receiving public concerns, and conducting inquiries into
environmental justice.
-------
Research and Data Collection
Agencies shall, whenever practicable and appropriate:
• Include diverse segments of the population in epidemiological and clinical studies and identify
multiple and cumulative exposures;
• Collect, maintain, and analyze information in order to provide assessments of environmental
and human health risks borne by populations identified by income, race, and national origin.
Agencies shall collect, maintain, and analyze information on the race, national origin, and income
levels of areas surrounding the following types of facilities, if they are expected to have a
substantial environmental, human health of economic effect on surrounding populations:
Federal facilities subject to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act's
reporting requirements; and
Facilities that become the subject of substantial Federal administrative or judicial action.
Federal Programs
Each federal agency must conduct its programs and activities that substantially affect human
health or the environment in a manner that does not exclude participation in, deny benefits of,
or discriminate against persons or populations because of their race, color, or national origin.
Subsistence Consumption of Fish and Wildlife
Federal agencies must collect maintain and analyze information on the consumption patterns of
populations that principally rely on fish and/or wildlife for subsistence and communicate the risks
of those consumptions patterns.
Federal agencies, as appropriate must publish guidance on methods for evaluating the human
health risks associated with the consumption of pollutant-bearing fish or wildlife and consider
such guidance in developing their policies and rules.
General Provisions
The executive order:
Covers agencies that conduct programs or activities that substantially affect human health or the
environment.
Requires implementation to be consistent with the principles set forth in the National
Performance Review.
Applies to Federal Agency activities in the United States and its territories and possessions, the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the Mariana
-------
Islands.
Requires Federal agencies to assume any financial costs of complying with the executive order,
unless otherwise provided by law.
-------
I. Environmental Justice Strategies
II. Public Participation and Access to Information
III. Interagency Working Group
IVo Research and Data Collection
V. Federal Programs
VI. Subsistence Consumption of Fish and Wildlife
VII. General Provisions
-------
EXECUTIVE ORDER ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
SIGNED BY PRESIDENT CLINTON FEB. 11
-------
FEDERAL LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS, EXECUTIVE ORDERS
What Federal Legislation, Regulations, and Executive Orders Would Affect
Environmental Equity Programs?
Proposed Federal legislation and an Executive Order would affect
Environmental Equity programs. A Senate bill and a House bill would
create an Office of Environmental Justice in a Cabinet-level Department
of the Environment. The provisions in the Senate bill (S. 171) define the
duties of the Office of Environmental Justice. These duties primarily
involve developing a strategic plan to ensure equality in environmental
protection and the implementation of various research initiatives. The
provisions in the House bill (Section 113 of the Conyers bill) are much
more extensive and include the establishment of an Advisory Committee
on Environmental Justice and Environmental Justice Assessment Grants.
The Environmental Justice Act (S. 1611) was reintroduced into the
Senate this year by Senator Baucus. It directs EPA to find out which
communities are most exposed to toxic emissions. If exposures in these
areas are found to have significant human health impacts, EPA may be
required to promulgate regulations to reduce toxic chemical emissions.
Proposed amendments to the Solid Waste Disposal Act (H.R. 1924) and
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (H.R. 1925) would also address Environmental Justice concerns.
This legislation is summarized below and included in the handbook.
Federal Legislation
• The Wellstone Amendment to S. 171 defines the duties of the
Office of Environmental Justice to include:
Developing a strategic plan to ensure equality in
environmental protection;
Evaluating whether environmental policy is helping
individuals who suffer the highest exposure to pollution, and
identifying opportunities for preventing or reducing such
exposure;
Compiling an annual report on progress in achieving
Environmental Equity;
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
7-1
-------
FEDERAL LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS, EXECUTIVE ORDERS
Requiring the collection of data on environmental health
effects so that pollution impacts on different individuals or
groups can be understood;
Identifying environmental high impact areas which are
subject to the highest loadings of toxic chemicals, through
all media; and
Assessing the health effects that may be caused by
emissions in the environmental high impact areas.
• Section 113 of the Conyers bill establishes an Office of
Environmental Justice within the Office of the Secretary of the
Department of the Environment. The Office of Environmental
Justice would be headed by a Director appointed by the President
with the advice and consent of the Senate.
The Director of the Office of Environmental Justice would be
required to develop and implement a strategy to promote equal
environmental protection for all people, regardless of race,
ethnicity, national origin or socio-economic status. The strategy
would have to:
Provide for the development, maintenance, evaluation, and
analysis of scientifically-based data on the extent to which
populations identifiable on the basis of race, national origin,
ethnicity, or socioeconomic status may be inadequately
protected from environmentally harmful substances;
Ensure that the Director
reviews and identifies the effect of the Department's
existing and proposed programs on the distribution
of environmental services and environmental
protection across geographic regions and among all
population groups, and
reviews and assesses new and existing standards,
guidelines, policies, and regulations to determine
their adequacy and effectiveness for the protection of
all population groups;
Facilitate and encourage the voluntary adoption of
techniques and programs by businesses for the prevention
7-2
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
-------
FEDERAL LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS, EXECUTIVE ORDERS
and reduction of adverse environmental consequences
among all population groups; and
Identify measurable goals to achieve progress.
In developing the strategy, the Director is required to consult with
States, local governments, Indian tribes, the regulated community,
labor, public interest groups, and the public.
The bill also gives the Director the authority to:
Provide technical assistance to Federal, State, and local
governments and others in addressing environmental justice
concerns, and
Establish an annual award program to recognize persons
that operate outstanding or innovative programs to achieve
environmental justice goals.
Section 113 of the Conyers bill would also establish an Advisory
Committee on Environmental Justice, an Environmental Justice
Assessment Program, and Environmental Justice Assessment
Grants.
• The Environmental Justice Act, S. 1161, requires EPA, in
consultation with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences,
the National Center for Health Statistics, and the Bureau of the
Census, to compile a list of the 100 areas in the United States
where the largest amounts (by weight) of toxic chemicals were
released during the last 5 years. These areas would be
designated Environmental High Impact Areas. The bill would
require the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human
Services to issue a report identifying the nature and extent of
acute and chronic impacts on human health in Environmental High
Impact Areas from exposure to toxic chemicals. If the report
identifies significant adverse impacts from exposure, the President
is required to propose administrative and legislative changes to
remedy and prevent such impacts and EPA would be required to
promulgate regulations applicable to any Federal permit for
construction or modification of a tcxic chemical facility in that area.
These regulations would have to require a net reduction in the
release of any toxic chemical determined to cause significant
adverse impacts on human health in the area.
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
7-3
-------
FEDERAL LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS, EXECUTIVE ORDERS
The bill also provides for the award of Technical Assistance Grants
to individuals or groups of individuals who may be affected by a
release or threatened release of a toxic chemical from any facility
in an environmental high impact area.
• An amendment to the Solid Waste Disposal Act, H.R. 1924, would
allow citizens of environmentally disadvantaged communities to
submit petitions to prevent the construction of new solid and
hazardous waste management facilities in their communities.
• An amendment to the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, H.R. 1925, would require
the Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry to collect and maintain information of the race, age,
gender, ethnic origin, income ievel, and educational level of
persons living in communities adjacent to areas contaminated with
toxic substance contamination.
Executive Order
A draft Executive Order would require Federal agencies to administer ail
regulations and programs affecting health and the environment, including
facility siting or permitting, in a manner that addresses the exposure of
minority and low-income populations to environmental hazards. The
Order cites the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act
and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to remind Federal agencies of
their obligations to address the economic and social impacts of all
Federal programs and to ensure that Federal programs do not subject
minority and low-income populations to environmental hazards.
7-4
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
-------
RECEIVED
JUL 22 199? n
TDEC, Bureau of Natural
RMOurcfS3^WWfib o 11/t1
1st Session ^ j[ ^
To establish a program to ensure nondiscriminatory compliance with environ-
mental, health, and safety laws and to ensure equal protection of the
public health.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
June 24 (legislative day, Juke 22), 1993
Mr. Baucus (for himself, Ms. Mo$ELEY-BRAUN, and Mr. Campbell) intro-
duced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works
A BILL
To establish a program to ensure nondiscriminatory compli-
ance with environmental, health, and safety laws and
to ensure equal protection of the public health.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the "Environmental Justice
5 Act of 1993".
6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
7 The Congress finds that—
8 (1) Toxic chemicals are being released in sig-
9 nificant amounts into the environment. Over three
-------
2
1 billion five hundred million pounds of toxic releases
2 were reported by approximately nineteen thousand
3 six hundred industrial plants in 1990, under the
4 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
5 Act.
6 (2) Notwithstanding the benefits of the Emer-
7 gency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act,
8 many toxic chemicals posing substantial health
9 threats as a result of releases, are not being re-
10 ported. The Emergency Planning and Community
11 Right-to-Know Act excludes hundreds of chemicals
12 listed as toxics under various environmental laws in-
13 eluding: sixteen hazardous air pollutants, and five
14 extremely hazardous substances listed in the 1990
15 Clean Air Act Amendments; one hundred and forty
16 chemicals regulated as hazardous waste under the
17 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act because of
18 acute or chronic toxicity; over two hundred chemi-
19 cals identified as known or probable human carcino-
20 gens by the EPA and the National Toxicology Pro-
21 gram; sixty-nine special review pesticides identified
22 under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
23 Rodenticide Act and hundreds of restricted use pes-
24 ticides; and ninety reproductive toxins identified by
25 the California Department of Health.
S 1161 is
-------
3
1 (3) Although environmental and health data of
2 toxic chemical releases are not routinely collected
3 and analyzed by income and race, racial and ethnic
4 minorities and lower income Americans may be dis-
5 proportionately exposed to toxic chemicals in their
6 residential and workplace environments.
