THE 2005 GULF COAST HURRICANES AND
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS-
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE DISASTER
PREPAREDNESS/RESPONSE
August 2006
A Report
prepared by the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
a Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Acknowledgements
The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) wishes to express its
appreciation to the members of the Gulf Coast Hurricanes Work Group (Work Group), who
worked under extremely difficult circumstances to produce draft recommendations for the
NEJAC's consideration. Most Work Group members came from devastated Gulf Coast areas,
and were themselves struggling to rebuild their own lives and communities. The NEJAC
especially wishes to acknowledge Ms. Wilma Subra, Work Group Chair, for the leadership, hard
work, and dedication she provided to producing this report.
Disclaimer
This Report and recommendations have been written as part of the activities of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council, a public advisory committee providing independent
advice and recommendations on the issue of environmental justice to the Administrator and other
officials of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
This report has not been reviewed for approval by the EPA, and hence, its contents and
recommendations do not necessarily represent the views and the policies of the Agency, nor of
other agencies in the Executive Branch of the federal government.
-------
THE 2005 GULF COAST HURRICANES AND
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS-
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE DISASTER
PREPAREDNESS/RESPONSE
August 2006
A Report
prepared by the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
a Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council Members
Richard Moore, Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice (Chair)
Sue Briggum, Waste Management, Inc.
Charles "Chip" Collette, Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Stephen Etsitty, Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency
Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network
Eileen Guana, Southwestern Law School
Jodena Henneke, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Richard Lazarus, Georgetown University Law Center
Harold Mitchell, ReGenesis, Inc.
Juan Parras, De Madres a Madres, Inc.
Shankar Prasad, California Environmental Protection Agency
Andrew Sawyers, Maryland Department of the Environment
Wilma Subra, Southern Mutual Help Association
Connie Tucker, Southeast Community Research Center
Kenneth Warren, Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen
Benjamin Wilson, Beveridge & Diamond, P.C.
Charles Lee, Designated Federal Officer, U.S. EPA Office of Environmental Justice
Gulf Coast Hurricanes Work Group Members
Wilma Subra, Southern Mutual Help Association (Work Group Chair)
Oliver Houck, JD, Tulane University Law School
Paul H. Templet, PhD, Professor, Louisiana State University
Jonathan B. Ward Jr., Ph.D., University of Texas/Medical
Beverly Wright, PhD, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice
Chuck Barlow, JD, Entergy Services, Inc.
Calvin Booker, Waste Management, Inc.
David Wise, Shintech, Inc.
James Black, Center for Environmental & Economic Justice
Stephen Bradberry, Louisiana Environmental Justice Project/LA-ACORN
Pamela Dashiell, Holy Cross Neighborhood Association
Juan H. Parras, De Madres a Madres, Inc.
Chuck Carr Brown, PhD, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
Charles T. "Chip" Collette, Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection
Johnny L. Dupree City of Hattiesburg, MS
Jodena N. Henneke, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Kevin Stephens, MD, JD, City of New Orleans
Gloria Tatum, Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality
Brenda Dardar Robichaux, United Houma Nation
Charles Lee, Designated Federal Officer, U.S. EPA Office of Environmental Justice
-------
We wholeheartedly affirm EPA's concern for groups which may be more vulnerable to the
environmental impacts of natural disasters because of physical, biological, socio-economic,
cultural, historical, or other factors. In its Framework for Cumulative Risk Assessment, EPA
defined vulnerability as: (1) susceptibility or sensitivity; (2) differential exposure; (3) differential
preparedness, and/or (4) differential ability to recover. We urge EPA to foster disaster research,
policy, planning, and program implementation which is more historically, socially, and
geographically informed. Indeed, experts agree that pre-disaster discrimination-be it economic,
educational or social-will exacerbate the impact of a disaster on a community. We also urge
EPA, where appropriate, to take a broad view of the environment and consider the environmental
and/or public health impacts related to housing, transportation, the interrelationship between the
built and natural environments, and other issues. Indeed, greater use of vulnerability analyses
and application of environmental justice principles can significantly enrich disaster policy-
making.
Representatives of Gulf Coast communities identified fourteen issues of concern. The
report grouped these issues and their associated recommendations into the following three areas:
1. Enhance EPA's disaster preparedness and response procedures;
2. Facilitate risk communications and environmental health response; and
3. Foster environmentally sound redevelopment.
We will highlight the most prominent recommendations. With respect to enhancing EPA
disaster preparedness and response procedures, we recommend that EPA consider revising its
disaster management procedures. Such revisions may include:
• Identify vulnerable populations and their environmental and/or public health needs
through use of tools such as thq Environmental Justice Geographic Assessment Tool;
• Ensure communications with, and input from, vulnerable populations in both the
development and implementation of new disaster response procedures;
• Facilitate greater inter- and intra-governmental coordination to protect vulnerable
populations;
• Incorporate an environmental justice function and staffing support in the Incident
Command System structure; and
• Develop public participation guidelines for disaster response situations, and promote their
adoption and use by relevant emergency response organizations in both the public and
private sectors.
Other recommendations in this area involve: (1) strengthening state, tribal and local government
preparedness; (2) ensuring that disaster communications delivery mechanisms reach all
populations; and (3) developing guidelines for residents who may come in contact with
floodwater, sediments, and hazardous materials in the future.
With respect to risk communications, we recommend that EPA:
• Evaluate the effectiveness of current mechanisms for communities to communicate with
agencies, such as an over-reliance on the Internet;
• Use focus groups to prepare risk communication materials, both in advance of and during
disasters, and ensure that messages are understandable for culturally and educationally
diverse populations;
• Ensure that materials are available in needed languages;
-------
• Establish a credible forum for dialogue with affected stakeholders about different ways to
improve risk communications, including the use of forums and expert panels;
• Use neutral facilitators, when appropriate;
• Provide technical assistance to communities to access and interpret data, and
• Build partnerships to ensure community outreach and meaningful involvement for
populations which historically have had less access to environmental and public health
information and/or the decision-making process.
