EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

This executive summary presents highlights of the sixteenth meeting of the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC), held December 3 through 5, 2001 at the Renaissance Madison Hotel in
Seattle, Washington. Each of the six subcommittees of the NEJAC met for a full day on December 5,
2001. On December 4, the NEJAC hosted a public comment period that focused on fish consumption and
contamination offish populations. Approximately 300 persons attended the meetings and the public
comment period.

The NEJAC is a federal advisory committee that
was established by charter on September 30, 1993
to provide independent advice, consultation, and
recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on matters
related to environmental justice. Ms. Peggy
Shepard, West Harlem Environmental Action,
serves as the chair of the Executive Council of the
NEJAC. Mr. Charles Lee, Associate Director for
Policy and Interagency Liaison, EPA Office of
Environmental Justice (OEJ), serves as the
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the Executive
Council. Exhibit ES-1 lists the chair, the vice-chair,
and the DFO of the Executive Council, as well as
the individuals who serve as chairs and vice-chairs
of the six subcommittees of the NEJAC and the
EPA staff appointed to serve as DFOs for those
subcommittees.

OEJ maintains transcripts and summary reports of
the proceedings of the meetings of the NEJAC.

Those documents are available to the public upon
request. The public also has access to the
executive summaries of reports of previous
meetings, as well as other publications of the
NEJAC, through the World Wide Web at
 (click on the publications icon). The summaries
are available in both English and Spanish.

REMARKS

Mr. Ron Kreizenbeck, Deputy Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 10, welcomed the
participants in the meeting of the NEJAC to Seattle.

He stated that EPA Region 10 includes the states o
Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska and is
home to many diverse, low-income communities;
communities of color; and more than 270 native
tribes, the members of which subsist on fish, plants
and wildlife. The degradation of habitats and
depletion of resources threatens the very way of life
of those people, he continued. Mr. Kreizenbeck
then stated that issues related to subsistence life
styles must be addressed to ensure equal
environmental protection, regardless of race,
income, culture, or ethnicity.

Exhibit ES-1

	

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
CHAIRS AND DESIGNATED FEDERAL
OFFICERS (DFO)

Executive Council:

Ms. Peggy Shepard, Chair
Mr. Charles Lee, DFO

Air and Water Subcommittee:

Ms. Annabelle Jaramillo, Chair
Ms. Eileen Guana, Vice-Chair
Ms. Alice Walker, co-DFO
Dr. Wil Wilson, co-DFO

Enforcement Subcommittee:

Ms. Savonala Home, Chair
Mr. Robert Kuehn, Vice-Chair
Ms. Shirley Pate, DFO

Health and Research Subcommittee:

Ms. Rose Marie Augustine, Chair
Ms . Jane Stahl, Vice-Chair
Ms. Brenda Washington, co-DFO
Ms. Aretha Brockett, co-DFO

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee:

Ms. Jennifer Hill-Kelly, Chair
Ms. Jana Walker, Vice-Chair
Mr. Daniel Gogal, DFO
Mr. Bob Smith, alternate-DFO

International Subcommittee:

Mr. Alberto Saldamando, Chair
Mr. Tseming Yang, Vice-Chair
Ms. Wendy Graham, DFO

Puerto Rico Subcommittee:

Dr. Graciela Ramirez-Toro, Chair
Ms. Teresita Rodriguez, DFO

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee:

Ms. Veronica Eady, Chair
Mr. Reiniero Rivera, DFO

ES-1

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Governor Gary Locke, (D), sent greetings to the members of the NEJAC, welcoming them to Seattle. In
his letter, Governor Locke emphasized that the issues related to water quality and fish consumption were
especially important to the residents of Washington. Exhibit 1-2 in Chapter One of this report contains a
copy of that letter.

Ms. Rosa Franklin, State Senator, Washington State Legislature and former member of the NEJAC,
commented on the timeliness of the current meeting of the NEJAC, held to discuss the relationship
between among water quality, fish consumption, and environmental justice. While contaminated air and
toxic streams affect all citizens, she continued, the changing demographics in the state of Washington and
the Pacific Northwest have brought a new urgency to the issue of fish consumption. Therefore, she said,
there is an urgent need in the region to further identify and quantify the types and magnitudes of risks to
communities and tribes that subsist on wild fish, plants, and other wildlife. Ms. Franklin stressed that the
activities of the NEJAC could have a long-term effect on the health of those communities.

Ms Velma Veloria, Washington State Representatives and former member of the NEJAC, explained that
the state of Washington had worked over the past three years to ensure that water is clean and that fish
populations continue to flourish in the state of Washington. She discussed environmental justice
legislation passed in the state, including a bill that charged the state's Department of Ecology and
Department of Health with jointly preparing a report on environmental risks faced by low-income and
minority groups; legislation that reformed the way work at cleanup sites is taxed; and legislation that
requires the Department of Health to examine the health effects of noise, particularly in the vicinity of the
city of Seattle's international airport.

Ms. Yalonda Sinde, Community Coalition for Environmental Justice, stated that her organization had been
the first non-profit environmental justice group in the Seattle area. She then expressed her excitement
about the opportunity to bring issues related to fish consumption and water quality before the NEJAC
during the current meeting.

Mr. Moses Squeochs, Yakima Nation and member of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, stated his
appreciation for the efforts of the NEJAC, but he also expressed concern that such a federal advisory
committee is needed to carry out the laws related to environmental justice enacted by the Congress of the
United States. Continuing, he said that the "hunter-gatherer" way of life continues to be practiced and that
there is a strong intent to preserve that way of life. He then stated that the search for justice, fairness, and
equality in relation to environmental issues must continue.

REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS

The members of the Executive Council received the following presentations:

Members of the NEJAC Fish Consumption Work Group provided an update on the NEJAC's Draft Fish
Consumption Report. During their presentation, the members of the work group reviewed the findings of
the work group, as outlined in the Draft Fish Consumption Report that had been compiled in preparation
for the December 2001 meeting of the NEJAC. The members of the Fish Consumption Work Group also
presented a number of "overarching recommendations" based on the conclusions presented in the draft
report. The members of the NEJAC then discussed the report and the recommendations at length,
suggesting revisions in the draft report and identifying additional recommendations. Members of the
NEJAC requested that final comments on the Draft Fish Consumption Report be submitted to OEJ by
January 31, 2002. The anticipated date for completion of the report is March 15, 2002. Mr. Lee stated
that a conference call was to be scheduled with affected communities, tribes, and stakeholders to discuss
the report.

Ms. Shepard presented the NEJAC's Strategic Plan to the members of the Executive Council. The plan
incorporates the issues raised and conclusions reached during the special business meeting of the
Executive Council of the NEJAC, held in Washington, D.C. in August 2001, and outlines the strategy of
the NEJAC for: (1) redesigning its activities to better fulfill its role as an advisor; (2) collaborating with EPA
to provide alternative mechanisms through which communities can bring site-specific issues to the
attention of EPA; and (3) developing, through a deliberative process that involves all stakeholders, an
effective work product that addressed issues related to environmental justice that are of principal concern

ES-2

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

to communities. The strategic plan will guide the work of the NEJAC through September 27, 2003, Ms.
Shepard announced.

Mr. Lee identified a series of tasks and provided assignments to members of the NEJAC to assist in
implementing the strategic plan. The tasks are:

Finalization of the NEJAC Policy Advice Development Model

Finalization of the NEJAC Model for incorporating community issues and concerns into the
NEJAC policy dialogue

Development of definitions of consensus and consensus-building

Development of a scoping report from the Ad Hoc Scoping Work Group on Cumulative Risk
Issues

WORK GROUP REPORTS AND COMMENTS

The members of the Executive Council of the NEJAC received reports and comments from the following
individuals:

Ms. Eileen Guana, Southwestern University School of Lawn and Vice-Chair of the Air and Water
Subcommittee, made a presentation on the Interagency Environmental Justice Implementation
Work Group.

Mr. Brandon Carter, EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO), provided an
update on the Federal Facilities Work Group.

Ms. Wilma Subra, Louisiana Environmental Action Now, member of the Air and Water
Subcommittee, and chair of the newly formed Pollution Prevention Work Group, presented an
update on the status of the development of the work group.

Mr. Lee reported that the Federal Facilities Work Group will work in coordination with and report to the
NEJAC Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee because the primary support for this work group is being
provided by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), which also supports that
subcommittee. OSWER has committed to adding another member to the subcommittee to provide
interface with the work group, he said.

Other presentations received by the Executive Council of the NEJAC were:

Mr. Barry Hill, Director, EPA OEJ, reported on the status of EPA's efforts to implement
recommendations included in the report of the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) report titled
Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice: An Analysis of U.S. EPA Statutory Authorities.
The ELI report reviews EPA's major environmental regulations that govern air and water quality,
waste management, use of pesticides and other chemicals, and the public's right to know. The
report identifies specific statutory authorities that can be used to promote environmental justice in
the full range of EPA program functions, including the establishment of standards and the
permitting process.

Ms. Ann Goode, Senior Consultant, Center for the Economy and Environment, National Academy
of Public Administration (NAPA), made a presentation on NAPA's research and evaluation of
EPA's efforts to address the widely recognized fact that low-income communities and
communities of people of color that are exposed to significantly greater environmental and public
health hazards than other communities face. NAPA's research and associated recommendations,
reported Ms. Goode, are presented in a report titled Environmental Justice in EPA Permitting:
Reducing Pollution in High-Risk Communities is Integral to the Agency's Mission." In the report,
she continued, NAPA recommends that EPA make changes in four distinct areas related to
environmental justice: leadership, permitting procedures, setting of priorities, and public
participation.

ES-3

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Mr. Martin Halper, Senior Science Advisor, EPA OEJ, provided an overview of EPA's draft
Framework for Cumulative Risk Assessment prepared by the Cumulative Risk Technical Panel of
the EPA Risk Assessment Forum, a standing committee of senior EPA scientists. The purpose of
this briefing is to help NEJAC prepare to address the issues of cumulative risk, which will be the
policy issue area to be discussed in 2003.

VIRTUAL TOUR AND RELATED DIALOGUE

Members of the NEJAC participated in a "virtual tour" dialogue of selected communities that are affected
by issues related to environmental justice, fish consumption, and water quality. Representatives of five
community organizations presented information about the contamination of waterways on which Native
Americans and impoverished people depend for survival and the loss of Native American heritage and
culture, as well as issues related to the exposure of farm workers to pesticides and herbicides. The topics
discussed are described briefly below.

Mr. Frank Roberts, Coeur d'Alene Tribe, Idaho, discussed the exposure of the Coeur d'Alene Tribe to
contamination caused by strip mining practices carried out on properties located near tribal lands. Mr.
Roberts explained that, although contamination currently is being cleaned up, preservation of tribal culture
has been threatened because the tribe cannot use the land for traditional purposes.

Mr. Daniel Morfin, Granger, Washington, explained that the application of herbicides and pesticides for
agriculture use is contaminating rivers and exposing farm workers to contaminants. The incidence of
respiratory ailments in the Granger area is high, and existing regulations are not being enforced, said Mr.
Morfin.

Ms. Jeri Sundvall, Environmental Justice Action Group of Portland, Portland, Oregon, pointed out the high
rate of cancer among Native American fishermen. In addition, she charged, Native Americans are being
robbed of their heritage and are expected to become assimilated into the broader culture.

Ms. Rosemary Ahtuangaruak Inupiat Community of Arctic Slope, Barrow, Alaska, expressed concern that
state agencies often "favor profit" over protection of the interests and concerns of tribes. Ms.
Ahtuangaruak explained that, although federal agencies have declared fish populations safe to eat, the
methodology for assessing risk does not consider the higher-than-average rates of fish consumption
among Native Americans.

Ms. Lee Tanuvasa, Korean Woman's Association, Tacoma, Washington, reported that her organization
was conducting a study to determine the safety of shellfish consumed by communities of Asian Pacific
Island people. She requested assistance in overcoming the language barrier and in determining how best
to present the findings of the study to the communities affected by the issue.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

The Executive Council of the NEJAC hosted a public comment period on December 4, 2001, at which
approximately 29 people participated. Described below are a summary of key concerns citizens
expressed during the evening session.

A majority of the public comments focused on the issue of contaminated waterways and the land
on which Native Americans and other impoverished people depend for living a subsistence life
style. Commenters pointed to rates of cancer and respiratory ailments among Native American
populations that are higher than the rates among non-Native populations in the United States.
The commenters stated that the inability of Native peoples to "live off the land" has led to a decline
in the transfer of spiritual and cultural values from generation to generation. The best way to
reduce contamination in waterways is to eliminate the source of the pollution, declared a number
of commenters.

Several commenters spoke about the ineffectiveness of risk assessments. Risk assessments, as
currently conducted, do not account for the cumulative effect of numerous chemicals on the
environment, they stated. Rather, those risk assessments examine only a single chemical, they

ES-4

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

claimed. Risk assessments focus only on cancer and fail to consider other health issues, they
added. Further, they do not account for the effect of chemicals on sensitive populations, several
commenters noted.

A number of commenters criticized EPA for failing to make an adequate effort to hold the U.S.
Department of Defense (DoD) accountable for the contamination of communities located on or
near military installations. EPA is not enforcing existing environmental regulations that govern
DoD facilities, the commenters claimed.

OTHER CONCERNS AND COMMITMENTS OF THE NEJAC

During their meeting, the members of the Executive Council of the NEJAC recommended that a work
group be established to address communications within the NEJAC and between the NEJAC and EPA
program offices. In addition, the members agreed to review and provide comments on the Framework for
Cumulative Risk Assessment. Formal development of the guidance will begin in 2002.

SUMMARIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS

Summarized below are the deliberations of the subcommittees of the NEJAC held on December 5, 2001.
Air and Water Subcommittee

The members of the Air and Water Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations and reports
described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. James Hanlon, EPA Office of Science and Technology (OST), provided preliminary comment on the
feasibility of implementing the recommendations presented in the NEJAC's Draft Fish Consumption
Report. Mr. Hanlon commended the Fish Consumption Work Group for its efforts and emphasized that
the availability of resources for the most part will determine what EPA can accomplish. Mr. Hanlon also
reviewed the logistics associated with the completion of the report and its submittal to the EPA
Administrator.

Mr. Lee presented an overview of and led discussions about the NEJAC Strategic Plan. He also
discussed the meeting of the NEJAC scheduled for December 2002 that will focus on issues related to
pollution prevention and environmental justice.

Mr. Jeff Bigler, EPA OST, provided to the Fish Consumption Work Group an update on plans to revise
volume four of EPA's Guidance Document for Assessing Chemical Contamination Data for Use in Fish
Advisories to incorporate awareness of issues related to environmental justice.

Mr. Peter Murchie, EPA Region 10 Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), presented to
the Air Toxics Work Group an overview of EPA's air toxics program.

The members of the subcommittee discussed the need to establish priorities among the recommendations
presented in the Draft Fish Consumption Report to (1) help EPA focus its efforts and (2) avoid
overwhelming the agency with numerous recommendations. The members agreed that, although the list
of recommendations may appear lengthy, individual items can be grouped under a few overall themes.

The members of the subcommittee discussed the potential effect of the NEJAC Strategic Plan on the
manner in which the subcommittee conducts its business. The members agreed that the subcommittee
must focus its efforts on only a few key issues, rather than attempting to "cover the whole waterfront" as it
had done in its early days. The members also agreed to explore methods of evaluating the effectiveness
of the subcommittee's work groups on specific issues.

The members of the subcommittee emphasized that the work of the Fish Consumption Work Group must
be used as a model to guide planning for the meeting of the NEJAC to be held in December 2002. The
members also requested that, in preparation for that meeting, the newly formed Pollution Prevention Work

ES-5

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Group should examine issues related to (1) environmental restoration, (2) clean production, (3) low-impact
development, and (3) the costs and benefits of pollution prevention.

Members of the Fish Consumption Work Group discussed the plans of EPA's Office of Water to revise
volume four of its Guidance Document for Assessing Chemical Contamination Data for Use in Fish
Advisories. The members of the work group agreed to (1) review the document and provide comment on
it to EPA and (2) identify and recommend individuals to serve on various EPA stakeholder work groups
and as technical consultants for the issuance of fish advisories. The members of the subcommittee also
discussed the future of the Fish Consumption Work Group, once the Draft Fish Consumption Report has
been completed. The members recommended that the work group expand its scope to explore other
issues related to water quality, such as total maximum daily loads (TMDL), confined animal feeding
operations (CAFO), and water permits.

The Permitting and Public Utilities work groups participated in a joint session, during which they agreed to
combine the two groups into a single work group. The members of the work groups discussed EPA's
White Paper No. 3 on flexible permitting, a report on a new source review study prepared by EPA's Office
of Air and Radiation (OAR), and other issues related to the permitting process. The members of the newly
combined work group agreed to develop a document that will describe "best practices" for permitting that
are sensitive to environmental justice issues, as well as review and provide comment on the report on a
new source review study the release of which is expected in January or February 2002. Members of the
work group also expressed concern that staffing of the work group was inadequate, in light of the number
of issues the group had taken under consideration.

The members of the Air Toxics Work Group discussed EPA's air toxics program. The members agreed to
review and provide comment on EPA OAR's Work Plan for the National Air Toxics and Integrated Air
Toxics Strategy.

Health and Research Subcommittee

The members of the Health and Research Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations and
reports described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. Patrick C. West, Emeritus Faculty, Environmental Sociology, School of Natural Resources and
Environment, University of Michigan, commented on research needed in the realm of environmental
justice and application of that research. Mr. West stated that lack of research should not be a barrier to
action, that existing information can be used, and that current research must be investigated to identify the
information to support action. Mr. West stressed that systematic and qualitative assessment of both
cumulative effects and co-risk factors must be included in the assessment of risks for such sensitive
groups as communities of color, low-income communities, and Native American tribes.

Ms. Tala Henry, Mid-Continent Ecology Division, EPA National Health and Environmental Effects
Research Laboratory, provided information about the parameters that are factors in the calculation of risk.
She emphasized that there is no specific procedure for the calculation of risk and that the default
parameters are not applicable under certain circumstances, such as assessment of the risks to sensitive
groups. Therefore, she explained, partnerships between experts and communities must be fostered so
that defensible and appropriate risk parameters can be established.

Mr. Wardner G. Penberthy, EPA Chemical Control Division, presented an overview of Section 4 of the
Toxic Substances and Control Act, which focuses on chemical testing. He provided detailed information
about EPA's High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge program, a voluntary testing program for facilities
that produce large volumes of chemicals. The goal of the program is to increase the availability to the
public of baseline data on the effects on health and the environment for approximately 2,800 HPV
chemicals, reported Mr. Penberthy.

Mr. Jeffrey Morris, EPA Office of Science Policy, Office of Research and Development (ORD),
recommended a change in the structure of the subcommittees of the NEJAC. Citing EPA's goals related
to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), Mr. Morris explained that, because health and

ES-6

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

research issues related to environmental justice cross boundaries among the various subcommittees,
such issues should be handled by a special interest work group, rather than an individual subcommittee.

The members of the subcommittee conducted a number of discussions about the accurate calculation of
risk for sensitive groups. The specific recommendations they agreed upon are:

It is essential that various factors related to cultural and spiritual concerns be included in models
for assessing risk. In addition, such factors as culture shock and cultural disintegration must be
addressed.

Parameters used in the calculation of risk must be specific to each particular community.
Parameters that currently are not included in risk assessment models include peak exposure and
consumption of whole fish, rather than the more widely used parameters of chronic exposure and
consumption of only the fillet of a fish.

The types of foods identified as components of a subsistence diet should include many more
foods that are not consumed by the general population.

Co-risk and cumulative risk factors should be used as a more accurate gauge of "true risk"
because people are exposed to more than one chemical at a time.

If the recommendations of the subcommittee on the subject of calculation of risk are to be
adopted, the definitions of "health" for a community and of what is to be considered "normal" must
be reconsidered.

The subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC consider the subsistence consumption needs of such
groups as Native Hawaiians and people in the Virgin Islands who were not considered as the report was
developed. The members of the subcommittee agreed that inclusion of those groups would help achieve
recognition of cultural groups that traditionally have been ignored in research related to environmental
justice.

The members of the subcommittee agreed that the need for research often is used as a barrier to action
and acknowledged that the information available is adequate to support the initiation of work. There is an
abundance of information that, although originally was not applied to issues of environmental justice, can
be reevaluated for its significance in the field of environmental justice, they noted. In addition, the
members recommended that extensive investigation of previous research be conducted to identify
available resources.

The members of the subcommittee agreed that the evaluation of HPV chemicals and the distribution to the
public of the baseline health data are crucial actions. Although some members expressed concern about
whether industry could be trusted to report reliably on production, the members agreed that there are
many safeguards related to testing and that the penalty for falsification is severe.

The subcommittee recommended increased cooperation between government agencies and local
organizations in sharing data and calling upon the expertise of indigenous organizations. Noting that local
people have first-hand knowledge and understanding of their communities and can gather information
more efficiently than outsiders, the members recommended that research be best conducted by local
groups, with the assistance and support of EPA.

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

The members of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations and
reports described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. Merv George, Administrator, Klamath River Inter-Tribal Fish and Water Council and member of the
Hupa Tribe, provided background information about the history of the council, outlined the five issues the
council addresses, and submitted his recommendations for improving the Draft Fish Consumption Report.

ES-7

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

He stressed that the Hupa and Yura tribes constantly must balance environmental and economic issues
when developing standards for water quality.

Ms. Gillian Mittelsteadt, Environmental Policy Analyst, Tulalip Tribes Natural Resource Program, and Mr.
Daryl Williams, Developer, Tulalip Tribes Natural Resource Program, presented the results of their study
that examined the consumption by members of the Tulalip Tribe offish taken from Puget Sound. Ms.
Mittelsteadt described the statistical framework of the study and outlined the benefits and lessons learned
through completion of the study. Mr. Williams discussed the problems that arise because, he said,
programs allow the trading of pollution emissions credits. Mr. Williams emphasized the negative effects
such programs have on tribal communities.

Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Executive Director, Indigenous Environmental Network and former chair of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, presented his recommendations for improving the Draft Fish
Consumption Report. He urged that the NEJAC consider the negative effects of radioactive contaminants
on habitats and focus attention on precautionary actions, rather than traditional risk assessment. He also
recommended that the NEJAC promote outreach to tribal communities to help those communities develop
a better understanding of the mission and responsibilities of the NEJAC.

Dr. Roseanne Lorenzana, liaison between Region 10 and EPA ORD, presented a list of five specific
recommendations for consideration by the subcommittee. She also presented the report Comparative
Dietary Risks: Balancing the Risks and Benefits of Fish Consumption, for which a risk assessment model
was used to define the conditions under which consumption of fish is a healthful dietary choice. She
urged that the subcommittee advise EPA to work with tribes to develop guidelines on cumulative risk that
are appropriate to the needs of tribes.

Ms. June Martin, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, began her presentation by telling the story of Annie
Aloa, a health aide in her village who had spoken out on behalf of the tribal community and who had been
awarded a grant by the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) to survey the health
problems of members of the tribe. Ms. Martin then discussed the failure of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to clean up the military facility located near her village.

Ms. Ahtuangaruak, who is a native of the village of Nuigant, Alaska, expressed her concern about and
recommendations for improving the representation of Alaskan Natives on the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee. She also urged that, in the Draft Fish Consumption Report, the subcommittee address the
tribal lands of Alaskan Natives, such as Prudhoe Bay. Residents of those lands, she pointed out, rely on
fishing and whaling for subsistence.

Ms. Pam Miller, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, expressed concern about the health of Alaskan
Natives tribal communities that are located on or near sites that have been abandoned by DoD. She also
voiced the concern of tribes about persistent organic pollutants (POP) that originate thousands of miles
south of Alaska, travel northward, and accumulate over northern Alaska. She requested that the
subcommittee advise EPA to hold DoD accountable for previous contamination and to focus on the
phased elimination of POPs.

Mr. Enoch Sheidt, Subsistence Coordinator, Maniilaq Association, and Mr. Francis Chin, Environmental
Justice Coordinator, Maniilaq Association, emphasized the importance of a subsistence lifestyle to
Alaskan Natives who are nomadic and migrate to locations where food is available. Consequently, the
presenters reported, tribes do not recognize the concept of "on reservation" and "off reservation." To an
Alaskan Natives, fishing is not merely a method of obtaining food, but rather is a spiritual experience, they
explained. In addition, Mr. Chin stated that the unemployment rate in the Indian community is 90 to 95
percent. Therefore, a subsistence lifestyle is an essential way of life that cannot be compromised, he said.

Mr. Art C. Ivanoff, Native Village of Unalakleet, expressed his concern about the effects of climate change
on the health of Alaskan Natives. Mr. Ivanoff requested that the Draft Fish Consumption Report include
climate change as a factor that affects the quality of fish. Climate change has depleted greatly the running
stock of salmon, while the migration patterns of salmon and animals used for food have not been studied
sufficiently, he explained.

ES-8

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Ms. Cheryl Steele, Elem Indian Colony, stated that fish advisories do not address issues related to the
consumption offish sufficiently. She urged that EPA provide indigenous peoples better guidance about
contaminated fish populations and that the agency work with local communities to eliminate sources of
contamination.

Mr. Kevin McKernan, Yurok Tribe, urged EPA to acknowledge those tribes that have developed and
adopted water quality standards. He stated that the use of EPA core standards might direct resources
away from tribes that have their own standards.

Ms. August Rozema, Swinomish Tribe, stated that the subcommittee and the NEJAC must "spread the
word" about its future meetings. She also encouraged the subcommittee to clarify the definition of the
word "fish" provided in the Draft Fish Consumption Report to include both fin- and shellfish.

The members of the subcommittee requested that the Alaskan Native community provide them more
information about issues related to fish consumption and water quality standards. After listening to
testimony offered by representatives of Alaskan Native communities, the members recognized that the
concerns of all indigenous peoples throughout the world, including those of Hawaii and the Caribbean,
also must be represented equally.

The members of the subcommittee discussed the effectiveness of risk assessment in adequately
addressing issues related to fish consumption, noting that traditional risk assessment models currently do
not include reference to pollution prevention and sustainability. The members recommended that a
"precautionary principle" approach to risk assessment replace the traditional model to account for the
benefits of preservation. The members also noted that risk assessment currently does not take into
account the fact that the variable average grams per day (gpd) used in most models cannot be
extrapolated to the lifestyle of members of indigenous communities, who consume many more fish in a
much shorter period of time than do members of other groups, thereby increasing their risk to a level
disproportionate to that affecting other groups.

The members expressed concern that fewer than 20 WQSs created by individual tribal communities have
been approved. Additional discussion focused on the difficulties tribal communities encounter in their
efforts to achieve the standards outlined in the WQSs because of economic setbacks.

The members of the subcommittee agreed to advise the NEJAC to urge EPA to augment its education
programs for tribal communities by providing more information about the role of the NEJAC. In addition,
the members recommended that tribes be included regularly in the deliberative process and that the
subcommittee change its role from that of "consultation" to that of "collaboration," a role that would
include deliberative dialogue. Such a change would improve communication between the NEJAC and
indigenous communities, they suggested.

International Subcommittee

The members of the International Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations and reports
described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. Goldtooth discussed the need to focus on issues of environmental justice related to transborder
matters that affect the First Peoples of North America and indigenous tribes in the Great Lakes basin. He
reported that First Nations and tribes in the Great Lakes basin suffer a disproportionate share of
environmental problems associated with the transport of POPs. The effects of POPs are intensified among
people who rely on a subsistence diet, he pointed out.

Ms. Katy Taylor, Assistant Director of Community Health Services, Alaska Native Tribal Health Services,
presented an overview of recent studies of the effects of POPs on the health of Alaskan Native women
and children who rely on subsistence consumption as the mainstay of their diets.

Ms. Miller provided information about the movement of POPs, facilitated by air and ocean currents, into
Alaska and the Arctic region. She also discussed contamination of DoD sites in Alaska.

ES-9

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Ms. Amy Fraenkel, EPA Office of International Activities (OIA), addressed the transborder risks associated
with exposure to POPs. She also presented information about progress toward completion of the Global
Persistent Organic Pollutants Treaty (also known as the Stockholm POPs Convention). She emphasized
that environmental justice groups must work to influence the process of planning how the United States
will implement the provisions of the treaty.

Ms. Eileen Henninger, EPA OIA, stated that it is important that the NEJAC provide comment to OIA on
issues related to biodiversity. Some of the work in that area will bring about major worldwide reductions in
the use of key harmful chemicals in farming and industrial applications, she said.

Mr. Lionel L. Brown Jr., Senior Information Management Officer, EPA OIA, presented an update on the
efforts of OIA to promote environmental awareness in Africa. Many areas in Africa are experiencing rapid
urbanization, he reported, adding that OIA has been working to educate local communities about issues
related to environmental justice. Mr. Brown also emphasized the heavy reliance on fish in the diets of
African people.

Mr. Enrique Manzanilla, Director, Cross Media Division, EPA Region 9, provided background information
about EPA's work related to the border areas of the United States and Mexico. He reviewed the activities
undertaken by Region 9 during the two years since the Roundtable on Environmental Justice on the U.S.-
Mexico Border was held in San Diego, California and reported on the success of outreach efforts
conducted by the Region 9 Border Liaison Office, located in San Diego.

Ms. Olivia Balandran, Office of the Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6, presented an update on the
outreach activities of the region's border office. She reported that the recent activities of that office
included efforts to respond to the recommendations presented at the roundtable meeting on the U.S.-
Mexico border.

Ms. Nelda Perez, Small Grants Coordinator, EPA Region 6 OEJ, presented information about activities
related to grants awarded to groups located in the U.S.-Mexico border area.

Mr. Richard Moore, Executive Director, Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice, and
former chair of the NEJAC, described letters his organization had written to EPA Administrator Christine
Todd Whitman and President Bush. Mr. Moore discussed the effects of increased militarization along the
U.S.-Mexico border that has taken place since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. He also
requested that the subcommittee complete the reports produced for the Roundtable on Environmental
Justice on the U.S.-Mexico Border and prepared by the NEJAC Farm Worker Work Group.

Mr. Apichart Thongyou, Secretary General, Thailand Research and Action for Development Institute,
discussed efforts undertaken in Thailand to reduce adverse effects on conditions of concern to the
environmental justice community that are caused by modernization and the development of heavy
industry. He and several other members of the delegation of visitors from Thailand discussed several
studies that examined heavy contamination by industry and its effect on fishermen who rely on fishing for
subsistence. Mr. Thongyou also described the work of EPA and its counterpart in Thailand to create a
public participation process, reauthorize environmental laws, and create a new ministry for the
environment.

The members of the subcommittee also participated in discussions related to various topics:

The members of the subcommittee identified similarities in the shortcomings of enforcement and
public participation efforts in Thailand and other nations. They discussed the value of, and the
need for, an international environmental network to support the transfer of information and data.

The members of the subcommittee concluded that the NEJAC and OIA should collaborate to build
a strong relationship between the work of OIA in Africa and the environmental issues addressed
by the NEJAC.

The members of the subcommittee discussed OlA's strategy of deploying culturally diverse teams
to represent EPA in international discussions. The members concluded that such a strategy is

ES-10

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

essential in engaging communities in discussions of treaties and encouraging collaboration
between the United States and other countries in the sharing of resources.

The members agreed that practices that contaminate water in one country and thereby affect the
health of residents of another country illustrate the "interconnectedness" of the global
environment. The members noted the similarity of the predicaments of subsistence fisherman in
the United States and other nations.

The members of the subcommittee concluded that there is a significant opportunity for the
NEJAC to participate in the development of the plan for the implementation by the United States
of the Stockholm POPs Convention. They also agreed to provide comment to OIA about the level
of implementation of the treaty. In addition, the members discussed the need to include in the
treaty provisions for a system for tracking the movement of POPs across the borders of the United
States.

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

The members of the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations
and reports described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. Michael Shapiro, Deputy Assistant Administrator, EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER), and Ms. Linda Garczynski, EPA OSWER, provided an overview of the direction new
senior managers plan for OSWER. They discussed the vision, mission, priorities, and values of the office,
reviewed changes that are taking place, and identified several key priorities for OSWER:

Pursuit of the One Cleanup Program Initiative, which is designed to make the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) programs more consistent with one another and to
increase the right-to-know component of each.

Establishment of revitalization and reuse as core issues of the OSWER action agenda.

Implementation of recycling and pollution prevention programs to encourage partnerships and
demonstration pilot projects in the area of reduction in source contamination.

Implementation of the Retail Initiative, which is designed to increase focus on public involvement
in the use of solid and hazardous waste and improve dialogue among communities.

Implementation of work force development programs to strengthen the effort to train new staff of
OSWER to meet its future challenges.

Mr. Samuel J. Coleman, EPA Region 6, provided an update on issues of environmental justice that affect
the community of Mossville, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. Mr. Coleman identified several specific
milestones:

Installation of an enhanced air monitoring network sanctioned by the Lake Area Industrial Alliance
and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Protection (LDEP).

Achievement of overall compliance with the requirements of LDEP and establishment of
parishwide dioxin screening as a standard procedure.

Creation of an advisory council that works closely with the community, industry, and LDEP.

Conduct a pilot health symposium designed to address health problems associated with exposure
to environmental hazards and contaminants.

Ms. Sharon Beard, NIEHS, made a presentation on worker education and training.

ES-11

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Mr. Carter; Dr. Mildred McClain, Executive Director, Citizens for Environmental Justice; and Ms. Doris
Bradshaw, Executive Director, Defense Depot Memphis Tennessee Concerned Citizens Committee, made
a presentation on the role of FFRRO in working with communities affected by adverse environmental
conditions. They explained that FFRRO plans to:

Identify and evaluate key issues of concern to such communities.