7 SEC. 3. PURPOSES AND POLICIES.
8 The purposes of this Act are—
9 (1) to establish and maintain information which
10 provides an objective basis for assessment of health
11 effects by income and race;
12 (2) to identify those areas with the largest re-
13 leases of toxic chemicals to the air, land, water, and
14 workplace;
15 (3) to assess the health effects that may be
16 caused by emissions in those areas of highest envi-
17 ronmental impact;
18 (4) to ensure that groups or individuals residing
19 within High Environmental Impact Areas have the
20 opportunity and the resources to participate in the
21 technical process which will determine the possible
22 existence of adverse health impacts;
23 (5) to identify those activities in high environ-
24 mental impact areas found to have significant ad-
25 verse impacts on human health; and
S 1161 is
-------
4
1 (6) to incorporate environmental equity consid-
2 erations into planning and implementation of all
3 Federal environmental programs and statutes..
4 SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
5 For the purposes of this Act:
6 (1) The term "Administrator" means the Ad-
7 ministrator of the United States Environmental Pro-
8 tection Agency.
9 (2).The term "environmental high impact area"
10 means any of the one hundred counties or appro-
11 priate geographic units with the highest total weight
12 of toxic chemicals released during the most recent
13 five-year period for which data is available, as cal-
14 culated pursuant to section 4 of this Act.
15 (3) The term "toxic chemicals" means—
16 (A) all hazardous substances as defined in
17 section 101(14) of the Comprehensive Environ-
18 mental Response, Compensation and Liability
19 Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601(14);
20 (B) all materials registered pursuant to the
21 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide
22 Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.);
23 (C) all chemicals subject to section 313 of
24 the Emergency Planning and Community
25 Right-to-Know Act of 1986;
S llfil IS
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
5
(D) all contaminants identified in the Safe
D ringing Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300g-l);
(E) all chemicals listed by the National
Toxicology Program as known or probable
human carcinogens; and
(F) all materials subject to the require-
ments concerning material safety data sheets
for hazardous chemicals under the Occupational
and Safety and Health Act of 1970 (15 U.S.C.
615 et seq.).
(4) The term "release" shall have the same
meaning as used'in section 101(22) of the Com-
prehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act of 1990 as amended by the
Superfvind Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986, and shall also include any release which re-
sults in exposure to persons within a workplace.
(5) The term "toxic chemical facility" means
any facility—
(A) subject to reporting requirements
under the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act of 1986;
(B) that generates, treats, stores or dis-
poses of a hazardous waste as defined in section
3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act;
S 1161 is
-------
6
1 (C) subject to section 112 or 129 of the
2 Clean Air Act;
3 (D) subject to sections 307 or 311 of the
4 Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
5 1251 et seq.);
6 (E) subject to the Federal Insecticide,
7 Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136
8 et seq.); or
9 (F) subject to the requirements concerning
10 material safety data sheets for hazardous
11 chemicals under the Occupational and Safety
12 and Health Act of 1970 (15 U.S.C. 615 et
13 seq.). For the purpose of this Act the term
14 "toxic chemical facility" shall include any Fed-
15 eral facility that releases a toxic chemical.
16 SEC. 5. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HIGH IM-
17 PACT AREAS.
18 (a) Determination of Impacted Areas.—Within
19 six months after the date of enactment, the Administrator
20 in consultation with the Agency for Toxic Substances and
21 Disease Registry, the National Institute for Environ-
22 mental Health Sciences, the National Center for Health
23 Statistics and the Bureau of the Census, shall determine
24 the most appropriate designation of Environmental High
S 1161 IS
-------
7
1 Impact Areas, either counties or other appropriate geo-
2 graphic unit.
3 (b) Publication of List.—Within twelve months
4 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator
5 shall publish a list, in rank order, of the total weight of
6 toxic chemicals released in each county or other appro-
7 priate geographic unit in the United States during the
8 most recent five-year period for which data are available.
9 If less than five years of data are available the Adminis-
10 trator shall use available data until further information
11 is reported.
12 (c) Compilation of List.—(1) In compiling the list
13 under subsection (a), the Administrator shall consider and
14 utilize all appropriate and available data compiled pursu-
15 ant to any environmental regulatory authority and other
16 sources, including available data on the presence of lead-
17 based paint and toxic chemicals from mobile vehicles.
18 (2) For each county or appropriate geographic unit
19 the Administrator shall calculate and compile in a data
20 base—
21 (A) the total weight of toxic chemicals released
22 into the ambient environment;
23 (B) the total weight of toxic chemicals released
24 into each environmental media (air, water, land,
25 workplace); and
S 1X61 is
-------
8
1 (C) the total weight of each toxic chemical re-
2 leased into the ambient environment, and into each
3 environmental media (air, water, land, workplace);
4 and whenever possible shall adjust the estimates of each
5 of the items in subparagraphs (A) through (C) to account
6 for the toxicity of the toxic chemicals.
7 (3) Within six months after the date of enactment
8 the Administrator shall review the methodology used to
9 compile and summarize information collected under sec-
10 tion 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community
11 Right-to-Know Act, and publish for public comment any
12 proposed changes to the methodology necessary to cal-
13 culate and compile the information required in paragraph
14 (1).
15 (4) The Administrator shall revise and republish the
16 list described in subsection (c) by the date that is five
17 years after the date of initial publication, and not less fre-
18 quently than every five years thereafter, using data com-
19 piled during the preceding five-year period.
20 (d) Environmental High Ijipact Areas.—(1)
21 Within twelve months after the date of enactment, and
22 every five years thereafter, the Administrator shall publish
23 a list of the one hundred counties or other appropriate
24 geographic unit with the highest total toxic chemical re-
25 leases based on the list published in subsection (b). Such
S 1161 is
-------
9
1 counties or other appropriate geographic unit shall be des-
2 ignated as "Environmental High Impact Areas".
3 (2) (A) To ensure that facilities with the highest po-
4 tential for release of toxic chemicals are operating in com-
I
5 pliance with all applicable environmental health and safety
6 standards, the Administrator, and the Secretary of Labor,
7 shall conduct compliance inspections of all toxic chemical
8 facilities subject to their jurisdiction in Environmental
9 High Impact Areas within two years after the date of en-
10 actment of this Act, and not less frequently than every
11 two years thereafter.
12 (B) Notwithstanding the requirements in subpara-
13 graph (A), the Administrator or the Secretary of Labor
14 may authorize any state or Indian tribe which has been
15 delegated authority to administer any Federal law regulat-
16 ing a toxic chemical which authorizes the inspection of
17 toxic chemical facilities for compliance with applicable
18 Federal environmental laws, to conduct such inspections
19 in lieu of the Administrator or the Secretary of Labor.
20 (3) Within twenty-four months after the date of en-
21 actment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human
22 Services, in consultation with the Administrator, the Sec-
23 retary of Labor, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the
24 Commissioners of the United States Commission on Civil
25 Rights, shall issue for public comment a report identifying
S 1161 is
-------
10
1 the nature and extent, if any, of acute and chronic impacts
2 on human health in Environmental High Impact Areas
3 from exposure to toxic chemicals. Such impacts shall in-
4 elude incidence of cancer, birth deformities, infant mortal-
5 ity rates, and respiratory diseases. Such report shall in-
6 elude a comparison of the health impact from exposure
7 to toxic chemicals in Environmental High Impact Areas
8 with other counties in the United States. The report shall
9 be coordinated by the Administrator of the Agency for
10 Toxic Substances Disease Registry of the Department of
11 Health and Human Services, and in coordinating the re-
12 port, the Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Sub-
13 stances and Disease Registry shall seek to—
14 (A) isolate the impacts of environmental pollu-
15 tion;
16 (B) segregate the effects of other factors such
17 as health care availability or substance abuse;
18 (C) rank the relative risks posed by the toxic
19 chemicals present in Environmental High Impact
20 Areas and by the varied sources of toxic chemicals
21 both individually and cumulatively;
22 (D) take into account the need to remedy the
23 impacts of such toxic chemicals in high population
24 density areas;
S 1161 is
-------
11
1 (E) evaluate the levels below which release of
2 toxic chemicals, either individually or cumulatively,
3 must be reduced to avoid adverse impacts on human
4 health; and
5 (F) determine the impacts of maintaining toxic
6 chemical releases at the current levels.
7 (4) If the report under paragraph (3) identifies sig-
8 nificant adverse impacts from exposure to toxic chemicals
9 on human health in Environmental High Impact Areas as
10 a group, the President' shall submit to Congress within
11 one year after publication of the report, proposed adminis-
12 trative and legislative changes to remedy and prevent such
13 impacts, including—
14 (A) the addition of facilities or chemicals to be
15 subject to reporting requirements of the Emergency
16 Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of
17 1986, or a reduction in threshold quantities of
18 chemicals that trigger reporting requirements under
19 such Act;
20 (B) the regulation of toxic chemicals not subject
21 to Federal law based on a statutory or administra-
22 tive exemption; and
23 (C) the imposition of additional regulatory
24 measures for toxic chemical facilities in an Environ-
25 mental High Impact Area, such as emissions fees,
S 1161 IS
-------
12
1 source reduction requirements, or restrictions on
2 toxic chemical releases.
3 SEC. 6. REDUCTION OF TOXIC CHEMICALS
4 If the report under section 4(d)(3) identifies signifi-
5 cant adverse impacts on human health from exposure to
6 toxic chemicals in an Environmental High Impact Area,
7 the Administrator shall promulgate regulations applicable
8 to any Federal permit for construction or modification of
9 a toxic chemical facility in that area. Such regulations
10 shall require a net reduction in the release of any toxic
11 chemical determined to cause such significant adverse im-
12 pacts on human health in that area.
13 SEC. 7. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.
14 (a) In General.—Subject to appropriations, and in
15 accordance with rules promulgated by the Secretary of
16 Health and Human Services in consultation with the Ad-
17 ministrator, the Secretary may award a grant to any indi-
18 vidual or group of individuals who may be affected by a
19 release or threatened release of a toxic chemical from any
20 toxic chemical facility in an environmental high impact
21 area.
22 (b) Grant requirements.—(1) A grant awarded
23 under this section shall—
24 (A) be designed to facilitate access by rep-
25 resentatives of environmental high impact areas to
s 1161 is
-------
13
1 the activities that involve public participation under
2 this Act and any other related law.