In addition, EPA should work with appropriate agencies to address issues such as mold, debris
and sediments, and assess whether a health survey of Gulf Coast residents impacted by the
hurricanes is appropriate.
With respect to environmentally sound redevelopment, we recommend that EPA work
with appropriate agencies to foster environmentally sustainable redevelopment and the
restoration of wetlands and barrier islands. In addition, EPA should work with appropriate
agencies to address issues such as Brownfields assessment and cleanup, worker protection, and
job training and creation.
In closing, we want to acknowledge the members of the Gulf Coast Hurricanes Work
Group for their contributions to this report. In particular, we wish to recognize the leadership,
hard work and dedication provided by Ms. Wilma Subra, Work Group Chair. We also want to
acknowledge the many EPA offices that worked with the NEJAC to develop meaningful
recommendations. These EPA offices include: Region 4; Region 6; Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (Office of Emergency Management, Office of Brownfields Cleanup and
Redevelopment); Office of Water; Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation; Office of
Radiation and Indoor Air; Office of Research and Development; and the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance (Office of Environmental Justice). We look forward to your
response to our advice and recommendations.
Sincerely,
'SRjcAarcl Q/tfloowe /s/
Richard Moore
Chair
cc: NEJAC Members
Granta Nakayama, Assistant Administrator, OECA
Thomas Dunne, Associate Administrator, Homeland Security
Susan Bodine, Assistant Administrator, OSWER
Catherine McCabe, Deputy Assistant Administrator, OECA
Stanly Meiburg, Deputy Regional Administrator, EPA Region 4
Lawrence Starfield, Deputy Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6
Barry E. Hill, Director, OEJ
Deborah Dietrich, Director, OEM
Charles Lee, Associate Director, OEJ and NEJAC Designated Federal Officer
Victoria Robinson, NEJAC Program Manager, OEJ
-------
[PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
-------
THE 2005 GULF COAST HURRICANES AND
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
FUTURE DISASTER PREPAREDNESS/RESPONSE
INTRODUCTION
The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is a formal federal advisory
committee chartered pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act ("FACA") to provide
advice and recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) on matters related to environmental justice. This report responds to EPA's request for
advice and recommendations on the following question:
"How can EPA effectively address the vulnerabilities of all communities to public
health and environmental risks and harms, including minority and low-income
communities, in EPA's response and rebuilding, and preparedness and prevention
efforts, in the aftermath of natural disasters similar to Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita, pursuant to the National Response Plan and applicable statutory authorities
and their implementing regulations, as well as Executive Order 12898?"
It is everyone's collective hope that, in the aftermath of disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita in 2005, we as a Nation not only will be able to rebuild healthier, more sustainable
communities, but also will be better prepared both to respond to future such events and to
prevent their negative consequences. Therefore, the NEJAC has worked earnestly to provide
advice and recommendations on the important question above. The EPA convened a multi-
stakeholder group of individuals from the Gulf Coast region, in the form of the NEJAC Gulf
Coast Hurricanes Work Group (Work Group), to formulate a set of initial draft recommendations
for the NEJAC to deliberate and act upon. The Work Group met in person twice, in New
Orleans, Louisiana (February 1-2, 2006) and Biloxi, Mississippi (April 11-12, 2006). The Work
Group also conducted several conference calls. In addition, the NEJAC Executive Council
deliberated on the Work Group's draft recommendations, and received public comments
regarding them, at a NEJAC Public Meeting in Washington, DC (June 20-22, 2006).
NEJAC Work Group members, who themselves have been struggling to rebuild and renew their
lives and devastated communities, requested that the NEJAC express their appreciation to the
EPA Administrator for the selfless, and often heroic, efforts of EPA staff in responding to the
recent hurricanes. They recognized the monumental scope of the hurricanes' impacts, and
commended EPA's rapid and extensive response efforts. In particular, they noted EPA's
sensitivity to the needs of disadvantaged communities. They urged the NEJAC to strongly
convey their communities' sense of tremendous anguish and urgency regarding their current and
future challenges, as well as EPA's important role in addressing them. As Mayor Johnny Dupree
of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, a member of that Work Group, poignantly stated on April 12, 2006:
"Because of EPA's past good work in environmental justice, communities in the Gulf Coast have
high expectations for EPA to provide leadership in addressing their concerns."
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 2 of 13
The NEJAC wholeheartedly affirms EPA's concern for those groups which may be more
vulnerable to the environmental impacts of natural disasters because of physical, biological,
socio-economic, cultural, historical, or other factors. We concur with the EPA charge's
description of the factors which may result in certain groups being more vulnerable to public
health and/or environmental impacts:
"Minority and/or low-income populations may reside in areas with polluting
facilities and/or other sources of environmental contamination. Such populations
may suffer from health conditions and other risk factors that make them more
susceptible to environmental risks and harms, particularly the long-term impacts.
Minority and/or low-income populations sometimes lack access to environmental
information and are unprepared to cope with environmental risks and harms,
including proper safeguards for reentry. Lastly, such populations may lack the
resources to recover from negative environmental impacts, such as access to health
care or the capacity to ensure safe and appropriate reuse of contaminated
properties."
EPA has defined vulnerability as: (1) susceptibility or sensitivity; (2) differential exposure;
(3) differential preparedness, and/or (4) differential ability to recover.1 For the purposes of this
report, individuals, communities, groups, or populations affected by any, or a combination, of the
above factors are referred to as being "vulnerable."