Provide a forum for dialogue between members of local communities and representatives of
government agencies.

Compile a list of resources available to communities and stakeholders that can help support
increased public participation.

Formulate a set of recommendations to the NEJAC, including the identification of "best practices"
for improving environmental cleanups and ways in which the NEJAC can best address issues
related to federal facilities.

The members of the subcommittee discussed the development of a strategic plan for the subcommittee.
Key issues they identified included the creation of a work force development committee and examination
of the role of the subcommittee on the Pollution Prevention Working Group. Additional themes they
identified included exploration of EPA's role in fostering strategic planning by communities for the re-use
and revitalization of contaminated sites, action to be taken after cleanup has been completed, and use of
lessons learned through demonstration projects conducted by the Integrated Work Group on
Environmental Justice and other outstanding projects.

The members of the subcommittee discussed at length three pending action items for 2002:

Transfer of the Federal Facilities Work Group to the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee and
addition of another member to that work group.

Provision of assistance to FFRRO in its efforts to integrate issues related to land use,
development, and redevelopment into the programs and procedures of EPA.

Identification of models, such as the Washington Naval Yard and other sites, to be used as
positive examples of OSWER's work with communities to achieve revitalization and reuse.

NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the NEJAC is scheduled for December 9 through 12, 2002 in Baltimore, Maryland.
The meeting will focus on pollution prevention. Planned activities include one opportunity for the public to
offer comments. More information about the upcoming meeting will be available on the NEJAC's Internet
home page at  (click on the link to the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council) or by telephone on EPA's toll-free environmental justice
hotline at 1 (800) 962-6215.

ES-12

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
MEETING SUMMARY

of the

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

of the

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

December 3, 4, and 6 2001
Seattle, Washington

Meeting Summary Accepted By:

Charles Lee	Peggy Shepard

Designated Federal Officer	Acting Chair


-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance
(2201 A)

December 2001
http://www.epa.gov/oeca/ej

Office of Environmental Justice

To Obtain Copies

Copies of this report may be obtained by writing or calling:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Environmental Justice
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue (MC 2201A)

Washington, DC 20460
Telephone: (202) 564-2515

and requesting: NEJAC Meeting Summary December 2001

You may also review this report it, along with the previously published reports, on the web site:


This report and recommendations has been written as a part of the activities of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), a public advisory committee providing extramural
policy information and advice to the Administrator and other officials of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). The Council is structured to provide balanced, expert assessment of matters related
to the Environmental Justice program. This report has not been reviewed for approval by the EPA
and, hence, the contents of this report and recommendations do not necessarily represent the views
and policies of the EPA, nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the federal government, nor
does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute a recommendation for use.


-------
PREFACE

The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is a federal advisory committee that
was established by charter on September 30, 1993, to provide independent advice, consultation,
and recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on
matters related to environmental justice. The NEJAC is made up of 24 members, and one DFO,
who serve on a parent council that has six subcommittees. Along with the NEJAC members who fill
subcommittee posts, an additional 32 individuals serve on the various subcommittees. To date,
NEJAC has held seventeen meetings in the following locations:

Washington, D.C., May 20, 1994

Albuquerque, New Mexico, August 3 through 5, 1994

Herndon, Virginia, October 25 through 27, 1994

Atlanta, Georgia, January 17 and 18, 1995

Arlington, Virginia, July 25 and 26, 1995

Washington, D.C., December 12 through 14, 1995

Detroit, Michigan, May 29 through 31, 1996

Baltimore, Maryland, December 10 through 12, 1996

Wabeno, Wisconsin, May 13 through 15, 1997

Durham, North Carolina, December 8 through 10, 1997

Arlington, Virginia, February 23 through 24, 1998 (Special Business Meeting)

Oakland, California, May 31 through June 2, 1998

Baton Rouge, Louisiana, December 7 through 10, 1998

Arlington, Virginia, November 30 through December 2, 1999

Atlanta, Georgia, May 23 through 26, 2000

Arlington, Virginia, December 11 through 14, 2000

Washington, DC, August 8 through 10, 2001

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001

The NEJAC also has held other meetings which include:

Public Dialogues on Urban Revitalization and Brownfields: Envisioning Healthy and
Sustainable Communities, held in Boston, Massachusetts; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
Detroit, Michigan; Oakland, California; and Atlanta, Georgia in the Summer 1995

Relocation Roundtable, Pensacola, Florida, May 2 through 4, 1996

/'


-------
Environmental Justice Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Roundtable, San
Antonio, Texas, October 17 through 19, 1996

Environmental Justice Enforcement Roundtable, Durham, North Carolina, December 11
through 13, 1997

International Roundtable on Environmental Justice on the U.S./Mexico Border, San
Diego, California, August 19 through 21, 1999

As a federal advisory committee, the NEJAC is governed by all provisions of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) of October 6, 1972. Those requirements include:

Members must be selected and appointed by EPA

Members must attend and participate fully in meetings of the NEJAC

Meetings must be open to the public, except as specified by the EPA Administrator

All meetings must be announced in the Federal Register

Public participation must be allowed at all public meetings

The public must be provided access to materials distributed during the meeting

Meeting minutes must be kept and made available to the public

A designated federal official (DFO) must be present at all meetings of the NEJAC (and its
subcommittees)

The NEJAC must provide independent judgment that is not influenced by special interest
groups

Each subcommittee, formed to deal with a specific topic and to facilitate the conduct of the business
of the NEJAC, has a DFO and is governed by the provisions of FACA. Subcommittees of the
NEJAC meet independently of the full NEJAC and present their findings to the NEJAC for review.
Subcommittees cannot make recommendations independently to EPA. In addition to the six
subcommittees, the NEJAC has established a Protocol Committee, the members of which are the
chair of the NEJAC and the chair of each subcommittee.

Members of the Executive Council of the NEJAC are presented in the table on the following page. A
list of the members of each of the six subcommittees are presented in the appropriate chapters of
the report.

EPA's Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) maintains transcripts of, summary reports on the
meetings of the NEJAC, and copies of material distributed during the meetings. Those documents
are available to the public upon request.

Comments or questions can be directed to OEJ through the Internet. OEJ's e-mail address is:

environmental-justice-epa@.epa.gov

Executive summaries of the reports on the meetings of the NEJAC are available in English and
Spanish on the Internet at the NEJAC's World Wide Web home page:

/'/'


-------
 (click on the link to the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council)

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

(2001)



Designated Federal Official:

Chair:

Mr. Charles Lee, Associate Director for Policy

Ms. Peggy Shepard

and Interagency Liasion, U.S. Environmental



Protection Agency Office of Environmental



Justice



Members



Ms. Rose Augustine

Mr. Harold Mitchell

Mr. Larry Charles

Mr. David Moore

Mr. Fernando Cuevas

Ms. Mary Nelson

Ms. Anna Frazier

Ms. Graciela Ramirez-Toro

Mr. Michel Gelobter

Mr. Alberto Saldamando

Ms. Eileen Guana

Ms. Jane Stahl

Mr. Richard Gragg

Ms. Wilma Subra

Ms. Savonala Home

Ms. Jana Walker

Ms. Jennifer Hill-Kelly

Mr. Kenneth Warren

Mr. Robert Harris

Ms. Pat K. Wood

Ms. Annabelle Jaramillo

Mr. Tseming Yang

/'/'/


-------
This page left intentionally blank

iv


-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section	Page

PREFACE	 i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	 ES-1

CHAPTER ONE: MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

1.0 INTRODUCTION	 1-1

2.0 REMARKS	 1-2

2.1	Remarks of the Deputy Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10 	 1-2

2.2	Remarks of Local Elected Officials, Community Members, and Tribal Leaders	 1-2

3.0 POLICY DIALOGUE ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WATER QUALITY, FISH

CONSUMPTION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE	 1-5

3.1	Overview of the Fish Consumption Report 	 1-5

3.2	Fish Consumption, Research Methods, and Approaches to Risk Assessment	 1-8

3.3	Fish Consumption and the Exercise of Existing Legal Authorities 	 1-9

3.4	Fish and Wildlife Consumption Advisories 	 1-10

3.5	Fish Consumption Concerns Among American Indian Tribes and Alaskan Native
Villagers	 1-10

4.0 DRAFT STRATEGIC PLAN OF THE NEJAC 	 1-11

4.1	Goals and Objectives 	 1-11

4.2	Implementation of the Strategic Plan 	 1-14

5.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 	 1-16

5.1	Update on the Interagency Environmental Justice Implementation Work Group 	 1-16

5.2	Report on the Community-Based Health Research Model 	 1-17

5.3	Update on the Federal Facilities Work Group	 1-17

5.4	Update on the Pollution Prevention Work Group 	 1-19

5.5	Briefing on the Cumulative Risk Technical Panel of the EPA Risk Assessment Forum 1-19

5.6	Update on the Implementation of Permitting Recommendations	 1-21

6.0 MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS	 1-25

6.1	Acknowledgments 	 1-25

6.2	New Business	 1-25

v


-------
Section	Page

CHAPTER TWO: VIRTUAL TOUR AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

1.0 INTRODUCTION	2-1

2.0 VIRTUAL TOUR HELD ON DECEMBER 3, 2001 	 2-1

2.1	Frank Roberts, Coeur d'Alene Tribe, Idaho 	2-1

2.2	Daniel Morfin, Farm Worker, Granger, Washington 	2-1

2.3	Jeri Sundvall, Environmental Justice Action Group, Portland, Oregon 	2-2

2.4	Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, Inupiat Community of Arctic Slope, Barrow, Alaska 	2-2

2.5	Lee Tanuvasa, Korean Woman's Association, Tacoma, Washington 	2-3

3.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD HELD ON DECEMBER 4, 2001 	 2-3

3.1	Dr. Mildred McClain, Citizens for Environmental Justice, Savannah, Georgia	2-3

3.2	Chief Johnny Jackson, Columbia EPED, Underwood, Washington 	2-3

3.3	Barbara Harper, Tyakama Nation, Yakima, Washington 	2-3

3.4	Marcia Henning, Washington Department of Health, Olympia, Washington 	2-4

3.5	Tom Miller, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, Oregon 	2-4

3.6	Joanne Bonnar Prado, Washington Department of Health, Olympia, Washington 	2-4

3.7	Enoch E. Shiedt, Maniilaq Association, Kotzebue, Alaska	2-5

3.8	Art Invanoff, Native Village of Unalakleet, Unalakleet, Alaska 	2-5

3.9	Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, Inupiat Community of Arctic Slope, Barrow, Alaska 	2-5

3.10	Wilbur Slockish Jr., Columbia River Education and Economic Development,

The Dalles, Oregon 	2-6

3.11	Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network, Bemidji, Minnesota 	2-6

3.12	Kendra Zamzow, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska 	2-6

3.13	Hilda Booth, Native Village of Noatak, Noatak, Alaska 	2-7

3.14	Lincoln Loehr, Heller Ehrman, Seattle, Washington 	2-7

3.15	Bill Doyle, Sierra Club, Seattle, Washington 	2-7

3.16	Coleen Poler, Mole Lake Sakoagon Defense Committee, Crandon, Wisconsin 	2-7

3.17	Cheryl Steele, Elem Indian Colony, Clearlake Oaks, California	2-8

3.18	Dottie Chamblin, Indigenous Women's Network	2-8

3.19	Jeffrey Thomas, Puyallup Tribal TFW Program, Puyallup, Washington 	2-8

3.20	June Martin and Jesse Gologergen, Alaska Community Action on Toxics,

Anchorage, Alaska 	2-8

3.21	Doris Bradshaw, Defense Depot Memphis Tennessee Concerned Citizens Committee,
Memphis, Tennessee	2-9

3.22	Richard Moore, Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice,
Albuquerque, New Mexico 	2-9

3.23	Violet Yeaton, Port Graham Village Council, Port Graham, Alaska 	2-9

3.24	Pamela K. Miller, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska 	2-10

3.25	Jonathan Betz-Zall and Kristine Wong, Antioch University Seattle, Seattle,

Washington 	2-10

3.26	John Ridgeway, Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington	2-11

3.27	Holly Welles, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, California	2-11

3.28	Winona LaDuke, White Earth Land Recovery, Ponsford, Minnesota 	2-11

3.29	Sara Koopman, Amazon Alliance, Seattle, Washington 	2-11

Section	Page

VI


-------
CHAPTER THREE: MEETING OF THE AIR AND WATER SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION	3-1

2.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE 	 3-1

2.1	NEJAC Strategic Plan 	3-1

2.2	Activities of the Work Groups	3-3

2.2.1	Fish Consumption Work Group	3-3

2.2.2	Permitting and Utilities Work Group	3-5

2.2.3	Urban Air Toxics Work Group	3-5

2.3	Staffing of Work Groups	3-6

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 	 3-6

3.1	Draft Fish Consumption Report	3-6

3.2	December 2002 Meeting of the NEJAC 	3-7

4.0 SIGNIFICANT ACTION ITEMS 	 3-8

vii


-------
Section	Page

CHAPTER FOUR: MEETING OF THE HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION	4-1

2.0 REMARKS	4-1

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 	4-1

3.1	Presentation on the Status of Research 	4-1

3.2	Presentation on Risk Assessment and Methodology	4-3

3.3	Presentation on the Toxic Substances Control Act and EPA's High Production Volume
Challenge Program 	4-4

3.4	Presentation on the Structure of the Subcommittees of the NEJAC	4-6

4.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE 	4-6

4.1	Mr. Walter Redmon, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 	4-6

4.2	Ms. Heather Halsey, State of California Governor's Office of Planning and Research .. 4-7

4.3	Written Comment Submitted by Ms. Kendra Zamzow, Alaska Community Action

on Toxics 	4-7

4.4	Written Comment Submitted by Mr. Wilbur Slockish, Jr., Columbia River Education and
Economic Development 	4-8

5.0 ACTION ITEMS	4-8

Vlll


-------
Section	Page

CHAPTER FIVE: MEETING OF THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION	5-1

2.0 REMARKS	 5-1

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 	 5-2

3.1	Klamath River Inter-Tribal Fish and Water Commission	5-2

3.2	Presentation on Survey of Fish Consumption by Tulalip Tribes	5-2

3.3	Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network 	5-3

3.4	Presentations by Members of the Alaskan Native Community 	5-4

3.5	Dr. Roseanne Lorenzana, EPA Region 10	5-5

3.6	Presentations by Other Tribal Representatives	5-5

4.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE 	 5-6

4.1	Discussion of the Pre-Meeting Discussion Draft Fish Consumption Report	5-6

4.2	Discussion of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee Strategic Plan	5-7

5.0 OTHER CONCERNS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE	 5-7

5.1	Precautionary Principle	5-7

5.2	Regulatory Enforcement	5-7

5.3	Representation of Alaskan Native Peoples on the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee 5-8

5.4	Tribal Sovereignty	5-8

IX


-------
Section	Page

CHAPTER SIX: MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION	6-1

2.0 REMARKS	6-1

3.0 DISCUSSION OF THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG WATER QUALITY, FISH CONSUMPTION, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 	6-1

3.1	Environmental Justice and Indigenous Peoples in the Great Lakes Region	6-1

3.2	Transfrontier Risks Posed by POPs and the Global Treaty on POPs	6-2

3.3	Report on EPA OIA and Biodiversity	6-3

3.3	Overview of the Effects of POPs on the Indigenous Peoples of Alaska 	6-4

3.4	Transportation of POPs in the Arctic Area and Contaminated Military Sites in Alaska .. 6-4

4.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 	6-5

4.1	Update on the Activities of EPA OIA in Africa 	6-5

4.2	Cultural Diversity Within EPA OIA	6-6

4.3	Update on U.S.-Mexico Border Activities 	6-6

4.3.1	EPA Region 9	6-6

4.3.2	EPA Region 6	6-7

4.3.3	Update on the Activities of Grassroots Organizations	6-7

5.0 PRESENTATION BY THE DELEGATION FROM THAILAND	6-8

6.0 ACTION ITEMS	6-9

x


-------
Section	Page

CHAPTER SEVEN: MEETING OF THE WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION	7-1

2.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND ITS WORK GROUPS 	 7-1

2.1	Year in Review 	7-1

2.2	Subcommittee Historical Overview 	7-2

2.3	Update on the Federal Facilities Work Group	7-3

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 	 7-4

3.1	Update on the Activities of the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 	7-4

3.2	Update on Mossville, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana	7-5

3.3	Brownfields Minority Worker Training Program 	7-6

3.4	Update on Brownfields and Environmental Justice Pilot Programs 	7-7

3.4.1	Update on Issues Related to Land Use 	7-8

3.4.2	Update on Brownfields Legislation 	7-9

4.0 SUMMARY OF DIALOGUE ABOUT THE STRATEGIC PLAN	 7-9

5.0 ACTION ITEMS	 7-10

xi


-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

This executive summary presents highlights of the sixteenth meeting of the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC), held December 3 through 5, 2001 at the Renaissance Madison Hotel in
Seattle, Washington. Each of the six subcommittees of the NEJAC met for a full day on December 5,
2001. On December 4, the NEJAC hosted a public comment period that focused on fish consumption and
contamination offish populations. Approximately 300 persons attended the meetings and the public
comment period.

The NEJAC is a federal advisory committee that
was established by charter on September 30, 1993
to provide independent advice, consultation, and
recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on matters
related to environmental justice. Ms. Peggy
Shepard, West Harlem Environmental Action,
serves as the chair of the Executive Council of the
NEJAC. Mr. Charles Lee, Associate Director for
Policy and Interagency Liaison, EPA Office of
Environmental Justice (OEJ), serves as the
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the Executive
Council. Exhibit ES-1 lists the chair, the vice-chair,
and the DFO of the Executive Council, as well as
the individuals who serve as chairs and vice-chairs
of the six subcommittees of the NEJAC and the
EPA staff appointed to serve as DFOs for those
subcommittees.

OEJ maintains transcripts and summary reports of
the proceedings of the meetings of the NEJAC.

Those documents are available to the public upon
request. The public also has access to the
executive summaries of reports of previous
meetings, as well as other publications of the
NEJAC, through the World Wide Web at
 (click on the publications icon). The summaries
are available in both English and Spanish.

REMARKS

Mr. Ron Kreizenbeck, Deputy Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 10, welcomed the
participants in the meeting of the NEJAC to Seattle.

He stated that EPA Region 10 includes the states o
Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska and is
home to many diverse, low-income communities;
communities of color; and more than 270 native
tribes, the members of which subsist on fish, plants
and wildlife. The degradation of habitats and
depletion of resources threatens the very way of life
of those people, he continued. Mr. Kreizenbeck
then stated that issues related to subsistence life
styles must be addressed to ensure equal
environmental protection, regardless of race,
income, culture, or ethnicity.

Exhibit ES-1

	

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
CHAIRS AND DESIGNATED FEDERAL
OFFICERS (DFO)

Executive Council:

Ms. Peggy Shepard, Chair
Mr. Charles Lee, DFO

Air and Water Subcommittee:

Ms. Annabelle Jaramillo, Chair
Ms. Eileen Guana, Vice-Chair
Ms. Alice Walker, co-DFO
Dr. Wil Wilson, co-DFO

Enforcement Subcommittee:

Ms. Savonala Home, Chair
Mr. Robert Kuehn, Vice-Chair
Ms. Shirley Pate, DFO

Health and Research Subcommittee:

Ms. Rose Marie Augustine, Chair
Ms . Jane Stahl, Vice-Chair
Ms. Brenda Washington, co-DFO
Ms. Aretha Brockett, co-DFO

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee:

Ms. Jennifer Hill-Kelly, Chair
Ms. Jana Walker, Vice-Chair
Mr. Daniel Gogal, DFO
Mr. Bob Smith, alternate-DFO

International Subcommittee:

Mr. Alberto Saldamando, Chair
Mr. Tseming Yang, Vice-Chair
Ms. Wendy Graham, DFO

Puerto Rico Subcommittee:

Dr. Graciela Ramirez-Toro, Chair
Ms. Teresita Rodriguez, DFO

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee:

Ms. Veronica Eady, Chair
Mr. Reiniero Rivera, DFO

ES-1

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Governor Gary Locke, (D), sent greetings to the members of the NEJAC, welcoming them to Seattle. In
his letter, Governor Locke emphasized that the issues related to water quality and fish consumption were
especially important to the residents of Washington. Exhibit 1-2 in Chapter One of this report contains a
copy of that letter.

Ms. Rosa Franklin, State Senator, Washington State Legislature and former member of the NEJAC,
commented on the timeliness of the current meeting of the NEJAC, held to discuss the relationship
between among water quality, fish consumption, and environmental justice. While contaminated air and
toxic streams affect all citizens, she continued, the changing demographics in the state of Washington and
the Pacific Northwest have brought a new urgency to the issue of fish consumption. Therefore, she said,
there is an urgent need in the region to further identify and quantify the types and magnitudes of risks to
communities and tribes that subsist on wild fish, plants, and other wildlife. Ms. Franklin stressed that the
activities of the NEJAC could have a long-term effect on the health of those communities.

Ms Velma Veloria, Washington State Representatives and former member of the NEJAC, explained that
the state of Washington had worked over the past three years to ensure that water is clean and that fish
populations continue to flourish in the state of Washington. She discussed environmental justice
legislation passed in the state, including a bill that charged the state's Department of Ecology and
Department of Health with jointly preparing a report on environmental risks faced by low-income and
minority groups; legislation that reformed the way work at cleanup sites is taxed; and legislation that
requires the Department of Health to examine the health effects of noise, particularly in the vicinity of the
city of Seattle's international airport.

Ms. Yalonda Sinde, Community Coalition for Environmental Justice, stated that her organization had been
the first non-profit environmental justice group in the Seattle area. She then expressed her excitement
about the opportunity to bring issues related to fish consumption and water quality before the NEJAC
during the current meeting.

Mr. Moses Squeochs, Yakima Nation and member of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, stated his
appreciation for the efforts of the NEJAC, but he also expressed concern that such a federal advisory
committee is needed to carry out the laws related to environmental justice enacted by the Congress of the
United States. Continuing, he said that the "hunter-gatherer" way of life continues to be practiced and that
there is a strong intent to preserve that way of life. He then stated that the search for justice, fairness, and
equality in relation to environmental issues must continue.

REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS

The members of the Executive Council received the following presentations:

Members of the NEJAC Fish Consumption Work Group provided an update on the NEJAC's Draft Fish
Consumption Report. During their presentation, the members of the work group reviewed the findings of
the work group, as outlined in the Draft Fish Consumption Report that had been compiled in preparation
for the December 2001 meeting of the NEJAC. The members of the Fish Consumption Work Group also
presented a number of "overarching recommendations" based on the conclusions presented in the draft
report. The members of the NEJAC then discussed the report and the recommendations at length,
suggesting revisions in the draft report and identifying additional recommendations. Members of the
NEJAC requested that final comments on the Draft Fish Consumption Report be submitted to OEJ by
January 31, 2002. The anticipated date for completion of the report is March 15, 2002. Mr. Lee stated
that a conference call was to be scheduled with affected communities, tribes, and stakeholders to discuss
the report.

Ms. Shepard presented the NEJAC's Strategic Plan to the members of the Executive Council. The plan
incorporates the issues raised and conclusions reached during the special business meeting of the
Executive Council of the NEJAC, held in Washington, D.C. in August 2001, and outlines the strategy of
the NEJAC for: (1) redesigning its activities to better fulfill its role as an advisor; (2) collaborating with EPA
to provide alternative mechanisms through which communities can bring site-specific issues to the
attention of EPA; and (3) developing, through a deliberative process that involves all stakeholders, an
effective work product that addressed issues related to environmental justice that are of principal concern

ES-2

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

to communities. The strategic plan will guide the work of the NEJAC through September 27, 2003, Ms.
Shepard announced.

Mr. Lee identified a series of tasks and provided assignments to members of the NEJAC to assist in
implementing the strategic plan. The tasks are:

Finalization of the NEJAC Policy Advice Development Model

Finalization of the NEJAC Model for incorporating community issues and concerns into the
NEJAC policy dialogue

Development of definitions of consensus and consensus-building

Development of a scoping report from the Ad Hoc Scoping Work Group on Cumulative Risk
Issues

WORK GROUP REPORTS AND COMMENTS

The members of the Executive Council of the NEJAC received reports and comments from the following
individuals:

Ms. Eileen Guana, Southwestern University School of Lawn and Vice-Chair of the Air and Water
Subcommittee, made a presentation on the Interagency Environmental Justice Implementation
Work Group.

Mr. Brandon Carter, EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO), provided an
update on the Federal Facilities Work Group.

Ms. Wilma Subra, Louisiana Environmental Action Now, member of the Air and Water
Subcommittee, and chair of the newly formed Pollution Prevention Work Group, presented an
update on the status of the development of the work group.

Mr. Lee reported that the Federal Facilities Work Group will work in coordination with and report to the
NEJAC Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee because the primary support for this work group is being
provided by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), which also supports that
subcommittee. OSWER has committed to adding another member to the subcommittee to provide
interface with the work group, he said.

Other presentations received by the Executive Council of the NEJAC were:

Mr. Barry Hill, Director, EPA OEJ, reported on the status of EPA's efforts to implement
recommendations included in the report of the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) report titled
Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice: An Analysis of U.S. EPA Statutory Authorities.
The ELI report reviews EPA's major environmental regulations that govern air and water quality,
waste management, use of pesticides and other chemicals, and the public's right to know. The
report identifies specific statutory authorities that can be used to promote environmental justice in
the full range of EPA program functions, including the establishment of standards and the
permitting process.

Ms. Ann Goode, Senior Consultant, Center for the Economy and Environment, National Academy
of Public Administration (NAPA), made a presentation on NAPA's research and evaluation of
EPA's efforts to address the widely recognized fact that low-income communities and
communities of people of color that are exposed to significantly greater environmental and public
health hazards than other communities face. NAPA's research and associated recommendations,
reported Ms. Goode, are presented in a report titled Environmental Justice in EPA Permitting:
Reducing Pollution in High-Risk Communities is Integral to the Agency's Mission." In the report,
she continued, NAPA recommends that EPA make changes in four distinct areas related to
environmental justice: leadership, permitting procedures, setting of priorities, and public
participation.

ES-3

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Mr. Martin Halper, Senior Science Advisor, EPA OEJ, provided an overview of EPA's draft
Framework for Cumulative Risk Assessment prepared by the Cumulative Risk Technical Panel of
the EPA Risk Assessment Forum, a standing committee of senior EPA scientists. The purpose of
this briefing is to help NEJAC prepare to address the issues of cumulative risk, which will be the
policy issue area to be discussed in 2003.

VIRTUAL TOUR AND RELATED DIALOGUE

Members of the NEJAC participated in a "virtual tour" dialogue of selected communities that are affected
by issues related to environmental justice, fish consumption, and water quality. Representatives of five
community organizations presented information about the contamination of waterways on which Native
Americans and impoverished people depend for survival and the loss of Native American heritage and
culture, as well as issues related to the exposure of farm workers to pesticides and herbicides. The topics
discussed are described briefly below.

Mr. Frank Roberts, Coeur d'Alene Tribe, Idaho, discussed the exposure of the Coeur d'Alene Tribe to
contamination caused by strip mining practices carried out on properties located near tribal lands. Mr.
Roberts explained that, although contamination currently is being cleaned up, preservation of tribal culture
has been threatened because the tribe cannot use the land for traditional purposes.

Mr. Daniel Morfin, Granger, Washington, explained that the application of herbicides and pesticides for
agriculture use is contaminating rivers and exposing farm workers to contaminants. The incidence of
respiratory ailments in the Granger area is high, and existing regulations are not being enforced, said Mr.
Morfin.

Ms. Jeri Sundvall, Environmental Justice Action Group of Portland, Portland, Oregon, pointed out the high
rate of cancer among Native American fishermen. In addition, she charged, Native Americans are being
robbed of their heritage and are expected to become assimilated into the broader culture.

Ms. Rosemary Ahtuangaruak Inupiat Community of Arctic Slope, Barrow, Alaska, expressed concern that
state agencies often "favor profit" over protection of the interests and concerns of tribes. Ms.
Ahtuangaruak explained that, although federal agencies have declared fish populations safe to eat, the
methodology for assessing risk does not consider the higher-than-average rates of fish consumption
among Native Americans.

Ms. Lee Tanuvasa, Korean Woman's Association, Tacoma, Washington, reported that her organization
was conducting a study to determine the safety of shellfish consumed by communities of Asian Pacific
Island people. She requested assistance in overcoming the language barrier and in determining how best
to present the findings of the study to the communities affected by the issue.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

The Executive Council of the NEJAC hosted a public comment period on December 4, 2001, at which
approximately 29 people participated. Described below are a summary of key concerns citizens
expressed during the evening session.

A majority of the public comments focused on the issue of contaminated waterways and the land
on which Native Americans and other impoverished people depend for living a subsistence life
style. Commenters pointed to rates of cancer and respiratory ailments among Native American
populations that are higher than the rates among non-Native populations in the United States.
The commenters stated that the inability of Native peoples to "live off the land" has led to a decline
in the transfer of spiritual and cultural values from generation to generation. The best way to
reduce contamination in waterways is to eliminate the source of the pollution, declared a number
of commenters.

Several commenters spoke about the ineffectiveness of risk assessments. Risk assessments, as
currently conducted, do not account for the cumulative effect of numerous chemicals on the
environment, they stated. Rather, those risk assessments examine only a single chemical, they

ES-4

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

claimed. Risk assessments focus only on cancer and fail to consider other health issues, they
added. Further, they do not account for the effect of chemicals on sensitive populations, several
commenters noted.

A number of commenters criticized EPA for failing to make an adequate effort to hold the U.S.
Department of Defense (DoD) accountable for the contamination of communities located on or
near military installations. EPA is not enforcing existing environmental regulations that govern
DoD facilities, the commenters claimed.

OTHER CONCERNS AND COMMITMENTS OF THE NEJAC

During their meeting, the members of the Executive Council of the NEJAC recommended that a work
group be established to address communications within the NEJAC and between the NEJAC and EPA
program offices. In addition, the members agreed to review and provide comments on the Framework for
Cumulative Risk Assessment. Formal development of the guidance will begin in 2002.

SUMMARIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS

Summarized below are the deliberations of the subcommittees of the NEJAC held on December 5, 2001.
Air and Water Subcommittee

The members of the Air and Water Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations and reports
described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. James Hanlon, EPA Office of Science and Technology (OST), provided preliminary comment on the
feasibility of implementing the recommendations presented in the NEJAC's Draft Fish Consumption
Report. Mr. Hanlon commended the Fish Consumption Work Group for its efforts and emphasized that
the availability of resources for the most part will determine what EPA can accomplish. Mr. Hanlon also
reviewed the logistics associated with the completion of the report and its submittal to the EPA
Administrator.

Mr. Lee presented an overview of and led discussions about the NEJAC Strategic Plan. He also
discussed the meeting of the NEJAC scheduled for December 2002 that will focus on issues related to
pollution prevention and environmental justice.

Mr. Jeff Bigler, EPA OST, provided to the Fish Consumption Work Group an update on plans to revise
volume four of EPA's Guidance Document for Assessing Chemical Contamination Data for Use in Fish
Advisories to incorporate awareness of issues related to environmental justice.

Mr. Peter Murchie, EPA Region 10 Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), presented to
the Air Toxics Work Group an overview of EPA's air toxics program.

The members of the subcommittee discussed the need to establish priorities among the recommendations
presented in the Draft Fish Consumption Report to (1) help EPA focus its efforts and (2) avoid
overwhelming the agency with numerous recommendations. The members agreed that, although the list
of recommendations may appear lengthy, individual items can be grouped under a few overall themes.

The members of the subcommittee discussed the potential effect of the NEJAC Strategic Plan on the
manner in which the subcommittee conducts its business. The members agreed that the subcommittee
must focus its efforts on only a few key issues, rather than attempting to "cover the whole waterfront" as it
had done in its early days. The members also agreed to explore methods of evaluating the effectiveness
of the subcommittee's work groups on specific issues.

The members of the subcommittee emphasized that the work of the Fish Consumption Work Group must
be used as a model to guide planning for the meeting of the NEJAC to be held in December 2002. The
members also requested that, in preparation for that meeting, the newly formed Pollution Prevention Work

ES-5

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Group should examine issues related to (1) environmental restoration, (2) clean production, (3) low-impact
development, and (3) the costs and benefits of pollution prevention.

Members of the Fish Consumption Work Group discussed the plans of EPA's Office of Water to revise
volume four of its Guidance Document for Assessing Chemical Contamination Data for Use in Fish
Advisories. The members of the work group agreed to (1) review the document and provide comment on
it to EPA and (2) identify and recommend individuals to serve on various EPA stakeholder work groups
and as technical consultants for the issuance of fish advisories. The members of the subcommittee also
discussed the future of the Fish Consumption Work Group, once the Draft Fish Consumption Report has
been completed. The members recommended that the work group expand its scope to explore other
issues related to water quality, such as total maximum daily loads (TMDL), confined animal feeding
operations (CAFO), and water permits.

The Permitting and Public Utilities work groups participated in a joint session, during which they agreed to
combine the two groups into a single work group. The members of the work groups discussed EPA's
White Paper No. 3 on flexible permitting, a report on a new source review study prepared by EPA's Office
of Air and Radiation (OAR), and other issues related to the permitting process. The members of the newly
combined work group agreed to develop a document that will describe "best practices" for permitting that
are sensitive to environmental justice issues, as well as review and provide comment on the report on a
new source review study the release of which is expected in January or February 2002. Members of the
work group also expressed concern that staffing of the work group was inadequate, in light of the number
of issues the group had taken under consideration.