3 (B) be used to obtain technical assistance relat-
4 ing to the inspection and review authorities de-
5 scribed in section 4(d)(2) and the study described in
6 section 4(d)(3); and
7 (C) be in an amount not to exceed $50,000.
8 (2) Each grant recipient shall be required, as a condi-
9 tion of the grant, to pay a non-Federal share equal to 20
10 percent of the grant amount. The Administrator may
11 waive the 20 percent contribution requirement if the grant
12 recipient demonstrates financial need to the satisfaction
13 of the Administrator. Not more than one grant may be
14 made with respect to each environmental high impact area
15 for the period of a grant (as determined by the Adminis-
16 trator). At the end of the period, a grant may be renewed
17 if the Administrator determines that the renewal is nec-
18 essarv to facilitate public participation.
19 (3) Grants under this subsection shall be considered
20 to be grants under section 117(e) of the Comprehensive
21 Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
22 of 1980 as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
23 Reauthorization Act of 1986, and shall be funded in the
24 same manner.
o
S 1161 IS
-------
103d CONGRESS w tt TTfc aig AN
1st Session H. K. ^105
To establish a program to assure nondiscriminatory compliance with all envi-
ronmental, health and safety laws and to assure equai protection of
the public health.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
May 12. 1993
Mr. Lewis of Georgia (for himself, Ms. McKinney. Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois,
Mr. Miller of California. Mr. Towns, Mr. Serrano, Mr. Stokes. Ms.
Waters, Miss Collins of Michigan, Ms. Norton, Mr.
I-IOCHBRUECKNER, Mr. Clyburn, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. Peterson of Min-
nesota, Mr. Edwards of California, Mr. FlLNER, Mr. FOGLIETTA, Mr.
Dellums, Mrs. Clayton, Mrs. Mink, Ms. Velazquez, Mr. Washing-
ton, Mr. Thompson, Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Clay, and Mr. Payne of New
Jersey) introduced the following bill: which was referred jointly to the
Committees on Energy and Commerce, Public Works and Transportation,
Education and Labor, and Agriculture
A BILL
To establish a program to assure nondiscriminatory compli-
ance with all environmental, health and safety laws and
to assure equal protection of the public health.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the "Environmental Justice
5 Act of 1992".
-------
2
1 SEC. 2. PURPOSES AND POLICIES.
2 The purposes of this Act are—
3 (1) to require the collection of data on environ-
4 mental health effects so that impacts on different in-
5 dividuals or groups can be understood;
6 (2) to identify those areas which are subject to
7 the highest loadings of toxic chemicals, through all
8 media;
9 (3) to assess the health effects that may be
10 caused by emissions in those areas of highest
11 impact;
12 (4) to ensure that, groups or individuals residing
13 within those areas of highest impact have the oppor-
14 tunity and the resources to participate in the tech-
15 nical process which will determine the possible exist-
16 ence of adverse health impacts;
17 (5) to require that actions be taken by author-
18 ized Federal agencies to curtail those activities
19 found to be having significant adverse impacts on
20 human health in those areas of highest impact; and
21 (6) to ensure that significant adverse health im-
22 pacts that may be associated with environmental pol-
23 lution in the United States are not distributed
24 inequitably.
•HR 2105 IH
-------
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY LEGISLATION
What State Legislation Would Affect Environmental Equity Programs?
The States may be ahead of the Federal Government with respect to
drafting and passage of legislation to address Environmental Equity
concerns. Eight States have drafted Environmental Equity legislation.
The legislation in one of these States, Louisiana, was signed into law in
June of 1993.
The legislation in the States contains many different types of equity
provisions including requirements to conduct research and further define
equity issues and problems, determine the demographic characteristics
in areas where potentially polluting facilities will be sited, provide grants
for equity research and education, and impose a moratorium on the
siting and permitting of new facilities in areas where adverse health
effects have been identified.
Equity legislation in six States is briefly summarized below. Copies of
State Environmental Equity and Environmental Justice legislation are
available from the Office of Environmental Equity.
® A proposed bill in California (AB-2212) would require a
description of the demographics of proposed project sites before
permit approval. Policymakers would be able to use demographic
descriptions to determine the potential discriminatory nature of
proposed projects.
• A proposed bill in Georgia (The Environmental Justice Act of
1993) would empower the State environmental agency to establish
a toxic release inventory, designate 20 environmental high-impact
areas, publish health risk assessments, and issue a moratorium
on siting in high risk areas.
• A bill which recently passed the Louisiana legislature and was
signed by the Governor (Act 767) directs the State environmental
agency to hold hearings on Environmental Equity and to make
follow up recommendations to the legislature.
• A proposed bill in New York (AB-7140) would direct the State
environmental agency to survey and maintain an index of
"environmental facility" locations and would require the submission
of an economic development plan for communities in which
environmental facilities will be located. Another bill in New York
would create a task force to promote Environmental Equity issues
in the private and public sectors by providing grants for research,
community outreach and education.
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
6-1
-------
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY LEGISLATION
• A proposed bill in North Carolina (HB-1423) would establish an
Environmental Justice study commission to examine State
environmental policies and siting patterns based on
socioeconomic and demographic data for low-income and minority
communities. The commission would also study the advisability of
empowering local communities in the environmental policymaking
process and the feasibility of introducing policies that ensure
Environmental Equity.
• A proposed bill in South Carolina (HB-3824) would require the
State environmental agency 'to identify environmental high risk
areas containing high levels of toxic chemicals." It would also
establish a technical assistance grant program, require the
reporting of significant adverse impacts of toxic pollution, require
that demographic information be submitted with applications to
site new facilities, and establish a moratorium on the siting and
permitting of new facilities if an adverse health impact is identified.
6-2
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE LEGISLATION
ALABAMA
Contact:
Sam Coleman
(205) 271-7917
No
Birmingham:
Mobile:
Jack McDuff
Chief, Civil Engineering
City of Birmingham
(205) 254-2335
Susan Nelson
(205) 434-7590
FLORIDA
Contact: Anna Marie Hartnett
(904) 487-2916
H.B. 1369
passed both
Houses 4-15-
94. Not signed
in to law.
GEORGIA
Contact:
David Word
(404) 656-4713
Legislature
meets Jan-Mar.
Bob Holmes
presented bill
two years ago.
Made it thru
subcommittee.
May be reintro
duced next yr.
KENTUCKY
Contact:
Russ Barnett
(502) 564-2150
No
-------
MISSISSIPPI Contact Sam Mabry
(601) 961-5545
Adjourned in
March. Nothing
pending.
NORTH CAROLINA Contact:
Richard Wisnent
(919) 715-4146
Henry Lancaster
(919) 715-4146
No. Envtl
Review
Commission
meets mthly.
SOUTH CAROLINA Contact: Mike Rowe
(803) 734-5381 House/Senate
Subcommittee will
adjourn first
of June. Still
in committee.
Environmental Justice Contact: Lil Mood
(803) 734-5440
TENNESSEE Contact: Chris Link
(615) 532-0107 Nothing pending in
General Assembly.
S. 2714 Std of
Fairness takes into
consideration
equity issues
(increase penalty
for illegal
dumping)
-------
3
1 TITLE I—IDENTIFICATION OF
2 ENVIRONMENTAL HIGH IM-
3 PACT AREAS
4 SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.
5 For the purposes of this Act:
6 (1) Administrator.—The term "Adminis-
7 trator" means the Administrator of the United
8 States Environmental Protection Agency.
9 (2) Environmental high impact areas.—
10 The terms "Environmental High Impact Areas" and
11 "EHIA" mean the 100 counties or appropriate geo-
12 graphic units with the highest total weight of toxic
13 chemicals present during the course of the most re-
14 cent 5-year period for which data is available, as cal-
15 culated pursuant to section 102.
16 (3) Secretary.—The term "Secretary' means
17 the Secretary of the United States Department of
18 Health and Human Services.
19 (i) Toxic chemicals.—The term "toxic
20 chemicals" includes all substances as defined in sec-
21 tion 101(14) of the Comprehensive Environmental
22 Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980;
23 any hazardous waste listed or identified pursuant to
24 the Solid Waste Disposal Act; any pollutant for
25 which air quality standards have been issued pursu-
•HH. 2105 IH
-------
4
1 ant to the Clean Air Act; any pollutant for which
2 water quality standards have been issued pursuant
3 to the Clean Water Act; all materials registered pur-
4 suant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
5 Rodenticide Act; and all substances and chemicals
6 subject to reporting obligations pursuant to the
7 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
8 Act.
9 (5) Toxic chemical facilities.—The term
10 "toxic chemical facilities" includes all facilities in-
11 eluding Federal facilities subject to a permit, inspec-
12 tion or review, or registration requirement pursuant
13 to the authority of the Solid Waste Disposal Act; the
14 Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Federal In-
15 secticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Aet; and the
16 OSHA Hazard Communication Standard; as well as
17 any facility subject to reporting obligations pursuant
18 to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
ly to-Know Act.
20 SEC. 102. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HIGH IM-
21 PACT AREAS.
22 (a) Determination of Impacted Areas.—Within
23 6 months after the date of enactment, the Administrator
24 of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry,
25 in consultation with the Environmental Protection Agen-
•HR 2105 IH
-------
o
1 cy, the National Institute for Environmental Health
2 Sciences, the National Center for Health Statistics and
3 the Bureau of the Census, shall determine the basis for
4 designation of Environmental High Impact Areas, either
5 counties or another appropriate geographic unit.
6 (b) Publication op List.—Within 12 months of en-
7 actment, the Administrator shall publish a list, in rank
8 order, of the total weight of toxic chemicals present in
9 each county or such appropriate geographic unit in the
10 United States during the most recent five-year period for
11 which data are available. The 100 counties or other appro-
12 priate geographic unit with the highest total weight shall
13 be designated as Environmental High Impact Areas.