Emerging literature on the issues of environmental justice and vulnerable populations, in the
wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, speaks to the need for disaster research, policy, planning,
and program implementation to be more historically, socially, and geographically informed.
This literature argues for taking a broad view of the environment, which includes issues such as
air quality, housing, and transportation, and the interrelationship between the built and natural
environments. Additionally, this literature advocates for a move away from viewing disasters as
acute events merely, concentrated in time and space, and separate from routine, or nondisaster
social processes. Indeed, experts agree that pre-disaster discrimination-be it economic,
educational or social-will exacerbate the impact of a disaster on a community.2 In this context,
greater use of vulnerability analyses and application of environmental justice principles can
significantly enrich disaster policy-making.3
To facilitate a much needed dialogue between the environmental justice and disaster
preparedness/response fields, NEJAC requests that EPA share with the public their lessons
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Framework for Cumulative Risk Assessment, EPA/630/P-02/001F, May
2003, p. 39-42.
2 Laska, Shirley, "The Role of Social Science Research in Disaster Preparedness and Response," Testimony to U.S.
House of Representatives Science Committee, Subcommittee on Research, November 10, 2005.
3 Center for Progressive Reform, "An Unnatural Disaster: The Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina," Washington, DC:
CPR Publication #512, September 2005.
Houck, Oliver, "Can We Save New Orleans?" Tulane Environmental Law Journal 19(1): 1-68, Spring 2006.
Pastor, Manuel, Robert D. Bullard, James K. Boyce, Alice Fothergill, Rachel Morello-Frosch, and Beverly Wright,
"In the Wake of the Storm: Environment, Disaster, and Race After Katrina," New York: Russell Sage Foundation,
May 2006.
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 3 of 13
learned regarding disaster response, rebuilding, preparedness, and prevention efforts for
minority, low-income, and other vulnerable populations. Since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita,
various EPA program offices, e.g., the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER) and the Office of Water (OW), and Regions 4 and 6 have worked to document lessons
learned from EPA's response to those natural disasters. Those lessons learned will inform
practices by all parties to better address the needs of minority, low-income, and other vulnerable
populations in future disaster events.
Additionally, while the NEJAC has restricted its recommendations to actions EPA can take
"pursuant to the National Response Plan and applicable statutory authorities and their
implementing regulations, as well as Executive Order 12898," many of the identified issues
cannot be addressed adequately without significant actions by other federal, state, or local
government agencies. For that reason, the NEJAC wishes to impress upon EPA the need to
proactively provide leadership to facilitate actions, where appropriate, by those agencies. In
addition to being the Co-Lead, with the U.S. Coast Guard, for Emergency Support Function
(ESF) #10 (Oil and Hazardous Materials), EPA plays a substantive role in nine other ESFs under
the National Response Plan (NRP) in cooperation with other Federal agencies. These include:
ESF #3 (Public Works and Engineering);
ESF #8 (Public Health and Medical Services);
ESF #11 (Agriculture and Natural Resources);
ESF #12 (Energy);
ESF #14 (Long-Term Community Recovery; and
ESF #15 (External Affairs).
The NEJAC urges the EPA Administrator and his leadership team to recognize that issues
affecting environmentally and economically distressed communities do not fit neatly within
Agency mandates. In this light, the NEJAC urges EPA to aggressively communicate to other
agencies the importance of incorporating environmental justice considerations into their
decision-making process, and to share EPA's tools for accomplishing this goal. As the lead
agency for Executive Order 12898, EPA has a special responsibility to play this role.
RECOMMENDATIONS
To respond to EPA's charge, the NEJAC makes recommendations in the following three subject
areas:
• Subject Area #1: Enhance EPA's disaster preparedness and response
procedures;
• Subject Area #2: Facilitate risk communications and environmental health
response; and
• Subject Area #3: Foster environmentally sound redevelopment.
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 4 of 13
For each area, the NEJAC has identified specific issues as well as specific actions,
implementation mechanisms, and the official[s] within EPA who should be charged to take those
actions.
SUBJECT AREA #1: ENHANCE EPA'S DISASTER PREPAREDNESS AND
RESPONSE PROCEDURES
In order to enhance EPA disaster preparedness and response procedures, the NEJAC makes
recommendations to address the following issues:
Revision of disaster management procedures;
State, tribal, and local government preparedness;
Disaster communications delivery mechanisms; and
Contaminated flood water, sediments, and associated hazardous materials.
ISSUE 1-1: REVISION OF EPA DISASTER MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES - EPA has
played a major role in the assessment and response effort as a result of the Gulf Coast hurricanes.
However, concerns have been raised about whether EPA's assessment and response results and
procedures have been adequate to address the needs of low income, minority, elderly, and other
vulnerable populations. While natural disasters, such as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, do not
discriminate in terms of their impact, certain populations, because of the vulnerability factors
identified earlier, may face greater public health and/or environmental risks and harms. It is
clear that these vulnerable populations need special attention when natural disasters occur. EPA
needs to be aware of where the most vulnerable populations reside in order to focus appropriate
resources to address the special needs of such residents. As part of its examination of its current
disaster management policies and procedures, EPA needs to also review its procedures for the
implementation of environmental waivers. The process for granting of environmental waivers
needs to be clearly communicated to affected stakeholders. EPA must explain to stakeholders
what considerations were involved (e.g., emergency pre-approved plans) in the issuance of any
waivers. In addition, concerns involving hurricane debris removal in New Orleans highlight the
current lack of clear and practicable public participation guidelines for disaster response
situations.