The members of the Air Toxics Work Group discussed EPA's air toxics program. The members agreed to
review and provide comment on EPA OAR's Work Plan for the National Air Toxics and Integrated Air
Toxics Strategy.

Health and Research Subcommittee

The members of the Health and Research Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations and
reports described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. Patrick C. West, Emeritus Faculty, Environmental Sociology, School of Natural Resources and
Environment, University of Michigan, commented on research needed in the realm of environmental
justice and application of that research. Mr. West stated that lack of research should not be a barrier to
action, that existing information can be used, and that current research must be investigated to identify the
information to support action. Mr. West stressed that systematic and qualitative assessment of both
cumulative effects and co-risk factors must be included in the assessment of risks for such sensitive
groups as communities of color, low-income communities, and Native American tribes.

Ms. Tala Henry, Mid-Continent Ecology Division, EPA National Health and Environmental Effects
Research Laboratory, provided information about the parameters that are factors in the calculation of risk.
She emphasized that there is no specific procedure for the calculation of risk and that the default
parameters are not applicable under certain circumstances, such as assessment of the risks to sensitive
groups. Therefore, she explained, partnerships between experts and communities must be fostered so
that defensible and appropriate risk parameters can be established.

Mr. Wardner G. Penberthy, EPA Chemical Control Division, presented an overview of Section 4 of the
Toxic Substances and Control Act, which focuses on chemical testing. He provided detailed information
about EPA's High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge program, a voluntary testing program for facilities
that produce large volumes of chemicals. The goal of the program is to increase the availability to the
public of baseline data on the effects on health and the environment for approximately 2,800 HPV
chemicals, reported Mr. Penberthy.

Mr. Jeffrey Morris, EPA Office of Science Policy, Office of Research and Development (ORD),
recommended a change in the structure of the subcommittees of the NEJAC. Citing EPA's goals related
to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), Mr. Morris explained that, because health and

ES-6

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

research issues related to environmental justice cross boundaries among the various subcommittees,
such issues should be handled by a special interest work group, rather than an individual subcommittee.

The members of the subcommittee conducted a number of discussions about the accurate calculation of
risk for sensitive groups. The specific recommendations they agreed upon are:

It is essential that various factors related to cultural and spiritual concerns be included in models
for assessing risk. In addition, such factors as culture shock and cultural disintegration must be
addressed.

Parameters used in the calculation of risk must be specific to each particular community.
Parameters that currently are not included in risk assessment models include peak exposure and
consumption of whole fish, rather than the more widely used parameters of chronic exposure and
consumption of only the fillet of a fish.

The types of foods identified as components of a subsistence diet should include many more
foods that are not consumed by the general population.

Co-risk and cumulative risk factors should be used as a more accurate gauge of "true risk"
because people are exposed to more than one chemical at a time.

If the recommendations of the subcommittee on the subject of calculation of risk are to be
adopted, the definitions of "health" for a community and of what is to be considered "normal" must
be reconsidered.

The subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC consider the subsistence consumption needs of such
groups as Native Hawaiians and people in the Virgin Islands who were not considered as the report was
developed. The members of the subcommittee agreed that inclusion of those groups would help achieve
recognition of cultural groups that traditionally have been ignored in research related to environmental
justice.

The members of the subcommittee agreed that the need for research often is used as a barrier to action
and acknowledged that the information available is adequate to support the initiation of work. There is an
abundance of information that, although originally was not applied to issues of environmental justice, can
be reevaluated for its significance in the field of environmental justice, they noted. In addition, the
members recommended that extensive investigation of previous research be conducted to identify
available resources.

The members of the subcommittee agreed that the evaluation of HPV chemicals and the distribution to the
public of the baseline health data are crucial actions. Although some members expressed concern about
whether industry could be trusted to report reliably on production, the members agreed that there are
many safeguards related to testing and that the penalty for falsification is severe.

The subcommittee recommended increased cooperation between government agencies and local
organizations in sharing data and calling upon the expertise of indigenous organizations. Noting that local
people have first-hand knowledge and understanding of their communities and can gather information
more efficiently than outsiders, the members recommended that research be best conducted by local
groups, with the assistance and support of EPA.

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

The members of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations and
reports described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. Merv George, Administrator, Klamath River Inter-Tribal Fish and Water Council and member of the
Hupa Tribe, provided background information about the history of the council, outlined the five issues the
council addresses, and submitted his recommendations for improving the Draft Fish Consumption Report.

ES-7

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

He stressed that the Hupa and Yura tribes constantly must balance environmental and economic issues
when developing standards for water quality.

Ms. Gillian Mittelsteadt, Environmental Policy Analyst, Tulalip Tribes Natural Resource Program, and Mr.
Daryl Williams, Developer, Tulalip Tribes Natural Resource Program, presented the results of their study
that examined the consumption by members of the Tulalip Tribe offish taken from Puget Sound. Ms.
Mittelsteadt described the statistical framework of the study and outlined the benefits and lessons learned
through completion of the study. Mr. Williams discussed the problems that arise because, he said,
programs allow the trading of pollution emissions credits. Mr. Williams emphasized the negative effects
such programs have on tribal communities.

Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Executive Director, Indigenous Environmental Network and former chair of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, presented his recommendations for improving the Draft Fish
Consumption Report. He urged that the NEJAC consider the negative effects of radioactive contaminants
on habitats and focus attention on precautionary actions, rather than traditional risk assessment. He also
recommended that the NEJAC promote outreach to tribal communities to help those communities develop
a better understanding of the mission and responsibilities of the NEJAC.

Dr. Roseanne Lorenzana, liaison between Region 10 and EPA ORD, presented a list of five specific
recommendations for consideration by the subcommittee. She also presented the report Comparative
Dietary Risks: Balancing the Risks and Benefits of Fish Consumption, for which a risk assessment model
was used to define the conditions under which consumption of fish is a healthful dietary choice. She
urged that the subcommittee advise EPA to work with tribes to develop guidelines on cumulative risk that
are appropriate to the needs of tribes.

Ms. June Martin, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, began her presentation by telling the story of Annie
Aloa, a health aide in her village who had spoken out on behalf of the tribal community and who had been
awarded a grant by the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) to survey the health
problems of members of the tribe. Ms. Martin then discussed the failure of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to clean up the military facility located near her village.

Ms. Ahtuangaruak, who is a native of the village of Nuigant, Alaska, expressed her concern about and
recommendations for improving the representation of Alaskan Natives on the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee. She also urged that, in the Draft Fish Consumption Report, the subcommittee address the
tribal lands of Alaskan Natives, such as Prudhoe Bay. Residents of those lands, she pointed out, rely on
fishing and whaling for subsistence.

Ms. Pam Miller, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, expressed concern about the health of Alaskan
Natives tribal communities that are located on or near sites that have been abandoned by DoD. She also
voiced the concern of tribes about persistent organic pollutants (POP) that originate thousands of miles
south of Alaska, travel northward, and accumulate over northern Alaska. She requested that the
subcommittee advise EPA to hold DoD accountable for previous contamination and to focus on the
phased elimination of POPs.

Mr. Enoch Sheidt, Subsistence Coordinator, Maniilaq Association, and Mr. Francis Chin, Environmental
Justice Coordinator, Maniilaq Association, emphasized the importance of a subsistence lifestyle to
Alaskan Natives who are nomadic and migrate to locations where food is available. Consequently, the
presenters reported, tribes do not recognize the concept of "on reservation" and "off reservation." To an
Alaskan Natives, fishing is not merely a method of obtaining food, but rather is a spiritual experience, they
explained. In addition, Mr. Chin stated that the unemployment rate in the Indian community is 90 to 95
percent. Therefore, a subsistence lifestyle is an essential way of life that cannot be compromised, he said.

Mr. Art C. Ivanoff, Native Village of Unalakleet, expressed his concern about the effects of climate change
on the health of Alaskan Natives. Mr. Ivanoff requested that the Draft Fish Consumption Report include
climate change as a factor that affects the quality of fish. Climate change has depleted greatly the running
stock of salmon, while the migration patterns of salmon and animals used for food have not been studied
sufficiently, he explained.

ES-8

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Ms. Cheryl Steele, Elem Indian Colony, stated that fish advisories do not address issues related to the
consumption offish sufficiently. She urged that EPA provide indigenous peoples better guidance about
contaminated fish populations and that the agency work with local communities to eliminate sources of
contamination.

Mr. Kevin McKernan, Yurok Tribe, urged EPA to acknowledge those tribes that have developed and
adopted water quality standards. He stated that the use of EPA core standards might direct resources
away from tribes that have their own standards.

Ms. August Rozema, Swinomish Tribe, stated that the subcommittee and the NEJAC must "spread the
word" about its future meetings. She also encouraged the subcommittee to clarify the definition of the
word "fish" provided in the Draft Fish Consumption Report to include both fin- and shellfish.

The members of the subcommittee requested that the Alaskan Native community provide them more
information about issues related to fish consumption and water quality standards. After listening to
testimony offered by representatives of Alaskan Native communities, the members recognized that the
concerns of all indigenous peoples throughout the world, including those of Hawaii and the Caribbean,
also must be represented equally.

The members of the subcommittee discussed the effectiveness of risk assessment in adequately
addressing issues related to fish consumption, noting that traditional risk assessment models currently do
not include reference to pollution prevention and sustainability. The members recommended that a
"precautionary principle" approach to risk assessment replace the traditional model to account for the
benefits of preservation. The members also noted that risk assessment currently does not take into
account the fact that the variable average grams per day (gpd) used in most models cannot be
extrapolated to the lifestyle of members of indigenous communities, who consume many more fish in a
much shorter period of time than do members of other groups, thereby increasing their risk to a level
disproportionate to that affecting other groups.

The members expressed concern that fewer than 20 WQSs created by individual tribal communities have
been approved. Additional discussion focused on the difficulties tribal communities encounter in their
efforts to achieve the standards outlined in the WQSs because of economic setbacks.

The members of the subcommittee agreed to advise the NEJAC to urge EPA to augment its education
programs for tribal communities by providing more information about the role of the NEJAC. In addition,
the members recommended that tribes be included regularly in the deliberative process and that the
subcommittee change its role from that of "consultation" to that of "collaboration," a role that would
include deliberative dialogue. Such a change would improve communication between the NEJAC and
indigenous communities, they suggested.

International Subcommittee

The members of the International Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations and reports
described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. Goldtooth discussed the need to focus on issues of environmental justice related to transborder
matters that affect the First Peoples of North America and indigenous tribes in the Great Lakes basin. He
reported that First Nations and tribes in the Great Lakes basin suffer a disproportionate share of
environmental problems associated with the transport of POPs. The effects of POPs are intensified among
people who rely on a subsistence diet, he pointed out.

Ms. Katy Taylor, Assistant Director of Community Health Services, Alaska Native Tribal Health Services,
presented an overview of recent studies of the effects of POPs on the health of Alaskan Native women
and children who rely on subsistence consumption as the mainstay of their diets.

Ms. Miller provided information about the movement of POPs, facilitated by air and ocean currents, into
Alaska and the Arctic region. She also discussed contamination of DoD sites in Alaska.

ES-9

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Ms. Amy Fraenkel, EPA Office of International Activities (OIA), addressed the transborder risks associated
with exposure to POPs. She also presented information about progress toward completion of the Global
Persistent Organic Pollutants Treaty (also known as the Stockholm POPs Convention). She emphasized
that environmental justice groups must work to influence the process of planning how the United States
will implement the provisions of the treaty.

Ms. Eileen Henninger, EPA OIA, stated that it is important that the NEJAC provide comment to OIA on
issues related to biodiversity. Some of the work in that area will bring about major worldwide reductions in
the use of key harmful chemicals in farming and industrial applications, she said.

Mr. Lionel L. Brown Jr., Senior Information Management Officer, EPA OIA, presented an update on the
efforts of OIA to promote environmental awareness in Africa. Many areas in Africa are experiencing rapid
urbanization, he reported, adding that OIA has been working to educate local communities about issues
related to environmental justice. Mr. Brown also emphasized the heavy reliance on fish in the diets of
African people.

Mr. Enrique Manzanilla, Director, Cross Media Division, EPA Region 9, provided background information
about EPA's work related to the border areas of the United States and Mexico. He reviewed the activities
undertaken by Region 9 during the two years since the Roundtable on Environmental Justice on the U.S.-
Mexico Border was held in San Diego, California and reported on the success of outreach efforts
conducted by the Region 9 Border Liaison Office, located in San Diego.

Ms. Olivia Balandran, Office of the Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6, presented an update on the
outreach activities of the region's border office. She reported that the recent activities of that office
included efforts to respond to the recommendations presented at the roundtable meeting on the U.S.-
Mexico border.

Ms. Nelda Perez, Small Grants Coordinator, EPA Region 6 OEJ, presented information about activities
related to grants awarded to groups located in the U.S.-Mexico border area.

Mr. Richard Moore, Executive Director, Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice, and
former chair of the NEJAC, described letters his organization had written to EPA Administrator Christine
Todd Whitman and President Bush. Mr. Moore discussed the effects of increased militarization along the
U.S.-Mexico border that has taken place since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. He also
requested that the subcommittee complete the reports produced for the Roundtable on Environmental
Justice on the U.S.-Mexico Border and prepared by the NEJAC Farm Worker Work Group.

Mr. Apichart Thongyou, Secretary General, Thailand Research and Action for Development Institute,
discussed efforts undertaken in Thailand to reduce adverse effects on conditions of concern to the
environmental justice community that are caused by modernization and the development of heavy
industry. He and several other members of the delegation of visitors from Thailand discussed several
studies that examined heavy contamination by industry and its effect on fishermen who rely on fishing for
subsistence. Mr. Thongyou also described the work of EPA and its counterpart in Thailand to create a
public participation process, reauthorize environmental laws, and create a new ministry for the
environment.

The members of the subcommittee also participated in discussions related to various topics:

The members of the subcommittee identified similarities in the shortcomings of enforcement and
public participation efforts in Thailand and other nations. They discussed the value of, and the
need for, an international environmental network to support the transfer of information and data.

The members of the subcommittee concluded that the NEJAC and OIA should collaborate to build
a strong relationship between the work of OIA in Africa and the environmental issues addressed
by the NEJAC.

The members of the subcommittee discussed OlA's strategy of deploying culturally diverse teams
to represent EPA in international discussions. The members concluded that such a strategy is

ES-10

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

essential in engaging communities in discussions of treaties and encouraging collaboration
between the United States and other countries in the sharing of resources.

The members agreed that practices that contaminate water in one country and thereby affect the
health of residents of another country illustrate the "interconnectedness" of the global
environment. The members noted the similarity of the predicaments of subsistence fisherman in
the United States and other nations.

The members of the subcommittee concluded that there is a significant opportunity for the
NEJAC to participate in the development of the plan for the implementation by the United States
of the Stockholm POPs Convention. They also agreed to provide comment to OIA about the level
of implementation of the treaty. In addition, the members discussed the need to include in the
treaty provisions for a system for tracking the movement of POPs across the borders of the United
States.

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

The members of the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee of the NEJAC received the presentations
and reports described below and discussed the topics summarized.

Mr. Michael Shapiro, Deputy Assistant Administrator, EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER), and Ms. Linda Garczynski, EPA OSWER, provided an overview of the direction new
senior managers plan for OSWER. They discussed the vision, mission, priorities, and values of the office,
reviewed changes that are taking place, and identified several key priorities for OSWER:

Pursuit of the One Cleanup Program Initiative, which is designed to make the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) programs more consistent with one another and to
increase the right-to-know component of each.

Establishment of revitalization and reuse as core issues of the OSWER action agenda.

Implementation of recycling and pollution prevention programs to encourage partnerships and
demonstration pilot projects in the area of reduction in source contamination.

Implementation of the Retail Initiative, which is designed to increase focus on public involvement
in the use of solid and hazardous waste and improve dialogue among communities.

Implementation of work force development programs to strengthen the effort to train new staff of
OSWER to meet its future challenges.

Mr. Samuel J. Coleman, EPA Region 6, provided an update on issues of environmental justice that affect
the community of Mossville, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. Mr. Coleman identified several specific
milestones:

Installation of an enhanced air monitoring network sanctioned by the Lake Area Industrial Alliance
and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Protection (LDEP).

Achievement of overall compliance with the requirements of LDEP and establishment of
parishwide dioxin screening as a standard procedure.

Creation of an advisory council that works closely with the community, industry, and LDEP.

Conduct a pilot health symposium designed to address health problems associated with exposure
to environmental hazards and contaminants.

Ms. Sharon Beard, NIEHS, made a presentation on worker education and training.

ES-11

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Summary

Mr. Carter; Dr. Mildred McClain, Executive Director, Citizens for Environmental Justice; and Ms. Doris
Bradshaw, Executive Director, Defense Depot Memphis Tennessee Concerned Citizens Committee, made
a presentation on the role of FFRRO in working with communities affected by adverse environmental
conditions. They explained that FFRRO plans to:

Identify and evaluate key issues of concern to such communities.

Provide a forum for dialogue between members of local communities and representatives of
government agencies.

Compile a list of resources available to communities and stakeholders that can help support
increased public participation.

Formulate a set of recommendations to the NEJAC, including the identification of "best practices"
for improving environmental cleanups and ways in which the NEJAC can best address issues
related to federal facilities.

The members of the subcommittee discussed the development of a strategic plan for the subcommittee.
Key issues they identified included the creation of a work force development committee and examination
of the role of the subcommittee on the Pollution Prevention Working Group. Additional themes they
identified included exploration of EPA's role in fostering strategic planning by communities for the re-use
and revitalization of contaminated sites, action to be taken after cleanup has been completed, and use of
lessons learned through demonstration projects conducted by the Integrated Work Group on
Environmental Justice and other outstanding projects.

The members of the subcommittee discussed at length three pending action items for 2002:

Transfer of the Federal Facilities Work Group to the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee and
addition of another member to that work group.

Provision of assistance to FFRRO in its efforts to integrate issues related to land use,
development, and redevelopment into the programs and procedures of EPA.

Identification of models, such as the Washington Naval Yard and other sites, to be used as
positive examples of OSWER's work with communities to achieve revitalization and reuse.

NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the NEJAC is scheduled for December 9 through 12, 2002 in Baltimore, Maryland.
The meeting will focus on pollution prevention. Planned activities include one opportunity for the public to
offer comments. More information about the upcoming meeting will be available on the NEJAC's Internet
home page at  (click on the link to the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council) or by telephone on EPA's toll-free environmental justice
hotline at 1 (800) 962-6215.

ES-12

Seattle, Washington, December 3-6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

CHAPTER ONE
MEETING
OF THE
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The sixteenth meeting of the Executive Council of
the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) took place Thursday, December 3 through
6, 2001, in Seattle, Washington. Ms. Peggy
Shepard, West Harlem Environmental Action, serves
as the newly appointed chair of the Executive
Council. Mr. Charles Lee, Associate Director for
Policy and Interagency Liaison, U.S., Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Environmental
Justice (OEJ), continues to serve as the Designated
Federal Officer (DFO) for the Executive Council.
Exhibit 1-1 presents a list of members of the
Executive Council who were present and identifies
those members who were unable to attend.
Approximately 300 people attended the meeting.

On December 5, 2001, each member of the
Executive Council who was present on that day
participated in the deliberations of the NEJAC
subcommittees. Chapters Three through Seven of
this meeting summary describe those deliberations.
In addition, the Executive Council hosted one public
comment period on the evening of December 4,
2001, as well as participated in a "virtual tour" of
environmental justice sites in EPA Region 10 on
December 3,2001. Approximately 30 people offered
comments during the public comment session.
Chapter Two presents a summary of the public
comments offered and the presentations made
during the virtual tour.

This chapter, which provides a summary of the
deliberations of the Executive Council, is organized
in six sections, including this Introduction. Section
2.0, Remarks, summarizes the remarks offered by
various speakers. Section 3.0, Discussion of the
Relationship Between Water Quality, Fish
Consumption, and Environmental Justice, provides
a summary of the testimony provided by the Fish
Consumption Work Group of the NEJAC and
describes the recommendations discussed by the
members of the work group and the members of the
Executive Council. Section 4.0, Draft Strategic Plan
of the NEJAC, presents a summary of the
discussions ofthe members of the Executive Council
about matters related to the NEJAC strategic plan.
Section 5.0, Presentations and Reports, provides
summaries of reports and presentations made to the
Executive Council on various other topics. Section
6.0, Miscellaneous Business, presents summaries of

Exhibit 1-1

	

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

Members Who Attended the Meeting
December 3 through December 6, 2001

Ms. Peggy Shepard, Chair
Mr. Charles Lee, DFO

Mr. Larry Charles
Ms. Veronica Eady
Ms. Anna Frazier**

Ms. Eileen Guana
Dr. Richard Gragg, III
Dr. Michael Gelobter*

Mr. Robert Harris*

Ms. Savonala "Savi" Home
Ms. Annabelle Jaramillo
Ms. Mary Nelson
Dr. Graciela Ramirez-Toro
Ms. Jane Stahl
Mr. Dean Suagee
Ms. Wilma Subra
Ms. Jana Walker
Mr. Kenneth Warren

List of Members
Who Were Unable To Attend

Ms. Rose Augustine
Mr. Fernando Cuevas
Ms. Jennifer Hill-Kelley
Mr. Harold Mitchell
Mr. David Moore
Mr. Alberto Saldamondo
Ms. Pat Wood
Mr. Tseming Yang

* Attended December 3 and 4, 2001 only
**Attended December 4 and 6, 2001 only

discussions by the members of the Executive
Council of other items before the council, including
recognition of those members whose terms were
soon to expire.

Chapter Two of this report presents a summary of
the virtual tour and public comment sessions held
December 3 and 4, 2001. Chapters Three through
Seven of this report present summaries of the
deliberations of each ofthe subcommittees that met

1-1

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

on December 5,2001. Appendix A presents a list of
the proposed revisions of the draft Fish Consumption
Report and recommendations proposed for additions
to it.

2.0 REMARKS

This section summarizes the remarks of the Deputy
Regional Administrator of EPA Region 10 and
representatives of local community organizations
and the Washington State legislature. Exhibit 1-2
provides a copy of the letter sent by Washington
Governor Gary Locke to the NEJAC.

2.1 Remarks of the Deputy Regional
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region 10

Mr. Ron Kreizenbeck, Deputy Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 10, welcomed the
members of the NEJAC, commenting on the
appropriateness of the selection of Region 10 to host
the current meeting, with its focus on subsistence
fish consumption, water quality, and environmental
justice. He explained that EPA Region 10, which
includes the states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho,
and Alaska, is home to many diverse, low-income
communities, communities of color, and more than
270 Native American tribes and Alaskan Native
villages. Many of those communities and tribes
subsist on fish, plants, and wildlife, he said, and the
harvesting, preparation, and consumption of wild
species is prevalent, as well as fundamental to the
heritage and traditions of their cultures. Mr.
Kreizenbeck stressed that the degradation of
habitats and the depletion of resources threatens the
very way of life of those communities and tribes.

Mr. Kreizenbeck also pointed out that, for many such
communities, there is no practicable alternative to
the resources of the land. Therefore, he continued,
it is not feasible to switch to or substitute other food
resources if the resources of their land are
contaminated. Moreover, he stated, for the
communities of concern, to abstain from
consumption of such resources is unimaginable for
cultural, traditional, or religious reasons. A
subsistence lifestyle, he stressed, is more than
simply a tradition — it is fundamental to the very
concept of self-determination.

Continuing, Mr. Kreizenbeck stated that issues of
environmental justice arise during the everyday work
at EPA Region 10, as the Agency issues and
reviews permits, reviews and approves water quality
standards, works on environmental impact
statements, performs risk assessments, and

develops monitoring plans. Addressing subsistence
issues as the Agency pursues those activities is
necessary to ensure that all communities receive
equal environmental protection, he said. Lacking
equal environmental protection for all, regardless of
race, income, culture, or ethnicity, he declared, there
can be no environmental justice.

2.2 Remarks of Local Elected Officials,
Community Members, and Tribal Leaders

Ms. Rosa Franklin, State Senator, Washington State
Legislature and former member of the NEJAC,
commented on the timeliness of the current meeting
of the NEJAC, held to discuss the relationship
between among water quality, fish consumption, and
environmental justice. While contaminated air and
toxic streams affect all citizens, she continued, the
changing demographics in the state of Washington
and the Pacific Northwest have brought a new
urgency to the issue offish consumption. Therefore,
she said, there is an urgent need in the region to
further identify and quantify the types and
magnitudes of risks to communities and tribes that
subsist on wild fish, plants, and other wildlife. Ms.
Franklin stressed that the activities of the NEJAC
could have a long-term effect on the health of those
communities.

Ms. Velma Veloria, State Representative,
Washington State Legislature and former member of
the NEJAC, noted that the convening of the NEJAC
in the state of Washington to discuss this issue of
fish consumption and environmental justice
reaffirmed that the quality of salmon and fish is a
concern not only of the fishing industry, but also of
tribes and other minority populations.

Ms. Veloria informed the members of the NEJAC
that the state of Washington had done much to
ensure that its water is clean and that fish remain
healthy. She explained that, in 1994, she, Ms.
Franklin, and several other legislators had introduced
a bill before the state legislature that requested that
the Washington Department of Ecology and the
Washington Department of Health jointly prepare a
report on the environmental risks that threaten low-
income and minority groups. She noted that the
initial funding to supportthe work had been obtained.
Ms. Veloria commented that the victory had been "an
incredible first step" in addressing the
disproportionate adverse effects of hazardous and
solid waste sites on low-income communities and
peoples of color.

1-2

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

Exhibit 1-2

w

«*Tt	«'€»¦»:

OFFICII Of lilt GOVERNOR

(, veerings from the Governor

Dmember 3.

'..jj.f, i-» i- it i ir.lv-i iic ,•	..ft f'-.r wit in 		- u in tie '."'en, i'tji

t ! IK Vn „ < ,t f ,¦<•.<•,.ffliio-i.tl s \ lo- IP. s. .mix 'I. M MC).

1 hi; •i ,>'	• Ji\,\ ,ir>J n;V>,-ii.iiiiin jn,

«i,K t h if--r.'rn'-c:Mi'«! «r i!^ M I wv ft. ,w-i p%.h i, I ht > i, y

Hirin.il.., (.«, .I.'.l -»A ln.-i.'l.ni.|iV'ii,. K. -\f*
, I.;«I' -I tii»;ni.il n.T, -iMi | i,n,r " . »¦ t*r, i		-tr, >>

ft hilr \u,t ,iii* Ih'.'t I In ih.» *mi ki I t\w M'a~! i tlx i> ilu- ra "iwr-li ,»* i, •i.irm.mil
Immaj of i»« Emgrmn &»» Ywu will M n ewHumfiiw;! bitit, ¦ «i. j: i «>«., - ,v
,it. v «-i c i.. m i:«i «*• \ m visit * WKinll* «ne

He- V 'I v ¦ 1 ,ivO- .hi' P..V- r.(J ti I tr	.,v i. U .tUnftan!'

1-3

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

In 1997, Ms. Veloria continued, the legislature
worked to incorporate environmental health into the
state's overall public health improvement plan. That
effort, she explained, had allowed the Washington
Department of Health to consider environmental
health risks to communities when performing
assessments of public health. She added that, in
that same year, legislation had been enacted that
reformed the way in which the work at clean-up sites
is taxed.

Ms. Veloria explained that, before the legislation was
passed, the owner of a cleanup site was taxed at a
particular rate if the owner cleaned up the site
voluntarily, but was taxed at a lower rate if the owner
waited until the Washington Department of Ecology
formally placed the site on a list of sites that required
cleanup. Such a tax system, she pointed out,
encouraged owners to delay cleanup, thereby
increasing the potential that contamination from the
sites would spread. By changing the system to
include a uniform tax for cleanups, she added, the
legislature removed site owners' incentive to delay
cleanup.

Continuing, Ms. Veloria stated that, in 1998, the
Washington state legislature enacted legislation that
requested that the Washington Department of Health
investigate the health effects of noise, particularly in
the vicinity of Washington's Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport (SEATAC) and review existing
studies of noise pollution to evaluate whether
disadvantaged groups are subject to
disproportionately high levels of exposure to
unhealthy noise pollution. Further, she continued, in
early 2001, the legislature's Agriculture and Ecology
Committee conducted a hearing on proposed
legislation that would require that the public be
notified of releases of hazardous substances.
Specifically, she explained, notices would be mailed
to residents, land owners, and businesses located
within one mile of a facility involved in such a release
and would provide detailed information about the
chemicals involved, the address of the facility, and
the date of the release. While the legislation has not
yet been enacted, she added, it is to be reintroduced
in 2002.

Mr. Moses Squeochs, Yakama Nation and member
of the NEJAC Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee,
observed that, while he appreciates the responsibility
and effort of the NEJAC, he is troubled that such an
"extra effort" is necessary to enforce legislation that
has been enacted by the Congress of the United
States. For example, he pointed out, federal law
requires that federal agencies identify the need to
ensure the protection of populations that exhibit

patterns of subsistence consumption of fish and
wildlife and to assist in providing such protection.
Federal law also requires that federal agencies
collect, maintain, and analyze information about the
consumption patterns of populations that rely
primarily on fish or wildlife for subsistence, added Mr.
Squeochs. He stressed that EPA has been charged
with implementation of federal environmental
statutes. He asked why it has been so difficult for
EPA to carry out that responsibility.

Continuing, Mr. Squeochs explained that he
represents the 14 Confederated Tribes and Bands of
the Yakama Nation that reside in the interior mid-
Columbia River basin. After reciting the names of
the 14 tribes and bands, he explained that each of
those communities, along with many other
indigenous communities, continue to maintain a
subsistence, or "hunter-gatherer," way of life and
sustain the customs and practices of their valuable
and rich heritage. He also commented that there is
a renewed and important effort among indigenous
peoples to restore their language and preserve their
culture, which reflects and maintains a deep
connection to the Earth, "their Mother."

Mr. Squeochs shared his remembrance of the first
time he had recited as a small child in school the
words of the Pledge of Allegiance "...with liberty and
justice for all." Ironically, he continued, more than 50
years later, he finds himself participating as a
member of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee in
an attempt to make such justice a reality for all and
to achieve some sense of fairness and equality. In
closing, Mr. Squeochs, stated his hope that the
NEJAC would continue to make history in the search
for justice.

Ms. Yolanda Sinde, Community Coalition for
Environmental Justice, also welcomed the members
of the NEJAC to the city of Seattle. She first noted
that the Community Coalition for Environmental
Justice, a multiracial organization, had been the first
official nonprofit environmental justice group formed
in the Seattle area. She then invited the members of
the NEJAC to attend a community reception to be
held that evening.

Ms. Sinde then briefly expressed her concern about
rumors that the NEJAC might be dissolved. She
stressed the importance of maintaining the
connection the NEJAC provides between EPA and
environmental justice communities and asked that
representatives of EPA or members of the NEJAC
address the concern during the meeting.

1-4

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

3.0 POLICY DIALOGUE
ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
WATER QUALITY, FISH CONSUMPTION,
AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

The NEJAC, in its continuing efforts to provide
independent advice to the Administrator of EPA in
areas related to environmental justice, focused its
sixteenth meeting on the relationship between water
quality, fish consumption, and environmental justice.
On Tuesday, December 4, the members of the
NEJAC heard a panel presentation by the members
of the Fish Consumption Work Group of the NEJAC.
The NEJAC had established the work group to assist
in developing a report and recommendations on this
issue.

Ms. Annabelle Jaramillo, Benton County Board of
Commissioners and chair of the Air and Water
Subcommittee, served as facilitator during the policy
dialogue. She began the discussion by reminding
the members of the NEJAC of the purpose of the
current meeting of the NEJAC. She explained that
the issue that the NEJAC had been asked to
consider and provide recommendations on was:

"How should EPA improve the quality,
quantity, and integrity of our Nation's aquatic
ecosystems in order to protect the health
and safety of people consuming or using
fish, aquatic plants, and wildlife?"

Ms. Jaramillo then stated that, in preparation for the
meeting, a report, Fish Consumption Report: Pre-
meeting Discussion Draft, had been developed to
provide a context for the discussions. The Fish
Consumption Work Group, she continued, had
prepared the report, with the assistance of Ms.
Catherine O'Neill, Associate Professor, Seattle
University School of Law.

3.1 Overview of the Fish Consumption Report

Ms. Jana Walker, Law Offices of Jana Walker and
vice-chair of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee,
provided an overview of the fish consumption report.
Ms. Walker first explained that the report is a
discussion draft intended to promote open dialogue
among the members of the NEJAC, as well as to
encourage public comment on its content. She
stated that the work group would welcome
comments on the draft report through January 2002.

Ms. Walker reported that the draft report includes a
background section and four chapters. The
background section explores the reasons
contamination of fish and aquatic ecosystems

Members of the NEJAC discuss presentations made by the
members of the NEJAC Fish Consumption Work Group.

causes concern about environmental justice. It does
so, she continued, through the perspectives of real
people who have suffered the harmful effects of such
contamination. She explained that, while there are
important differences among affected groups,
communities of color, low-income communities, and
tribes generally consume greater quantities of fish
than do other segments of the population and
depend on healthy fish and aquatic ecosystems to a
greater extent and in different ways than does the
general population. Therefore, she continued, these
communities and tribes are forced to bear a
disproportionate share of the environmental effects
that result from pollution of the waters.