14 (c) Compilation of List.—In compiling the list
15 under subsection (a), the Administrator shall—
16 (1) calculate with the best data available the
17 total weight of toxic chemicals present in each coun-
18 ty by multiplying the total volume of substances con-
19 taining toxic chemicals (whether waste, process or
20 other material) by the concentration of toxic chemi-
21 cals contained in these substances;
22 (2) adjust the weights calculated under para-
23 graph (1) to account for the relative toxicity of the
24 toxic chemicals;
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
r
19
20
21
22
23
24
6
(3) determine, with the best available data, the
actual and potential exposures, and toxicity of the
toxic chemicals present in each impacted area;
(4) consider and utilize all appropriate data
compiled pursuant to any environmental regulatory
authority and other sources, including but not lim-
ited to available data on lead-based paint and the ex-
istence of pollutants from mobile sources; and
(5) distinguish between toxic chemicals which
are (A) in a contained, controlled environment such
as barrels, factories, warehouses, or lined landfills
for any period of time during the 5-vear period; and
(B) released into the air, water, soil or groundwater
of the area during the 5-vear period as a result of
authorized or unauthorized activities.
(d) Methods.—Within 6 months after the enact-
ment of this Act, the Administrator in consultation with
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
shall publish for public comment the methods to be used
to calculate the total weight of toxic chemicals in waste,
process, or other materials, including the assumptions to
be used when the precise concentrations of toxic chemicals
are not known and the criteria used to account for relative
toxicity, as required by subsection (b)(2).
•HR 2105 IH
-------
7
1 (e) Revision and Republication.—The Adminis-
2 trator shall revise and republish the list described in sub-
3 section (a) of this section not less than every 5 years,
4 using data compiled for that 5-year period.
5 TITLE II—ENFORCEMENT
6 INITIATIVES
7 SEC. 201. MANDATORY INSPECTIONS.
8 To assure that facilities with the highest potential for
9 release of toxic chemicals into the environmient are operat-
10 ing in compliance with all applicable environmental, health
11 and safety standards, the Administrator, and the Assist-
12 ant Secretary of the Occupational Safety and Health Ad-
13 ministration shall conduct compliance inspections or re-
14 views of all toxic chemical facilities in Environmental High
15 Impact Areas subject to their respective jurisdictions with-
16 in 2 years after the enactment of this Act, and not less
17 than every 2 years thereafter.
is TITLE III—COMMUNITY
19 PARTICIPATION
20 SEC. 301. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.
21 Subject to such amounts as may be appropriated and
22 in accordance with rules promulgated by the Secretary in
23 consultation with the Administrator, the Secretary may
24 make grants available to any individual or group of indi-
25 viduals who may be affected by a release or threatened
HE "2105 IH
-------
8
1 release from any toxic chemical facility in an EHIA. Such
2 grants shall—
3 (1) be designed to facilitate access by represent-
4 atives of EHIAs to the public participation provi-
5 sions of this Act and other law;
6 (2) be used to obtain technical assistance relat-
7 ing to the inspection and review authorities listed in
8 section 201 of this Act and the Secretarial study de-
9 scribed in section 401 of this Act; and
10 (3) not exceed $50,000 for a single grant recipi-
11 ent.
12 Each grant recipient shall be required, as a condition of
13 the grant, to contribute 20 percent of the total cost of
14 the grant requested unless the grant recipient dem-
15 onstrates financial need. Not more than one grant may
16 be made with respect to each EHIA, but the grant may
17 be renewed to facilitate public participation where nec-
18 essary.
r
19 SEC. 302. FUNDING.
20 Within one year after the enactment of this Act, the
21 Administrator shall promulgate regulations establishing a
22 system of fees or assessments on toxic chemical facilities
23 in EHIAs to substitute for appropriations as the funding
24 mechanism for the community grant program established
25 in section 301. The fees or assessments shall take into
•HR 2105 IH
-------
9
1 account the volume adjustments provided in section
2 102(e).
3 TITLE IV—IDENTIFICATION AND
4 PREVENTION OF HEALTH IM~
5 PACTS
6 SEC. 401. SECRETARIAL STUDY.
7 Within 24 months after the enactment ot' this Act.
8 the Secretary, in consultation with the Administrator, the
9 Secretary of the Department of Labor, the Bureau of In-
10 dian Affairs, and the Commissioners of the United States
11 Commission on Civil Rights, shall issue for public com-
12 ment a report identifying the nature and extent, if any,
13 of acute and chronic impacts on human health in EHIAs
14 as compared to other counties. Such impacts shall include
15 but not be limited to cancer, birth deformities, infant mor-
16 tality rates, and respirator}' diseases. The report shall be
17 coordinated by the Administrator of the Agency for Toxic
18 Substances Disease Registry, who shall work closely with
19 the Directors of the National Institute for Environmental
20 Health Sciences, the National Center for Health Statis-
21 tics, and the Center for Disease Control, and shall seek
22 to—
23 (1) isolate the impacts of environmental pollu-
24 tion;
•HR 2105 IH
-------
10
1 (2) segregate the effects of other factors such
2 as health care availability or substance abuse or diet;
3 (3) rank the relative risks posed by the toxic
4 chemicals present in EHIAs and by the varied
5 sources of toxic chemicals, both individually and cu-
6 mulatively;
7 (4) take into account the need to remedy the
8 impacts of pollution in high population density
9 areas;
10 (5) evaluate the levels below which release of
11 toxic chemicals, either individually or cumulatively,
12 must be reduced to avoid adverse impacts on human
13 health; and
14 (6) determine the impacts of uncontrolled re-
15 leases.
16 As a result of the report in communities where the Admin-
17 istrator of the Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Reg-
18 istry has determined that adverse health impacts exist, the
19 agency shall also make this information readily available
20 to members of the community by providing information
21 directly to the affected communities and tribal govern-
22 ments in the Environmental High Impact Areas about the
23 release of toxic chemicals and the potential effects of such
24 exposure.
•HK 2105 IH
-------
11
1 SEC. 402. LEGISLATIVE RESPONSE.
2 (a) Report.—If the report under section 401 identi-
3 fies significant adverse impacts of environmental pollution
4 on human health in EHIAs as a group, the President shall
5 submit to Congress within one year after publication of
6 the report, proposed legislation to remedy and prevent
7 such impacts. Such legislation shall include—
8 (1) expansion of EPCRA to include additional
9 facilities, additional chemicals, or reduced quantities
10 of chemicals triggering reporting obligations;
11 (2) means to redress regulatory loopholes (such
12 as recycling and industrial wastes exempt from regu-
13 lation under subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal
14 Act and wastes subject to lessened regulatory re-
15 quirements); and
16 (3) measures such as taxes on uncontrolled or
17 controlled emissions, or restrictions on toxic chemi-
18 cal releasing activities within an EHIA to induce
19 source reduction in EHIAs, regardless of whether
20 facilities are in compliance with existing law.
21 (b) Report on Changes and Recommenda-
22 TIONS.—Within 2 years after publication of the report, the
23 Administrator shall provide a report to the Congress which
24 identifies all of the changes made or recommended to be
25 made to the Environmental Protection Agency's existing
26 regulations, the purpose for each change and the goals to
•HR 2105 IB
-------
12
1 be achieved as a result of the substantive changes. The
2 Administrator shall also advise Congress of the regulatory
3 changes that were not made because of the presence of
4 conflicting statutory mandates or the lack of statutory
5 authority.
6 (c) Proposed Legislation.—Within 3 years after
7 publication of the health impact study, the President shall
8 submit to Congress proposed legislation to remedy the
9 problems of conflicting statutory mandates or the lack of
10 statutory authority identified in the report to Congress
11 pursuant to subsection (b).
12 SEC. 403. MORATORIUM.
13 If the report under section 401 finds significant ad-
14 verse impacts of environmental pollution on human health
15 in EHIAs, there shall be a moratorium on the siting or
16 permitting of any new toxic chemical facility in any EHIA
17 shown to emit toxic chemicals in quantities found to cause
18 significant adverse impacts on human health. A new toxic
19 chemical facility may be cited or permitted in such an
20 EHIA during this period only if—
21 (1) the need for the activity is shown to the
22 Secretary;
23 (2) the owner or operator of the facility dem-
24 onstrates that the facility will develop a plan and
*HR 2106 IH
-------
13
1 maintain a comprehensive pollution prevention pro-
2 gram; and
3 (3) the facility demonstrates that it will mini-
4 mize uncontrolled releases into the environment.
5 The moratorium shall continue in effect in such an EHIA
6 until the Administrator determines, upon petition of any
7 interested party, that the health-based levels identified
8 pursuant to section 401(5) have been attained at the
9 EHIA.
-HE 2108 IH
-------
5
j DESCRIPTION
OCLASTAFF
CONTACT
SLiNATl7.
HOUSl:
CONFliRF.NCF -
FINAL ACTION
EPA ELEVATION TO CABINET- Continued
Amendments adopted by the Senate
introduced new issue areas:
1) benefit/cost analysis,
2) comparative risk analysis,
3) job impact analysis,
4) compliance assistance Cor
small businesses
5) compliance assistance for
small governmental jurisdic-
tions, s.
6) wetlands.
Kate Perry
(2 60 - 5203)
Anne Metcalf
(260-5190)
S.380, Roth R-DE
3 co-sponsors 1-D/2-R
• Straight elevation.
• Referred to the Committee
on Governmental Affairs.
H.R.109, Boehlert R-NY
55 co-sponsors 36-D/l0-R/l-I
* Generally addresses most of
the issues listed under
description of elevation to
Cabinet other than the
Senate amendments.
• Referred to the
Committees on:
- Government Operations; and
- Foreign ACfairs.
U. R. 62 4 , dinger R-PA
17 co-sponsors 0-D/17-R
• Straight elevation.
* Referred to the Committee on
Government Operat ions.
* Non-bill specific hearings:
- 3/29/93 before Subcommittee
on Environment, Energy &
Natural Resources of the
Committee on Government
Operat ions;
- 4/20/93 and 5/6/93 before
the Committee on Government
Operations.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY ISSUES
What Are Some of the Areas Where Environmental Equity Issues Can
Arise?