Recommendation 1-1: The EPA Assistant Administrator for OSWER should carefully
examine whether significant changes in EPA's response procedures are necessary to deal with
future natural disasters, particularly as needed to address the needs of the most vulnerable
populations. To enhance the Agency's ability to address environmental justice issues, EPA
should:
Identify vulnerable populations and their environmental and/or public health needs
through use of tools such as the Environmental Justice Geographic Assessment Tool;4
Ensure communications with, and input from, vulnerable populations in both the
development and implementation of new disaster response procedures;
4 www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaliustice
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 5 of 13
Facilitate greater inter- and intra-governmental coordination to protect vulnerable
populations;
Incorporate an environmental justice function and staffing support in the Incident
Command System structure;
Develop public participation guidelines for disaster response situations, and promote their
adoption and use by relevant emergency response organizations in both the public and
private sectors;
Include a stakeholder communications and implementation plan for the exercise of any
environmental waivers;
Consider whether, when, and how it would be appropriate for EPA to help resolve
disputes through use of such options as mediation, collaborative problem-solving models,
and other approaches that assure the best information and respect for the needs of the
community;
Review whether or not there needs to be emergency preparedness exercises to identify
and involve vulnerable populations;
Review and revise, if necessary, its procedures for ensuring that waste management
facilities used for waste disposition have proper safeguards;
Analyze and publicize the demographic characteristics of areas where environmental
sampling results exceed EPA and/or state agency risk levels;
Evaluate EPA emergency response activities to ensure that such activities do not result in
disparate impacts.
If deemed necessary, EPA should immediately begin to implement these revised response
procedures. EPA should work with other federal agencies to modify, as appropriate, ESF #10,
the National Contingency Plan, the National Approach for Response and its disaster response
procedures, to adequately address the specific needs of the most vulnerable populations. EPA
should also incorporate disaster management training into its environmental education program.
This disaster management plan evaluation and appropriate revisions should be based upon input
from people "on the ground" on how to best implement these changes.
ISSUE 1-2: STATE, TRIBAL, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT PREPAREDNESS - In
major disaster events in the future, state, tribal, and local government emergency preparedness
organizations in the Gulf Coast region should be better prepared to address the needs of
populations which may be disproportionately affected by environmental risk and harm by such
events. EPA should work with other federal agencies, and state, tribal, and local governments to
create a state of preparedness in the Gulf Coast region for future natural disasters. Advance
planning for major disaster events is currently inadequate in the Gulf Coast region, as well as
other areas of the country.
Recommendation 1-2: The EPA Assistant Administrator for OSWER should amend EPA's
guidance to State Emergency Response Commissions (SERC), Local Emergency Planning
Committees (LEPC), and other state/local emergency management organizations, to improve
disaster planning by state, tribal, and local government jurisdictions. This updated guidance
should call for items such as the following:
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 6 of 13
Better procedures for the evacuation of vulnerable populations, such as low-income and
minority residents and hospital and nursing facility patients; and
Emergency response exercises/drills involving the most vulnerable populations.
In addition, EPA should work with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to strengthen regional disaster management
structures. These efforts include government-community forums on disaster management and
disaster management guidelines for community organizations and residents.
ISSUE 1-3: DISASTER COMMUNICATIONS DELIVERY MECHANISMS - It is clear
that the demands for information by affected stakeholders greatly challenged EPA and first
responders' ability to communicate with each other and provide information to the public. EPA
response personnel had telecommunications problems during the early weeks after the hurricane.
In some Gulf Coast region communities, phone and computer systems were severely impacted.
A major issue for EPA is ensuring that the communications delivery mechanisms are in place to
reach historically disadvantaged and underserved populations.
Recommendation 1-3: The EPA Assistant Administrator for OSWER should develop an
improved disaster management communications action plan in anticipation of similar disasters in
the future. This action plan should ensure the communications equipment and delivery
mechanisms are in place to reach all affected residents, particularly the most vulnerable
populations. EPA should address the inadequacies of its own telecommunications equipment to
be better prepared for future major natural disasters. EPA also should work in collaboration with
communities so that such plans address the cultural, linguistic, and other needs of different
groups. In addition, EPA should work with utilities and the private sector to develop a better
system for identifying technology to meet community telecommunications needs in the aftermath
of future disasters.
ISSUE 1-4: CONTAMINATED FLOOD WATER, SEDIMENTS, AND ASSOCIATED
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - During future major hurricanes and rain events, it is probable
that there will floodwater and sediments. These floodwater and sediments will contain various
levels of contaminants, such as hazardous substances and sewage sludge. Residents, particularly
in minority and low-income communities, will not have easy access to clean water, vaccinations,
doctors, or disinfecting soap.
Recommendation 1-4: The EPA Assistant Administrator for OSWER should work with
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to develop guidelines for
residents who may come in contact with contaminated flood water, sediments, and
associated hazardous materials. Written materials should be culturally appropriate, prepared
in advance, and translated into the necessary languages. EPA and other agencies should
disseminate these guidelines early to potentially affected stakeholders, and encourage the
implementation of these guidelines. EPA should also work with other appropriate federal
and state officials to stock emergency shelters with appropriate medical supplies.
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 7 of 13
SUJBECT AREA #2: FACIILITATE RISK COMMUNICATIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH RESPONSE
In order to better facilitate risk communications and environmental health response, the NEJAC
makes recommendations to address the following issues:
Risk communications;
Community partnerships and collaborative problem-solving;
Mold contamination;
Waste debris and sediments; and
Public health concerns.