Continuing, Ms. Walker explained that fish not
caught commercially are a healthy, cheap, and
readily available source of protein in the diet.
Persons who subsist chiefly or solely on such fish
therefore are more likely to be members of
communities of color, low-income communities, or
tribes. Affected groups also may consume or use
fish, aquatic plants, and wildlife for cultural,
traditional, or religious reasons. They also may eat
different parts of the fish than do other segments of
the population, and they may prepare the fish in
different ways, as well. Conventional
understandings about catching, harvesting,
preparing, and eating fish do not capture such
practices adequately.

Ms. Walker then pointed out that communities of
color, low-income communities, and tribes also may
be exposed to different, and often numerous, types
of exposures to environmental pollutants than is the
case among the general population. Many toxins
and toxic chemicals persist in the environment for
very long periods of time and bioaccumulate in fish,
plants, wildlife, and ultimately the people who eat
them, she explained. Although the specific health
risks posed by such multiple exposures are
unknown, she said, it has been documented that

1-5

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

many of the chemicals of concern are highly toxic to
humans. Such chemicals, continued Ms. Walker,
can cause reproductive, neurological, and endocrine
disorders; cancer; and negative developmental
effects in children.

Ms. Walker stressed that "healthy waters and
watersheds mean healthy people." She
acknowledged that EPA has made progress in
addressing water pollution over the past 30 years,
but declared that much more must be done because,
today, only 60 percent of the nation's lakes, rivers,
and estuaries are clean enough to be used for
fishing and swimming. Continuing, Ms. Walker
pointed out that 40 percent of assessed waters are
degraded to the point that they no longer support
theirdesignated uses. Further, some 300,000 miles
of rivers and streams and more than 5 million acres
of lakes do not meet water quality goals, she added.
Many of those waters are not safe for swimming and
cannot support healthy fish, she said.

Ms. Walker then reported that Chapter 1 of the draft
fish consumption report evaluates the tools that EPA
uses to define, evaluate, and respond to the adverse
health effects of exposure to contaminated aquatic
ecosystems. She explained that fish consumption is
the primary route of exposure to many toxic
contaminants. To establish environmental
standards, EPA uses exposure data related to the
ingestion of contaminated fish, she said. To develop
those national water quality standards and criteria,
she went on, certain assumptions must be made
about how much fish people eat, which parts of the
fish they eat, and which people are eating those fish.
However, such exposure assumptions often reflect
only the habits of the general population; the
increased potential for exposure among populations
that consume larger quantities of fish, such as
communities of color, low-income communities, and
tribes, are not considered.

Providing an example, Ms. Walker stated that, until
recently, federal water quality standards were based
on the exposure assumption thatthe average person
consumes only 6.5 grams per day (g/day) of fish.
However, studies of rates of consumption of fish in
tribal, low-income, and minority communities have
revealed rates that are more than 100 times the
value assumed by EPA. Ms. Walker added that the
draft report provides ample evidence that ethnic
minorities and tribes are more likely to eat the whole
fish, including the skin, head, and tail, and that those
parts contain higher levels of pollutants than the filet,
which is the part of the fish most likely to be
consumed by individuals in the general population.

Continuing, Ms. Walker said that Chapter 1 of the
report also discusses the issues related to aggregate
or multiple exposures and cumulative risks, noting
that current EPA methodologies proceed as if
humans are exposed to only one contaminant at a
time.

In summary, Chapter 1 of the fish consumption
report addresses issues related to assumptions
made by EPA about patterns of fish consumption,
said Ms. Walker. Exposure assumptions must be
revised to reflect the lives and circumstances of all
people, including those subject to high levels of
exposure, she emphasized.

Chapter 2 of the fish consumption report focuses on
EPA's risk reduction strategies that require risk
producers, usually the polluters, to clean up, reduce,
or prevent environmental contamination, Ms. Walker
then reported. The chapter also examines existing
legaI authorities u nder federaI envi ronmentaI statutes
that might be exercised more effectively to address
contaminants of concern and to protect the health of
people who consume large quantities of fish, she
added.

Chapter 3 of the fish consumption report, continued
Ms. Walker, examines EPA's risk avoidance
strategies, under which affected communities and
tribes are asked to change their practices to avoid
exposure to harmful contaminants. She explained
that the chapter examines the role fish consumption
advisories should play in protecting the health of
people who consume or use fish and concludes that
the role of such an advisory varies, depending on the
community or tribe affected by it. Chapter 3 also
identifies several significant concerns related to
reliance on fish advisories, she said.

Ms. Walker then stated that Chapter 4 of the fish
consumption report addresses considerations unique
to the 556 federally recognized tribes, including 229
Alaskan Native villages. She explained that, while
tribes share many of the concerns described in the
preceding chapters, their unique political and legal
status distinguishes them from all other affected
groups in many ways and warrants separate
treatment in the report. Unlike other affected groups,
tribes also are government entities and regulators
that exercise broad inherent sovereignty over their
members, territories, and resources, she said.
Chapter 4 also discusses the unique susceptibilities
of tribes to the adverse effects of pollution on health.

In closing, Ms. Walker stressed that the fish
consumption report is not intended to ignore or
belittle the progress EPA has made in addressing

1-6

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

water pollution. However, she stated, it is clear that
many obligations remain unfulfilled and much work
remains to be done. As the members of the NEJAC
continue their discussions over the coming months,
she suggested, their challenge will be to develop
meaningful advice about the approach EPA should
take in the effort to improve the quality of aquatic
ecosystems, thereby protecting the health of all
people who consume fish, especially highly exposed
communities and tribes.

In response to the overview of the fish consumption
report provided by Ms. Walker, Mr. Jim Hanlon, EPA
Office of Water (OW) Office of Science and
Technology recognized the high quality of the work
produced by the work group. He then expressed his
belief that the report will be important to EPA as the
Agency works to address issues related to fish
contamination. He remarked that EPA had made
great strides in improving water quality over the past
10 years, but acknowledged that much work remains
to be done. Mr. Hanlon reminded the audience that
the objectives of EPA OW are to ensure that water is
safe to drink; that water resources are safe for
aquatic recreation; that fish are safe to eat; and that
our water resources provide a balanced, high-quality
system that supports aquatic life.

Mr. Hanlon then stated that, only 10 years earlier,
fewer than five states in the country used risk-based
methodologies to develop fish consumption
advisories. However, he continued, through
cooperation with the states, EPA OW had developed
a set of guidelines that states used in developing the
fish consumption advisories that are now in place.
The guidelines include guidance on sampling
methodologies, analytical methodologies of
laboratories, risk management, and risk
communication. Mr. Hanlon then reported that more
than 40 states now use risk-based methodologies to
develop fish consumption advisories for their
populations.

In conjunction with the Minnesota Department of
Health, Mr. Hanlon continued, EPA recently had
sponsored a conference in Chicago, Illinois, that was
attended by more than 400 people, representing all
50 states and more than 50 tribal entities. The focus
of the conference was risk communication related to
fish consumption. The proceedings of that
conference had been released, he said, and would
be discussed during the meeting of the Air and
Water Subcommittee to be held on December 5,
2001. Mr. Hanlon added that he also would discuss
with the members of the Air and Water
Subcommittee the further actions that the agency is
considering. Those actions would focus on the

1-7

development of additional tools to assist states in
improving their risk communication capabilities.

Responding to Ms. Walker's comments about
outdated methodology forthe development of human
health criteria, Mr. Hanlon stated that EPA recently
had replaced a document that had been in use since
the early 1980s with updated information that is
based on available statistical information about
average consumption levels for general populations,
sport fishers, and subsistence populations. He noted
that the release of the updated information
represented an important transition from the use of
historical bioconcentration factors to the use of
bioaccumulation factors in the derivation of water
quality criteria. The new approach has the effect of
lowering the acceptable criteria by a factor of as
much as 100. Mr. Hanlon added that the new
methodology also recognizes, for the first time, the
concept of relative source contribution. That is, he
explained, individuals do not receive their entire body
burden of a particular toxic pollutant from
consumption offish tissue alone, but rather from a
combination of exposure routes, all of which must be
considered.

Continuing his discussion of the activities of EPA
OW, Mr. Hanlon stated that the office, in cooperation
with the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), recently completed its second
mailing to health care providers. Through the
mailing, he explained, packages of information about
the contamination offish was disseminated to more
than 135,000 health care providers across the United
States, including pediatricians, obstetricians,
gynecologists, family physicians, physician's
assistants, and midwives. Mr. Hanlon then stated
that EPA does not believe that consumption
advisories are the solution to problems related to the
contamination of fish. Rather, he said, such
advisories are temporary measures taken to advise
the public about health risks that may be associated
with the consumption of contaminated fish.

Mr. Hanlon then reported that EPA's Total Maximum
Daily Load (TMDL) Program is making "giant steps
forward." Exhibit 1-3 presents the definition of
TMDL. During 2002, he continued, some 2,000
TMDL projects will be underway nationwide. He
added that approximately 33 states operate under
consent agreements or court orders that require that
the states and EPA step forward and complete
development schedules reflecting the priority ranking
of each pollutant.

Concluding his remarks, Mr. Hanlon emphasized that
the "Achilles heel" of the national water program

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

continues to be the lack of robust information or data
about watersheds throughout the United States.
Referring to Ms. Walker's comment that 40 percent
of assessed water bodies do not meet standards for
their designated uses, Mr. Hanlon pointed out that
only 20 to 25 percent of the nation's water bodies
have been assessed.

Ms. Shepard also offered several comments about
the information presented in the draft fish
consumption report. She stated that in her own
state, New York, many groups have been in
consultation with the state Department of
Environmental Conservation about fish advisories for
the Hudson River, in which contamination has been
known to exist for many years. However, she
pointed out, authorities have posted no fish
consumption advisories related to the river. Ms.
Shepard said that, along the Hudson River,
subsistence fishers are selling fish to local fish
markets. EPA, she suggested, should find a way to
mandate that fish advisories be posted. She
suggested furtherthat a public information campaign
be mounted to reach affected communities. Ms.
Shepard then stated that the glaring disparity
between how water quality standards, enforcement,
and cleanup are implemented confirms continuing
unequal enforcement in communities that are among
the most highly exposed to contaminants —
communities of color, low-income communities, and
tribes. She then stated her belief thatthe information
presented in the draft report reinforces recognition of
the need for accelerated investigation projects and
protocols for determining the cumulative effects of
multiple exposures.

Finally, Ms. Shepard commented that financial
resources should be made available to affected
groups so that they can educate their own
communities in their own languages and in a manner
that reflects their own cultures and customs.

3.2 Fish Consumption, Research Methods, and
Approaches to Risk Assessment

Dr. Patrick West, Professor Emeritus, University of
Michigan, provided a detailed summary of
information about research methods and approaches
to risk assessment that agencies use to define,
evaluate, and respond to the adverse health effects
caused by contamination of aquatic environments.
Chapter 1 of the draft fish consumption report
presents that information.

Dr. West stated that the contamination of fish,
aquatic plants, and wildlife is an especially pressing
concern for many communities of color, low-income

communities, and tribes, whose consumption and
use practices differ, often profoundly so, from those
of the general population. He explained that
members of those communities often consume far
greater quantities offish, aquatic plants, and wildlife
than does the general population. Further, they
consume and use different species and parts than
the general population, and they employ culturally
different methods of procuring and preparing the fish,
aquatic plants, and wildlife that they use. Therefore,
continued Dr. West, communities of color, low-
income communities, and tribes are among the
segments of the population that are most highly
exposed to contaminants in the fish, plants, wildlife,
and aquatic environment. He explained that
available literature documents that the 95th
percentile fish consumption rates for various affected
communities and tribes range from 225 g/day to 489
g/day. Yet, he pointed out, EPA regularly and
routinely approves a human consumption rate of 6.5
g/day in risk assessment methodologies.

Dr. West then discussed policy related to fish
consumption in a legal and cultural context. He
stated thatthe contamination offish, aquatic plants,
and wildlife also is troubling to many communities of
color, low-income communities, and tribes because
such groups consume and use fish, aquatic plants,
and wildlife in different cultural, traditional, religious,
historical, economic, and legal contexts than what
agencies have defined as the general population.
For example, tribes have rights guaranteed by treaty
to take fish. The unique legal obligations established
under such treaties are relevant to EPA's decisions
that affect the health of the fish and the fishery
resource, he said.

Dr. West explained that fish consumption and use of
fish often is prescribed by the culture and tied closely
to the collective and individual identity of a
community or tribe. The existence of such different
contexts is demonstrated abundantly by both
testimonial evidence and study in social science, he
continued. For the reasons he had identified, said
Dr. West, current fish consumption practices are, in
an important sense, indispensable for many
communities and tribes.

Dr. West then discussed the possibility of a
"suppression effect" related to fish consumption. He
explained that a suppression effect occurs when a
fish consumption rate for a given group reflects a
current level of consumption that is diminished
artificially from the appropriate baseline level for the
group. Suppression effects may occur because of
contamination or fear of consuming contaminated
items (members of a group consume fewer fish than

1-8

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

they naturally would because they fear that the fish
are contaminated) or depletion of resources
(members of a group consume fewer fish than they
naturally would because fewer fish are available for
consumption), he said. He explained that, when
standards are based on fish consumption rates that
are not adjusted for suppressed consumption, the
standards initiate a "downward spiral," with more
contamination permitted, leading to a greater
suppression effect, and so on.

Continuing, Dr. West stated that current risk
assessment methods do not account adequately for
susceptibilities and co-risk factors that affect
individual responses to environmental contaminants.
Co-risk factors include underlying health status,
quality of diet, genetics, socioeconomic status,
access to health care, and other factors. For
example, he said, low-income socioeconomic status
may combine with and intensify health effects of
consuming contaminated fish in environmental
justice communities.

Dr. West then stated that current risk assessment
methods also evaluate risks as if humans were
exposed to a single contaminant at a time by a single
route of exposure. He explained that members of
environmental justice communities, however, often
are exposed to numerous contaminants, at a given
time or in succession, often by more than one route
of exposure. For example, he stated, the 13
Confederated Bands of the Yakama Nation fish in
the Columbia River; more than 100 contaminants
have been identified in the tissues offish taken from
that river.

Dr. West then observed that the efforts of affected
communities and tribes are integral in producing
relevant, accurate, scientifically defensible data. He
said that affected communities and tribes therefore
must be involved at every stage of research on the
issues he had discussed, from identifying research
needs to designing research methods; interpreting
the policy implications of the finding of such
research; and determining the importance of the
research to the agency's risk assessment,
management, remediation, and emission permitting
processes.

Continuing his remarks, Dr. West stated that
environmental justice communities also have a
broader policy role to play beyond the arena of
research. He stated that tribal populations
throughout the country have challenged the NEJAC
and EPA to "walk in their moccasins" — to see and
experience the importance offish consumption and
related use of subsistence resources taken from the

waters and the land and the harsh effects of pollution
and pollution policy as the tribes themselves
experience them. The same ideal, Dr. West added,
holds true for other environmental justice
communities and cultures.

Dr. West then stated that, at the recent conference
in Chicago that Mr. Hanlon had mentioned, he had
heard members of tribes and other environmental
justice communities repeatedly urge EPA to take a
broader, more holistic view that goes beyond the
very important, but very short-term, narrow, and
focused, policy of exclusive reliance on advisories.

Dr. West then asked the members of the NEJAC if
they would be willing to "walk in the moccasins" of
affected communities and, with renewed
determination, take on the difficult issues of
prevention and remediation.

3.3 Fish Consumption and the Exercise of
Existing Legal Authorities

Ms. Walker provided a summary of the information
presented in Chapter 2 of the fish consumption
report. She stated that approximately 40 percent of
assessed waters in the United States do not support
use for fishing or swimming. She added that some
10 percent by volume of all sediments under waters
in the United States are contaminated heavily; the
list of sediments in surface waters that require
cleanup is long, she said, and the number of fish
consumption advisories rises each year. Ms. Walker
explained that, because people of color, low-income
people, and American Indians and Alaskan Natives
are disproportionately among the populations that
experience the greatest exposure to contamination,
any lapses in the efforts of agencies to prevent,
reduce, clean up, and restore contaminated aquatic
environments will impose a disproportionate burden
on those affected groups. Referring to the regulation
of mercury emissions, Ms. Walker noted her
understanding that, in the near future, EPA was to
address rule-making for the regulation of mercury
emissions from institutional, industrial, and
commercial boilers. She stated that such regulation
is needed.

Continuing, Ms. Walker stated that a rule regulating
mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants
might not be proposed until December 2003.
Meanwhile, she pointed out, coal-fired power plants
are the single largest source of air emissions of
mercury in the country. She then stated that a rule
regulating emissions of mercury from chloroalkaline
plants is needed. Although only approximately one
dozen such plants are located in the United States,

1-9

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

she explained, each plant is a very significant source
of such emissions. In some cases, a plant may be
the most significant local source of emissions of
mercury. She then cited as an example two
chloroalkaline plants in Louisiana that contribute
more mercury emissions than all the coal-fired power
plants in the state combined.

Continuing her presentation, Ms. Walker stated that
EPA's guidance documents and standards consider
a higher level of cancer risk to be "acceptable" for
"more highly exposed subgroups" than for the
general population. That standard is inequitable and
deeply troubling, as a matter of environmental
justice, because it is people of color, low-income
people, and American Indians and Alaskan Natives
who make up the "more highly exposed subgroups,"
she said.

3.4 Fish and Wildlife Consumption Advisories

Ms. Marianne Yamaguchi Santa Monica Bay
Restoration Project provided a summary of the
information about fish and wildlife consumption
advisories that Chapter 3 of the fish consumption
report presents. Ms. Yamaguchi pointed out that fish
advisories are just one component of a
comprehensive strategy for the management of
health risks. She also noted that fish advisories are
a strategy for risk avoidance rather than risk
reduction. She explained that, typically, advisories
are intended to provide information about the nature
and the extent of contamination and its potential
adverse effects on health. Their purpose, she noted,
is to encourage consumers to avoid consuming
contaminated species and to suggest alternative
ways in which people could continue to eat fish.
However, she added, fish advisories are not effective
in many environmental justice communities because
fish substitutes are not readily available or because
changes in fish consumption practices may cause
great anguish or cultural harm. Therefore, said Ms.
Yamaguchi, a comprehensive strategy for the control
of health risks should go beyond the issuance offish
advisories.

Continuing, Ms. Yamaguchi observed that, while
advisories are useful, if they are to be effective, they
must be tailored to the specific locations and
communities of concern. She pointed out that there
is no "one-size-fits-all" strategy and suggested that
attempts to ensure consistency across broad regions
or among population groups may not be useful or
appropriate.

She stated that affected communities and tribes play
an integral role in relevant, appropriate, and effective

risk communication efforts. Affected communities
and tribes, she continued, therefore must be involved
as partners, or in the case of tribal governments, as
"co-managers," at every stage of the communication
process — in identifying needs and priorities, in
developing content for advisories that is appropriate
for the groups of concern, in helping to prepare
translations and communicate the message, and in
helping to interpret communities' responses to risk
management efforts.

3.5 Fish Consumption Concerns Among
American Indian Tribes and Alaskan Native
Villagers

Mr. Dean Suagee, Vermont Law School discussed
information presented in Chapter 4 of the fish
consumption report. Mr. Suagee stated that the
political and legal status of tribes is unique among
affected groups and so warrants separate treatment.
As sovereign entities, federally recognized tribes
maintain a government-to-government relationship
with the federal government and its agencies, he
explained. Continuing, Mr. Suagee stated that the
unique legal status of tribes includes a trust
responsibility on the part of the federal government
and, for many tribes, treaty rights, as well. He then
remarked that EPA must demonstrate respect forthe
unique status of Native American tribes and Alaskan
Native villages.

Mr. Suagee explained further that, in general, there
is no environmental protection infrastructure in Indian
country because Indian country had been overlooked
during the development of the first federal
environmental laws. He stated that, because tribes
do not have the same kinds of resources as states
have to devote to program development, tribes are
for the most part dependent on EPA and other
federal agencies, such as the Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA), the Indian Health Service (IHS), and
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD).

Turning to the role of tribes as regulators in
protecting the environment, Mr. Suagee stated that,
although tribal governments and EPA are
responsible for implementing water quality standards
in Indian County and on Alaskan Native lands, only
16 of the 565 federally recognized tribes and
Alaskan Native villages have water quality standards
that have been promulgated or approved by EPA.
Therefore, continued Mr. Suagee, there are
considerable gaps in water quality standards in
Indian country, as well as gaps related to other
statutes.

1-10

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

Mr. Suagee then noted that EPA had been engaged
for some two and one-half years in consultations with
tribes related to EPA's proposal to promulgate core
federal water quality standards for Indian country.
The proposed rule finally was signed on January 19,
2001, he said. However, he continued, the rule
became subject to the moratorium on new rules and
was "passed back" to EPA by Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). Mr. Suagee then explained that,
during the November 2001 meeting of the Tribal
Caucus of the T ribal Operations Committee (TOC) in
Albuquerque, New Mexico, he had been told that
OMB provided two suggested options when the rule
was returned to EPA. He then noted that he was
unsure of the current status of the rule. He
remarked, however, that the Tribal Caucus was near
consensus that EPA should move forward to
promulgate the current rule as a proposed rule.

Mr. Suagee also stated that, because of the
historical difference in the way Alaskan Natives have
been treated, the implications of the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act and case law interpreting that
act, and the use of the term "reservation" in the
provisions of the Clean Water Act and the Clear Air
Act that authorize treatment of tribes like states, the
solutions for Indian country that are available in the
lower 48 states are not available in Alaska.

Mr. Suagee then stated that EPA also should explore
the development of more appropriate designated
uses for culturally important water bodies in Alaska
than those currently in place. Although those issues
had not yet been included in the draft fish
consumption report, suggested Mr. Suagee, the work
group and the NEJAC should revise the report to
include a recommendation that is specific to Alaskan
Natives.

The members of the Executive Council then
discussed the draft fish consumption report and
developed proposed revisions and additional
recommendations. Appendix A presents a list of
those proposed revisions and additional
recommendations.

4.0 DRAFT STRATEGIC PLAN
OF THE NEJAC

Ms. Shepard presented the strategic plan of the
NEJAC to the members of the Executive Council.
She explained that the strategic plan incorporates
the issues raised and conclusions reached at the
August 2001 meeting of the Executive Council, held
in Washington, D.C. Ms. Shepard advised that the
introduction section of the strategic plan will be
revised to reflect the Executive Council's

appreciation for the efforts of past NEJAC members,
especially the efforts of those who had served as
founding members. In addition, these revisions will
note the past contributions of NEJAC in advancing
policy development within the EPA related to
environmental justice.

4.1 Goals and Objectives

Over the previous year, Ms. Shephard noted, the
NEJAC had been reviewing its role and discussing
how the NEJAC could best promote environmental
justice and fulfill the mission set forth in its charter.
In general, said Ms. Shepard, the members of the
NEJAC had concluded that they can better fulfill the
mission of their charter by refocusing their own
processes and work products, while redirecting the
site-specific issues to the appropriate EPA regional
offices that have both the responsibility to address
such issues and the authority to do so. She stressed
that, during its meetings, the NEJAC would continue
to solicit public comment on policy issues before the
NEJAC.

Ms. Shepard then read the revised mission
statement for the NEJAC that is presented in the
strategic plan. The mission statement reads as
follows:

"The NEJA C is a federal advisory committee
that provides timely, relevant, cogent, and
independent advice to the EPA
Administrator on matters of environmental
justice to ensure the fair treatment of all
peoples, including minority, low-income, and
indigenous populations and federally
recognized tribes, and often overlooked
populations, such as agricultural workers."

Continuing, Ms. Shepard explained thatthe Strategic
Plan outlines the strategy of the NEJAC to (1)
redesign its activities to better perform the advisory
role its charter establishes; (2) collaborate with EPA
to provide regional and other alternative mechanisms
other than meetings of the NEJAC, such as regional
listening sessions, through which communities can
bring site-specific issues to the attention of EPA; and
(3) develop, through a deliberative process that
involves all stakeholders, an effective work product
grounded in issues of importance to environmental
justice communities. She added that the strategic
plan is to guide the work of the NEJAC through
September 27, 2003.

Ms. Shepard stressed that disproportionate adverse
effects on communities of color, low-income
communities, and tribes are at the very heart of

1-11

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

environmental justice. They also, she continued, are
the impetus of the grassroots activism that prompted
the development of several key products, including
President Clinton's Executive Order 12898 on
Environmental Justice and the subsequent formation
of the NEJAC, along with numerous other products
over the years. The NEJAC, she declared, will
continue to make strong recommendations to EPA
on the conduct of regional listening sessions and
other mechanisms that will take place in the coming
year, as well as recommendations on follow-up to
those sessions.

Ms. Shepard then briefly outlined the six goals for
the Executive Council of the NEJAC and its
subcommittees, which, she noted, are presented in
the strategic plan. Those goals, she said, will guide
the NEJAC in accomplishing its mission.

First, Ms. Shepard explained, a work product goal
was developed to identify several methods of
providing cogent, timely, relevant, and effective
advice, both formal and informal, to the EPA
Administrator. Second, the strategic plan sets forth
a process goal aimed at developing and
implementing a deliberative, consultative, and
collaborative process on which the NEJAC can base
its advice to the EPA Administrator, she said. A third
goal is the public participation and public input goal
that outlines how the NEJAC actively will employ
mechanisms for soliciting the views of minority, low-
income, indigenous, and agricultural worker
populations and of federally recognized tribes, she
continued. She explained that the third goal
addresses (1) public participation at meetings of the
NEJAC, (2) the incorporation of community concerns
and issues into the policy dialogue of the NEJAC,
and (3) public participation at the regional level.

Continuing, Ms. Shepard stated that a fourth goal
included in the strategic plan is an organizational and
procedural goal. She explained that, the purpose of
the fourth goal is to obtain better briefings from EPA
about its initiatives and activities and to become
better able to communicate externally with the larger
environmental justice movement, communities, other
stakeholders, government and industry. The
NEJAC, she said, would request that EPA initiate a
review of the NEJAC organizational structure and
procedures. Implementation of the initiative will
enable the NEJAC to more effectively and efficiently
develop advice and render it to the EPA
Administrator, she said.

A fifth goal presented in the strategic plan, Ms.
Shepard continued, is a communications goal that
outlines a communication plan for improving the flow

of information from EPA to the NEJAC and for
creating a listserv to enable members of the
Executive Council and DFOs to discuss matters
properly between meetings of the NEJAC. Last, she
said, the strategic plan includes the goal of
developing an effective orientation program for new
members of the NEJAC and its subcommittees.

Ms. Shepard then publicly thanked Ms. Jaramillo,
who chaired the committee that drafted the strategic
plan, and the members of the drafting committee, Mr.
Kenneth Warren, Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-
Cohen and member of the Enforcement
Subcommittee; Ms. Wilma Subra, Louisiana
Environmental Action Now and member of the
Health and Research Subcommittee; and Ms.
Veronica Eady, Massachusetts Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs and chair of the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee.

Ms. Jaramillo commented that the development and
implementation of the plan would be a dynamic
process. That is, she continued, the strategic plan
will "grow and move with the times." She also
echoed Ms. Shepard's praise for Ms. Subra, Mr.
Warren, and Ms. Eady for their hard work in writing
the strategic plan.

Ms. Jane Stahl, Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection, stated her belief that the
strategic plan would set the stage for a wonderfully
productive collaboration between the NEJAC, which
was created to help give communities a voice in the
world of environmental protection and environmental
management, and the organizations and
bureaucracies that are supposed to be doing that
work on behalf of all communities and
constituencies.

The importance of the plan, Ms. Stahl continued, is
that it provides the NEJAC and communities with a
structure through which they can move forward.
Everyone is on the same side, she stressed, but
different individuals bring different talents and
different views to the table. She stated that all
stakeholders must communicate and work with one
another, but that they should do so in a structured
fashion. In that way, she observed, they will achieve
an end result, rather than bringing about increased
division and controversy over issues that are
important to all stakeholders.

In closing, Ms. Stahl expressed her belief that the
organized process presented in the strategic plan
would help not only the NEJAC as a group to
achieve its goals, but also the communities that the
NEJAC serves to accomplish the same outcome.

1-12

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

She added that implementation of the strategic plan
also would help EPA move forward in addressing
issues that are important to communities that have
been "excluded from the table" in the past.

Dr. Graciela Ramirez-Toro, Interamerican University
of Puerto Rico and chair of the Puerto Rico
Subcommittee, applauded the work of the drafting
and writing committee (that developed the draft
strategic plan. She then offered several suggestions
for revision or clarification of the plan. First, she
suggested that the strategic plan include some
discussion of the ways in which the work groups will
include individuals, such as technical experts, who
are not members of the NEJAC. She also suggested
that the strategic plan outline at least a general time
line and protocol for scheduling conference calls.
Finally, Dr. Ramirez-Toro suggested that the
strategic plan be revised to identify the role of
members who live in a particular region during
listening sessions held in that region.

Ms. Savonala "Savi" Home, Land Loss Prevention
Project and chair of the Enforcement Subcommittee,
congratulated the members of the Executive Council
for dealing with the reality that the NEJAC is a
federal advisory committee and therefore must
conform to the requirements of the act that governs
such a body. She echoed the concern voiced by Dr.
Ramirez-Toro that the strategy for and goals of the
regional listening sessions should be defined more
clearly in the draft strategic plan. In particular, she
noted, the plan should describe clearly how
comment and advice generated during regional
listening sessions would be funneled to the
Executive Council of the NEJAC.

Responding to Ms. Home's concerns, Ms. Stahl,
while noting that she was pleased that the EPA
regions have moved forward in accepting the notion
of regional listening sessions, expressed agreement
that a means of conveying information to the NEJAC
should be included in the strategy developed for the
regional listening sessions. Ms. Stahl added that the
NEJAC must monitor the issues that arise during
those sessions so that its members will be cognizant
of such issues on a national level, ratherthan leaving
them confined only to a regional level.

Expressing concern that EPA might find it necessary
to secure state participation, Ms. Shepard asked Ms.
Stahl to discuss her perspective on the role of state
governments in the regional listening process. Ms.
Stahl responded that she believed that the states
would want to participate in the listening sessions.
She pointed out that there are issues of
environmental justice in all states. The states, she

said, cannot afford to withhold participation. Ms.
Stahl then expressed her belief that the listening
sessions would prove to be an effective way for EPA
to engage the states on a regional basis. She stated
further that she hoped that the regional sessions will
be conducted in a manner that will be an opportunity
for sharing of concerns and of information, rather
than an avenue for the "demonization" of state
bureaucracies or state environmental agencies.

Mr. Lee warned against the implementation of the
regional listening sessions lacking an "action plan" or
guidance on the format of the sessions, how the
sessions will be evaluated, and how action taken in
response to issues raised during the sessions will be
measured. He stressed that it is the business of the
NEJAC to encourage and advise EPA to ensure that
the agency develops a standard operational and
procedural process for the regional listening
sessions. He suggested that, in the future, NEJAC
may, if it chooses, to provide advice and
recommendations on regional listening sessions.

Ms. Subra commented that each EPA regional office
had provided the drafting and writing committee with
a report on the status of the issues on which that
region was working. She suggested that the
information provided be disseminated to
communities in each region so that members of the
communities can review the actions of regional
offices. Ms. Subra noted that, if repeated on at least
an annual basis, such action also could serve as an
effective mechanism by which the EPA regional
offices can provide information to the NEJAC on the
regional issues and initiatives.

Referring to the involvement of the states in the
regional listening sessions, Ms. Subra commented
that some state agencies perform at a "less-than-
appropriate" level. Therefore, she continued,
citizens look to the EPA regional office for
assistance. Ms. Subra stressed that it is important
that both the EPA regional offices and the states
attend the listening sessions, so that tasks and
responsibilities can be delegated. She added that it
will be important that the NEJAC "keep its finger on
the pulse," continuing to be fully cognizant of what
issues have been identified, what individual or entity
has been assigned to address those issues, and
whether the issues are being addressed.

Ms. Eileen Guana, Southwestern University School
of Law and vice-chair of the Air and Water
Subcommittee, pointed out that the NEJAC does not
have oversight authority over the EPA regional
offices. However, she added, the NEJAC can work
to prompt the establishment of a standard of

1-13

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

accountability for the regions and a voluntary
mechanism for informing the NEJAC of activities
conducted by the regions.

Mr. Warren pointed out two importantthemes that he
said were apparent in the strategic plan. First, the
proposed deliberative process, which intends that
the NEJAC focus on delivering work products to EPA
that can be integrated into EPA policy and practice,
is the most effective way the NEJAC can influence
environmental justice, he said. Another key theme
of the strategic plan, he continued, is that the
proposed processes are collaborative —
collaborative processes between the NEJAC and
EPA and between the NEJAC and communities are
envisioned in the strategic plan, he noted. Mr.
Warren also stressed that the development of a
communication plan is a key element of the strategic
plan. He said that a communication plan that
provides for a number of channels of communication
with EPA will allow the members of the NEJAC to
better understand EPA's actions, in turn allowing the
NEJAC to act more effectively to accomplish the
mission set forth under its charter.

Ms. Anna Frazier, DINE' CARE and member of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, informed the
members of the NEJAC that she had talked with
several representatives of grassroots organizations
who wish to comment on the draft strategic plan.
Those individuals would offer their comments during
the public comment period to be held in conjunction
with the current meeting ofthe NEJAC, she reported.

Mr. Robert "Bob" Harris, Pacific Gas and Electric
Company and member of the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee, stressed that the draft strategic
plan establishes a foundation that will allow the
NEJAC to have influence nationwide in resolving
problems because the plan involves all stakeholders.
Mr. Harris commended EPA's regional
administrators for their understanding of the
importance of the role that they must play in
developing and implementing the strategic plan and
for the role they will play in bringing together all
stakeholders in their regions.