Environmental Equity issues have been raised with respect to various
types of environmental media and environmental protection programs.
The following information, suggesting that the benefits of environmental
protection are differentially distributed, is drawn from the sources listed in
the Bibliography section.
• In communities with one operating commercial hazardous waste
management facility, the percentage of the population who are
minorities is approximately twice that of communities not having
such facilities. In communities with two or more operating
commercial hazardous waste management facilities or one of the
five largest commercial landfills, the percentage of the population
who are minorities is more than three times that of communities
not having such facilities.
• African-Americans constitute more than 20 percent of the
population in 7 of the 10 metropolitan areas with the highest
numbers of uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. (The African-
American percentage of the total U.S. population is 11.7 percent.)
• In West Dallas, a 3,000 unit public housing project was located 50
feet from a smelter and in the path of prevailing southerly winds.
Despite repeated complaints and the involvement of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the smelter was repeatedly in
violation of lead emissions limits for 15 years, until it was finally
ordered closed in 1984.
o A hazardous waste facility operated by Chemical Waste
Management in Emelle, Alabama (the largest such operation at the
time it was built), was constructed without the knowledge or input
of local residents, 90 percent of whom were African-American.
® Using average exposure assumptions in estimating the risk posed
by water pollutants does not sufficiently protect minority
subpopulations, including some African- and Native Americans,
who consume much higher than average amounts of fish.
® The Navajo communities along the Rio Puerco in New Mexico
have long been exposed to high concentrations of thorium-230,
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
5-1
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY ISSUES
radium-226, lead-210, and polonium-210 in the river's waters as a
result of mine dewatering: Although the contamination caused by
a spill from a uranium milling facility will be addressed in the
Superfund program, efforts to address pollution problems in the
area did not include the provision of alternative water supplies.
• At all income levels, the percentage of African-American children
with unacceptable blood lead levels is roughly twice that of White
children.
• African-Americans and Kispanics are at substantially greater risk,
relative to non-Hispanic Whites, of being exposed to air pollutants
despite the fact that the African-American population of the U.S. is
concentrated in the South. (The South is the area in the U.S. with
the lowest overall percentage of the population exposed to air
pollutants.)
• Minorities are over 60 percent more exposed than Whites to the
combination of total suspended particulates, sulfates, sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides, ozone, and carbon monoxide. Until
1982, however, they were benefiting more from air pollution
control than Whites. This has not been the case since 1982, and
the gap in benefits at the national scale is widening to the
detriment of minorities.
• EPA concluded that pesticide regulations to protect farmworkers
(many of whom are Hispanic) were ineffective in 1983. More
protective regulations were not issued until 1992, when EPA came
under increasing pressure from Environmental Equity groups.
• A study of EPA enforcement data showed that penalties under
hazardous waste laws at sites having the greatest percentage of
White population were about 500 percent higher than penalties at
sites with the greatest minority population.
• Enforcement penalties under all environmental laws are 46 percent
higher in White communities than in minority communities.
• Abandoned hazardous waste sites in minority areas take 20
percent longer to be placed on the Superfund National Priority List
than those in White areas.
5-2
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY ISSUES
• Containment, generally a cheaper cleanup remedy than
permanent treatment, is more often chosen as the preferred
method of cleanup for Superfund sites in minority areas than in
White areas.
EPA has not verified the accuracy of this information. However, the
existence of such a large body of information, pertaining to a variety of
environmental media and programs, suggests that there is a need to
continually monitor EPA programs for equity effects. Based on the
information presented above, as well as EPA's own analyses, the Office
of Environmental Equity suggests that the following areas deserve
particular attention in the development ,and implementation of equitable
environmental programs and policies:
• The siting/location of commercial hazardous waste treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities, municipal solid waste landfills, and
other potentially polluting facilities;
® The enforcement of environmental laws and regulations;
• The assessment of risks to account for subgroups within the
population who are exposed to pollutants from many different
sources or who may be exposed to much higher than average
risks; and
• The distribution of environmental entitlement monies, such as
Superfund cleanup dollars, the Leaking Underground Storage
Trust Fund, and sewage treatment grants to address
environmental problems.
Environmental Equity Handbook - September 1993
5-3
-------
Office of Environmental Justice
Statistics:
From July 1993 to April 1994, there were a total of 32 possible
environmental justice sites routed to the Office of Environmental
Justice (OEJ).
The sites are broken down into the appropriate program areas:
Program *
Number
WASTE DIVISION
3
NPL, Remediation
7
Emergency Response
3
Remediation, GA-EPD
1
RCRA, Subtitle D
6
RCRA, Subtitle C
1
Medical Waste Incinerator
2
TITLE VI
1
WATER DIVISION
Wastewater
3
Drinking Water
1
UIC, pilot project
1
Wetlands, permit
1
AIR DIVISION
1
EIS
1
* Some sites may involve more than one program. The major lead
program at the site was used for identification.
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
2
s
EPA REGION IV
SUPERFUND COMMUNITY RELATIONS COORDINATORS
1. SITE ASSESSMENT
CINDY WEAVER, 404-347-5059, VOICE MAIL #6209
2. EMERGENCY RESPONSE & REMOVAL
MICHAEL HENDERSON, 404-347-3931, VOICE MAIL #6106
3. NORTH SUPERFUND REMEDIAL (NPL SITES)
SOUTH CAROLINA - CYNTHIA PEURIFOY
NORTH CAROLINA - DIANE BARRETT
TENNESSEE/KENTUCKY - SUZANNE DURHAM
1-800-435-9233, 404-347-7791
4. SOUTH SUPERFUND REMEDIAL (NPL SITES)
SOUTH FLORIDA - ROSE JACKSON, VOICE MAIL #6272
NORTH FLORIDA - CARLEAN WAKEFIELD, VOICE MAIL #6256
ALABAMA, GEORGIA & MISSISSIPPI - BETTY WINTER, VOICE MIAL
#6264
1-800-435-9234, 404-347-2643
-------
HEPA Public Involvement in the
Superfund Program
Citizens can help make decisions about Superfund activities in their communities
through both independent action and formal community relations activities
sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Recognizing the
importance of considering public input and keeping the public informed as
response actions are planned and carried out, EPA guarantees public involvement
in the Superfund process.
How can citizens There are many ways for individuals or groups to participate in the Superfund
participate in the process besides participating in EPA-sponsored community relations activities.
Superfund process? For example, citizens can:
Report actual or potential releases of hazardous substances to the
National Response Center's 24-hour hotline (1-800-424-8802).
Ask EPA to conduct a preliminary site assessment. Anyone who is, or
may be, affected by the release of a hazardous substance can petition EPA
to conduct a preliminary assessment of a site to determine whether the site
threatens human health or the environment. The preliminary assessment
is the first step in the Superfund process and identifies hazardous sub-
stances at the site, and the populations and sensitive environments likely to
be affected by their release. A petition should include, if possible: the type
of substances that were, or might be, released; the sons of activities that
occurred where the release happened; and, whether State or local authori-
ties were contacted about the release.
Ask the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
to conduct a health assessment at a site. Health assessments help EPA
decide whether to study further possible human health effects from actual
or potential hazardous substance releases.
Hire a technical advisor with a Technical Assistance Grant (TAG).
EPA provides TAGs of up to $50,000 to groups threatened by hazards at
Superfund sites. These grants can be used to hire a technical advisor who
may 1) review site-related documents and attend site-related hearings and
meetings, 2) explain technical information to the group and the community,
and 3) communicate group concerns to the community. Grants may not be
used to develop new information or to undertake legal action. Also, the
group is required to provide 20 percent of the cost of the technical advice.
The group contribution can be in-kind services, such as administrative
support, rather than cash. Under certain circumstances EPA may waive the
group contribution.
-------
Sue the government. Citizens can sue the government or any person that
violates any standard, regulation, condition, requirement, or order that has
become effective due to the Superfund process.
How does EPA Citizens can influence the Superfund process by participating in EPA-sponsored
ensure that Citizens' community relations activities. These activities inform the public about clean-up
concerns are plans and progress, and involve citizens in making decisions about Superfund
included in the activities in their communities. By focusing on citizen concerns, community
Superfund process? relations activities help EPA and the State ensure that clean-up actions address the
problems especially important to the community. They also help EPA and States
that manage response actions collect information about a site's conditions and
history.
Community relations activities range from small discussions between concerned
citizens and government officials in private homes or offices to large public
meetings where Vicials can present site developments to the entire community.
Such gatherings let citizens raise issues, express concerns, and ask questions. They
also help EPA understand the community's information needs, and how and when
citizens want to be involved in the Superfund process. In addition to holding
meetings, EPA and States issue press releases announcing new developments in
site work and fact sheets summarizing current knowledge about a site's problems
and clean-up options.
Through meetings and discussions, citizens often provide EPA with information
about a site's history that proves valuable in planning a response action. Their
knowledge about when and how a site was contaminated may help EPA select
sampling and monitoring locations in and around the site. EPA may learn about
who is responsible for a problem from discussions with community mem bers. EPA
also considers citizen concerns in deciding how to clean up a site, so that the
selected clean-up actions deal with the problems especially important to the
community.
For each removal and remedial action, a Superfund spokesperson is ap-
pointed to inform the community about the release and the actions Superfund
is taking, and to respond to questions. In addition, the spokesperson is
responsible for contacting State and local officials and individuals who are
immediately affected by a release. Spokespersons usually are drawn from the
EPA's Superfund program community relations staff. If, however, a site is State;
managed, the spokesperson will be a State employee.
Community relations activities for short-term removal responses are different
from those for longer-term remedial responses, which c^n be conducted only at
sites on EPA's National Priorities List (NPL). During a removal action, the On-
Scene Coordinator (the person in charge at the site) must protect public health and
property until the immediate threat is over. This means that during a removal the
urgency of the problem may leave very little time to involve citizens in deciding
2
-------
how the site will be cleaned up. At such times, the primary community relations
activity is to inform citizens about response actions and their effects on the
community. Nevertheless, EPA regulations provide for as much community
involvement as is feasible. During a removal that lasts longer than 45 days, or
during a remedial response, citizens can leam more about EPA activities and can
communicate their concerns to EPA.