ISSUE 2-1: RISK COMMUNICATIONS - The NEJAC recognizes that EPA, as well as other
federal, state, tribal, and local government agencies, have undertaken extensive outreach and
community involvement activities in their efforts to communicate with residents affected by the
hurricanes. Massive numbers of fact sheets and other information materials have been
distributed throughout the Gulf Coast region. Some documents have been translated into
Spanish, Vietnamese, and other languages for non-English speaking populations. EPA has
recognized, however, that these important information documents do not always reach all
individuals, including those affected by factors which make them more vulnerable to
environmental and/or public health risks and harms. In addition, an apparent disagreement exists
between federal, state, tribal, and local government officials, and community and environmental
organizations about the adequacy of environmental assessment and remediation activities to date.
Similarly, some environmental and community groups dispute the sufficiency of the testing and
contend that some of the Gulf Coast region is still marred by various contaminants. These
conflicting messages about environmental conditions have left some displaced residents in a
quandary as to whether it is safe to return home. This is particularly the case for the most
vulnerable populations.
Recommendation 2-1: The EPA Assistant Administrator for OSWER should work
proactively with environmental and health officials and affected stakeholders to improve risk
communications with vulnerable populations. Such an effort should:
Evaluate the effectiveness of current mechanisms for communities to communicate with
agencies, such as an over-reliance on the Internet;
Use focus groups to prepare risk communication materials, both in advance of and during
disasters, and ensure that messages are understandable for culturally and educationally
diverse populations;
Ensure that materials are available in needed languages;
Establish a credible forum for dialogue with affected stakeholders about different ways to
improve risk communications, including the use of forums and expert panels;
Use neutral facilitators, when appropriate; and
Provide technical assistance to communities to access and interpret data.
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 8 of 13
As part of this process, EPA should better communicate how it makes public health risk
decisions. EPA and appropriate state agencies should continue to develop a format for future
releases of environmental data in order to provide a better, more comprehensive, and
understandable explanation of the data.
ISSUE 2-2: COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS AND COLLABORATIVE PROBLEM-
SOLVING - Organizations at the local level throughout the Gulf Coast region have played a
critical role in addressing the environmental, public health, and quality of life needs of
communities devastated by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. These organizations include:
community-based organizations, academia, civic and faith-based organizations, business and
industry, and government. Building partnerships with these organizations is important to EPA's
achieving its environmental and public health mission. Such partnerships serve as a platform for
delivery of many EPA resources, as well as those of other federal and state agencies. In addition,
they are an ideal vehicle for working with non-traditional and difficult-to-reach subpopulations.
Examples of the activities of such partnership initiatives in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita include:
Distribution of reentry kits (.Louisiana Environmental Action Network, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana);
Supply of ice, water, and gasoline {local and tribal governments in Texas, Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, and Arkansas);
Environmental health outreach (University of Texas/Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas);
Sponsorship of community cleanup {Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, New
Orleans, Louisiana)., and
Surveillance and early notification of problems {electricpower suppliers).
Recommendation 2-2: Appropriate EPA Regional Administrators, including those in Region
4 and Region 6, should work with appropriate federal, state, tribal, and local government
agencies to support the creative use of partnerships to ensure community outreach and
meaningful involvement for populations which historically have had less access to
environmental and public health information and/or the decision-making process. Such
community-based partnerships can be effective in at least four important areas:
Meeting the immediate environmental/public health needs of communities;
Assisting community residents to participate meaningfully in the many meetings,
planning charettes, and community involvement activities being conducted by federal,
state, tribal, and local governments;
Assisting community residents to interpret environmental and public health data through
venues such as community workshops and expert forums; and
Evaluating EPA's current collaborative problem-solving practices in areas such as
community outreach, community impact assessment, and risk communication.
ISSUE 2-3: MOLD CONTAMINATION - The storm surges of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
caused flood water damage to homes and buildings and resulting mold growth in the Gulf Coast
region of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Southeast Texas. Large sections of the City of
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 9 of 13
New Orleans (Orleans Parish), and the three surrounding parishes (Jefferson, Plaquemines, and
St. Bernard) were flooded for weeks, leading to extensive mold growth in buildings. Flooding
associated with hurricanes and large rain events raise concerns about the potential for respiratory
health effects from exposure to water-damaged homes. These conditions also raise concerns that
vulnerable populations, such as minority and low-income communities, as well as children,
pregnant women, and the elderly, may need greater attention to prevent negative health effects
from exposure to water-damaged homes.
Recommendation 2-3: The EPA Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation (OAR),
working in conjunction with the EPA Regions, should develop strategies to assist community
residents, particularly from vulnerable populations, to better utilize existing guidance and tools
about mold. For example, EPA should work with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) to help local governments, universities, and/or community-based
organizations to establish community-based environmental education and remediation assistance
projects, which have a focus on mold. These community-based projects will provide residents,
particularly from vulnerable populations, with guidance on safe mold remediation practices, the
necessity of using adequate respiratory protection and other equipment, and appropriate
contractor qualifications and capability. Procuring appropriate protective equipment has been a
major challenge for residents in the Gulf Coast. As a result, these projects should also help
residents identify sources of funding to assist in these efforts.
ISSUE 2-4: WASTE DEBRIS AND SEDIMENTS - Large quantities of waste debris and
sediments are still located in communities throughout the Gulf Coast region. Sediment,
when dried, becomes airborne and poses respiratory hazards to sensitive populations. EPA
and State officials indicate that these wastes do not pose a short-term or long-term threat to
public health. The presence of asbestos and lead in some of the hurricane waste debris
presents special waste management problems. The sources of the asbestos and lead existed
prior to hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Many sediments deposited by the storm surges and
flood waters contain varying concentrations of toxic heavy metals (arsenic, chromium, lead),
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, and diesel range organics. Although the lead for the
collection and disposal of these materials is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE),
EPA plays a role in advising on their activities. Gulf Coast residents want these wastes
removed as soon as possible. Long-term build-up of waste materials has particularly
negative consequences in already distressed communities. The longer such waste remains,
the greater residents' anxiety about potential health concerns grows. In addition to
inconsistent pickup of debris and lack of communications about waste removal operations in
minority and low-income communities, trucks sometimes operate without the appropriate
waste coverings.