Ms. Shepard then turned to Mr. Lee for remarks
about specific plans for implementation of the draft
strategic plan.

4.2 Implementation ofthe Strategic Plan

Mr. Lee first pointed out that the decision to "refocus"
the NEJAC did not arise from a discussion that had
started six months earlier, but had resulted from
discussions that began some five or six years ago.

He then emphasized that the draft strategic plan
effectively incorporates community involvement and
public participation. For example, he said, the draft
fish consumption report is an excellent example of a
work product of the NEJAC that was developed
through a deliberative process and based on the
views of communities about the issues and concerns
of importance to those communities. Such
processes and products have the potential to
translate effectively into true improvements for
communities, he stressed.

Mr. Lee then reviewed the NEJAC's schedule for
2002, as set forth on page 12 ofthe draft strategic
plan. He first stated that the Pollution Prevention
Work Group was to be established formally in
January 2002. Mr. Lee added that Ms. Subra and
Mr. Warren were to serve as co-chairs ofthe work
group.

Continuing, Mr. Lee reported that the Fish
Consumption Work Group was to make its report
and the recommendations associated with it final by
March or April 2002. Similarly, he added, the
Interagency Environmental Justice Implementation
Work Group was to complete its strategies report
and recommendations on the same timetable.

Also in April 2002, Mr. Lee continued, OEJ was to
provide a document that sets forth uniform
procedures for the operation of subcommittees. He
explained that the draft strategic plan ofthe NEJAC
identifies five elements that are key to the successful
operation ofthe subcommittees and work groups of
the NEJAC: leadership; membership; the role of
DFOs; support from and communication with EPA
program offices; and development of strategic goals
and plans. Recognizing that there are significant
differences among the subcommittees ofthe NEJAC
with respect to the five elements of success, OEJ, in
consultation with the NEJAC, will develop
procedures that will provide an operational baseline
for all subcommittees and work groups, explained
Mr. Lee. In developing the procedures, he added,
the NEJAC, in consultation with the OEJ and
relevant EPA program offices, was to develop a
process for evaluating the effectiveness of the
subcommittees ofthe NEJAC. Ms. Shepard would
lead that initiative, said Mr. Lee.

Mr. Lee identified a series of tasks and provided
assignments to members ofthe NEJAC to complete
these tasks. The tasks are:

Finalization of NEJAC Policy Advice

Development Model

1-14

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

Finalization of NEJAC Model for Incorporation
Community Issues and Concerns into NEJAC
Policy Dialogue

Development of a definition of consensus and
consensus-building

Scoping report from Ad Hoc Scoping Work
Group on Cumulative Risk Issue

Continuing, Mr. Lee stated that the NEJAC also
would complete its work on the above tasks by June
30, 2002.

Mr. Lee explained that, as prescribed in the draft
strategic plan of the NEJAC, the subcommittees of
the NEJAC were to be asked to prepare annual
strategic plans and progress reports to be submitted
to the Executive Council of the NEJAC, OEJ, and the
appropriate EPA program offices. He said that each
subcommittee should submit a new or revised
strategic plan to OEJ by September 30, 2002.
Progress reports, he continued, would be due each
year at least 30 days before each meeting of the
NEJAC. The progress reports should describe in
detail the subcommittee's progress in meeting the
goals stated in its strategic plan, he noted.

Finally, Mr. Lee stated that the next meeting of the
NEJAC was to be held in Baltimore, Maryland in
December 2002. The issue that the NEJAC would
be asked to consider and provide recommendations
about during that meeting, he announced, was to be:

"How can EPA promote innovative pollution
prevention approaches to ensure a clean
and healthy environment and improve the
quality of life for all people, including low-
income communities, minority communities,
and Tribes?"

Ms. Home asked how the reports, procedures, and
processes developed for implementation of the
strategic plan were to be incorporated into the
current document. She also noted some ambiguities
in the language of the current version of the
document, asking whether it would be possible to
amend the current text. Mr. Lee responded that
suggested revisions of the text and the products
developed for implementation over the time period
covered by the plan would be incorporated into a
revised document after December 2002.

Returning his attention to the implementation of
public participation at the regional level, Mr. Lee
stated that OEJ is developing a process that EPA
regional offices can implement in hosting listening

sessions. He stated that many questions must
considered during development of the process,
including:

Who should be invited to participate

How the various regions can integrate the

listening sessions into their regional plans

Whether sub-regional meetings should be

conducted, when appropriate

Mr. Lee then stated that, once a draft strategy for
conducting the regional sessions has been
formulated by OEJ, in conjunction with the EPA
regional offices, OEJ was to provide a report to the
NEJAC. He stated that the NEJAC then would
advise EPA about the implementation of the strategy
for the regional listening sessions and provide the
agency recommendations about that effort.

Ms. Stahl suggested that members of the NEJAC
should be able to work directly with the regional
offices of EPA to engage in the regional listening
sessions, noting that the Executive Council could
glean many "lessons learned" from the public
comment period process. She also commented that
the members of the NEJAC perhaps could confer
with EPA regional administrators during a meeting of
the NEJAC.

Dr. Richard Gragg, III, Florida A&M University and
member of the Health and Research Subcommittee,
commented that the public also should have the
opportunity to provide comments on the process for
conducting regional listening sessions.

Ms. Eady expressed her belief that the listening
sessions would be a useful addition to EPA's
strategy for increasing public participation. However,
she also expressed concern that the sessions would
not lead to action by the EPA regional offices,
pointing out that, in the past, citizens often had
traveled to address the NEJAC only after regional
authorities ignored them. She also expressed
concern that the NEJAC would not be able to
monitor the activities of 10 EPA regions. Ms.
Shepard responded that communities still would
have the opportunity to address the NEJAC during
public comment periods. Ms. Shepard agreed,
however, that reporting to the NEJAC about the
progress of the listening sessions would be an
important issue to be considered during the
development of the process for those sessions.

1-15

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

5.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS

This section summarizes the presentations and
reports made to the Executive Council of the NEJAC.

5.1 Update on the Interagency Environmental
Justice Implementation Work Group

Ms. Guana provided an overview of the draft
document, The National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council's Report on Integration of
Environmental Justice in Federal Agency Programs.
That document was developed by the Interagency
Environmental Justice Implementation Work Group
to present information about the progress of the
federal government in integrating environmental
justice into the policies, programs, and activities of its
agencies in a manner consistent with the provisions
of existing laws and Executive Order 12898. The
draft report, she explained, provides an analysis of
information presented during the December 2000
meeting of the NEJAC, which had been held in
Arlington, Virginia.

Ms. Guana reported further that the work group
faced particular challenges in developing
recommendations for EPA about interagency
implementation on the basis of the panel discussions
heard during the December 2000 meeting. She said
that the policy issue related to interagency
implementation is broad. Many of the presentations,
she continued, did not provide complete descriptions
of the pertinent activities of agencies because the
presentations, of necessity, were limited in length.
Some individuals, Ms. Guana explained further,
made very general presentations that failed to
provide specific information. Although other
presenters provided a few, very specific examples of
an agency's activities, time limitations prevented
them from providing details about those activities,
she added.

The work group faced another challenge in
organizing the report, continued Ms. Guana.
Different agencies have different missions and work
under completely different legal authorities, she
explained. She pointed out that it was problematic
for the work group to present the report in a way that
could capture that diversity without inviting
comparisons that may be unfair, given the differing
activities and legal authorities of the various
agencies of the federal government.

Continuing, Ms. Guana stated that a third challenge
that the work group faced in developing the report
was that they could not verify independently that
agencies were doing what they said they would be

doing or to evaluate the effectiveness of the efforts
of the agencies.

To meet those challenges, said Ms. Guana, the
members of the work group drew on various
additional sources in an attempt to obtain more
complete information about the actions of federal
agencies. Such sources, she noted, included the
web sites of the various agencies. She pointed out
that the sources were not independently verified
sources, a circumstance that introduced yet another
limitation on the information included in the report.

Discussing the structure of the report, Ms. Guana
stated that, to provide a legal context for the
discussion of the activities of the agencies, the report
began with a discussion of legal authorities. She
noted that the discussion of legal authorities was
limited principally to those authorities granted the
various agencies under environmental statutes.
However, she noted, many agencies have authorities
under other statutes. To her knowledge, she said,
the agencies have not performed a systematic study
of all their legal authorities within the context of
environmental justice. Therefore, she reported, in its
report, the work group had recommended to the
NEJAC that the NEJAC advise EPA to request each
federal agency to undertake a review of all its legal
authorities.

Ms. Guana then pointed out that the report also
included information about legal developments that
had taken place since the December 2000 meeting
and the potential implications of such developments
for the environmental justice movement. She cited
the Supreme Court decision in the Sandoval case in
which a divided court said the Civil Rights Act of
1964 does not authorize private lawsuits that
contend state government policies have a
discriminatory effect. Title VI of the act allows a suit
only if litigants can prove discrimination was
intentional, the court ruled.

Continuing, Ms. Guana noted that the work group
had organized the report in a mannerthat would alert
the reader to the differences among agencies in
terms of their potential for exerting influence on
environmental issues and their varying levels of legal
authority. The report includes a table that
categorizes the agencies by the nature of their
activities, she added. Continuing, she explained that
the work group also made an effort to convey an
understanding of the types of activities in which the
various agencies are engaged, including an analysis
of activities the various agencies have in common.

1-16

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

Concluding her remarks, Ms. Guana stated that the
intent of the report was to provide the reader with a
complete and fair picture, or "baseline snapshot," of
the actions in which the various agencies currently
are engaged. The report, she suggested, therefore
can be used in the future to measure progress in
integrating environmental justice into the policies,
programs, and activities of the agencies. She added
that the report could be helpful to the agencies
themselves by providing information about the
activities of sister agencies in areas of common
interest that may assist them in determining how
they can address environmental concerns related to
their own missions. Ms. Guana then stated that the
work group welcomes suggestions and comments
from the members of the NEJAC about
strengthening the report and making it more useful to
EPA and other federal agencies.

Ms. Walker suggested that a representative of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee be invited to
participate in preparing the final report. She stated
that the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee had
made several recommendations to the work group
as the report was being drafted; she noted that those
recommendations had not been included in the
report. Ms. Guana responded that the work group
had focused first on the organization of the
information in the report. She added that the work
group would be interested in reviewing the
recommendations of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee and incorporating those suggestions
into the final report.

Ms. Stahl expressed her understanding that all the
subcommittees had provided recommendations
during the planning stages of the report. She
suggested that the recommendations of all the
subcommittees be reviewed as the final report is
prepared.

Ms. Walker then asked when the final report was
expected to be available. Mr. Lee responded that
the final report was to be completed and distributed
in March or April 2002.

5.2 Report on the Community-Based Health
Research Model

Mr. Lee provided an update on the status of the
report on the community-based health research
model that the NEJAC had undertaken to develop.
He reminded the participants in the meeting that, in
response to issues discussed during the meeting of
the NEJAC in Atlanta, Georgia, in May 2000, a 20-
member work group, made up of members of the
NEJAC and representatives of HHS and EPA, had

been formed to develop such a model. The final
report of that work group had been distributed to the
Executive Council in early 2001, he added.

Mr. Lee explained that a primary theme of
community-based health research models was the
need for interagency collaboration. To provide a
meaningful response to the recommendations set
forth in the health report, EPA's Office of Research
and Development (ORD), in collaboration with OEJ
and EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and
Toxic Substances (OPPTS), had developed a
strategy for interagency collaboration in the area of
community-based health research. The strategy,
continued Mr. Lee, had been forwarded to the office
of the EPA Administrator for review. He stated that
he expected a response from the Administrator in the
near future. That expectation expressed, Mr. Lee
then tabled discussion of the proposed strategy,
pending receipt of that response.

5.3 Update on the Federal Facilities Work Group

Mr. Brandon Carter, EPA Federal Facilities
Restoration and Reuse Office and DFO of the
Federal Facilities Work Group of the NEJAC,
provided an update on the activities of the work
group.

Mr. Carter explained that the task of the work group
is to identify and evaluate key issues related to the
activities and operations of federal facilities that are
of concern to environmental justice communities.
The objectives of the work group, he stated, are to:

Formulate national policy recommendations to
address such concerns

Provide a forum for the conduct of dialogue
communities

Compile a list of resources available to
communities and stakeholders

Produce a written report that summarizes the
findings and recommendations ofthe workgroup

Mr. Carter stated that the work group had begun
reviewing case studies in January 2001 to identify
the key issues related to federal facilities that are of
concern to environmental justice communities and to
gather information that could serve as a basis for the
development of the work group's policy
recommendations. He noted that work group also
evaluated the effectiveness of previous policy
recommendations made by various other federal
advisory committees. He also noted that, during the

1-17

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

meeting of the NEJAC in December 2000, the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Department
of Defense (DoD), and the U.S. Department of the
Interior (DOI) had signed a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) that ensured their cooperation
with the Federal Facilities Work Group and assigned
staff members to collaborate with the work group.

Mr. Carter then announced that the work group
expects to submit a final report to the NEJAC before
the December 2002 meeting of the NEJAC to be
held in Baltimore, Maryland. Mr. Lee reported that
the NEJAC Federal Facilities Work Group will work
in coordination with and report to the NEJAC Waste
and Facility Siting Subcommittee. This will improve
coordination between EPA and the NEJAC because
the primary support being provided to this work
group is being provided by the OSWER, which also
supports the NEJAC Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee. OSWER has committed to adding
another member to the subcommittee to provide
interface with the work group, he said.

Ms. Subra asked whether the working group was to
evaluate the level of consistency between cleanup
efforts at federal facilities and those at other cleanup
sites, such as Superfund sites. Mr. Carter
responded that the work group was reviewing case
studies from a representative sample of various
types of sites, including a formerly used defense site
(FUDS), a base realignment and closure (BRAC)
site) site, and a DOE site. The work group, he
stated, would compare the principles and
recommendations that are being implemented bythe
various authorities. Mr. Carter added, however, that
such a comparison is difficult because the authorities
that regulate how and by whom sites are cleaned up
differ significantly.

Mr. Subra then asked whether the work group had
considered the possibility that inactive federal
facilities currently undergoing cleanup will be
reactivated in response to the terrorist attacks of
September 11,2001. She asked whether it would be
necessary to complete cleanup at a site before new
activities could begin. Mr. Carter responded that
sites that have been identified by Congress under
the BRAC Program would not reopen because those
properties are to be transferred out of the ownership
of the DoD. Other sites that are put on standby by
the federal government could be reactivated, he
noted. Many sites on the National Priority List (NPL),
a list of national priorities for sites with known or
threatened releases of hazardous substances, are
active facilities that continue to operate while
undergoing cleanup, explained Mr. Carter.

Ms. Stahl reminded Mr. Carter and the members of
the Executive Councilthatthe Environmental Council
of States (ECOS) also had provided
recommendations to the EPA Administrator through
resolution. Ms. Stahl suggested that, as it develops
its report, the work group draw on staff of ECOS as
a resource.

Ms. Eady asked whether the work group was to
address the recurring issue of the determination of
the lead agency when more than one federal agency
has legal authority over cleanup of a federal facility.
Mr. Carter responded that the work group planned to
address the issue, commenting that issues related to
the authority of the lead agency and that of EPA
authority under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA) and the National Contingency Plan (NCP)
are "implicit in the issues related to federal facility
sites."

Ms. Subra pointed out that one issue linked to
federal facilities with increasing frequency over the
past few years is contamination with perchlorate, a
soluble oxidating agent used in the manufacture of
explosives. Ms. Subra asked Mr. Carter whether, in
its report, the work group would address specifically
issues related to perchlorate. Mr. Carter responded
that the report was not intended to address issues
related to specific contaminants or implementation of
measures to address such specific contaminants
under cleanup programs. However, he continued,
EPA currently is developing a new maximum
concentration level (MCL) for perchlorate. He then
agreed to provide the Executive Council of the
NEJAC updates on the status of the development of
the MCL.

Dr. Gragg asked whether the report would identify
the number of communities that may be affected
directly by environmental conditions at federal
facilities and the status of cleanup efforts at the
facilities identified. Mr. Carter responded that the
work group had examined the possibility of
cataloguing environmental justice communities that
are located at or near federal facility sites but had
discontinued the effort because of constraints
imposed by limitations on resources. Instead, the
work group decided to focus the report on the
implementation of cleanup programs at federal
facilities, he said. Mr. Carter added that the work
group would be able to identify the total number of
federal facility sites.

Ms. Mary Nelson, Bethel New Life and member of
the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee,
commented that, to ensure that contamination does

1-18

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

not reoccur at cleanup sites, standards for
prevention should be included in the report.

Mr. Lee commented that lessons learned from
several positive developments in the cleanup of
federal facilities could be incorporated into the report.
For example, he said, the cleanup and restoration of
the Metlakatla Indian community of Metlakatla,
Alaska, an environmental justice and national
Brownfields showcase community, successfully
involved DoD, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). He also
mentioned the success of Bridges to Friendship, an
environmental justice demonstration project
underway at the Washington Navy Yard in southeast
Washington, D.C. Mr. Lee noted that the progress
such efforts illustrate is significant.

5.4 Update on the Pollution Prevention Work
Group

Ms. Subra, co-chair of the newly formed Pollution
Prevention WorkGroup, provided a brief overview of
the preliminary objectives of that work group.

Ms. Subra stated that the primary objective of the
work group would be to evaluate how existing
technologies, mechanisms, and programs for
pollution prevention can be implemented in
environmental justice communities to improve the
quality of the environments of those communities. In
light of information presented by the Fish
Consumption Work Group, she said, her work group
will consider how pollution prevention efforts can
reduce contamination of aquatic environments.
Continuing, Ms. Subra reported that the working
group also would investigate mechanisms for
measuring the effectiveness of pollution prevention
measures.

Ms. Subra informed the members of the Executive
Council that she and Mr. Warren, co-chairs of the
working group, were to submit to EPA a list of
potential members of the work group before the end
of 2001. She requested that the members of the
Executive Council submit names of suggested
members of the work group to her and Mr. Warren.
Mr. Barry E. Hill, Director, EPA OEJ, added that the
members of the Executive Council also should
recommend to EPA consultants that have
experience in pollution prevention.

Ms. Walker requested that a representative of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee be appointed to
serve on the work group. She also asked that the
work group consider whether an evaluation of the
issue of the "precautionary principle" would be

appropriate in light of the objectives of the work
group.

Ms. Jaramillo suggested that the work group also
evaluate the cost and benefits of environmental
restoration, clean production, and low-impact
development.

Mr. Suagee reported that his clinic currently is
working with three tribes to develop tribal
environmental policy and acts, specifically by
creating an environmental review process for the
tribes. The purpose of the effort, he explained, is to
avoid pollution and other environmental degradation
that might arise as a result of economic
development. Mr. Suagee then volunteered to
participate on the work group.

Ms. Eady noted that there are several valuable
resources in the state of Massachusetts, including
the Toxicities Reduction Institute and the Center for
Sustainable Production. She volunteered to suggest
some individuals representing those organizations as
potential members of the Pollution Prevention Work
Group.

Dr. Gragg suggested that the work group also
consider pollution prevention at DOE and DoD
facilities.

Mr. Larry Charles, ONE/CHANE and member of the
International Subcommittee, specifically asked that
Ms. Dianne Wilkins, Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality be selected to represent the
International Subcommittee on the Pollution
Prevention Work Group.

5.5 Briefing on the Cumulative Risk Technical
Panel of the EPA Risk Assessment Forum

Mr. Lee introduced Mr. Martin Halper, EPA OEJ, to
provide an overview of the current draft Framework
for Cumulative Risk Assessment prepared by the
Cumulative Risk Technical Panel of the EPA Risk
Assessment Forum, a standing committee of senior
EPA scientists. The purpose of this briefing is to
help NEJAC prepare to address the policy issue area
for 2003, which is slated to be cumulative risk.

Mr. Halper explained that the framework document
was developed to provide a basic structure and
definition of key principles for EPA's cumulative risk
assessments. In the future, he said, the framework
document will be used as a foundation for
comprehensive guidance for cumulative risk
assessment. Mr. Halper noted that, in some cases,
concepts introduced in the framework document

1-19

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

require the application and knowledge of methods
that currently are not available. Therefore, he
continued, the document also outlines research and
development needs that must be met to support
evaluation of cumulative risks.

Mr. Halper singled out two elements of the
framework document that he considered particularly
significant to the environmental justice movement.
First, he said, the chapter on planning, scoping, and
formulation of problems requires that public officials,
experts on risk, community leaders, and interested
and affected parties seek agreement on the purpose,
scope, and approach for the risk assessment
through extensive dialogue before the assessment
begins. Second, he continued, the framework
document addresses the concepts of the
vulnerability, and specifically the susceptibility, of a
population as important factors in the assessment of
cumulative risk. Mr. Halper explained that a
vulnerable population is a population at increased
risk of adverse effect. The concept, he explained
further, includes individuals or sensitive subgroups
that may be highly susceptible to risk because of a
number of possible factors, such as stage of life,
prior exposure, or existing state of disease.

Mr. Halperthen stated that the framework document,
which includes traditional quantitative considerations,
as well as qualitative considerations, has the
potential to affect the ways in which EPA and other
federal agencies operate.

Continuing, Mr. Halper stated that, in general, the
framework document has been applauded
universally. He then said that a full peer review of
the document was to be conducted in the fall of
2002. After the framework document is final, he
continued, the first steps in the development of a
formal guidance document will include the
development of new studies and the evaluation of
existing studies that can be used as case studies
and the testing of some of the concepts of
cumulative risk assessment identified in the case
studies. He added that the development of the
guidance document would take approximately two
years.

Ms. Guana asked whether the framework document
addresses the concept of peak periods of exposure
as a qualitative consideration in cumulative risk
assessment. She also asked whetherthe framework
document identifies an optimal geographic scale at
which to assess cumulative risk, noting that an
assessment of only large-scale exposures might
mask the effects of a number of small sources of
exposure.

Mr. Halper reminded the members ofthe NEJACthat
the framework document is not a guidance
document. Therefore, specific methods for
evaluating peak-period exposures and determining
the optimal geographic scale for a risk assessment
are not included in the document, he said. However,
he continued, the framework document does point
out that the duration and geographic scale of
exposure are important considerations that should
be included in a cumulative risk assessment. He
added that such considerations can be site-specific
and should be discussed by all stakeholders during
the planning and scoping phase of a cumulative risk
assessment.

Calling attention to the preface of the framework
document, Mr. Suagee pointed out that tribes had
not been included in the extensive peer review ofthe
document. He stressed that tribal peoples should be
involved in the review process. Dr. Gragg noted that
the list of reviewers in the preface did not appear to
include representatives of environmental justice
communities or other affected groups. Mr. Halper
responded that those groups would be included in
the formal peer review process. Mr. Lee also
stressed to Mr. Halper that the experiences and
expertise of the members of the NEJAC and their
relationships with tribes, environmental justice
communities, states, and other entities make the
members important and valuable resources for the
panel in developing the framework document and
future guidance documents on cumulative risk
assessment.

Mr. Lee noted that the NEJAC Ad Hoc Scoping Work
Group is being asked to address two questions in
preparation for addressing the cumulative risk issue.
The questions will address:

What are some focused approaches (specific
definitions, conceptual frameworks, questions,
methodologies, areas, etc.) to the issue of
cumulative risks (and impacts) that will make a
significant contribution at this time to addressing
environmental justice concerns related to the
issue?

How can the NEJAC make best use of its own
capacities (membership, constituencies,
outreach and deliberative processes, knowledge
base, etc.) to address the issue of cumulative
risks (and impacts)?

Dr. Gragg asked whether the framework document
addresses the issue ofthe "precautionary principle"
as a strategy for risk management. Mr. Halper
responded that the document does not discuss

1-20

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

principles of risk management, but rather addresses
issues and considerations that are important in
evaluating cumulative risk.

Ms. Shepard asked about the implications of the
document for state permitting programs. She asked
whether state environmental quality review acts or
new legislation that specifically identifies cumulative
risk as a required consideration would be necessary
before the concepts presented in the framework
document could influence state permitting
processes. In response, Mr. Halper expressed his
belief that the document will provide an impetus to
the adoption of the concept of cumulative risk in the
approach to assessment.

5.6 Update on the Implementation of Permitting

Recommendations

Mr. Hill made a presentation on the status of EPA's
implementation of recommendations made in the
report of the Environmental Law Institute (ELI)
"Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice:
An Analysis of U.S. EPA Statutory Authorities." The
ELI report reviews the principal environmental
regulations of EPA) that govern maintenance of air
and water quality, management of waste, regulation
of the use of pesticides and chemicals, and
fulfillment of public right-to-know legislation, reported
Mr. Hill. The report also identifies specific statutory
authorities for promoting environmental justice in the
full range of EPA program functions, including
permitting and the setting of standards, he said.

Mr. Hill then described the context in which the ELI
report was developed. He first shared an
observation of one of the framers of the Constitution
of the United States, "This is a government of laws
and not of men". Therefore, observed Mr. Hill, if
there is no law, there can be no regulations.
Because there is no stand-alone federal
environmental justice statute, he continued,
supporters of the environmental justice movement
must look at the existing laws and implementing
regulations to determine whether and how
environmental justice is in fact embedded in those
laws.

Continuing, Mr. Hill noted that, to integrate the
concept of environmental justice into the regulatory
process, supporters of environmental justice must
answer two questions:

"What is the legal authority?"

"Assuming the legal authority exists, how can
environmental justice be incorporated
administratively into permitting programs?"

Mr. Hill then presented the five steps necessary to
incorporate environmental justice into EPA's
regulatory process. The starting point, he said, is the
advice and recommendations of the NEJAC. In
response to discussions that took place at its 1999
meeting, he continued, the NEJAC had issued a
report in July 2000 that focused on permitting
authorities under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), the Clean Air Act (CAA), and
the Clean Water Act (CWA). In that report, he said,
the NEJAC had recommended that EPA examine all
the statutes under which it exercises regulatory
authority to determine whether the legal authority to
incorporate environmental justice into the agency's
regulations is embedded in those statutes.

Continuing, Mr. Hill stated that the next step in
incorporating environmental justice into EPA's
regulatory process is legal analysis of existing
statutes, as recommended by the NEJAC, and
evaluation of how environmental justice can be
incorporated in EPA's regulatory process from an
administrative point of view. At the request of OEJ,
ELI had performed a legal analysis, Mr. Hill
explained, examining every statute underwhich EPA
exercises authority, to identify opportunities to use
existing statutory authorities to advance
environmenta. ustice. He also noted that, in
December 2000, Mr. Gary Guzzi, EPA Office of
General Counsel, had issued a memorandum that
stated that environmental justice indeed is
embedded in existing laws and implementing
regulations. Therefore, there is no need for a stand-
alone environmental justice statute, declared Mr. Hill.

With regard to the incorporation of environmental
justice from an administrative point of view, Mr. Hill
stated that OEJ had asked the National Academy of
Public Administrators (NAPA) to evauate how
environmental justice might be incor orated into the
permitting process under RCRA, th CWA, and the
CAA. Mr. Hill then announced that, after his
presentation, Ms. Ann Goode, senior consultant for
NAPA, was to discuss the findings of that
organization's evaluation.

The third step, Mr. Hill continued, is training. A
training collaborative made up of representatives of
EPA headquarters, EPA regional offices, industry,
and community groups has been convened to
develop a basic course on environmental justice that
reflects recommendations made in the ELI and
NAPA reports, he said. Further, EPA will develop

1-21

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

CAA and CWA training modules targeted to federal
and state permit writers. The modules will train
those individuals in integrating considerations of
environmental justice into state and federal permits.

Mr. Hill then said that, after training has been
provided, the next step is implementation. EPA OEJ
would work with senior managers at EPA and EPA's
Environmental Justice Steering Committee to
implement environmental justice, as recommended
in the ELI and NAPA reports, into their daily work
under the authority provided by existing laws, he
said.

Mr. Hill stated that the last step is evaluation. The
EPA Inspector General will be asked to evaluate all
programs for success in integrating environmental
justice, as outlined in the NAPA and ELI reports, he
said.

Ms. Ann Goode then gave a presentation on NAPA's
research and evaluation of EPA's efforts to address
the widely recognized fact that some communities of
low-income people and people of color are exposed
to significantly greater environmental and public
health hazards that other communities. NAPA's
research and associated recommendations are
presented in the report "Environmental Justice in
EPA Permitting: Reducing Pollution in High-Risk
Communities is Integral to the Agency's Mission,"
she said.

Ms. Goode then explained that NAPA, an
independent nonprofit organization that was
chartered by Congress in 1967, is made up of some
500 fellows, including former members of Congress,
leaders of nonprofit organizations and local
government officials. Specifically, she said, NAPA
was asked to prepare a report that would help the
public better understand how considerations of
environmental justice can be incorporated into the
permitting process under RCRA, the CWA, and the
CAA.

Ms. Goode stated that, in the report, NAPA
recommended to EPA that changes be made in four
distinct areas related to environmental justice:
leadership, permitting procedures, setting of
priorities, and public participation.

In the area of EPA's leadership in integrating
environmental justice into permitting processes, Ms.
Goode stated that President Clinton's Executive
Order 12898 on environmental justice, as well as the
policy statement Administrator Christine Todd
Whitman issued to EPA assistant administrators on
August 9,2001 and statements made by former EPA

administrators, clearly articulated a commitment to
environmental justice. However, despite the
commitment of senior EPA leadership and, in many
cases, allocation of substantial resources to the
effort, Ms. Goode said, environmental justice has not
yet been integrated fully into the agency's core
mission or staff functions. There remains a
"disconnect" between policy pronouncements and
program realities, she added, although EPA has
significant statutory and regulatory authority, as well
as numerous opportunities to exercise discretion to
incorporate considerations of environmental justice
into its permitting processes, she added. Specific
expectations for outcomes have not accompanied
the commitments made, she continued, nor has EPA
adopted methods of measuring progress in achieving
outcomes or accountability to ensure that EPA
managers and staff work to implement policies
related to environmental justice.

Ms. Goode stated that NAPA's recommendations for
EPA leadership in the area of integrating
considerations of environmental justice into the
agency's permitting processes are:

Building on the EPA Administrator's recent
environmental justice memorandum, EPA's
assistant administrators for air, water, and waste
and EPA's regional administrators should
reinforce the importance of the policy on the
incorporation of considerations of environmental
justice, the role of that policy in the
accomplishment of EPA's core mission, and the
expectation that managers and staff will
implement consideration of environmental justice
in their projects and activities.

EPA should complete its draft national guidance
on environmental justice and develop practical
tools that permit writers can use to identify and
address issues of environmental justice related
to air, water, and waste permits.

EPA's offices of Air and Radiation, Water, and
Solid Waste and Emergency Response should
develop strategic plans that demonstrate how
environmental justice is to be integrated into the
substance and procedures of their permitting
programs. Further, they should explore carefully
ways in which they can use the authorities set
forth in the General Counsel's legal opinion
dated December 1, 2001 to incorporate
considerations of environmental justice into
permits for new and ongoing projects.

Each strategic plan for incorporating
environmental justice into a permitting program

1-22

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

should specify goals, measures of
performance, expected outcomes,
mechanisms for measuring accountability,
and time frames for meeting the goals set
forth in the plan.

EPA should establish an accountability process
that includes clear measures of performance for
evaluating the success of EPA managers and
staff in incorporating considerations of
environmental justice into air, water, and waste
permits.

EPA should identify disproportionately affected
and other adversely affected communities and
establish explicit goals for reducing the risks
posed to such communities. Further, EPA
should set clear expectations for producing
results that are linked directly to the agency's
mission and give staff an important measure of
performance that the staff can support whole-
heartedly. Such tasks also could provide
measures of EPA's progress in implementing
environmental justice and could be reinforced by
agency wide reporting thattracks such progress.

EPA should develop a communication
mechanism for agency wide sharing of
information about tools that are effective in
addressing environmental justice, including
descriptions of best practices and lessons that
all media programs, regional offices, and states
can learn. The mechanism should coordinate
EPA's activities in incorporating considerations
of environmental justice into permitting
processes, so that permit writers in all EPA's
media programs and EPA regional offices can
become more effective and efficient in
responding to concerns related to environmental
justice.

EPA should evaluate the effectiveness of its
national workshop on Fundamentals of
Environmental Justice to determine how well the
workshop meets its intended objectives,
including the effective implementation of
environmental justice in permitting.

EPA should develop a program for rewarding the
extra efforts of employees in addressing
environmental justice in permitting through
recognition under existing national awards
programs and through the development of
additional recognition programs.

Turning to a discussion of opportunities for

integrating considerations of environmental justice

into individual permitting programs, Ms. Goode
explained that a recent legal opinion issued by EPA's
Office of General Counsel (OGC) made it clear that
the CAA, the CWA, and RCRA provide permitting
staff ample authority to address the concerns of
high-risk communities when developing the terms
and conditions of individual permits. The EPA
Administrator reaffirmed that opinion in her August 9,
2001, memorandum to senior EPA officials, she said.
However, EPA managers have not made it routine
procedure to provide their permitting staff with
straightforward, practical tools and procedures for
incorporating community concerns into permits, nor
have they directed that staff to ensure that concerns
related to environmental justice are considered
systematically in the conduct of EPA's permitting
programs, continued Ms. Goode. Further, many
EPA permit writers have not been provided the
opportunity to learn how they can contribute to the
resolution of issues related to environmental justice
through an increased awareness of the community
that may be affected by a proposed permit. Such
awareness, said Ms. Goode, would include
consideration of the nature of the risks the
community faces; the concerns of the community
about the activity related to the proposed permit, the
capacity of the community to participate in the
permitting process, and the best methods of
communicating with the community.