If a removal is expected to begin within 6 months of the site inspection and to
be completed in less than 120 days, the lead agency (either EPA or the State) must
make an administrative record available to the public. The administrative record
contains the information that the agency used to decide the removal action was
necessary. The public may comment on the administrative record for at least 30
days from its issuance. The lead agency responds in writing to significant
comments, and these responses also become part of the administrative record.
If a removal is expected to begin within 6 months of the site inspection and to
take longer than 120 days, the lead agency must prepare a Community Relations
Plan (CRP) and establish at least one information repository.
The CRP specifies how the lead agency will ensure that local residents can express
their opinions and concerns about the site and how the public will be kept informed
of all clean-up actions at the site. The lead agency uses information gathered in
discussions and meetings with residents, local officials, and public interest groups
to prepare its CRP.
The information repository, often called a site file, usually is located in a public
building such as a school, library, or town hall. Typically, a site file includes press
releases, fact sheets, and technical reports about lead agency activities and a site's
contamination problem(s). The lead agency may withhold confidential or sensitive
information if public disclosure coula hinder legal actions to force responsible
parties to pay clean-up costs. Otherwise, the public has a right to know everything
about a site.
If a removal is expected to begin more than 6 months after the site inspection,
the lead agency must create a CRP and establish a site file before removal activities
begin. The lead agency also must publish in a major local newspaper where and
when the public can examine the agency's analysis of a site's engineering costs and
their related alternatives. The public may comment on this analysis for at least 30
days; the lead agency will extend this comment period by 15 days if a timely request
is made. The lead agency also prepares written comments to significant responses
from the public, placing these comments in the site file.
Before beginning a remedial action, the lead agency must prepare a CRP,
establish a site file, and inform the community about the availability of Technical
Assistance Grants.
3
-------
The public must have a chance tocomment before the lead agency makes any major
decisions concerning remedial actions at a site. Citizens are encouraged to
comment on the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) and the pro-
posed remediation plan during a 30-day comment period. The RI/FS assesses how
serious the site contamination is, characterizes the potential risks to the community,
and examines the feasibili ty of various clean-up options. The proposed remediation
plan explains in non-technical language the preferred method of cleaning up the
site and the other alternatives under consideration. EPA or the State agency must
publish in a major local newspaper a brief analysis of the proposed plan, including
when and where it can be examined. If a timely request is made, the public
comment period can be extended 30 days.
EPA must hold a public meeting during the public comment period. EPA
encourages and gives strong consideration to public comments on all the alterna-
tive remedial actions being considered at a given site, and on other site activities.
EPA also considers each alternative's reliability, effectiveness, construction cost,
and maintenance cost. After this consideration, EPA must prepare a Responsive-
ness Summary describing the significant public comments and responding to the
issues raised. After selecting the final engineering design, the lead agency must
issue a fact sheet and give a public briefing before starting the remedial action.
What effects can Public involvement in Superfund contributes to sound decisions and greater
citizen input have? protection of public health and the environment. A number of site cleanups
have been significantly influenced by public involvement in the Superfund
process. For example:
Citizens and businesses near a site in Illinois were concerned that EPA's
proposed clean-up alternative would harm the town's economy by limiting
use of a nearby lake shore. In response, EPA developed a different clean-
up alternative which allowed the town to use the lake shore.
Residents near a site in Minnesota expressed a strong preference that EPA
treat their contaminated wells rather than connect residents to a nearby
city's reservoir. After carefully considering information that residents
provided, EPA proposed a plan to treat their wells to remove contaminants.
Although EPA tries to include a community's preference when choosing a site
remedy, EPA has the final say and may select a remedy that is more effective, based
on reliability, permanence, or cost.
4
-------
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX 1.—SAMPLE REQUEST AND APPEAL LETTERS
A. Freedom of Information Act Request Letter
Agency Head [or Freedom of Information Act Officer]
Name of Agency
Address of Agency
City, State, Zip Code
Re: Freedom of Information Act Request.
Dear :
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act.
I request that a copy of the following documents [or documents
containing the following information] be provided to me: [identify
the documents or information as specifically as possible].
In order to help to determine my status to assess fees, you should
know that I am (insert a suitable description of the requester and
the purpose of the request).
[Sample requester descriptions:
a representative of the news media affiliated with the
newspaper (magazine, television station, etc.),
and this request is made as part of news gathering and not for
a commercial use.
affiliated with an educational or noncommercial scientific in-
stitution, and this request is made for a scholarly or scientific
purpose and not for a commercial use.
an individual seeking information for personal use and not
for a commercial use.
affiliated with a private corporation and am seeking infor-
mation for use in the company's business.]
[Optional] I am willing to pay fees for this request up to a maxi-
mum of $ If you estimate that the fees will exceed
this limit, please inform me first.
[Optional] I request a waiver of all fees for this request. Disclo-
sure of the requested information to me is in the public interest be-
cause it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding
of the operations or activities of the government and is not primar-
ily in my commercial interest. [Include a specific explanation.]
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Name
Address
City, State, Zip Code
Telephone Number [Optional]
(31)
-------
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX 1.—SAMPLE REQUEST AND APPEAL LETTERS
A. Freedom of Information Act Request Letter
Agency Head [or Freedom of Information Act Officer]
Name of Agency
Address of Agency
City, State, Zip Code
Re: Freedom of Information Act Request.
Dear :
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act.
I request that a copy of the following documents [or documents
containing the following information] be provided to me: [identify
the documents or information as specifically as possible].
In order to help to determine my status to assess fees, you should
know that I am (insert a suitable description of the requester and
the purpose of the request).
[Sample requester descriptions:
a representative of the news media affiliated with the
newspaper (magazine, television station, etc.),
and this request is made as part of news gathering and not for
a commercial use.
affiliated with an educational or noncommercial scientific in-
stitution, and this request is made for a scholarly or scientific
purpose and not for a commercial use.
an individual seeking information for personal use and not
for a commercial use.
affiliated with a private corporation and am seeking infor-
mation for use in the company's business.]
[Optional] I am willing to pay fees for this request up to a maxi-
mum of $ If you estimate that the fees will exceed
this limit, please inform me first.
[Optional] I request a waiver of all fees for this request. Disclo-
sure of the requested information to me is in the public interest be-
cause it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding
of the operations or activities of the government and is not primar-
ily in my commercial interest. [Include a specific explanation.]
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Name
Address
City, State, Zip Code
Telephone Number [Optional]
(3D
-------
SUBMITTING A FOIA REQUEST?
GAIASIFIVAX. WFim-it-94
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is found in 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552, as amended, and the EPA regulations
for implementing the FOIA are found in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 1, Part 2. In an effort to assist
you in preparing and submitting a FOIA request for copies of records held by EPA for the states of AL, FL, GA, KY,
MS, NC, SC, and TN, we offer the following suggestions.
Try FAX First. The FAX Phone number for the FOIA Office is (404) 347-0021.
It is important that the letterhead or return address of "faxed" letters contain large print because small print is
difficult to read. You should also realize that some clarity of the original letter is lost in transmission, so your name,
address, and phone number should be readable. Help us to help you by ensuring that this vital information gets through
the FAX machines. Also, when you send a FOIA request by FAX, please do not mail the original letter. Identical
requests (one by FAX and one in the mail) usually results in EPA processing r\o separate requests, which may cause a
delay. Sony, but EPA cannot FAX copies of the information you request.
Simplify Your Request.
If you are requesting records for several sites or facilities, it's better to combine the requests into one. You
need only state that you are requesting copies of records under FOIA to ensure that we will handle the request in
accordance with the statutes and regulations. Your FOIA request is assigned to the persons who have custody of the
records, who will review and evaluate the request for (I) an adequate description of the records sought, (2) whether
payment of fees are guaranteed, and (3) readable information such as requester's name, address, and phone.
Be Specific and Detailed in Describing the Records.
Provide as much information as you can to help locate the records you request. If you know the Program
Office and/or person's name who has custody of the records, please include that information in your letter. The major
Program offices are Waste, Water, Air, Environmental Services, and Policy A Management. Include pertinent data
such as the name of the site or facility, name of previous owner (s), location by state, county, and/or EPA identification
number, time period, and background. When requesting the "FINDS" list, specify the states and counties.
Give an Assurance of Payment for Providing Copies.
When you give an assurance of payment in your request letter, it saves time. If you do not guarantee payment
ofwts, your re$mi could bt Meytd &&**** to*# #
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
CHAPTER 7: EXEMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS
1. OVERVIEW
FOIA establishes nine exemptions which provide the only basis
for withholding information. The exemptions may apply singly or
in combination to a given request. The nine exemptions are
listed in the box below and discussed at length in the body of
the chapter. If you have questions concerning whether specific
documents may fall under any of the exemptions, consult the
appropriate FOI or legal office.
FOIA also specifies certain types of information that are not
subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.
Records that are excluded from FOIA provisions and the manner in
which requests for such information should be handled by action
offices is discussed later in this chapter.
Exemption
1 - Matters of National Defense or
Foreign Policy
Exemption
2 - Internal Agency Rules
Exemption
3 - Information Exempted by Other
Statutes
Exemption
4 - Trade Secrets, Commercial, or
Financial Information (Confidential
Business Information)
Exemption
5 - Privileged Inter- or Intra-Agency
Memoranda
Exemption
6 - Personal Privacy
Exemption
7 - Records or Information Compiled for
Law Enforcement Purposes
Exemption
8 - Records of Financial Institutions
Exemption
9 - Geological or Geophysical Infor-
mation and Data Concerning Wells
7-1
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
2. THE NINE EXEMPTIONS
a. Exemption 1 - Matters of National Defense or Foreign
Policy. This exemption authorizes an agency to withhold
information concerning national defense or foreign policy.