Recommendation 2-4: The EPA Assistant Administrator for the OSWER should work
with the USACE and applicable state and local agencies to ensure that waste debris and
sediments are collected, transported, and disposed in an environmentally-acceptable manner.
EPA should:
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 10 of 13
Ensure disposal of this waste debris and sediments in appropriate facilities,
implementation of applicable air monitoring of emissions from incinerators and open
burn operations, and updating of waste management guidelines as appropriate;
Ensure that appropriate planning is in place to identify disposal facilities that can
handle waste debris and sediment in an environmentally-acceptable manner;
Encourage applicable agencies to create incentives to encourage contractors to
conduct activities, such as disposal, in an environmentally-acceptable manner;
Conduct environmental justice assessments of areas near proposed facilities using
tools such as the Environmental Justice Geographic Assessment Tool; and
Work with its partner agencies to ensure that unnecessary impediments to debris and
sediment removal are expeditiously addressed.
ISSUE 2-5: PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERNS - The 2005 hurricanes may have created or
exacerbated health issues for minority and low-income populations. Direct exposure to flood
water, air pollutants, mold, and debris have created hazards that increased the risk of respiratory
disease, infections (e.g., dermal, gastrointestinal, pulmonary), physical injury (e.g., lacerations,
fractures, other musculoskeletal injuries), and adverse effects of toxicant exposures (e.g., organ
system injuries, exacerbation of preexisting conditions such as asthma). In addition, disruption
of normal health care systems and psychosocial stresses related to storm damage, evacuation,
and recovery exacerbated chronic health problems and probably resulted in to new health
problems as well. In such post-disaster situations, cumulative environmental and/or public
health risks and impacts can be a pressing issue. While public health agencies are primarily
responsible for addressing these issues, EPA can provide significant assistance by providing
information on environmental health hazards to health care providers in a timely manner and by
moving quickly to reduce the impacts of environmental pollutants.
Recommendation 2-5: The EPA Assistant Administrator for the Office of Research and
Development should work with appropriate federal health agencies such as the CDC, particularly
the National Center for Environmental Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (NCEH/ATSDR), to assess whether a health survey of Gulf Coast residents impacted by
the hurricanes is appropriate. A useful initial approach would be to determine the types and
frequencies of health issues that were encountered by care providers in the aftermath of the
hurricanes. While the care provided in New Orleans and Mississippi coast communities
occurred under chaotic circumstances, care provided to evacuees to Houston was delivered at
large evacuation centers and in local hospitals. A study, entitled "The Impact of Health Care
Safety Net Policies and Programs on the Continuity of Medical Care: A Hurricane Katrina
Evacuee Community Case Study," is currently being conducted under the direction of Sondip
Mathur, Ph.D., at Texas Southern University in Houston, Texas. EPA should obtain the results
of this study to use in determining how environmental factors impacted public health following
the hurricanes, whether future studies may be needed and/or feasible, and how to set priorities to
assist public health agencies in future disasters.
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 11 of 13
SUBJECT AREA #3: FOSTER ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND REDEVELOPMENT
In order to foster environmentally sound redevelopment, the NEJAC makes recommendations to
address the following issues:
Sustainable redevelopment;
Coastal wetlands and barrier islands;
Brownfields assessment and cleanup;
Worker protection; and
Job training and creation.
ISSUE 3-1: SUSTAINABLE REDEVELOPMENT - The rebuilding process in the wake of
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita presents an opportunity for EPA, other federal agencies, local, state
and tribal governments, business and industry, academics, non-governmental organizations, and,
most importantly, the affected communities themselves, to promote sustainable development
approaches throughout the affected region. Such sustainable redevelopment approaches should
address environmental, public health, economic, and social equity concerns, both short-term and
long-term, in the design and construction of housing, transportation, health care, education, green
space, energy, and other critical systems. Although EPA may not have primary jurisdiction in a
number of areas important to rebuilding, it does have a support role in Public Works and
Engineering (ESF #3), Public Health (ESF #8), Energy (ESF #12) and Long Term Community
Recovery (ESF #14). In addition, EPA has a number of programs and initiatives that can provide
scientific input to an environmentally sustainable rebuilding process, such as Clean
Energy/Energy Efficiency, Sustainability, Environmental Stewardship, and Smart Growth.
Moreover, impacted community residents, many of whom are displaced, should be meaningfully
involved in decisions regarding future redevelopment of their affected region.
Recommendation 3-1: The EPA Administrator, in conjunction with other relevant agencies,
should initiate an effort to promote coordination internally and across agencies that would begin
to address the reconstruction of infrastructure. Because infrastructure is so important to those
affected by environmental injustice, EPA should work proactively with the USACE and FEMA
on the need to give priority to the restoration of infrastructure in minority, low-income, and other
vulnerable communities. Use of geographic information system platforms, such as the
Environmental Justice Geographic Assessment Tool, by the USACE and FEMA is essential to
identifying minority, low-income, and vulnerable communities. EPA should also promote
processes that consider the views of community residents in the rebuilding process. The EPA
Administrator should designate one individual to ensure that EPA's contributions to the
sustainable redevelopment effort are effectively implemented in a timely manner.