Continuing, Ms. Goode pointed out that, because
EPA's legal authority to issue permits is based on
the provisions of RCRA, the CAA, and the CWA,
EPA's ability to address other common concerns
among high-risk communities, such as noise
pollution, traffic concerns, and odor, is limited. She
also explained that, in the area of permitting
programs, EPA's credibility in high-risk communities
depends upon its ability to visibly use opportunities
for enforcing permit conditions, including more
frequent inspections, local monitoring of
environmental conditions, and reductions in backlogs
of permit renewals for existing facilities.

Ms. Goode stated that NAPA's recommendations to
EPA in the area of integrating considerations of
environmental justice into individual permitting
programs are:

Senior program managers of EPA's air, water,
and waste programs should take prompt steps to
use their authorities, as outlined in the legal
opinion issued by OGC, to prepare guidance
documents for staff on how to fully incorporate
considerations of environmental justice into their
permitting programs. The managers should
develop these documents after consulting with

1-23

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

representatives of affected communities and
regulated entities. The programs also
should use legal mandates and
discretionary authorities to the fullest extent
possible to expand opportunities for public
participation in permitting programs;
increase monitoring and public reporting;
and impose in new, revised, and renewed
permits conditions designed to reduce the
burdens of pollution and public health
hazards on disproportionately affected
communities.

Intheshortterm, EPAshoulddeterminewhether
it can provide communities with earlier notice of
permit applications so that the public will have a
better opportunity to interact directly with EPA's
permit writers and the community's concerns
can be considered during the drafting and
negotiating stages of the permitting process.

Over the long term, EPA should revise its
permitting regulations to ensure that nearby
communities are notified of a permit application
as early as possible.

EPA should revise its public notification
practices to ensure that public notices are
provided in languages commonly spoken in the
affected communities and placed in libraries,
churches, community centers, and other
locations accessible to members of those
communities.

EPA managers should provide permit writers
with check lists or similar tools the permit writers
can use in identifying and considering concerns
related to environmental justice.

EPA budget and administrative staff should
recognize the additional time and effort that
permit writers must devote to developing permit
conditions that take into account issues of
environmental justice and to working more
closely with community groups. The agency's
workload models should be adjusted as
appropriate to indicate the average number of
permits to be handled by a permit writer in light
of such additional effort.

Continuing her overview of the NAPA evaluation, Ms.
Goode discussed NAPA's findings related to EPA's
use of permitting as a strategic element in pollution
prevention and risk reduction. She stated that EPA
had undertaken efforts to improve the science of
cumulative risk assessment so that more tools are
available to better assess disproportionate and

adverse effects on communities. However, while
waiting for advances in the science of cumulative risk
assessment, she explained, EPA and states
currently have several tools available to support
analysis of exposures of disproportionately affected
communities to actual or potential multiple pollutants.
She also said that EPA could perform more frequent
and comprehensive environmental monitoring in
communities to determine whether those
communities should be given priority attention.

Ms. Goode stated that NAPA's recommendations to
EPA in the area of the use of permitting as a
strategic element in pollution prevention and risk
reduction are:

EPA should consult with state and local health
and environmental officials to address concerns
related to environmental justice and identify
high-priority communities in which residents are
exposed to disproportionately high levels of
pollution.

EPA should evaluate tools that have been
developed by its regional and program offices,
such as the Office of Policy, the Office of Civil
Rights, and OEJ. EPA should identify among
those tools potential best practices the Agency
can recommend when it develops practical
guidance documents to assist permitting staff in
incorporating considerations of environmental
justice into EPA permits nationwide.

Referring to improvement by EPA in increasing
public participation in the permitting process, Ms.
Goode stated that the Agency had experimented
with various techniques for enhancing public
participation. The techniques, however, she noted,
have not yet been made standard operating
procedure for EPA's permitting processes in the air,
water, and waste programs. Ms. Goode then stated
that NAPA's recommendations to EPA in the area of
the use of permitting as a strategic element in
pollution prevention are:

EPA should expand its Technical Assistance
Grant (TAG) and Technical Outreach Services
forCommunities(TOSC) programs to offer more
timely and accessible technical assistance to
communities that need such support.

Using its discretionary authority, EPA should
adopt procedures for providing early notice to
communities once permit applications have been
completed. Such notices should provide the
name of an Agency community liaison and solicit
comments from the community before the

1-24

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

Agency negotiates the terms and conditions
of a permit.

Concluding her remarks, Ms. Goode stated that OEJ
also had asked NAPA to next evaluate three state
permitting programs. She commented that, while
EPA itself performs relatively little permitting
compared with the states, EPA could serve as a
model for state permitting programs.

Mr. Hill added that the states selected for NAPA's
evaluation would fall into the following categories: (1)
a state that has passed or enacted environmental
justice legislation; (2) a state that has issued an
official statement that environmental justice is a
policy issue; and (3) a state that has established an
environmental justice commission or a body similar
to the NEJAC. He explained that the purpose of
evaluating states that fall into those categories is to
demonstrate how such states can serve as models
for their sister states.

Ms. Stahl expressed her belief that the next step
should be development of the guidelines and
standards to be applied through the appropriate
authorities. She explained that, until standards have
been developed, permitting and enforcement
programs would not have the tools necessary to
apply the principles.

Ms. Subra commented that, in the area of public
participation, it is not sufficient to give communities

Exhibit 1-3

RETIRING MEMBERS OF THE
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

Ms. Rose Augustine
Ms. Elaine Barron
Ms. Daisy Carter
Mr. Fernando Cuevas
Ms. Denise Feiber
Dr. Michel Gelobter
Mr. Dan Greenbaum
Ms. Rita Harris
Ms. A. Caroline Hotaling
Ms. Jennifer Hill-Kelley

Ms. Savi Home
Ms. Annabelle Jaramillo
Mr. Philip Lewis
Mr. Neftali Garcia Martinez
Ms. Zulene Mayfield
Mr. David Moore
Mr Carlos Porras
Mr. Leonard Robinson
Mr. Alberto Saldamando
Mr. Mervyn Tano
Mr. Michael Taylor
Ms. Marianne Yamaguchi

Ms. Shephard presents Ms. Home with a certificate of
appreciation for her years of service on the NEJAC.

1-25

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Executive Council

the opportunity to comment. She stressed that there
is a real need, particularly in environmental justice
communities, for capacity building and access to
technical assistance. Ms. Subra said that the
community must understand what the rules are,
where the application violates the rule, and how a
community can ensure that such information is
entered into the record. Ms. Goode responded that
the NAPA report includes explicit recommendations
about increasing support for technical assistance for
communities.

6.0 MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
6.1 Acknowledgments

Mr. Lee announced that OEJ would recognize and
honor members of the NEJAC whose terms were to
expire on December 31, 2001. Exhibit 1-3 presents
the names of the retiring members of the NEJAC.

Mr. Lee also commended the efforts of the DFOs of
the various subcommittees and work groups of the
NEJAC: Ms. Wendy Graham, Ms. Shirley Pate, Mr.
Will Wilson, Ms. Alice Walker, Mr. Rey Rivera, Mr.
Brandon Carter, Ms. Brenda Washington, Ms. Aretha
Brockett, Ms. Teresita Rodriguez, and Mr. Daniel
Gogal. He also thanked the staff of EPA Region 10,
including Ms. Joyce Kelly, Mr. Michael Letourneau,

Dr. Gragg suggested that the membership of the
Puerto Rico Subcommittee of the NEJAC be
expanded to include representatives from the Virgin
Islands. Dr. Gragg pointed out that other
dependencies ofthe United States, particularly those
that are islands, are faced with issues of
environmental justice. Ms. Home commented that
she strongly agreed with Dr. Gragg's suggestion. Dr.
Ramirez-Toro suggested that the recommendation
be communicated to EPA Region 2 office and the
Caribbean Field Office, noting that those offices
provide financial support for the Puerto Rico
Subcommittee.

Ms. Shepard stated that she would like to compile a
year-end report on the accomplishments of the
NEJAC during 2001. She asked that the chair of
each subcommittees e-mail a list of that
subcommittee's accomplishments to herself and Ms.
Marva King, NEJAC Program Manager, EPA OEJ,
by January 15, 2002.

Ms. Victoria Plata, and Ms. Ony Okorna, for their
support in coordination of the planning of the
meeting ofthe NEJAC with community groups in the
region.

Continuing, Mr. Lee recognized the efforts of the
staff of OEJ, especially Mr. Hill, Director of OEJ; Ms.
Linda K. Smith, Associate Director for Resources
Management, EPA OEJ; Marva E. King, NEJAC
Program Manager; and Ms. Jaime Song, OEJ Intern,
and thanked them for their hard work.

Ms. Jaramillo personally thanked Mr. Lee for his
efforts, stating that the meetings of the NEJAC
"could not happen" without his guidance. She then
thanked Ms. Shepard for her hard work and for her
leadership during the meeting ofthe NEJAC.

6.2 New Business

This section summarizes items of new business
discussed during the closing remarks of the
members of the Executive Council of the NEJAC.
Ms. Shepard stated that the items should be noted in
the record and would be discussed by the members
ofthe Executive Council in the future.

1-26

Seattle, Washington, December 3 through 6, 2001


-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the

AIR AND WATER SUBCOMMITTEE
of the

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

December 5, 2001
Seattle, Washington

Meeting Summary Accepted By:

{JJU/A&fyb 4^-——/ i



Alice Walker	Eileen Guana

Co-Designated Federal Official	Vice Chair

Wil Wilson

Co-Designated Federal Official


-------
CHAPTER THREE
MEETING OF THE
AIR AND WATER SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Air and Water Subcommittee of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
conducted a one-day meeting on Wednesday,
December 5, 2001, during a four-day meeting of the
NEJAC in Seattle, Washington. Ms. Annabelle
Jaramillo, Benton County Board of Commissioners,
continues to serve as chair of the subcommittee.
Ms. Alice Walker, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Office of Water (OW), and Dr. Wil
Wilson, EPA Office of Air and Radiation (OAR),
continue to serve jointly as the Designated Federal
Officials (DFO) for the subcommittee. Exhibit 3-1
presents a list of the members who attended the
meeting and identifies the member who was unable
to attend.

This chapter, which provides a summary of the
deliberations of the Air and Water Subcommittee, is
organized in five sections, including this Introduction.
Section 2.0, Activities of the Subcommittee,
summarizes the discussions about the NEJAC
strategic plan and the activities of the work groups of
the Air and Water Subcommittee. Section 3.0,
Presentations and Reports, presents an overview of
each presentation and report delivered during the
subcommittee meeting, as well as a summary of
relevant questions and comments of members of the
subcommittee. This section also includes a
summary of the discussions about the draft fish
consumption report prepared by the Fish
Consumption Work Group. Section 4.0, Significant
Action Items, summarizes the significant action
items adopted by the subcommittee.

2.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE

This section discusses the activities of the
subcommittee, including discussions about the
NEJAC strategic plan and the activities of the work
groups of the Air and Water Subcommittee.
Members of the subcommittee also discussed
concerns associated with the adequacy of the staffing
of the work groups of the subcommittee.

2.1 NEJAC Strategic Plan

Ms. Jaramillo commended the lead authors of the
NEJAC strategic plan - Ms. Wilma Subra, Louisiana
Environmental Action Network; Mr. Kenneth Warren,
Wolf Block Schorr and Solis-Cohan LLP; and Ms.
Veronica Eady, Commonwealth of Massachusetts -
for their efforts. She suggested that the members of
the subcommittee review Section VII, Organization

Exhibit 3-1

	

AIR AND WATER SUBCOMMITTEE

Members Who Attended the Meeting
December 5, 2001

Ms. Annabelle Jaramillo, Chair
Ms. Eileen Gauna, Vice-Chair
Ms. Alice Walker, Co-DFO
Dr. Wil Wilson, Co-DFO

Dr. Elaine Barron
Ms. Daisy Carter
Mr. Daniel Greenbaum
Mr. Kenneth Manaster
Mr. Leonard Robinson

Ms. Wilma Subra
Mr. Damon Whitehead
Ms. Marianne Yamaguchi

Member
Who Was Unable To Attend

Dr. Michel Gelobter

and Procedure Goal, of the report which sets forth the
framework for the responsibilities of the NEJAC
subcommittees. She noted that recent meetings of
the Executive Council of the NEJAC had evolved from
a meeting at which a broad range of subjects was
discussed to a meeting at which the members
focused on a specific theme. The use of a
"roundtable" discussion format that was designed to
promote dialogue among the members of the
Executive Council about the issues being discussed,
reflected continued improvements to the process, she
continued.

Ms. Jaramillo commented that the new approach to
conducting meetings had enhanced the productivity
of the Executive Council. She added that the
strategic plan also had established an expectation
that each of the subcommittees would develop a work
plan for its activities. Since its inception, the Air and
Water Subcommittee had been attempting to cover
"the whole waterfront" of issues, from permitting to
urban air toxics to fish consumption, she observed.
In light of the requirement for work plans, Ms.
Jaramillo asked that the work groups conduct similar
planning during their meetings. She encouraged the
work groups to focus on several key issues and
propose schedules for their work.

Dr. Elaine Barron, Paso del Norte Air Quality Task
Force, stated that it is important that the NEJAC
continue to evaluate its effectiveness in increasing the

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Air and Water Subcommittee

influence of the public on EPA's policies and
procedures. She asked that the members of the
NEJAC identify successes and failures so that
lessons are learned.

Mr. Damon Whitehead, Earth Conservation Corps,
recalled that, several years ago, the Executive
Council had considered the issue of self-evaluation.
He asked whether the details of the process had
been completed and, if not, whether the process
could be "jump-started" again. He added that after
the Public Participation and Accountability
Subcommittee had disbanded several years earlier,
it was not clear how considerations related to public
participation were to be incorporated into the
discussions of each of the remaining subcommittees.

Mr. Charles Lee, EPA Office of Environmental Justice
(OEJ) and DFO of the NEJAC, responded that, in
1998, the NEJAC had established an Assessment
Work Group to address the issue of evaluating the
effectiveness of the NEJAC. He stated that the work
group had been established to ensure that all
stakeholder groups were involved, including such
representatives of EPA as Mr. Rob Brenner, EPA
OAR, and Ms. Laura Yoshii, EPA Region 9. Mr. Lee
said that the work group had prepared a report that
served as the basis of the discussions conducted
during the facilitated dialogue meeting of the
Executive Council of the NEJAC that took place in
August 2001.

Mr. Lee reported that one of the findings of the work
group was that the NEJAC appears to represent
"many things to many people." For example, he said,
the NEJAC is regarded as a platform through which
the public could gain access to the government.
Continuing, Mr. Lee reported that every comment
made at meetings of the NEJAC, had received a
response, such as referral of the issue to the
appropriate EPA office. He acknowledged, however,
that there was a question about whether a number of
such actions had brought about real, meaningful
progress. Mr. Lee commented that many people
think of a meeting of the NEJAC as a conference at
which the audience makes presentations rather than
a meeting at which the members discuss issues. He
emphasized the importance of recognizing that the
purpose of NEJAC meetings is to provide
recommendations to EPA, with planned follow-up on
the implementation and evaluation of those
recommendations.

Mr. Lee said that the key issue to be considered in
2002 is how the subcommittees of the NEJAC can be
most effective. He stated that, until that issue has
been clarified, it would be difficult to begin evaluating

33	

the work of the subcommittees. He observed that the
assignment to each meeting of a specific theme
would improve opportunities for discussion and
collaboration among the members of the NEJAC. Mr.
Lee emphasized the importance of establishing a
collaborative framework among:

OEJ and the program offices

NEJAC and EPA (including OEJ and the program

offices)

Members of the NEJAC

NEJAC and environmental justice communities

Mr. Lee also stated that members participating in the
August 2001 facilitated dialogue meeting of the
NEJAC had identified five elements of a successful
subcommittee:

-	A strong, committed, and knowledgeable
DFO appointed by the sponsoring program
office

-	High-quality leadership that encourages
participation

-	High-quality membership that eagerly
participates and is knowledgeable about the
subject matter

-	Support from the sponsoring program office

-	A strategic plan to guide the activities of the
subcommittee

Mr. Lee said that the NEJAC Assessment Work
Group planned to establish a set of guidelines for the
strategic plans of the subcommittee. Pointing to the
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy
and Technology (NACEPT), of which Ms. Subra is a
member, he noted that the NACEPT has been
designed as a standing committee with ad hoc work
groups that are established to address a single issue.
Continuing, Mr. Lee stated that, by December 31,
2002, he expected that the NEJAC will have adopted
a modified version of that structure. He added that he
and Mr. Barry E. Hill, director of EPA OEJ, had been
meeting with the assistant administrators of EPA,
emphasizing that each program office must provide
leadership and direction to the subcommittees its
sponsors. Mr. Lee said that he and Mr. Hill had
stressed that the NEJAC exists to serve the EPA
program offices and that those offices should provide
guidance to help the subcommittees retain focus and
be productive.

Mr. Lee stated that, during the coming year, one goal
of the NEJAC would be to strive to make the work
groups more efficient. He acknowledged that the
members of the subcommittees and work groups

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Air and Water Subcommittee

were conducting their work for the NEJAC on their
own time. He added that his goal was to allay fears
that serving on the NEJAC was an "all-consuming
commitment."

Ms. Daisy Carter, Project AWAKE, emphasized that
members of community groups appear before the
NEJAC to voice their concerns directly to
representatives of EPA. She added that such
individuals expect EPA to help solve their problems.
She asked whether that was indeed the case. Mr.
Lee responded that the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) requires that a public comment period be
held during each meeting of the NEJAC. He
confirmed that any person can attend a meeting to
voice his or her concerns during the public comment
period. However, he observed, because so many
issues are raised during any given public comment
period, it has become evident that another forum is
needed in which people can voice their concerns and
receive direct responses from agency representatives.
Mr. Lee pointed to the proposed idea of conducting
regional clinics or listening sessions at which
members of communities can speak out fully about
their concerns. Mr. Kenneth Manaster, Santa Clara
University School of Law, asked that EPA inform
members of the NEJAC about the dates and
locations of the regional listening sessions, so that
those members can attend the sessions.

Pointing to the many committees formed by federal
agencies under the FACA legislation, Dr. Barron
suggested that they also should be examined for
effectiveness, so that the NEJAC can identify the
lessons learned and, in turn, advise communities
about how to be more effective in interacting with
local governments. She explained that members of
communities must be empowered locally because
their concerns should be sent "to the top" (for
example, to EPA) as well as "to the bottom" (for
example, to local municipalities). She added that
public officials tend to listen to their constituents
rather than to those above them.

Ms. Gauna recalled the comments made on the
previous day by Mr. Richard Moore, Southwest
Network for Environmental and Economic Justice and
former chair of NEJAC. He had observed, she said,
there is a pervading perception that the NEJAC is not
fulfilling its mission. Ms. Gauna stressed that the
NEJAC always offers advice to EPA, as it has been
charged to do. If EPA does not accept the
recommendations of the NEJAC, that circumstance
is a failure of EPA rather than the NEJAC, she
continued, adding that EPA must provide assurance
that it is taking the recommendations of the NEJAC
seriously.

Mr. Lee acknowledged that there is a perception that
the NEJAC is ineffective, as well as concerns that the
process of developing the strategic plan had been
closed. He explained that the views of the public
were solicited to the broadest extent possible, but
that many community members who were invited to
comment were not available or did not wish to do so.
Mr. Lee added that public participation will be
encouraged during the implementation of the plan
over the coming years.

2.2 Activities of the Work Groups

This section discusses the activities of the work
groups of the Air and Water Subcommittee. The
Permitting and Public Utilities Work Groups held a
joint breakout session, during which the two bodies
were merged permanently into a single work group.

2.2.1 Fish Consumption Work Group

Mr. Leonard Robinson, TAMCO, provided an update
on the activities of the Fish Consumption Work
Group. He stated that the Fish Consumption Work
Group plans to (1) review the document and provide
comment on it and (2) identify and recommend
individuals to serve on various EPA stakeholder work
groups and as technical consultants for the issuance
of fish advisories. Those goals, he added, are to be
accomplished by December 2002.

Mr. Robinson also reported that Mr. Jeff Bigler, EPA
Office of Science and Technology (OST), had made
a presentation to the work group about the plans of
EPA OW to revise Volume IV of EPA's Guidance
Document for Assessing Chemical Contamination
Data for Use in Fish Advisories. That volume, which
focuses on risk communication, will be revised to
incorporate awareness of issues of environmental
justice, he said. Mr. Bigler explained that EPA is
developing a second edition of the document because
comments the received by the agency have
suggested that the existing guidance could be
improved by incorporating an awareness of
environmental justice. Comments also suggested the
report should acknowledge that contaminated fish
exist in many areas of the United States.

During his presentation, Mr. Bigler also had described
three technical groups that will be coordinated by
EPA OW:

The Stakeholder Work Group would be tasked to
provide technical input, project leadership, and
decisions regarding recommendations of the
guidance document. Members will include tribal

TJ

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Air and Water Subcommittee

leaders and representatives of cultural and ethnic
groups and state government agencies.

The National Stakeholder Work Group would be
tasked to address issues related to EPA's
national Fish and Wildlife Contamination Program
(NFWCP). Membership would consist of
representatives of federal, state, and tribal
agencies who would serve in an advisory
capacity to the NFWCP. Exhibit 3-2 describes
the activities of the NFWCP.

drafts, and (3) EPA reviews and publishes the revised
document.

During its deliberations, the Fish and Consumption
Work Group had developed a preliminary list of
recommendations:

Both EPA proposed work groups should review
the Fish Consumption Report before asking the
NEJAC for comments related to fish consumption
and water quality\

Guidance on fish consumption advisories should:

-	Convey to communities the relevant criteria
used to develop fish consumption advisories

-	Consider making guidance on fish
consumption advisories mandatory

-	Involve the target audience in the design and
goal-setting stages

-	Target the message to ethnic health groups
and healthcare providers

-	Help affected communities become
empowered to affect the situation

-	Condense the recommendations in the
guidance to avoid repetition and overlap,
striving for "simplicity"

-	Explore and discuss comparative dietary
risks

-	Offer alternatives or options for affected
communities

-	Explore best practices through research on
international entities

-	Maintain sensitivity to sovereignty and the
cultural way of life of tribal populations

-	Include the temporal component of advisories
and their effects on communities

Membership of the proposed EPA stakeholder

work groups should:

Exhibit 3-2

	

NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE
CONTAMINATION PROGRAM

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA) National Fish and Wildlife Contamination
Program (NFWCP) provides technical assistance to
states, tribes, and federal agencies for matters
related to the assessment of health risks associated
with exposure to chemical contaminants in fish and
other wildlife. Specifically, the NFWCP conducts
the following ongoing activities:

•	Issues national guidance documents,
including the Guidance Document for
Assessing Chemical Contamination Data for
Use in Fish Advisories

•	Conducts national forums, workshops, and
conferences, such as the 2001 National Risk
Communication Conference in Chicago

•	Conducts national outreach to medical
communities in conjunction with the U.S.
Department of Flealth and Fluman Services

•	Conducts special studies, such as the studies
of Cook Inlet in Alaska and the Mississippi
delta

•	Provides assistance in preparing federal
advisories

•	Issues the online News Service on
Contaminants in Fish

Products prepared by NFWCP are available
electronically at: .

A group of technical consultants who will provide
technical advice, project management, and logistical
support to EPA and develop and revise new materials
under the direction of the Stakeholder Work Group.

Mr. Bigler presented the following process by which
the revised guidance will be developed: (1)
consultants and stakeholder groups develop outlines,
(2) consultants and stakeholder groups develop

-	Include on the Stakeholder Work Group
representatives of the environmental justice
team of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
the Latino community, the Seattle Public
Utilities, and the Air and Water
Subcommittee of the NEJAC

-	Include on the National Stakeholder Work
Group a member of the NEJAC

Mr. Robinson noted that the terms of three members
of the Air and Water Subcommittee who also serve
on the Fish Consumption Work Group would expire
December 31, 2001. Dr. Barron asked how the
institutional knowledge of the current members of the
work group would be passed along to new work group
members. She asked whether the departing

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Air and Water Subcommittee

members could be called upon in the future to provide
advice. Ms. Jaramillo responded that the NEJAC
could decide whether to appoint them to serve as
members of a work group. Ms. Marianne
Yamaguchi, Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project,
explained that, even after the Fish Consumption Work
Group has ceased functioning, the former members
can be asked to serve in a different capacity. Ms.
Jaramillo commented that, once a person becomes
a resource, he or she always will remain a resource.

Ms. Yamaguchi asked that the work group consider
water permitting issues in the future given that the
Permitting Work Group primarily was addressing
permitting issues from a perspective of air quality.
She suggested that another work group be created to
address permitting issues from the perspective of
water quality. Ms. Jaramillo agreed, adding that total
maximum daily loads (TMDL) and confined animal
feeding operations (CAFO) are issues the new work
group should consider. She said that, when the Fish
Consumption Work Group completes its work on the
report, it could turn its attention to general issues
related to water quality. Ms. Gauna asked that the
subcommittee consider changing the name of the
work group if it is to take on such additional issues.

Dr. Barron expressed concern that EPA has no
program office that addresses the issue of water
supply. She stressed that water supply is an
important issue in arid tribal areas.

2.2.2 Permitting and Utilities Work Group

Mr. Daniel Greenbaum, Health Effects Institute,
reported that the Permitting Work Group, which had
merged with the Public Utilities Work Group, would
continue focusing on three issues: (1) reviewing
EPA's White Paper No. 3 on flexible permitting, (2)
reviewing EPA OAR's new source review study report
that is expected to be issued in January or February
2002 and that will present recommendations for
changing the protocol for conducting new source
reviews, and (3) developing a document on "best
practices" for permitting that are sensitive to issues
of environmental justice.

Mr. Greenbaum explained that EPA's new source
review study report consisted of a 90-day study
described in President George W. Bush's energy
plan. He observed that the report originally had been
due on August 15, 2001, but that its issuance had
been delayed to coincide with the promulgation of
stringent emissions reductions requirements for
electrical utilities.

Ms. Gauna stated that the "best practices" guide
would include a discussion of alternative site analysis
and alternative production processes. She added
that the report also would examine EPA's statutory
authority to require measures and incentives in the
permitting process that encourage facilities to "go
above and beyond" the regulatory requirements. The
document also would provide information about public
participation strategies and empowering communities
to monitor the activities of facilities in their vicinity.
She stated that she anticipated the potential for
collaborative efforts with other work groups of the
NEJAC, the Clean Air Act FACA committee, or other
groups addressing permitting issues.

Mr. Greenbaum added that Mr. Manaster had agreed
to serve as vice-chair of the new Permitting and
Public Utilities Work Group. He added that another
issue on the work group's agenda is upcoming
legislation related to mercury. Expected in January
2002, the legislation would include a proposal for
reducing the amounts of mercury used in power
plants, he said.

Ms. Gauna then repeated her concern that the work
group was not staffed adequately to deal with all the
issues it has under consideration.

2.2.3 Urban Air Toxics Work Group

Mr. Whitehead informed the subcommittee that Mr.
Peter Murchie, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards (OAQPS), had presented to the Urban
Air Toxics Work Group an overview of EPA's air
toxics program. Mr. Whitehead said that Mr. Murchie
had described EPA OAR's Work Plan for the
National Air Toxics and Integrated Air Toxics
Strategy, a major document that was to provide the
framework for the activities of the program. Mr.
Whitehead reported that the work plan had been
completed at the end of October 2001 and that EPA
plans to implement the work plan by 2003.

Mr. Whitehead stated that Dr. Barron; Dr. Michel
Gelobter, Redefining Progress and former chair of the
Air and Water Subcommittee; and Mr. Bunyan Bryan,
University of Michigan, serve on the Clean Air Act
FACA committee. Continuing, Mr. Whitehead said
that the work plan would have a significant effect on
the way in which EPA deals with the issue of "hot
spots" under its urban air toxics strategy. He
reported that, during the public comment period of the
previous day, it had been revealed that EPA had been
examining local-scale assessments of "hot spots."
Mr. Whitehead explained that EPA had said it would
use local data and provide incentives and support for
conducting such assessments. Mr. Whitehead

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Air and Water Subcommittee

added that he would like the Urban Air Toxics Work
Group to prepare comprehensive comments to the
work plan, before the next meeting of the NEJAC.

2.3 Staffing of Work Groups

Ms. Gauna expressed concern that subcommittees
and work groups may not be staffed adequately to
accomplish their goals. Specifically, she commented
that the Permitting Work Group was understaffed
severely. Dr. Wilson explained that the EPA program
offices that sponsor the subcommittees decide how
to staff a subcommittee. He added that, while there
is no limit on the number of members who serve on a
subcommittee, the amount of resources available
from the program office could be a limiting factor.

Mr. Whitehead called the attention of the members to
page 9 of the NEJAC strategic plan, which states that
work groups can seek resources outside the agency.
Ms. Gauna acknowledged that fact, but added that
those individuals who are working with, but not
assigned to, a subcommittee must pay for their own
travel expenses. She commented further that
resources are insufficient to allow the NEJAC to deal
with the regulatory initiatives which she described as
"daunting." She acknowledged that it is difficult to
identify people who are familiar with air and water
issues, as well as environmental justice. She
stressed the importance of assigning to work groups
individuals who can spend time reviewing regulations
and guidance documents.

Mr. Lee acknowledged that, nationally, only three to
six people are knowledgeable of issues related to
environmental justice, as well as the technical issues
of air permitting. He said that Ms. Gauna's concern
point to a more extensive structural problem than
merely that facing the NEJAC. It is, he noted, difficult
to identify people who have the necessary expertise.
Mr. Lee then said that the same individuals always
are suggested. Mr. Bob Kellam, EPA OAQPS,
agreed with Mr. Lee that only a handful of people in
the country understand the complexities of several of
EPA's programs and understand issues of
environmental justice, as well. He encouraged the
work groups to explore academic institutions as
resources that can provide expertise.

Dr. Barron added that the subcommittee could
"gather all the experts in the world" on any topic.
However, she continued, if the subcommittee fails to
include diverse opinions the NEJAC would fail in its
charge. She pointed out that "it is not always the
brains who have the expertise, but those people who
can think outside the box."

33T

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS

This section summarizes the presentations and
reports made to the Air and Water Subcommittee on
the draft Fish Consumption Report and the role of the
subcommittee in planning for the meeting of the
NEJAC to be held in December 2002.

3.1 Draft Fish Consumption Report

Ms. Jaramillo congratulated the members of the Fish
Consumption Work Group for its extensive efforts in
preparing the draft report. She reported that the
document is the product of 18 months of planning and
development. She explained that a 30-day comment
period had been held after the Fish Consumption
Work Group had completed consideration of the
focused recommendations that supported the
recommendations that already had been presented to
the Executive Council of the NEJAC. Ms. Jaramillo
added that, after comments on the report have been
addressed, the Executive Council of the NEJAC
would vote to determine whether the document was
ready for submission to the EPA Administrator. Ms.
Jaramillo expressed her hope that the final
recommendations would be sent to the Administrator
by March 2002.

Mr. Robinson commented that the process of
developing the report had been "very interesting and
synergistic." He commended Ms. Walker and Ms.
Yamaguchi for their contributions and efforts to
coordinate activities with members of the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee in developing the report.

Ms. Yamaguchi emphasized the importance of using
the work of the Fish Consumption Work Group as a
segue into planning for the December 2002 meeting
of the NEJAC to be held in Baltimore, Maryland, so
that the work that already has been completed will
not be lost, she said. She expressed the hope that
the "take-home" question raised by the report would
be "Where is the regulatory or clean-up side of the
fish consumption equation?"

Ms. Jaramillo then stated her belief that the current
theme of fish consumption could bring about a
smooth transition to the pollution prevention theme of
the December 2002 meeting. Ms. Jaramillo then
commented that the current meeting was focusing on
the advisory aspect of the fish consumption issue and
stated her expectation that the focus of the
December 2002 meeting would examine the
regulatory aspect of the issue.

Mr. Jim Hanlon, EPAOST, also commended the Fish
Consumption Work Group for its efforts. He observed

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Air and Water Subcommittee

that much thought had gone into the
recommendations developed by the work group.
However, he asked that members of the work group
realize that some of their recommendations were
"easier said than done." He commented that several
recommendations, such as those for the elimination
of sources and the selection of priority compounds,
are relatively far-reaching. Mr. Hanlon asked that the
work group assign priorities to each recommendation
- for example, short-term or long-term or Tier 1 or Tier
2. He stated that it otherwise would be difficult for
EPA to know where to begin. He also stated that
most of what EPA could accomplish in implementing
the recommendations would depend on available
resources. He stated that he looked forward to
working with the Air and Water Subcommittee to
refine and implement the recommendations.

Ms. Subra, commented that other initiatives in
progress could be useful as resources for EPA as it
implements the recommendations of the NEJAC. For
example, she said, in terms of phasing out chemicals
and eliminating exposure to certain sources, EPA
could look to the work of a tri-lateral trade council on
which representatives of Mexico, the United States,
and Canada had developed regional action plans for
a select list of chemicals. Mr. Hanlon added that
EPA also is involved in a bilateral agreement with
Canada that deals with environmental issues in the
Great Lakes region.

Ms. Gauna expressed her concern that EPA would
focus on broad principles that could not be
implemented under the current statutory
circumstances, rather than turning its attention to
specific recommendations that could be
implemented. Mr. Greenbaum encouraged EPA and
the work group to avoid "getting lost in the details."
He suggested that EPA examine less detail in the
recommendations, but instead focus on the more
general comments.