1) To qualify under this exemption, the information must
fall under the criteria established by Executive
Order 12356 (implementing the National Security
System) to be classified in the interest of national
defense or foreign policy and in fact be properly
classified pursuant to procedural and substantive
criteria contained in the Executive Order.
2) Certain information may be classified or reclassified
after EPA has received a request for it under FOIA.
Special approvals are required. No EPA document may
be classified or reclassified once a request for the
document under FOIA or Privacy Act has been received,
unless the classification is clearly consistent with
Executive Order 12356 and is authorized by the
Administrator (see Facilities and Support Services
Manual, Volume 4850, Security, Part 2, Document
Security, Chapter SCR 2-03, Classification).
3) With the Agency's increased involvement in the
international arena, it is quite likely that we will
have classified records in our possession that are
responsive to FOIA requests.
b. Exemption 2 - Internal Agency Rules. This exemption
protects records "related solely to the internal personnel rules
and practices of an agency."
1) Internal matters of a relatively trivial nature for
which there is no substantial and legitimate public
interest in disclosure are encompassed under this
exemption. Examples include: documents governing
staff use of parking facilities; statements of policy
as to sick leave; and file numbers, routing stamps
and other administrative markings. The rationale for
such withholdings is to prevent unwarranted
administrative burden.
2) As a matter of policy, EPA does not withhold records
of a trivial nature, even though such records fall
within Exemption 2. Discretionary release of such
records is encouraged (see Chapter 9).
7-2
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
3) Exemption 2 also has been interpreted to encompass
more substantial internal matters, the disclosure of
which would allow circumvention of a statute or
agency regulation.
c. Exemption 3 - Information Exempted by Other Statutes.
Under this exemption, information that is specifically exempted
from disclosure by another Federal statute, which has been.
enacted by Congress, is also exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
1) One example is statements of government witnesses
relating to federal criminal prosecutions under the
Jencks Act.
2) The statute in question must (1) leave no discretion
as to the requirement that matters be withheld from
the public or (2) establish particular criteria for
withholding or refer to particular types of matters
to be withheld.
3) The Privacy Act is not an Exemption 3 statute.
Privacy considerations are covered under Exemption 6
or 7(C).
d. Exemption 4 - Trade Secrets, Commercial or Financial
Information (Confidential Business Information). This exemption
allows the Agency to withhold trade secrets and commercial or
financial information obtained from a person and privileged or
confidential. EPA regulations elaborating on Exemption 4 are
located at 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B. See Chapter 8 for a
detailed discussion of procedures to be followed in responding to
requests involving Confidential Business Information (CBI).
e. Exemption 5 - Privileged Inter-Agency or Intra-Agency
Memoranda. This exemption allows the Agency to withhold from
disclosure inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda or letters
which fall under one or more of the following privileges:
o the deliberative process privilege;
o the attorney work-product privilege;
o the attorney-client privilege;
o the government commercial information privilege;
o the expert witness report privilege;
o the investigative report privilege; and
o the confidential informant privilege (see also
Exemption (b)(7)(D)).
7-3
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual 1550
05/04/92
1) Agency Discretion and Waiver. Even though a document
falls under one of the privileges, the Agency encour-
ages the discretionary release of the document,
unless release would significantly harm the Agency
decisionmaking process. All of these privileges may
have been waived if the Agency has disclosed the
document to third parties (see Chapter 6, Section 3
on Prior Disclosure).
2) Inter- or Intra-Agency Records. Exemption 5 only
applies to inter- or intra-agency records.
o Inter-Agency Records include only those trans-
mitted between Federal agencies, but generally not
those transmitted between Federal and State
agencies.
o Intra-Agency Records are those transmitted within
EPA and include reports prepared by outside
consultants at the request of the Agency. Recom-
mendations from State officials to EPA may be
considered intra-agency records in limited
circumstances when EPA has solicited State
comments, has a formal relationship with the
State, and the records concern a specific
deliberative process. (The Office of General
Counsel or Regional Counsel should be consulted in
these instances.)
3) The Privileges under Exemption 5.
o The Deliberative Process Privilege. This
privilege incorporates the traditional government
privilege against discovery of government
documents. The purpose of this privilege is to
protect the quality of the Agency's decisionmaking
process (i.e., to protect against premature
disclosure of proposed policies before they are
adopted), to encourage candid and frank
discussions among Agency officials, and to avoid
premature disclosure which could mislead the
public. NOTE: Former Administrator Ruckelshaus1
memorandum of October 3, 1984, addresses the
assertion of the deliberative process privilege in
litigation and does not cover the assertion of
this privilege in FOIA matters.
7-4
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
o Predecisional. Deliberative Documents. Only pre-
decisional, deliberative documents may be with-
held. Predecisional, deliberative documents are
written prior to the Agency's final decision and
usually contain recommendations or express
opinions on that decision. These documents
typically discuss the pros and cons of the
Agency's adoption of one viewpoint or another. In
determining whether a document is predecisional,
consider the document's language and its place in
the Agency's chain of decisionmaking. Documents
written by a subordinate and transmitted to a
superior are more likely to be predecisional than
those written by a person with final decision-
making authority. (NOTE: As a general rule,
action offices must segregate from the record
those predecisional and deliberative sections and
release the factual portions to the requester.)
o Drafts of Documents are Often Predecisional. They
must be part of the decisionmaking chain and
either (1) contain language which discusses or
debates the decision being made, or makes
recommendations, such as a memorandum from a
subordinate to a superior which discusses the
effects and pros and cons of the decision; or (2)
represent a tentative expression of the Agency's
position, as in a draft administrative order or
memorandum which is being reviewed prior to the
adoption of a final Agency position.
o Factual Portions of Deliberative Process Documents
Must Ordinarily be Released. The deliberative
process privilege does not allow the withholding
of purely factual portions of documents. Purely
factual portions of these documents must be
released if they can be segregated from the
remainder of the document (see Chapter 6, Section
6). If the facts themselves reflect the Agency's
deliberations or involve some subjective opinion
which may be reviewed or evaluated and changed,
such factual portions may also be withheld.
o Final and Post-Decisional Documents. Final
decision documents and post-decisional documents
may not be withheld under the deliberative process
privilege. These include post-decisional analyses
or explanations of a final decision as well as
7-5
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
descriptions of Agency efforts to enforce current
Agency policies. Documents lose their
predecisional status if they are adopted, either
formally or informally, as the Agency's final
position on a matter, or if they are specifically
incorporated by reference in a final Agency
decision. Similarly, the deliberative process
privilege does not allow the withholding of .'
"Agency working law," such as guidelines, orders,
decisions or interpretations that are used to make
decisions affecting the public.
o Settlement Documents. Some courts have held that
documents transmitted between the government and
third parties during settlement negotiations are
not inter- or intra-agency documents, but have
indicated much sympathy for withholding such
documents from public disclosure for policy
reasons. The Department of Justice has indicated
that settlement documents may be withheld by
agencies at the administrative level, particularly
where strong policy interests militating against
disclosure are present.
o The Attorney Work-Product Privilege. This
privilege allows the withholding of documents
prepared by, or at the direction of, an attorney
in anticipation of possible litigation (which can
include administrative proceedings). Litigation
need not have commenced but it must be reasonably
contemplated. This means that a specific claim
must exist that is likely to lead to litigation.
The privilege is still applicable after a legal
case has ended or even if it was never begun, as
long as the documents were prepared in reasonable
contemplation of litigation.
Segregable factual materials need not be deleted
from attorney work-product documents since the
facts are generally intertwined with an attorney's
evaluation of the case. The privilege, however,
does not extend to purely factual documents, such
as witness statements or objective data, unless
the documents reflect the results of an attorney's
evaluation, or reveal his/her strategy or thought
process.
7-6
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
o The Attorney-Client Privilege. This privilege
applies to confidential communications between
attorney and client. An attorney-client
relationship is necessary to invoke this
privilege. Such a relationship exists for
communications between an Agency attorney and an
Agency employee. The application of this
privilege requires that the communications between
the parties be of a confidential nature. Unlike
the attorney work-product privilege, the
availability of the attorney-client privilege is
not limited to the context of litigation. The
privilege still applies when this information is
disseminated within the Agency to persons involved
with the matter in question. However, unre-
stricted distribution within the Agency would
preclude the Agency from claiming the privilege.
o The Government Commercial Information Privilege.
A privilege is available to the government for
information it generates in the process leading up
to the award of a contract. This privilege
incorporates the language of Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(c)(7), which provides that "for good
cause shown ... a trade secret or . . . confi-
dential research, development or commercial
information" may be protected in discovery in
civil litigation. This privilege expires once the
contract is awarded or upon withdrawal of the
contractual offer. An example of this privilege
is cost estimates prepared by the government and
used to evaluate the construction proposals of
private contractors.
o The Expert Witness Report Privilege. Another
privilege that is commonly invoked allows the
withholding of records generated by an expert
witness.
o The Investigative Report Privilege. This
privilege has been applied to protect witness
statements in Inspector General investigations.
o The Confidential Informant Statement Privilege.
Statements obtained from confidential informants
such as statements given to the Inspector General
by witnesses who have been granted confiden-
tiality, may be withheld.
7-7
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
f. Exemption 6 - Personal Privacy. Exemption 6 permits the
withholding of all information about individuals in "personnel.
medical, and similar files, the disclosure of which would
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
1. Threshold test: The record must be a personnel,
medical or similar file. This is a relatively easy
test to meet. Personnel and medical files are easily
identified. The term "similar file" has been very
broadly interpreted to include any information about
a particular individual which is identifiable to that
individual.
o The actual label assigned to the file is of no
significance. Nor does the information have to be
of a highly sensitive or intimate nature.
o If a record can be sanitized so that the identity
of the individual cannot be determined from the
record itself, or from the record in conjunction
with publicly available information, the record is
not a similar file and does not meet the threshold
test for Exemption 6. Accordingly, a sanitized
copy of the record should be disclosed.