ISSUE 3-2: COASTAL WETLANDS AND BARRIER ISLANDS - Many Gulf Coast
wetlands and barrier islands have been depleted. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita have destroyed or
damaged more than several hundred square miles of coastal wetlands and barrier islands. These
natural barriers traditionally provide a buffer to the storm surge from hurricanes and also help
protect the levees around New Orleans. Due to the location of their communities in low-lying
areas, many environmental and economically distressed communities were disproportionately
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 12 of 13
affected by the storm surge and the breech and overtopping of the levee system. Environmental
justice communities in Gulf coastal areas, including numerous tribal communities, have been
negatively impacted due to the loss of homes and the destruction of natural resources on which
they depend for their subsistence. The impact of future hurricanes will be greatest in the areas
where the most vulnerable populations live. Restoration of coastal wetlands and the barrier
islands can help minimize this impact.
Recommendation 3-2: The EPA Assistant Administrator for the Office of Water should work
proactively with the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), USACE, and other federal, state, tribal, and local government agencies to establish a
high priority for the creation and restoration of coastal wetlands and barrier islands along the
Gulf Coast. These agencies should also identify other areas in the United States that require
coastal wetland and barrier island restoration. In addition to protecting the largest number of
residents and minimizing the impact on the existing levee system, EPA should also consider
potential adverse and disparate impacts on minority, tribal, and low-income populations when
undertaking wetlands and barrier islands restoration projects.
ISSUE 3-3: BROWNFIELDS ASSESSMENT AND CLEANUP - Many formerly clean
properties in the Gulf Coast region may have been contaminated due to hurricane wind damage
and/or associated flooding. In the event that such properties, otherwise known as Brownfields,
exist, they need to be assessed and remediated prior to reuse. Adequate resources will be needed
to conduct these activities to ensure that all communities, including historically disadvantaged
and underserved minority and low-income communities, can conduct appropriate assessment,
remediation, and reuse activities.
Recommendation 3-3: The EPA Assistant Administrator for OSWER should use EPA's
Brownfields program to help address this issue. EPA Headquarters, EPA Regions 4 and 6, and
appropriate states should give high priority to the use of targeted brownfields assessment and
Brownfields grant funds to assess these properties and determine the extent of contamination.
Further, consistent with the governing authority, EPA should continue to give high priority for
the award of Brownfields assessment, cleanup, revolving loan fund, and job training grants to
vulnerable communities, including those located in the Gulf Coast region impacted by the
hurricanes. While legitimate administrative constraints exist, EPA should continue to consider
ways to streamline the Brownfields grant application process to make it as easy as possible for
affected Gulf Coast communities, to apply for Brownfields grants. In conclusion, EPA should
consider the recommendations of the NEJAC report on Unintended Impacts of Redevelopment
and Revitalization in Five Environmental Justice Communities that promote activities to protect
communities against unintended impacts during the course of rebuilding the Gulf Coast.5
ISSUE 3-4: WORKER PROTECTION - Steps need to be taken to protect the health of all
cleanup workers, including minority, low-income, and undocumented workers who work as
casual day laborers, and who have been, and are being, exposed to asbestos on roofs, mold
indoors, and other contaminants during assessment and remediation activities. Many of these
workers are not being equipped with, nor wearing, protective clothing and proper equipment.
5 See: www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaliustice
-------
The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations
August 2006
Page 13 of 13
The same concerns apply to homeowners who conduct their own assessment and remediation
activities. The lead for worker protection is the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA).
Recommendation 3-4: The EPA Assistant Administrator for OSWER should coordinate with
other federal, state, tribal and local government agencies, to develop an outreach strategy toward
cleanup workers, in which EPA can offer its special expertise on environmental hazards. The
strategy should include appropriate job training, equipment, and public information materials.
EPA should work with organizations like OSHA and the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH) to provide this technical assistance.
ISSUE 3-5: JOB TRAINING AND CREATION - Many people in the Gulf Coast region lost
jobs, businesses, and homes in the aftermath of the hurricanes. This issue disproportionately
affects minority and low-income populations. Much environmental expertise will be necessary,
and many environmental job opportunities (assessment, remediation, reuse, etc.) will be
available in this major rebuilding program. Further, adequate and affordable housing will be
necessary for those affected residents seeking these opportunities.
Recommendation 3-5: The EPA Assistant Administrator for OSWER should redirect as
much of EPA's environmental job training resources, both technical and financial, as possible to
assist residents in the Gulf Coast region impacted by the hurricanes to rebuild their lives and
rebuild their communities. Specifically, these resources include the worker training programs
administered by OSWER, the Environmental Response Team, and the Office of Brownfields
Cleanup and Redevelopment (OBCR). In addition, EPA should:
Direct its cleanup contractors to give priority attention to providing opportunities to local
area residents, particularly those who lost jobs due to the impact of the hurricanes;
Partner with worker training organizations like the National Institute for Environmental
Health Sciences (NIEHS) (e.g., the Brownfields Minority Worker Training Program) and
the Department of Labor (DOL) in this effort;
Provide training through FEMA disaster recovery centers; and
Work with other federal agencies (e.g., FEMA and the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development) to provide adequate housing for these job trainees and workers
-------
[PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
-------
APPENDIX A:
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
EPA CHARGE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND HURRICANES KATRINA AND RITA
- January 23, 2006 -
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maintains an ongoing commitment to
ensure environmental justice for all people, regardless of race, color, national
origin, or income. In recognizing that minority and/or low-income communities
frequently may be exposed disproportionately to environmental harms and risks,
EPA works to protect these and other burdened communities from adverse human
health and environmental effects of its programs, consistent with existing
environmental and civil rights laws, and their implementing regulations, as well
as Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations"(February 11, 1994).
Ensuring environmental justice means not only protecting human health and the
environment for everyone, but also ensuring that all people are treated fairly and
are given the opportunity to participate meaningfully in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.
Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator
Memorandum, "Reaffirming the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's Commitment to Environmental Justice " (November 4,
2005)
The recent natural disasters of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita resulted in monumental impacts. The
affected region included areas located in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.
For Hurricane Katrina, federal disaster declarations encompassed approximately 90,000 square
miles. Over one million households have received disaster assistance.6 More than 72,000
federal personnel were deployed.7 Environmental damage included flooding, inoperable
drinking water and wastewater treatment systems, numerous spills, and massive amounts of
debris. The two hurricanes combined rank as one of the largest natural disasters in United States
history.
The response and rebuilding efforts, and future preparedness and prevention activities, create
daunting challenges for local, state, and federal agencies; community groups; academia; business
and industry; tribal governments; and others. The "Environmental Health Needs and Habitability
6 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2005. At http: //www. dhs. gov/interweb/assetlibrarv/katrina.htm
7 Ibid.
-------
Assessment," issued jointly by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and EPA
on September 17, 2005, identified 13 key areas that impact the environmental health and
habitability of the City of New Orleans. The key areas are: Unwatering, Power, Natural Gas,
Vector/Rodent/Animal Control, Underground Storage Tanks (e.g., gasoline), Food Safety,
Drinking Water, Wastewater, Road Conditions, Solid Waste/Debris, Sediments/Soil
Contamination (Toxic Chemicals), Housing, and Worker Health and Safety.8 Many of the
CDC-EPA assessment findings and recommendations apply to all areas impacted by Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita.
Pursuant to the National Response Plan (NRP), the all-discipline, all-hazards plan that
establishes a single, comprehensive framework for management of domestic incidents, EPA is
the coordinating agency for Emergency Support Function (ESF) #10 (Oil and Hazardous
Materials Response). ESF #10 calls for "the appropriate response and recovery actions to
prepare for, prevent, minimize, or mitigate a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment
caused by actual or potential oil and hazardous materials incidents."9 EPA's assigned missions,
under ESF #10 and other applicable statutes and their implementing regulations, include:
• Environmental sampling;
• Drinking water assessment;
• Wastewater assessment;
• Reconnaissance and assessment of industrial facilities and spills;
• Collection of household hazardous waste;
• Removal of orphan drums/hazardous debris; and
• Emergency response for spills and special sampling.
EPA is not the only agency responsible for environmental issues. The U.S. Army Corp
of Engineers, the U.S. Coast Guard, or respective States may be charged with a particular
assignment, with EPA serving in a support role. EPA also plays a support role for several other
ESFs, including ESF #3 (Public Works and Engineering), ESF #8 (Public Health and Medical
Services); ESF #11 (Agriculture and Natural Resources); ESF #12 (Energy); ESF #14 (Long-
Term Community Recovery), and ESF #15 (External Affairs).
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita exemplify the vulnerability of certain populations along the
Gulf Coast, many of which already faced environmental justice issues. Several factors may
result in these populations being disproportionately affected by public health and environmental
risks and harms. Minority and/or low-income populations may reside in areas with polluting
facilities and/or other sources of environmental contamination. Such populations might suffer
from health conditions and other risk factors that make them more susceptible to environmental
risks and harms, particularly the long-term impacts. Minority and/or low-income populations
sometimes lack access to environmental information and are unprepared to cope with
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Environmental
Health Needs and Habitability Assessment," September 17, 2005.
9 National Response Plan, ESF#10-1. December 2004.
-------
environmental risks and harms, including proper safeguards for reentry. Lastly, such populations
may lack the resources to recover from negative environmental impacts, such as access to health
care or the capacity to ensure safe and appropriate reuse of contaminated properties.10
Community input is important to assure that government agencies develop and implement
effective strategies to address environmental risks and harms.
To this end, EPA requests the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC), through its Gulf Coast Hurricanes Workgroup, to provide advice and
recommendations on the environmental justice issues related to EPA's response and rebuilding,
and preparedness and prevention efforts in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, based
upon the following question:
How can EPA effectively address the vulnerabilities of all communities to public
health and environmental risks and harms, including minority and low-income
communities, in EPA's response and rebuilding, and preparedness and prevention
efforts, in the aftermath of natural disasters similar to Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita, pursuant to the National Response Plan and applicable statutory authorities
and their implementing regulations, as well as Executive Order 12898?
For the purposes of this charge, EPA has identified the following four major areas of focus:
(1) Community Involvement Issues: Identify ways in which EPA can address prospective
communications needs and ensure the meaningful involvement of all communities, including
minority and low-income populations, during the Agency's response, rebuilding, preparedness,
and prevention efforts in the aftermath of natural disasters similar to Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita.
(2) Environmental Health Concerns and Risk Communications: Identify specific areas of
environmental health concern to vulnerable populations, including short-term and long-term,
which may emerge during the ongoing response and rebuilding efforts, and provide advice
regarding how EPA can address such concerns in the aftermath of natural disasters similar to
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
(3) Environmental Justice in Rebuilding Efforts: Identify actions that EPA can take, pursuant
to its statutory authorities, to ensure that the environmental and/or public health needs of
vulnerable population groups are meaningfully addressed in the rebuilding process in the
aftermath of natural disasters similar to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
(4) Future Emergency Planning, Preparedness, and Response: Identify lessons learned from
EPA's disaster response experience, both positive and negative, in the aftermath of Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita, for the integration of environmental justice into future emergency planning,
preparedness, and response efforts, pursuant to the National Response Plan and applicable
statutes and their implementing regulations.
10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Framework for Cumulative Risk Assessment, EPA/630/P-
02/00IF, May 2003, p. 39-42.
------- |