Dr. Barron stated that she recognized that EPA
would have great difficulty following up on every single
recommendation. She asked, however, that the
agency be aware that many affected populations
would not change their practices, even though the
health risks posed by the contaminants are known.
She urged that EPA "see the bigger picture," that
there is a need for clean ecosystems everywhere.
Dr. Barron stressed that it had been shown
repeatedly that the killing or contamination of animals
and plants ultimately will harm humans. She
stressed that EPA must work with other agencies
that may have money to work with communities at
high risk.

3.2 December 2002 Meeting of the NEJAC

The subcommittee discussed the meeting of the
NEJAC scheduled for December 2002 that will focus
on pollution prevention and environmental justice. Mr.
Lee presented the policy issue and question that
would be the theme of the December 2002 meeting:

How can EPA promote innovative
approaches to pollution prevention to ensure
a clean and healthy environment and improve
the quality of life for all people, including low-
income communities, minority communities,
and tribes?

Mr. Lee stated that one goal of the meeting would be
to present environmental justice and pollution
prevention as a "win-win" strategy for all stakeholders.
He provided one example topic, how EPA can
promote innovative approaches to pollution prevention
to address the concerns of environmental justice
communities. Continuing, Mr. Lee said that the
participants in the meeting would discuss the need to
integrate pollution prevention into EPA's various
programs, such as air, water, and solid waste
management. He then stated that the participants
also would explore obstacles to the integration of
pollution prevention and environmental justice.

Mr. Lee referred to a background paper developed by
EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
(OPPT) for the December 2002 meeting. The
background paper opened with a quote of U.S.
Representative John Conyers (D-Ohio):
"Communities of color and low-income Americans
seek not to redistribute pollution, from dirtier and
overexposed areas to cleaner and underexposed
areas. They instead seek to prevent pollution at the
source so that all Americans can breathe clean air,
drink clean water, and eat clean food" (April 1993).

Mr. Lee noted that examples of pollution prevention
include diesel reduction in the amounts of diesel fuel
used, product replacement, tribal solid waste cleanup
plans, and energy efficiency. He referred to a group
known as Janitors for Justice that deals with
environmental products that such workers must use.
He also referred to the success of EPA's Pollution
Prevention for Environmental Justice program, which
has allocated $14 million in grants. Mr. Lee added
that innovative approaches also include partnerships,
citing the Houston Ship Channel Source Reduction
Model and the Dow-Midland Model as examples.

Mr. Lee then announced that the NEJAC would like
the Air and Water Subcommittee to play a role in
organizing the December 2002 meeting. He said that

3T

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Air and Water Subcommittee

the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee, the
Health and Research Subcommittee, and the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee also would be
represented in the planning process. He added that
OEJ and the other program offices would provide staff
support.

Ms. Subra reported that she and Mr. Warren, co-chair
of the work group would work together to develop a
strategy for planning the meeting. She said they
would focus on exploring available opportunities for
pollution prevention and share such information with
environmental justice communities. Ms. Subra added
that, with the help of the DFO of the Pollution
Prevention Work Group, she and Mr. Warren would
prepare a report on their findings. Members of the
subcommittee requested that, in preparation for the
next meeting, the newly formed Pollution Prevention
Work Group examine issues related to
(1) environmental restoration, (2) clean production, (3)
low-impact development, and (3) the costs and
benefits of pollution prevention.

Mr. Whitehead acknowledged that integrating the
topics of "pollution prevention" and "environmental
justice" would be a timely exercise. He asked for
clarification of whether the term "pollution prevention"
included the concept of clean production. He added
that the subcommittee should consider an analysis
of the economic benefit of pollution prevention and
low-impact or retro-development. He encouraged the
work group not to think of pollution prevention in a
"limited box," which usually is thought of in the
context of air and waste issues, he explained. Mr.
Whitehead also asked that the work group consider
issues related to water, as well. Ms. Jaramillo added
that pollution prevention also includes environmental
restoration.

Ms. Carter asked that EPA comment on the overlap
and duplication of programs at EPA. She observed
that several offices appear to deal with the same
issues. She asked that EPA consider eliminating
some of the overlap and allocating more resources to
the offices that address a problem directly.

Mr. Greenbaum expressed concern about the efforts
of the other work groups during the next meeting.
Ms. Yamaguchi agreed that the issue should be
discussed and expressed concern that participation
in the meeting by subcommittee members who are
not involved in planning the meeting may be limited.
She stated that the goal should be to link existing
work groups to the pollution prevention theme, as
well.

4.0 SIGNIFICANT ACTION ITEMS

This section summarizes the significant action items

adopted by the subcommittee.

/ Recommend that EPA OEJ coordinate with the
various EPA program offices that sponsor NEJAC
subcommittees efforts to adequately staff the
work groups of the subcommittees, specifically
the Permitting and Public Utilities Work Group.

/ Recommend that EPA consider ways to
eliminate redundancy in programs that address
the same issues, so that fewer resources will be
spent on duplicate efforts and more resources
can be allocated to the primary office or agency
that addresses each issue.

/ Review and provide comment on the following
documents:

EPA's Work Plan for the National Air Toxics
and Integrated Air Toxics Strategy
- Volume IV: "Risk Communication" of EPA's
Guidance Document for Assessing Chemical
Contamination Data for Use in Fish
Advisories

/ Identify individuals to recommend for service on
various EPA stakeholder work groups and for
service as technical consultants to provide advice
about the issuance of fish advisories.

/ Develop a document on "best practices" for
permitting that are sensitive to issues of
environmental justice and review and provide
comment on EPA OAR's new source review
study report that is to be issued in January or
February 2002.

/ Encourage state and local governments to
incorporate into their strategic plans a philosophy
of awareness of environmental justice similar to
that expressed in EPA Administrator Christine
Todd Whitman's August 2001 letter that states
EPA's commitment to environmental justice.

/ Recommend that, after completion of the fish
consumption report, the Fish Consumption Work
Group expand its scope to explore other issues
related to water quality (such as TMDLs, CAFOs,
and permitting related to water).

/ Recommended that EPA establish an
organizational division to address issues related
to water supply.

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
MEETING SUMMARY

of the

HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE

of the

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

December 5, 2001
Seattle, Washington

Meeting Summary Accepted By:

nda Washington J

6

ane
ahl

Co-Designated Federal Officer

Vice-Chair

, -... .i •/-*

Aret	ha Brockett

Co-Designated Federal Officer


-------
CHAPTER FOUR
MEETING

OF THE

HEALTH AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Health and Research Subcommittee of the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) conducted a one-day meeting on
Wednesday, December 5, 2001, during a four-day
meeting of the NEJAC in Seattle, Washington. Ms.
Jane Stahl, Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection, continues to serve as
vice-chair of the subcommittee. Ms. Brenda
Washington, Office of Research and Development,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and
Aretha Brockett, EPA Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, continue to serve as the co-Designated
Federal Officers (DFO) for the subcommittee.
Exhibit 4-1 presents a list of the members who
attended the meeting and identifies those members
who were unable to attend.

This chapter, which provides a summary of the
deliberations of the Health and Research
Subcommittee, is organized in five sections,
including this Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks,
summarizes the opening remarks of the vice-chair
and the co-DFO. Section 3.0, Presentations and
Reports, presents an overview of each presentation
and report, as well as a summary of relevant
questions and comments offered by the members of
the subcommittee and the speakers. Section 4.0,
Summary of Public Dialogue, summarizes
discussions that took place during the public
dialogue period provided by the subcommittee.
Section 5.0, Action Items, summarizes the action
items agreed upon by the members of the
subcommittee.

2.0 REMARKS

Ms. Jane Stahl, vice-chair of the Health and
Research Subcommittee, opened the subcommittee
meeting by welcoming the members present and Ms.
Brenda Washington, the co-DFO. She encouraged
the speakers and members of the audience to
introduce themselves, and they did so. Mr. Martin
Halper, Senior Science Advisor, EPA Office of
Environmental Justice, also was present and
participated extensively in the discussions.

Continuing, Ms. Stahl provided background
information about the NEJAC and the function of the
Health and Research Subcommittee. She stated
that the issue of fish consumption currently is the
principal concern of the subcommittee. She then
identified four aspects of the issue:

DFFTIVTTTOIVS

Exhibit 4-2
	

Exhibit 4



Co-Risk¦. Risk associated with an individual's
Members Who Attended theTweeting

not

[Terc§:*ants>

responses to environmental cc

v	December:,	

specifically related to toxic exposure, such as, but not

limited to, un^m^ajtji ^tus^selme quality

of diet, ge^tiM^sWM^omicsta¥b

Cumulative ]

Risk: Risk associatedwith multiple
Ms. rameTa Kingfisher	r

pollutants by m^pj^^th^g^s thaljgumulatively

may cause a variety of adverse effects on humans,

plants, or animals or	on ecological

systems anc^jsir^roc^

fcfna

onXVR"nsd

Ms. Rose Marie Augustine, Chair
Mr. Lawrence Dark
Mr. Carlos Porras
Mr. Philip Lewis
Ms. Aretha Brockett, co-DFO

What is known

What is not known

What knowledge must be gathered

Whether the current risk assessment strategy
adequately addresses issues of environmental
justice issues related to the issue.

Ms. Stahl stated that the goal for the subcommittee
meeting was to develop a better understanding of
research on fish consumption, so that the
subcommittee will be able to comment more
knowledgeably on the recommendations currently
before the NEJAC Executive Council or develop new
recommendations that include a "specific bent" on
health and research needs.

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS

This section summarizes the presentations made to
the Health and Research Subcommittee.

3.1 Presentation on the Status of Research

Mr. Patrick West, Emeritus Faculty, Environmental
Sociology, School of Natural Resources and
Environment, University of Michigan, presented an
overview about the status of research on the

4-1

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Health and Research Subcommittee

consumption of fish. Mr. West made three major
points. First, he said, the need for research should
not be a barrier to action. Continuing, Mr. West
stated that there is no area in which perfect research
has been completed; however, he said, there often
has been sufficient data collected to support action.
He stated that strong recommendations related to
point source discharges could be made on the basis
of the results of studies that have identified
consumption limits based on comparative grams per
day (gpd). Strong recommendations for remediation
of point source and non-point source discharges can
be made when human consumption is 60 to 90 gpd,
continued Mr. West. The studies, he said, provide a
scientific basis for taking action related to a sensitive
group when the gpd consumption in that community
is known, even when no specific study of that
community has been performed.

Second, said Mr. West, a concerted effort should be
made to investigate existing research so that the
scientific community can expand its knowledge base.
Information exchange is weak, he noted, especially
in the area of fish consumption; such exchange of
information should be strengthened, he suggested.
Mr. West then noted that a number of useful studies
have been conducted by local communities, but are
unknown to the greater scientific community. He
added that a great deal of information has been
gathered through studies of other subjects that may
be helpful in the area of environmental justice. For
example, he said, a study may have considered race
as a factor, but may not have considered the
amounts offish consumed by race. Such data can
be reassessed for correlations with race without
requiring significant additional effort, Mr. West
pointed out.

Finally, Mr. West identified the issues of co-risk and
cumulative risk as areas in which additional research
is needed. Exhibit 4-2 presents definitions of those
two concepts. Mr. West pinpointed co-risk and
cumulative risk as the most important topics of
discussion. Exposure to toxic contaminants in fish
can pose increased risk when an individual also is
subject to such co-risk factors as the adverse health
effects associated with low-income status, he said.
Therefore, co-risk factors are an essential part of
accurate risk assessment, he declared. On the
other hand, he pointed out, many of the studies that
have evaluated co-risk have attributed poor health
after exposure to contaminants only to co-risk
factors, rather than to the toxicity of the
contaminants. He said that such attribution to co-
risk factors is incorrect. Such findings, he said, are
a means of "getting toxins off the hook" as a cause
of adverse health effects. Such adverse effects, he

concluded, instead are caused by the interaction of
co-risk factors and toxicity.

Mr. Halperthen clarified Mr. West's definition of co-
risk by classifying biological effects in terms of
susceptibility and non-biological effects in terms of
vulnerability. The non-biological effects or
vulnerability would be co-risk factors, he said.
Examples of vulnerability, continued Mr. Halper,
would include asthma in children and effects
associated with religious practices. For example,
Mr. Halper described a scenario under which
increased vulnerability as a result of asthma may
lead to a greater susceptibility to the toxicity of
certain contaminants. Mr. Halper then discussed
religious and cultural practices that require the eating
of fish. The psychological effects associated with
not eating the fish or eating fish that are
contaminated increase the susceptibility of the
individual and the culture to the effects of toxins, said
Mr. Halper. Mr. West then expressed agreement
with Mr. Halper's comments.

Cultural health is a co-risk factor, stated Mr. West.
The study of co-risk factors has led the scientific
community to reconsiderthe definition ofwhat health
is — whether it is only physical or whether it is
cultural, as well. Mr. West described loss of culture
as a loss of individual identity that can lead to a
number of physiological ailments, such as substance
abuse, homicide, and suicide. Such physiological
effects in turn are related directly to human health.

Most of the research available, said Mr. West,
consists of testimonials from affected groups about
such factors as peak exposure and consumption of
all parts of the fish. However, he continued, to
obtain useful information about co-risk factors, he
stated, "systematic qualitative" and "systematic
testimonial" research must be done. The research,
he continued, should meet a number of
requirements. First, it should focus equally on
sensitive groups, ratherthan favoring one group over
another, he explained. Currently, most studies of co-
risk factors focus on Native Americans and ignore
other sensitive groups, he said. For example,
continued Mr. West, African-American fishermen
along the Detroit River who eat large amounts of
contaminated fish for subsistence are one group that
has not been studied. Further, he continued, the
work should not equate low-income populations with
minority populations because many low-income
communities at risk are not minority communities.
He pointed to low-income communities in Minnesota
of which the residents overwhelmingly are white.

Research, said Mr. West, should be conducted in a
manner that fosters partnerships between

4-2

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Health and Research Subcommittee

communities and experts by inviting communities to
complete their own research with the guidance of
experts. Finally, he added, the results should be
presented in a manner that is readily communicable
to the community. Often, he said in conclusion,
members of communities do not understand such
terms as "grams per day," and fish advisories
therefore are ignored.

3.2 Presentation on Risk Assessment and
Methodology

Ms. Tala Henry, EPA National Health and
Environmental Effects Laboratory, made a
presentation that included comments related to Mr.
West's remarks, as well as information about her
work in hazardous waste risk assessment. She
expressed agreement with Mr. West that the lack of
perfect data should not be an impediment to action.
Continuing, she stated that EPA ORD often
encounters that problem when the agency creates
rules and completes risk assessments for pesticide
registrations and hazardous waste sites. The
approach EPA ORD has taken is to quantify risk as
accurately as possible, she said, and to carefully
describe the assumptions made in developing the
results, as well as the uncertainties associated with
those results.

Ms. Henry also stated agreement that co-risk is an
area in which research is needed and that it is a very
intangible area to define. She noted that EPA
currently is working to define cumulative risk more
clearly. That effort, she noted, takes an ecosystem-
based approach that considers both human and
ecological health. Continuing, she discussed
susceptibility and vulnerability, stating that "within
susceptibility lies exposure and effect."

EPA has created default values and methods for risk
assessment; however, there is no definitive rule for
the conduct of assessment, said Ms. Henry. It is
typical and acceptable to adjust default values to
reflect site-specific circumstances, she continued.
She explained that such adjustments typically are
made for sites that affect sensitive groups, such as
members of tribes who consume largerthan average
amounts of fish, Superfund sites, and sites
addressed under the provisions of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). In
addition, she noted, many scenarios use a variety of
values for parameters, thereby increasing the
accuracy of the risk assessment.

Ms. Pamela Kingfisher, Indigenous Women's
Network, asked for clarification of the phrase "move
off the default values," which Ms. Henry had used in
her discussion of adjustments to values used in risk

assessment. Ms. Henry replied that certain
numerical values are considered typical for
parameters in risk assessment equations. Such
values include weight, duration of exposure, and
exposure rates, she continued. Choosing different
values for the parameters that apply to a specific site
or group would constitute "moving off the default,"
she explained.

Participants in the meeting engaged in much
discussion related to Ms. Henry's presentation. Mr.
Wardner G. Penberthy, EPA Chemical Control
Division, commented that, to increase the accuracy
of risk assessment, a broader variety of tissues of
animals used as subsistence foods must be
evaluated. Ms. Henry added that experts should be
aware of new chemicals that may be present and
that may have adverse health effects. Mr. West
suggested that both prevention and remediation of
contamination should be instituted after risk has
been quantified. Ms. Stahl agreed that remediation
is not effective if the source of contamination is not
removed.

The participants conducted much discussion of the
various presentations that had been made. Ms.
Kingfisher pointed out that Hawaiians, people in the
Caribbean, and those inhabitants of other island
groups had been omitted from consideration in
evaluations offish consumption. She recommended
that those groups be included in such efforts. Mr.
Halper recommended that other subsistence food
not eaten by the broader population be included in
risk assessment models. Ms. Kingfisher then stated
that cultural and spiritual aspects had not been
included to the extent desirable in consideration of
the risk assessment issue. To encompass more
cultural aspects, it is necessary to include other
pathways in addition to food when assessing
exposure to sensitive communities, added Mr.
Halper, noting that such pathways might include
religious practices and dermal exposure.

3.3 Presentation on the Toxic Substances
Control Act and EPA's High Production
Volume Challenge Program

Mr. Penberthy presented both an overview of
Section 4 of the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) and information about EPA's High
Production Volume (HPV) Challenge program. He
distributed a handout that described both programs.
Mr. Penberthy stated that TSCA had become
effective on January 1, 1977. The legislation does
not supersede the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air
Act, or Superfund, he added. Its original purpose, he
explained, was to fill gaps in previous legislation.

4-3

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Health and Research Subcommittee

TSCA gives EPA the authority to gather information
about exposures that affect health and safety and to
require testing and control exposures related to
"new" and "existing" industrial chemicals. An

Exhibit 4-3

	

HIGH PRODUCTION VOLUME
CHALLENGE PROGRAM

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program
is a program through which chemical companies
voluntarily provide basic information about the
toxicity of their HPV chemicals. HPV chemicals are
those chemicals that are produced in or imported to
the United States amounts that exceed one million
pounds per year. The program uses the standard tests,
procedures, and formatting of results used in the
Screening Information Data Set (SIDS) program, a
cooperative, international effort to secure basic
toxicity information on HPV chemicals worldwide.

Detailed Information about EPA's HPV Challenge
Program can be found on the Internet at:
, as well as at
.

"existing" chemical is defined as one that is listed on
TSCA's 1977 inventory of chemicals in the United
States market and "new" chemicals as those not
included on that list. Currently, he continued, 74,000
chemicals in use in that market are recorded in the
inventory. Substances that are not covered by
TSCA include pesticides, tobacco, tobacco products,
firearms, ammunition, nuclear materials (source,
special, or byproducts), foods, food additives, drugs,
medical devices, and cosmetics, he continued.

Mr. Penberthy then stated that Section 4 of TSCA
addresses chemical testing. The policy, he
explained, states that adequate data on the health
effects of chemicals is to be the responsibility of
those entities that manufacture and process the
chemicals. To ensure that such responsibility is met,
EPA constructed test rules and negotiated testing
agreements and enforceable consent agreements.
Creation of an enforceable consent agreement is a
great deal cheaper, easier, and less time-consuming
than creating new regulations, he observed.

Four findings must be made about a chemical before
a rule governing it can be developed, Mr. Penberthy
continued. They are: a hazard or "A" finding, an
exposure or "B" finding, a "data adequacy" finding,
and a "testing is necessary" finding. An "A" finding is

made when existing data show that the chemical
presents an unreasonable risk to human health or
the environment and that there is a probability of
exposure, he explained. A "B" finding is made when
a chemical is produced or imported in large
quantities and is released into the environment or
causes significant or substantial human exposure.
A "data adequacy" finding indicates that current data
are inadequate to support the conduct of a risk
assessment. Finally, he said, a "testing is necessary"
finding indicates that testing is required to conduct a
risk assessment.

Ms. Stahl then asked Mr. Penberthy to define the
term "unreasonable risk" as he had used that term.
She also asked how a finding can be made if the
data available are not adequate, especially, she
noted, in the case of an "A" finding. Mr. Penberthy
replied that an "A" finding is the most difficult finding
to make. A "B" finding is much easier to make, he
continued; for such a finding, four items are
necessary. A substantial production or importation
is defined as one million pounds or more per year.
Next, there must be a substantial release of the
chemical that at least 1 million pounds or 10 percent
of the volume, continued Mr. Penberthy. Third,
substantial exposure is defined as exposure of 1,000
workers, 10,000 consumers, or 100,000 members of
the general population. For a "B" finding, the first
item and one of the three other items must be
applicable, he said. Finally, human exposure must
be significant, he added.

Mr. Penberthy then discussed EPA's new voluntary
testing program, the High Production Volume
Challenge program, more commonly known as the
HPV Challenge. The purpose of the HPV Challenge
program is to make available to the public by 2005 a
baseline set of data on health and environmental
effects for approximately 2,800 HPV chemicals. The
program is necessary, said Mr. Penberthy because
there are no publicly available studies on 43 percent
of HPV chemicals in use in the United States.
Further, he added, for seven percent of such
chemicals, there are no full sets of publicly available
studies. Exhibit 4-3 presents information about the
HPV Challenge program.

Data being developed for the effort include
information about solubility in water, vapor pressure,
biodegradation, acute toxicity, toxicity of repeated
doses, genetic toxicity, and reproductive toxicity, said
Mr. Penberthy. Concepts that are stressed under
the program, he continued, include public
involvement in each step of the process and
consideration of animal welfare.

In response to the question of a member of the
audience about whether the program considers the

4-4

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Health and Research Subcommittee

cumulative and synergistic effects of chemicals, Mr.
Penberthy stated that the HPV program provides
information about individual chemicals only.
Continuing, he noted that the program would allow
experts to more accurately identify those chemicals
that require more detailed study to address such
issues as cumulative and synergistic effects.
Mr. Penberthy stated that the testing program had
produced the following results for 470 companies
participating: 120 chemicals covered by test rules; 70
chemicals covered by negotiated testing agreements
and enforceable testing agreements; 400 chemicals
covered by voluntary testing agreements; 2,155
chemicals being secured for basic hazard data by
the HPV Challenge; and 250 chemicals covered by
formal decisions not to test.

In response to a question posed by Ms. Kingfisher,
Mr. Penberthy stated that the health information
about the chemicals studied would be available to
the public through the Internet. Additional methods
of disseminating the information would be created by
each state and could include such methods as fact
sheets, he added.

Mr. Penberthy then stated that companies had
begun to submit plans that set forth their methods
and timetables for obtaining health information about
the chemicals they manufacture and providing that
information to EPA. Those plans will be published
on the Internet and will be made available for public
comment. In addition, EPA will attempt to fill data
gaps left by companies that have not volunteered to
provide information about the chemicals they
produce, he said.

The participants discussed Mr. Penberthy's
presentation at length. All members of the
subcommittee and speakers agreed that it is both
helpful and necessary to have baseline health
information on a broad range of chemicals.
However, there was some debate about how
financially feasible the task of developing such
information might be. Mr. Halper stated that the cost
of analytical testing for chemicals in fish could be
hundreds of thousands of dollars for each chemical.
Such tests would be used to develop parameters for
risk assessment, he noted. Ms. Henry then
suggested that, on the other hand, current
knowledge of chemical fate, lipid content, and
bioaccumulation would allow performance of some
of the analyses mathematically.

Ms. Kingfisher stated that she would find it difficult to
trust chemical companies to do their own reporting,
adding that the program involves a great deal of trust
in the chemical companies on the part of EPA and
that tribal communities are not shown such trust in

the case of work that they have done or are willing to
do. Mr. Penberthy replied that the standard protocol
for assessing basic health data for the chemicals
ensure some safeguard against falsification and
increase accuracy on a technical level. In support of
Mr. Penberthy's position, Mr. Halper added that the
EPA Office of Enforcement investigates, in detail, the
record keeping of the laboratories that perform the
analyses. Problems identified have resulted in
prosecution, added Mr. Halper.

3.4 Presentation on the Structure of the
Subcommittees of the NEJAC

Mr. Jeffrey Morris, EPA ORD, Office of Science
Policy, recommended a change in the structure of
the subcommittees of the NEJAC. He distributed a
handout that outlined the evolution of the Health and
Research Subcommittee and the changes that his
agency was proposing. The handout stated that
EPA ORD and EPA Office of Prevention, Pesticides,
and Toxic Substances (OPPTS) had been providing
financial and administrative support to the NEJAC
since 1993. Recently, it continued, the director of
the Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) had begun
to develop a new vision of the structure and function
of the NEJAC and its subcommittees. OEJ had
asked ORD and OPPTS to discuss changes in the
NEJAC and in the Health and Research
Subcommittee that would enhance their interaction
with EPA and their ability to provide sound advice
and recommendations that are appropriate in light of
EPA's priorities.

Mr. Morris then discussed the outcome of that
discussion. The proposal that was developed, he
continued, is that each subcommittee of the NEJAC
align itself with EPA's goals related to the
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
The purpose of the GPRA is to improve public
confidence in the performance of federal agencies
by holding each agency responsible for achieving the
goals of its programs, he continued. EPA has 10
goals, Mr. Morris explained, stating that they relate
to air, water, safe food, safe communities,
hazardous waste, enforcement, information, sound
science, and effective management.

The NEJAC Air and Water subcommittee addresses
the first two goals, he continued. Health and
research issues related to environmental justice
cross the boundaries among subcommittees, he
said; therefore, specific issues should be handled by
the applicable subcommittee, rather than by a
separate subcommittee Mr. Morris added that the
other eight goals could be considered by the NEJAC
as a whole. He then stated that the Health and
Research Subcommittee should be redefined to

4-5

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Health and Research Subcommittee

address the goal of safe communities and should
work with ORD and OPPTS; those two offices, he
noted, already have focused on that goal as issues
of environmental justice affect it. Other sources of
assistance might include the Interagency Working
Group on Environmental Justice (IWG), EPA's new
Tribal Science Council, and regional science
councils, suggested Mr. Morris. He added that much
of the work on cumulative risk could be based on the
Superfund program.

Ms. Stahl then referred to questions about reworking
the NEJAC that had been raised recently. She
stated that the NEJAC meeting in August 2001 was
an effort on the part of the NEJAC to "save itself."
The NEJAC sought to determine whether the council
was meeting its goals and whether it was worth the
resources devoted to it, she continued. Ms. Stahl
said that only subcommittees, such as the Air and
Water Subcommittee, which address issues related
to media, were producing tangible results. She
stated that the Health and Research Subcommittee
played a supporting role in the NEJAC. The
products the subcommittee produced were valuable
in and of themselves, she observed, but were not
aligned with the strategic goals of the NEJAC. She
then stated her belief that the fate of the
subcommittee should be brought up first by the
Health and Research Subcommittee itself. The
position of ORD and OPPTS should be considered,
said Ms. Stahl, but it should not be the only factor
considered in the evaluation. Mr. Morris responded
that ORD and OPPTS intended the proposal to
facilitate discussion of possible changes in the
NEJAC.

4.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE

Ms. Stahl encouraged public dialogue on topics that
had been discussed by the members of the
subcommittee during its meeting. This section
summarizes dialogue among members of the
subcommittee, speakers, and other individuals. In
addition, two written comments on topics discussed
during the meeting that were submitted by members
of the audience are included in the summary below.

4.1 Mr. Walter Redmon, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency Region 5

Mr. Walter Redmon, EPA Region 5, discussed
contaminants in fish as they are related to his work
on the Great Lakes. He recalled that mercury first
was found in sediments of the Saint Clair River in
1969 and 1970. Before that time, he continued, it
had been assumed that mercury would not
bioaccumulate because it was inert and that it

therefore would not create a problem. Next,
continued Mr. Redmon, DDT was found in the river.
Monitoring of the lakes began at that time, he said,
adding that levels of contaminants were tracked in
lake trout approximately 7 to 8 pounds in size. The
monitoring has continued since 1970 and has
provided a trend line of contaminants in fish that is
more thorough than any other currently available, he
stated.

Mr. Redmon explained that the trend-monitoring
program, which was designed by a statistician,
required the collection of 100 fish, equaling 10 fish
composites. The large sample number allows
sensitivity to small changes in contaminant levels in
fish tissue, he pointed out. The trend line identified
through the monitoring effort has shown that levels
of every pollutant except mercury have declined
dramatically, by more than 90 percent, over the time
frame of the sampling, stated Mr. Redmon.

Mr. Redmon then referred to another study
conducted by EPA in the 1980s under which various
species of fish from throughout the United States
were sampled. The study considered 65
contaminants, one of which was dioxin, which had
not been considered in any prior study, he stated.
Technology had advanced to a point that made it
possible to detect dioxin at the levels being observed
in fish he added. Mr. Redmon then explained that
the results showed approximately the levels of
contaminants predicted, except in the case of
mercury. Mercury was found in areas where it was
not expected to be. Mercury, he declared, is tied to
certain circumstances, such as air pollution, which
are present over a wide range of areas. For several
years, the Great Lakes had been thought to be the
only area where mercury would be found, he
continued, because that region was the only one for
which data were available. However, elevated levels
of mercury were identified in other regions, as well,
although those regions had not been evaluated
previously, said Mr. Redmon. Therefore, he stated
in conclusion, it is not appropriate to assume that
there are no elevated levels of contaminants in a
certain area simply because that area has not been
evaluated.

Currently, Mr. Redmon continued, there is a new
study on contaminants in fish tissue that also is
statistically designed and that uses randomly
selected sampling sites. The list of contaminants
being considered has been expanded further to
include previously unevaluated chemicals, such as
new pesticides. The Great Lakes was excluded
from the study because there is a great deal of
sample data on that region, he noted. Mr. Redmon
then stated that he expects to find the same

4-6

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Health and Research Subcommittee

contaminants that were found in the previous Great
Lakes study because he has found conditions to be
similarthroughoutthe country, except in areas in the
immediate vicinity of sources.

Mr. Redmon then described another study
conducted by EPA Region 5 from 1970 through
1980. That study, he explained, had evaluated
streams as a collection system for contaminants.
The study analyzed whole fish collected at 80 to 90
sites in the five-state region that were in the
downstream sections of larger basins. The agency
conducted scans of the contaminants present in the
fish, reported Mr. Redmon, adding that the results of
the study had been published in 1980.

4.2	Ms. Heather Halsey, State of California
Governor's Office of Planning and Research

Ms. Heather Halsey, State of California Governor's
Office of Planning and Research, first commented
on Mr. Penberthy's presentation. She clarified the
difference between rules and statutes, stating that
the NEJAC can make recommendations to EPA
about rulemaking, but that only Congress can enact
statutes. Ms. Halsey refuted the notion that EPA
merely implement statutes enacted by Congress.
She referred to the first slide Mr. Penberthy's
presentation that read TSCA "gives EPA broad
authority to gather information on health/safety and
exposure for, require testing of, and control exposure
to 'new' and 'existing' industrial chemicals." That
statement, said Ms. Halsey, seems to suggest that
EPA has the authority to create its own rules in
fulfilling its purpose. Turning to the subject of
parameters for risk assessment, Ms. Halsey stated
that it is important to include small numbers as
significant. For example, she explained, there may
be a tribe that has only a small number of members;
however, if each of the members is experiencing
adverse effects caused by contaminants in fish, that
fact should be considered significant.

4.3	Written Comment Submitted by Ms. Kendra
Zamzow, Alaska Community Action on
Toxics

Ms. Kendra Zamzow, Alaska Community Action on
Toxics, submitted written comments on several
issues discussed by the members of the
subcommittee. Discussing the issue of risk
assessment, Ms. Zamzow suggested that analysis of
risk to fetuses, infants, and pregnant women, rather
than determination of site-specific or culture-specific
risk would be more cost effective and useful. She
noted that such an approach would cross cultural
and national boundaries and address all groups. In

addition, she stated, action would be taken more
quickly if policymakers were to consider risk that
affects their children. In her statement, Ms. Zamzow
recommended that the subcommittee and the
NEJAC address biomagnification. In many Alaskan
communities, she wrote, "a fish is eaten by a seal,
which is eaten by a walrus, which is eaten by a
human." Therefore, she concluded, a level of a
contaminant that is safe in a fish may be unsafe level
once it has biomagnified through the food chain and
eaten by a human.

Turning to the topic of research, Ms. Zamzow's
statement expressed her belief that the conduct of
research on previously completed studies would be
productive. In addition, she suggested, literature
from other countries, such as Canada and European
nations, should be researched, as well. Ms. Zamzow
cited the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program
as a good resource for information about bio-
accumulative and persistent organic chemicals.

Ms. Zamzow also endorsed the fostering of
partnerships between tribes and scientists. She
mentioned in particular Mr. Ron Serudato of the
State University of New York. She stated that Mr.
Serudato had worked successfully with the Mohawk
Nation to resolve issues related to water quality. He
currently is working with the Village of Savoonga and
Alaska Community Action on Toxics to raise issues
of environmental justice related to contamination at
an abandoned military site, she wrote. The Alaska
Sea Otter and Sea Lion Commission is working with
a research group from the University of Alaska to
provide Alaskan communities the knowledge
necessary to conduct a broad range of monitoring,
she continued. Ms. Zamzow suggested that local
listening groups could serve as links with local
communities and scientists to bring
recommendations to EPA.

In her written statement, Ms. Zamzow then
questioned why companies still are permitted to
manufacture chlorinated hydrocarbons. She wrote
that it is "insane" to allow the chemical industry to be
responsible for its own research.