2. Balancing test: Information which meets the
threshold test is withholdable under Exemption 6 if
the invasion of privacy resulting from disclosure
would be clearly unwarranted. To determine this, the
individual's privacy interest must be balanced
against the public interest in disclosure.
Privacy interest: Encompasses the individual's
reasonable expectation of privacy and control over
the dissemination of personal information about
himself. Individuals have an expectation of privacy
with respect to information which, by its nature, is
personal, embarrassing or otherwise injurious to the
individual. Privacy interests also include the right
to be free from the secondary effects of disclosure
such as harassment or unwanted intrusions even if the
information itself is not inherently harmful.
o Individuals may have a privacy interest in
information which is publicly available, e.g.,
marital status or home address, but there is no
privacy interest in information which is very well
known and clearly in the public domain.
7-8
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
o Businesses and other entities do not have privacy
rights.
Public interest; There is a public interest in a
particular Agency record if disclosure of that record
sheds light on the operations or activities of the
government. The interest is that of the general .
public in knowing what its Government is doing. The
FOIA reguester's identity, personal motives or
interests (including commercial interests) in seeking
the information are not relevant to the issue of
public interest and must not be considered in
determining if a public interest exists.
Balancing process: First, determine if the
individual has any privacy interest in the
information. If there is none, the information must
be released even if there is no public interest.
Second, if there is a privacy interest, determine
whether any public interest in the information
exists. If both privacy and public interests exist,
the competing interests must be weighed against each
other and the stronger interest prevails. If the
privacy interest outweighs the public interest, the
information is exempt under Exemption 6 and may not
be released in the Agency's discretion.
3. Glomar; Occasionally a FOIA request is worded in
such a way that it would not be possible to deny the
record under Exemption 6 without revealing the very
information which is protected under the Exemption.
For example, drug counseling records maintained by
EPA's Employee Counseling and Assistance Program are
normally withholdable under Exemption 6. However, if
EPA denied a FOIA request for such records in
reliance on Exemption 6, the Agency would be
revealing the existence of such records, the very
information which is protected. To guard against
such inadvertent disclosures, the Agency may provide
a "Glomar" response; that is, it would neither
confirm nor deny the existence of records in response
to all requests for counseling records. The
appropriate EPA legal office must be contacted before
responding to the FOIA request in any case in which a
"Glomar" response might be suitable.
4. Law Enforcement Records: Exemption 6 would normally
be applicable to protect the personal privacy of
7-9
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
individuals named in law enforcement files if there
is no countervailing public interest. Exemption
7(C), which protects personal privacy in the law
enforcement context, would also be applicable. Since
the test for applying Exemption 7(C) is less
stringent than that of Exemption 6, consideration
should always be given to relying on both exemptions.
See discussion of Exemption 7(C) below.
5. Personnel-Related Records on Federal Employees: EPA
frequently receives FOIA requests for personnel-
related information on current and former Agency
employees. Federal employees have privacy rights
with respect to the personal details of their
employment and there is frequently little or no
public interest in this information. However, other
personnel information on Federal employees is
considered available to the public upon request
because it has been determined by the courts, the
Office of Personnel Management and/or common practice
that there is little if any privacy interest in this
information. Many records, such as employee
applications. (SF 171's) and official personnel
folders, contain both exempt and non-exempt
information. The following lists describe the types
of personnel-related information which is frequently
subject to FOIA requests and whether such information
is customarily considered exempt or not under
Exemption 6.
7-10
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual 1550
05/04/92
EXEMPT
NOT EXEMPT
Social Security No.
Name/position/organization *
Home addresses & Telephone No.
Office addresses/ Tel. No. *
Salaries in the Private Sector
Fed./State Gov. salaries (past
and present)/amounts of awards
and within grade increases
Evaluations/appraisals
Position descriptions/job
standards
Employment/Education data
not related to qualifi-
cations for Federal employment
Employment/Education data
related to Qualifications for
Federal employment
Identities of unsuccessful
applicants for employment or
promotion
Identities of successful
applicants for employment or
promotion
Recommendations for
promotions, awards
College grades
Birthdate/Marital status/
similar personal or family
data
Approved promotions, awards,
including employee grade and
step
Past Federal/State/Military
service and dates of service *
Life/health/charity/thrift
savings options and
withholding data
Citizenship
Reasons for terminating past
employment
* With the exception of
certain sensitive positions
Leave records
7-11
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
g. Exemption 7 - Records or Information Compiled For Law
Enforcement Purposes. In 1986, exemption 7 was amended to apply
to all records or information compiled for law enforcement
purposes whose release could reasonably be expected to cause the
specified harm. Prior to 1986 the exemption applied only to
investigatory records whose release would cause the harm each
sub-section sought to prevent. Exemption 7 provides that records
or information compiled for law enforcement purposes need not be
disclosed in six specific instances (discussed below).
1) Exemption 7(A): Interference with Enforcement
Proceedings. Records or information compiled for law
enforcement purposes may be withheld where disclosure
"could reasonably be expected to interfere with
enforcement proceedings." Harm to the government's
case in court by premature release of evidence or
information, or damage to the Agency's ability to
conduct an investigation, constitutes interference
under this exemption. Damage to a related or similar
enforcement proceeding also constitutes interference.
Exemption 7(A) can be invoked only as long as the
enforcement proceeding is in progress, pending or
anticipated.
The government must be able to specifically
articulate the kind of harm that would affect its
case. Some types of harm that fall under this
exemption include premature disclosure of the
government's evidence and strategy or the focus of
its investigation, and the possibility that potential
witnesses and sources of information would be
inhibited.
The applicability of this exemption need not be
justified document by document since some generic
categorization of documents is permitted. For
instance, acceptable generic categories include
"witness statements prior to a hearing," "affidavits
and interviews of charging parties," and
"correspondence with attorneys and charging parties."
2) Exemption 7(B): Deprive a Person of the Right to a
Fair Trial. Records or information compiled for law
enforcement purposes may also be withheld if their
disclosure "would deprive a person of the right to a
fair trial or an impartial adjudication." This
exemption applies mostly in the criminal trials of
individuals.
7-12
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual 1550
05/04/92
3) Exemption 7(C): Unwarranted Invasion of Personal
Privacy. Records or information compiled for law
enforcement purposes may be withheld if disclosure
"could reasonably be expected to constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." The
public interest in the disclosure of a document must
be balanced against the invasion of privacy that
would result from disclosure. Exemption 7(C) is not
limited to matters contained in an individual
personnel, medical or similar file, but pertains to
any personal information compiled for law enforcement
purposes.
Courts have recognized the danger of damage to an
individual's reputation simply because his or her
name is mentioned in a record compiled for law
enforcement purposes even though he or she is not
charged. Such information may be released only where
exceptional interests weigh in favor of disclosure.
Exemption 7(C) is also used to protect the identities
of FBI agents and other law enforcement officials who
are personally involved in compiling records or
information for law enforcement purposes, and to
withhold the names of informers who may not
technically qualify as confidential sources under
Exemption 7(D).
4) Exemption 7(D): Disclose Identity of Confidential
Source. The first prong of Exemption 7(D) applies to
civil law enforcement investigations and permits
records and information compiled for law enforcement
purposes to be withheld if disclosure "would reveal
the identity of the source." The second prong of
Exemption 7(D) applies to a criminal law enforcement
matter and allows the withholding not only of the
identity of the confidential source, but also any
information provided by the source. This allows
withholding of information provided by a confidential
source even if the information was obtainable by
other means.
There is no balancing test used in applying this
exemption. To receive protection under this Section,
the Agency must have given sources an express promise
of confidentiality, or there must be circumstances
from which assurances of confidentiality reasonably
may be inferred.
7-13
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual 1550
05/04/92
5) Exemption 7(E): Reveal Techniques. Procedures or
Guidelines. This exemption permits the withholding
of records or information compiled for law
enforcement purposes that "would disclose techniques
and procedures for law enforcement investigations or
prosecution, or would disclose guidelines for law
enforcement investigation or prosecution if such
disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk
circumvention of law." Generally, the technique or
procedure should not be known to the public. Those
portions of an internal agency enforcement manual or
guidelines that would enable the circumvention of the
law should be withheld.
6) Exemption 7(F): Endanger Life or Safety of Any
Individual. Under this exemption any records or
information compiled for law enforcement purposes may
be withheld if disclosure "could reasonably be
expected to endanger the life or physical safety of
any individual." No balancing test is required.
h. Exemption 8 - Records of Financial Institutions. This
exemption applies to reports prepared for agencies
responsible for the regulation or supervision of
financial institutions (such as the Federal Reserve
Board). It generally does not apply to records in EPA's
possession.
i. Exemption 9 - Geological and Geophysical Information and
Data Concerning Wells. This exemption pertains to
"geological and geophysical information and data,
including maps, concerning wells."
3. EXCLUSIONS
a. Substantive Guidelines.
1) Whenever a request is made which involves access to
records described in sub-section (b)(7)(A) and
o the investigation or procedure involves a possible
violation of criminal law; and
o there is reason to believe that the subject of the
investigation is unaware of its pendency and
7-14
-------
Freedom of Information Act Manual
1550
05/04/92
o the disclosure of the existence of the records
could reasonably be expected to interfere with
enforcement proceedings,
the Agency may, only during such time as these
circumstances continue, treat the records as not
subject to the FOIA reguirements.
2) Action offices shall also deny the existence of
records whenever informant records maintained by the
Agency under an informant's name or personal
identifier are requested by a third party according
to the informant's name or personal identifier and
the informant's status as an informant has not been
officially confirmed.
b. Procedural Guidelines. In situations where it would
appear to be appropriate to rely on the exclusion provisions,
action offices must consult with the Office of General Counsel,
Contracts and General Law Division prior to responding to the
request.
It is important to distinguish between the exclusions set
forth above and the situation where an agency expressly refuses
to confirm or deny the existence of records (i.e.,"Glomar")
responsive to the FOIA request.
7-15
------- |