4.4 Written Comment Submitted by Mr. Wilbur
Slockish, Jr., Columbia River Education and
Economic Development

Ms. Zamzow presented the written comments of Mr.
Wilbur Slockish, Jr., Columbia River Education and
Economic Development, related to the activities of
the Health and Research Subcommittee. In his
statement, Mr. Slockish stated his belief that the
scientific method of risk assessment is wrong; he

4-7

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Health and Research Subcommittee

expressed his objection to the inclusion of his culture
in risk assessment. Risk assessment is based
substantially on the physiology and physical
characteristics of white populations, he wrote. Mr.
Slockish stated that the physiology of his people
differs from that of white people; his people therefore
interact with chemicals in ways that differs from the
way in which white people interact with such
substances, he wrote. In his statement, he pointed
out as illustration that it was highly probable that
several of the white men present in the
subcommittee meeting were bald or balding, but that
no man in his tribe had ever lost his hair.
Continuing, Mr. Slockish expressed in his statement
his belief that the NEJAC and EPA had not dealt
appropriately with the problem of risks posed by the
consumption offish. He stated that EPA should stop
the release of chemicals into the environment, rather
than determine what levels of chemicals are safe.
He then stated that such an approach to
contamination could be accomplished only through
a change in mind set and in the consumer lifestyle of
the American culture.

5.0 ACTION ITEMS

This section summarizes the action items adopted
by the subcommittee. Those action items are:

Request that EPA OPPTS identify HPV
chemicals that are potentially toxic and that can
enter into the aquatic environment. Further,
request that EPA OW work with OPPTS to
identify a higher level of testing for HPV
chemicals in fish. Request that additional
testing and rulemaking be expedited when a
pathway is identified.

Request collaboration between and among
federal agencies in sharing data about
contaminant levels identified in fish and other
aquatic resources. EPA should determine
whether the Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice should be assigned
responsibility for the issue.

4-8

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
MEETING SUMMARY

of the

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE

of the

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

December 5, 2001
Seattle, Washington

Meeting Summary Accepted By:

- X

t,	' tUA'V ¦



Daniel Gogal

Designated Federal Official

Jana Walker
Vice Chair


-------
CHAPTER FIVE
MEETING
OF THE

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee of the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) conducted a one-day meeting on
Wednesday, December 5, 2000, during a four-day
meeting of the NEJAC in Seattle, Washington. In the
absence of Ms. Jennifer Hill-Kelly, (Oneida
Environmental Health & Safety Department, Ms.
Jana Walker, attorney at law, holding the position of
vice chair of the subcommittee, served as acting
chair during the meeting. Mr. Daniel Gogal, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of
Environmental Justice (OEJ), serves as the
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the
subcommittee. Exhibit 5-1 presents a list of the
members who attended the meeting and identifies
the member who was unable to attend.

This chapter, which provides a summary of the
deliberations of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, is organized in six sections, including
this Introduction. Section 2.0, Remarks, summarizes
the opening remarks of the acting chair and the
DFO, as well as any administrative remarks made
throughout the meeting. Section 3.0, Presentations
and Reports, presents an overview of each
presentation and report received by the
subcommittee during its meeting, as well as a
summary of questions asked and comments offered
by the members of the subcommittee. Section 4,
Activities of the Subcommittee, summarizes the
discussions of the members of the subcommittee
about the activities of the subcommittee, including
their discussion of the NEJAC's Pre-Meeting
Discussion Draft of the Fish Consumption Report
(fish consumption report) and the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee Strategic Plan for 2001 -
2003. Section 5.0, Other Concerns of the
Subcommittee, summarizes the members'
deliberations related to four issues relevant to
indigenous communities.

2.0 REMARKS

As acting chair of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, Ms. Walker opened the meeting by
welcoming the members present and Mr. Gogal, the
DFO. Ms. Walker explained that she was serving as
the acting chair of the subcommittee, replacing Ms.
Hill-Kelly who was unable to attend.

Mr. Gogal stated that the participants in the meeting
represented a "most diverse group of people." He
added that, although the meeting was conducted for

Exhibit 5-1

	

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE

Members Who Attended the Meeting
December 5, 2001

Ms. Jana Walker, Vice Chair
Mr. Daniel Gogal, DFO
Mr. Bob Smith, Alternate DFO

Ms. Anna Frazier
Ms. Coleen Poler
Mr. Moses Squeochs
Mr. DeanB. Suagee

Members
Who Were Unable To Attend

Ms. Jennifer Hill-Kelly, Chair
Ms. Barbara Warner

the members of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, the comments of observers would be
welcome during the dialogue session scheduled for
that afternoon.

Mr. Gogal requested that Mr. Moses Squeochs,
Yakama Nation Environmental Program,
Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama
Nation and member of the subcommittee, lead the
subcommittee in an invocation "in the manner of his
people." Mr. Squeochs first led the invocation in the
form of a song-prayer and then interpreted the
meaning of the song for those present.

In his interpretation, Mr. Squeochs stated that the
song of invocation spoke of Mother Earth and the
connection between the environment and every
person on Earth. The song, he continued, is one
way in which tribal elders teach Native peoples to
always respect Mother Earth; making such an
invocation appropriate for beginning a meeting of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee, he concluded.

During lunch, the members of the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee watched the documentary
film "In the Light of Reverence." Mr. Dean B.
Suagee, Vermont Law School First Nations
Environmental Law Program and member of the
subcommittee, briefly introduced the film, stating that
indigenous people around the world face many
challenges as they work to preserve their sacred
places. The need for such preservation was the
motivation offilmmakerTobyMacleod, he explained,

5-1

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

adding that the film tells stories from three tribes, the
Lakota, the Hopi, and the Wintu. The stories
describe the struggles of the three tribes to preserve
what remains of their sacred places. The film, Mr.
Suagee continued, explores the relationship of
American culture to nature in three places
considered sacred by native peoples.

After the participants viewed the film, Ms. Walker
stepped down as acting chair because she had been
taken ill. Mr. Don Aragon, Wind River Environmental
Quality Commission, served as acting chair for the
remainder of the meeting.

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS

This section summarizes the presentations made
and reports submitted to the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee.

3.1 Klamath River Inter-Tribal Fish and Water
Commission

Mr. Merv George, Administrator, Klamath River Inter-
Tribal Fish and Water Commission and member of
the Hupa Tribe, first provided information about the
history of the commission on which he serves. The
commission was founded in 1995, he explained, and
has focused on a number of issues related to water
quality. Mr. George stated that four tribes living in
northern California make upthe current membership
of the commission. Continuing, he explained thatthe
tribes and the state government have developed a
cooperative working relationship, and that the
majority of the tribes reside on tribal reservations.

The five issues of greatest importance to the
membertribes ofthe commission, he continued, are:

Habitat restoration, particularly in the case ofthe
salmon population

Hydroelectric dams and their effects on the
salmon population

Agricultural issues related to water quality

Economic issues and the balancing of economic
needs with environmental rights

Maintenance of tribal sovereignty

Turning to the issue of hydroelectric dams, Mr.
George explained that the salmon population on
which the Hupa and Yura tribes subsist can not
reach pristine habitat because their paths are
blocked by hydroelectric dams. Mr. George then

stressed that the Hupa and Yura tribes constantly
must balance environmental and economic issues
when developing standards for water quality. He
stated that a "political jujitsu" forces tribes to struggle
to maintain their cultural practices, while at the same
time incorporating modern politics and economics
into their lifestyles.

In conclusion, Mr. George presented his
recommendations to the subcommittee. First, he
suggested that the subcommittee urge EPA to
provide resources to the tribes so that the tribes will
be able to conduct studies (such as testing of tissue
samples). He also recommended that the
subcommittee add language to the NEJAC fish
consumption report that recognizes the importance
and necessity of subsistence living to indigenous
peoples. "Fish are not less important than the blood
that flows through our veins," he stated. He also
added that he would submit formal written testimony
to the subcommittee and the NEJAC by the January
31,2002 deadline that had been established for such
submittals.

Mr. Suagee expressed interest in obtaining written
comments on disruptions in water flow and their
effects on the lifestyles of the Hupa and Yura
peoples.

3.2 Presentation on Survey of Fish Consumption
by Tulalip Tribes

Ms. Gillian Mittelsteadt, environmental policy analyst,
Tulalip Tribes Natural Resource Program, and Mr.
Daryl Williams, Tulalip Tribes Natural Resource
Program, presented the results of a study of
consumption offish among members ofthe Tulalip
tribe. Ms. Mittelsteadt described the statistical
framework of the study, as well as the benefits it
produced and lessons learned. The study took place
in 1993 and 1994, she explained, and was a non-
random survey ofthe two Tulalip tribes that reside in
the Puget Sound area. The survey, she added, was
a joint effort of EPA Region 10 and U.S. Ecology
Inc., the objective of which was to quantify the rates
and patterns offish consumption ofthe members of
the two tribes. The study analyzed the rates of
consumption of both shellfish and finish and reported
a median consumption rate of 58 grams per day
(gpd), she explained. That rate, Ms. Mittelsteadt
pointed out, is 10 times the national average that has
been documented by EPA.

Ms. Mittelsteadt then stated that, although the survey
served as a catalyst for follow-up studies, much
remains to be accomplished. One benefit of the
study, she said, was that the state of Washington

5-2

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

now has modified its human health standard to a
value higherthan the median value identified through
the survey. Ms. Mittelsteadt then described some
lessons her team learned by conducting the survey.
She stressed the importance of educating the Tulalip
tribal communities about issues of environmental
justice.

Mr. Williams first added a footnote to Ms.
Mittelsteadt's presentation, reporting that male
members of the tribes surveyed consumed more fish
than the female population. He also stated that,
because the Tulalip tribes do not have off-
reservation fishing rights, they must fish areas in
which the highest levels of contamination are
present. Mr. Williams then discussed problems
caused by pollution credit programs and the negative
effects such programs have on native tribal
communities. After describing a pollution credit
program designed to promote the trading of such
credits, he stated that such programs provide those
groups that can afford to buy pollution credits the
"right to pollute." However, he continued, tribes that
reside along the Puget Sound are limited in what
they can discharge because they do not have the
resources to purchase pollution credits.
Consequently, he explained, the tribes have no
impact on the other sources of pollution that affect
their local fish populations.

Mr. Williams expressed concern that the NEJAC fish
consumption report recommends that tribal
communities alter their diets to incorporate non-
traditional food sources. He explained that it is not
healthy for tribal communities to do so. The Tulalip
survey supported his position, he added, by
identifying increased rates of cancer and diabetes
among members of the two tribes who had altered
their diets in response to fish advisories.

Continuing, Mr. Williams suggested additional
revisions of the NEJAC fish consumption report.
First, he stated that the two Tulalip tribes have
adopted their own water quality standards; however,
EPA had not approved those standards. However,
the tribes continue to enforce the standards
themselves, he added. Mr. Williams then urged that
the subcommittee recommend that the NEJAC
request that EPA approve the water quality
standards of both tribes.

In response to the suggestions offered by Mr.
Williams, Mr. Aragon stated that EPA had made
some progress in recognizing tribal water quality
standards. He then stated that tribal water quality
standards must be as stringent as federal standards,
or more so; tribes therefore encounter economic

difficulties when they attempt to enforce and
maintain the standards they have implemented, he
said. Mr. Squeochs asked Mr. Williams whether the
two tribes had developed their water quality
standards independently of one another. Mr.
Williams responded that the Tulalip tribes had
received funding from EPA to develop the standards
together, noting again that the standards have not
been approved by the Agency.

Continuing, Mr. Aragon asked Mr. Williams whether
the activities of the U.S. Navy have had adverse
effects on the Tulalip tribes. Mr. Williams answered
that the tribes are not affected directly, noting that
the Navy base located near the tribal communities
actually is "a good neighbor" to those communities.

Ms. Anna Frazier, DINE' CARE, asked Mr. Williams
whether the Tulalip tribes are recognized by the
federal government. Mr. Williams responded that
several tribes banded together to form the federally
recognized Tulalip Tribes, which has 3,200
members.

3.3 Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous
Environmental Network

Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental
Network and former chair of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee, presented his recommendations for
improving the NEJAC fish consumption report. He
urged that the subcommittee:

Promote outreach to tribal communities to
communicate information about the
responsibilities and activities of the NEJAC

Include in the fish consumption report the
negative effects of radioactive contaminants on
native habitats

Focus attention not on traditional risk
assessment but on precautionary actions

Mr. Goldtooth then distributed packets of handouts,
including "Environmental Injustice in the Great Lakes
Water Quality Agreement," "Preventing Mercury
Contamination for Native Peoples of the Great
Lakes," and a pamphlet that provided background
information about the Indigenous Environmental
Network.

Mr. Goldtooth then summarized the written testimony
he had read during the public comment period held
on the previous evening. It is essential, he said to
analyze the effects of all toxics and chemicals when
applying a risk assessment model to the issues of

5-3

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

environmental justice that affect indigenous people.
Mr. Goldtooth also urged that the subcommittee
adopt a focus on precautionary actions, rather than
the traditional risk assessment approach. See
Section 3.11 of Chapter Two of this report for a
summary of that statement.

Mr. Goldtooth then submitted another document,
"Tracking Dioxins," and summarized the principal
points set forth in it. The document, said Mr.
Goldtooth, describes a groundbreaking study
performed by the North American Commission for
Environmental Cooperation (NACEC) that linked
dioxins accumulating in the new polar territory of
Nunavut to source regions thousands of kilometers
away. Mr. Goldtooth also stated that the scientists
who conducted the study used a model to track
"puffs" of dioxin-containing air pollution released at
various locations in North America and deposited in
eight regions in the polar territory of Nunavut.

Finally, Mr. Goldtooth suggested two objectives for
the consideration of the subcommittee. First, he
urged that the subcommittee develop a guide for
environmental justice, noting as well that it is
important to reach out to tribal leaders. Second, Mr.
Goldtooth recommended that the subcommittee
review the precautionary principle approach to risk
assessment and recommend the NEJAC urge EPA
to consider using such an approach. In conjunction
with that second recommendation, he added the
subcommittee should promote active outreach
related to its document "Guide on Consultation and
Collaboration with Indian Tribal Governments and
the Public Participation of Indigenous Groups and
Tribal Members in Environmental Decision Making."

Mr. Aragon then expressed agreement with the
recommendations that Mr. Goldtooth had offered,
citing a need for more studies that perform risk
assessment, rather than needs assessment.
Continuing, he stated that there is a need to analyze
the long-term effects of persistent pollutants
throughout the world because such contamination
crosses national as well as international boundaries.

3.4 Presentations by Members of the Alaskan
Native Community

Representatives of the Alaskan Native community
presented their concerns and recommendations to
the subcommittee.

Ms. Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, Inupiat Community of
Arctic Slope and native of the Village of
Nuiqsut, Alaska, expressed her concerns about and
recommendations for improving the representation of

Alaskan Natives on the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee. She also urged that, in the NEJAC
fish consumption report, the subcommittee address
Alaskan tribal land, such as Prudhoe Bay, where
residents rely on fishing and whaling for subsistence.
See sections 2.4 and 3.9 of Chapter Two of this
report for a summary of her comments during the
public comment period.

After Ms. Ahtuangaruak's presentation, Ms. June
Martin, Alaska Community Action on Toxics,
presented a story about a health aide in her village
who had spoken out on behalf of the tribal
community and had been awarded a grant from the
National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences
(NIEHS) to support a survey of the health problems
of members of the tribe. Ms. Martin then discussed
the failure of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) to take action to clean up the military
facility located near her village. She urged that the
subcommittee assist Alaskan Native communities to
hold the federal government accountable for
contamination left by military actions. See section
3.20 of Chapter Two of this report for a summary of
her comments during the public comment period.

Ms. Pam Miller, Alaska Community Action on Toxics,
expressed her concern about the health of Alaskan
Native tribal communities residing on or near
abandoned U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) sites.
She reported that there are five military Superfund
sites and approximately 700 formerly used defense
sites (FUDS) in Alaska. She added that many of the
sites are contaminated with polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB) and dioxins, in addition to solvents,
fuels, radioactive waste, and chemical munitions.
Historically, continued Ms. Miller, DoD has preferred
remedies such as institutional controls, landfills, and
natural attenuation, which, she declared, are not
adequate to protect the health of the Alaskan Native
people. The native people who reside near the DoD
sites are deeply concerned about health problems
that could be linked to chemical exposures, including
cancer, diabetes, miscarriages, and low birth weight
in babies, she said.

Ms. Miller insisted that federal agencies, especially
EPA, must hold DoD accountable for the cleanup of
hazardous waste sites in Alaska, including FUDS.
Additional sites merit inclusion on the National
Priorities List, she added. She then discussed tribal
concerns about persistent organic pollutants (POP),
such as dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT),
toxaphene, mirex, and lindane, which originate
thousands of miles south of Alaska, travel northward,
and accumulate over northern Alaska.
Contaminants from the long-range transport of POPs

5-4

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

and military sites in Alaska pose a serious threat to
the health of people who rely on traditional diets of
fish and marine mammals, she stated.

In addition, Ms. Miller reported that the method of
risk assessment EPA uses fails to consider major
pathways of exposure, including pharmaceutical
uses, residues in food from previous uses of lindane,
breast milk, and residues in water. Ms. Miller stated
that the signing in May 2001 of the international
treaty on POPs, known as the Stockholm
Convention, was an important first step toward the
long-term protection of the health of all people. Ms.
Miller requested that the subcommittee and the
NEJAC take a leadership role in advising the United
States Senate to ratify the Stockholm Convention.

3.5 Dr. Roseanne Lorenzana, EPA Region 10

Dr. Roseanne Lorenzana, EPA Region 10,
presented a list of five specific recommendations to
be made to EPA, which she suggested the
subcommittee consider: (1) study and document the
tribal health effects on tribes of mixtures of
contaminants in fish and shellfish; (2) develop
cumulative risk guidelines that are appropriate to the
needs of tribes; (3) complete EPA's assessment of
non-cancer health effects of PCBs and characterize
the health risks posed by methyl mercury at
exposure levels higher than the EPA references
dose (RfD); (4) allow informed decision-making
about contaminants in fish and shellfish in the
categories of comparative dietary risk, benefits data,
and peer review comments; and (5) use
understandable language in discussions of mixtures
and cumulative risk. Dr. Lorenzana, who serves as
science liaison between EPA Region 10 and the
EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD),
also recommended that the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee provide enhanced support for
meaningful participation in EPA's Tribal Science
Council.

Dr. Lorenzana also presented the report
"Comparative Dietary Risks: Balancing the Risks and
Benefits of Fish Consumption," for which a risk
assessment model was used to define the conditions
under which consumption offish is a healthy choice.
She urged the subcommittee to advise EPA to work
with tribes to develop cumulative risk guidelines that
are appropriate to the needs of the tribes. In
conclusion, Dr. Lorenzana recommended that the
subcommittee advise EPA to specifically identify
adequate and ongoing research funds to address
tribal issues related to subsistence, including risk to
children, and provide an annual report on the
agency's efforts.

3.6 Presentations by Other Tribal
Representatives

After the presentations by those individuals who had
been scheduled to appear, the floor was opened to
presentations by members of the audience.

Ms. Cheryl Steele, Elem Indian Colony, stated that
fish advisories do not sufficiently address issues
related to the consumption of fish. She urged that
EPA provide more guidance to indigenous peoples
and that EPA work with the people to eliminate
sources of contamination, especially contamination
from mercury mine tailings. See section 3.17 of
Chapter Two of this report for a summary of her
comments during the public comment period.

Mr. Kevin McKernan, Yurok Tribe, offered specific
recommendations for improving the NEJAC fish
consumption report. He suggested that EPA
acknowledge those tribes that have adopted their
own water quality standards. Specifically, he said,
the report should be expanded to include discussion
of: (1) the number of tribes that had developed their
own water quality standards; (2) how many tribes
have standards that are pending approval; and (3)
why so few tribes have done so. In addition, Mr.
McKernan recommended that Chapter 4 of that
report include a discussion of the resources available
to tribes for use in establishing approved water
quality standards.

Mr. McKernan added that the use of core standards
might direct resources away from tribes that have
their own water quality standards. He suggested the
subcommittee add the following text to chapters 2
and 4 of the fish consumption report:

"NEJAC strongly urges the EPA
administrator to make tribal water quality
standards a priority. This recommendation
is consistent with and embraces EPA's
Indian Policy."

Mr. McKernan also stated that EPA, by limiting the
amounts of fish that the tribal members may
consume, the agency is reducing the rate of
consumption and having a direct suppression effect
on the diets and subsequently the subsistent
lifestyles of tribal communities. Mr. McKernan urged
that the subcommittee add to Chapter 4 of the report
text that describes the issues related to the effect of
suppression and discusses the effects related to
statutory limitations. Finally, Mr. McKernan
emphasized the importance of addressing the quality
and quantity of fish when conducting scientific
surveys because the quality of the fish, he pointed

5-5

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

out, has direct implications for tribal consumption
rates. EPA also should address quantity and quality
of fish in the review of permits and National
Environmental Policy Act documents that assess fish
populations for contamination from non-point
sources.

After Mr. McKernan's presentation, Mr. Bill Doyle,
Sierra Club, discussed the adverse effect the dams
along the lower Snake River in southeastern
Washington are having on the salmon populations.
Mr. Doyle stated that several dams along the river
are not in compliance with federal clean water
standards; the conditions such dams cause are fatal
to salmon populations. USACE is responsible forthe
cleanup of many of the sites and bringing them into
compliance, he added, but no action had yet been
taken, he pointed out. Mr. Doyle stated that the
situation is another example of a federal agency that
is out of compliance and that has a negative effect
on the tribes in the Columbia River basin area.

Ms. Augusta Rozema, Swinomish Tribe, stated that
the subcommittee and the NEJAC must "spread the
word" about future meetings ofthe NEJAC. She also
offered specific comments to the NEJAC fish
consumption report and encouraged the
subcommittee to make specific changes in the
language ofthe report that, she suggested, would
clarify the definition ofthe word "fish" to include both
fin- and shell fish. Ms. Rozema urged the
subcommittee to use numbers from the 2000 census
in Chapter 4, rather than the 1990 census numbers
that the report currently contains.

4.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE

This section discusses the activities of the
subcommittee, which included discussion of the
NEJAC's Pre-Meeting Discussion Draft ofthe Fish
Consumption Report and the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee Strategic Plan for 2001 - 2003.

4.1 Discussion of the Pre-Meeting Discussion
Draft Fish Consumption Report

Ms. Coleen Poler, Mole Lake Sokoagon Defense
Committee, began the discussion by providing an
overview ofthe ofthe draft fish consumption report.
Ms. Poler highlighted several recommendations
made by the NEJAC during the first two days of
Executive Council sessions, specifically the
recommendations that more emphasis be placed on
prevention, enforcement, and protection and that the
NEJAC as well as its subcommittees, promote more
participation on the part ofthe EPA regional offices.
Ms. Poler added other recommendations, such as

adding bioaccumulation to the risk assessment
portion of the report and ensuring that every
indigenous community is represented equally in the
report. Exhibit 5-2 summarizes the
recommendations ofthe subcommittee for revising
the NEJAC draft fish consumption report.
Ms. Walker added two more recommendations that
had been addressed by the NEJAC to be referred to
EPA for consideration. The NEJAC, she said, had
recommended that the draft fish consumption report
include discussion of the suppression and peak
effects on members of indigenous communities. She
explained that peak effects occur when tribes suffer
more severe effects than other populations from
contaminated water because they consume peak
amounts offish during short periods of time, rather
than an average amount of fish consistently
throughout the year. The fish consumption work
group will address all the recommendations made by
the NEJAC, as well as the information provided
during the public comment period, she added.

Continuing, Ms. Walker stated that the way
subsistence activities are viewed and how they
should be valued need to be addressed adequately
in the fish consumption report. She asked that the
subcommittee add more insight into those issues
and submit recommendations to the NEJAC.
Particularly in Chapter 4, she said, the concept of
subsistence living should be examined more
thoroughly, she explained.

Ms. Poler then stated that the text in the draft fish
consumption report also should include all
indigenous people around the world, including
Alaskan, Hawaiian, and Caribbean natives, as well
as low-income people and people of color. Ms. Poler
expressed concern about the time scale over which
such changes will take place. She stated that,
because she comes from a grassroots background,
she is not content to wait for action to take place.
She stated that she rather would see concrete
modifications of the document. She urged that the
subcommittee continue to search for a mechanism
that would increase local involvement and provide
recommendations to the NEJAC.

Ms. Ahtuangaruak then recommended that the
issues related to Alaskan tribal land, such as the
Village of Oltiklik near Prudhoe Bay where the
people subsist on fishing and whaling, be
incorporated into Chapter 4 ofthe fish consumption
report. Ms. Martin expanded on Ms. Ahtuangaruak's
point by recommending that the text ofthe chapter
discuss the role of non-profit organizations and
clarify that all Alaskan Native peoples do not reside
on reservations. Therefore, she said, it is not

5-6

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

relevant to distinguish between "on- and off-"
reservation. Ms. Ahtuangaruakthen stated that EPA
should consult with the tribes at an early stage,
rather than after contamination has become a
problem. She added that, although there is a
recommendation for tribal consultation in the report,
there must be stronger language in the report that
supports enforcement of that recommendation.

Mr. Enoch Shiedt, Subsistence Coordinator, Maniilaq
Association, explained that the native people of
Alaska are nomadic and therefore move to locations
at which food is available. Consequently, he
continued, there are few boundaries between tribes
when there is no concept of "on- and off-"
reservation.

Mr. Francis Chin, environmental justice coordinator,
Maniilaq Association, then emphasized the
importance of a subsistence lifestyle to Alaskan
Native communities. In the opinion of an Alaskan
Native, he pointed out, fishing is not just a method of
obtaining food, but is rather a spiritual experience.
Continuing, Mr. Chin stated that, in the Indian
community, the unemployment rate is 90 to 95
percent. Therefore, he said, a subsistence lifestyle is
essential for survival and cannot be compromised.

Concluding the discussion, Mr. Art C. Ivanoff, Native
Village of Unalakleet, expressed his concern about
the effects of climate change on the health of
Alaskan natives. He requested that the fish
consumption report include climate change as a
factor that affects the quality offish. Climate change
has depleted the running stock of salmon, he said,
adding that the migration patterns of salmon and
other animals used for food have not been
sufficiently studied.

Ms. Poler also suggested that a list of points of
contact for Alaskan Native organizations, as well as
grassroots organizations, be included in Appendix A
to the fish consumption report.

4.2 Discussion of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee Strategic Plan

The members of the subcommittee reviewed the
seven objectives outlined in the subcommittee's
strategic plan for 2001 through 2003. Mr. Suagee
reviewed the objectives and provided insight on
several necessary changes. Objective one, Mr.
Suagee stated, has been completed for the most
part, and objective two will be completed in the
coming year when the next NEJAC meeting takes
place. He added that the subcommittee was
meeting its schedule for completing the next five

objectives, with minor modifications to be made.
Specifically, he stated that Mr. Goldtooth's
recommendations should be made available to the
members of the subcommittee and added to the text
of objective five. Mr. Suagee also stated that the
subcommittee must give more attention to objective
seven and that the subcommittee must work on
institutionalizing its role as an advisory body to EPA.

Ms. Poler then offered her recommendations for
changing the strategic plan. She first reminded the
members of the subcommittee that the needs of
Alaskan Native people must be considered an
objective of the subcommittee in the upcoming year.

Concluding the discussion, Mr. Aragon
recommended that the subcommittee add another
objective to the strategic plan that would address his
concern that the Indian community is "getting too
fragmented." The objective, he stated, would be to
advise EPA to provide funds to the Office of
Environmental Information (OEI) to support a
network through which tribes could share data.

5.0 OTHER CONCERNS OF THE
SUBCOMMITTEE

This section summarizes the members' deliberations
related to four issues relevant to indigenous
communities: the precautionary principle, regulatory
enforcement, the representation of Alaskan Natives
on the subcommittee, and tribal sovereignty.

5.1	Precautionary Principle

Mr. Squeochs expressed his interest in learning
more about the precautionary principle discussed by
Mr. Goldtooth during the public comment period. Mr.
Squeochs stated that he would like the
subcommittee to obtain more information from Mr.
Goldtooth and present any recommendations about
the principle to the NEJAC. In response, Mr. Suagee
stated that the precautionary principle is a basic idea
in the study of ecology; "if there is not enough
information, don't upset the system," he said. If EPA
errs, he continued, the Agency should err on the side
of protection. The precautionary method of risk
assessment embodies such an approach, he pointed
out.

5.2	Regulatory Enforcement

Ms. Frazier expressed her concern about the
enforcement of EPA regulations. It seems, she said,
that the only way for a grassroots organization to be
heard is through a lawsuit, adding that the politics
involved might block progress in many situations.

5-7

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

Ms. Frazier then expressed her concern that,
although the purpose of the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee is to advise the EPA, she is frustrated
at the lack of action taking place and believes that
the subcommittee should help "put more teeth" into
its recommendations and provide more support to
organizations at the grassroots level.

Mr. Aragon then commented on the public comment
period that took place on the previous evening; he
asked to hear more from Alaskan Native
communities in the future. He added that he had
been troubled to hear that, in some cases, federal
agencies are the perpetrators that contaminate the
water on which such communities depend for
subsistence. The fish consumption work group, he
said, should analyze the actions of federal agencies
in the local area and address issues related to their
presence, such as leaking underground storage
tanks and lead paint, he stated. Mr. Aragon then
stated his concern about contamination left behind
by military activities in northern Alaska and
expressed his desire that affected communities in
Alaska develop remedies for such problems, or be
provided the opportunity to identify such remedies.

5.3	Representation of Alaskan Native Peoples on
the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

In response to the concern expressed by
representatives of Alaskan Native peoples that such
peoples are not represented on the Indigenous
Peoples Subcommittee, Mr. Squeochs stated that
such an individual had held a seat on the
subcommittee and that the subcommittee currently
was searching for new representation of Alaskan
Native communities. Mr. Squeochs added thattribes
should be included regularly in the deliberative
process and that the subcommittee should change
its role from that of "consultation" to that of
"collaboration," a role that would include deliberative
dialogue and improvement of communication
between the NEJAC and indigenous communities.

5.4	Tribal Sovereignty

Mr. Aragon stated that the government must clarify
the distinction between on-and off-reservation fishing
rights and must determine to what degree tribes
have authority over individuals who are not members
of the tribe but who live on the reservation. Mr.
Suagee cited Atkinson v Shirley and Nevada v
Hicks, two Supreme Court cases decided in May and
June 2001 that had resulted in rulings in which
Indian tribes asserted their inherent sovereignty. In
both cases, he explained, the Supreme Court had
applied the "general proposition" that the Court had

announced in 1981 in Montana v United States -
that "the inherent sovereign powers of an Indian tribe
do not extend to the activities of nonmembers of the
tribe." The Court's decision in Montana has been
criticized heavily because it marked a profound
departure from the established principles of federal
Indian law. In fact, said Mr. Suagee, the Court had
to acknowledge that there were a number of cases
upholding inherent tribal sovereignty over non-
Indians, and so the Court said that there are two
exceptions to the "general proposition:"

"A tribe may regulate, through taxation, licensing
... the activities of nonmembers who enter into
consensual relationships with the tribe,"
"A tribe may also retain inherent power to
exercise civil authority over conduct of non-
Indians on fee lands within its reservation when
that conduct threatens ... the political integrity,
the economic security, or the health or welfare of
the tribe."

Mr. Suagee stated that in the two cases decided in
May and June 2001, the Supreme Court has once
again changed the rules and has made it that much
harder for tribal governments to regulate the
activities of nonmembers residing on the reservation.

5-8

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section	Page

CHAPTER FIVE MEETING OF THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SUBCOMMITTEE	 5-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION	 5-1

2.0 REMARKS	 5-1

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS 	 5-2

3.1	Klamath River Inter-Tribal Fish and Water Commission	5-2

3.2	Presentation on Survey of Fish Consumption by Tulalip Tribes	5-2

3.3	Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network 	5-3

3.4	Presentations by Members of the Alaskan Native Community 	5-4

3.5	Dr. Roseanne Lorenzana, EPA Region 10	5-5

3.6	Presentations by Other Tribal Representatives	5-5

4.0 ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE 	 5-6

4.1	Discussion of the Pre-Meeting Discussion Draft Fish Consumption Report 	5-6

4.2	Discussion of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee Strategic Plan 	5-7

5.0 OTHER CONCERNS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE	 5-7

5.1	Precautionary Principle	5-7

5.2	Regulatory Enforcement	5-7

5.3	Representation of Alaskan Native Peoples on the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee 	5-8

5.4	Tribal Sovereignty	5-8

5-9

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the

INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE
of the

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

December 5, 2001
Seattle, Washington

Meeting Summary Accepted By:

Wendy Graham
Designated Federal Official

Larry Charles
Acting Chair


-------
CHAPTER SIX
MEETING
OF THE

INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The International Subcommittee of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
conducted a one-day meeting on Wednesday,
December 5, 2001, during a four-day meeting of the
NEJAC in Seattle, Washington. Mr. Larry Charles,
Sr., O.N.E./C.H.A.N.E., Inc., served as acting chair
of the subcommittee in the absence of Mr. Alberto
Saldamando, International Indian Treaty Council,
who is the current chair of the subcommittee. Ms.
Wendy Graham, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Office of International Activities (OIA),
continues to serve as the Designated Federal Officer
(DFO) for the subcommittee. Exhibit 6-1 presents a
list of the members who attended the meeting and
identifies those members who were unable to attend.

This chapter, which provides a summary of the
deliberations of the International Subcommittee, is
organized in six sections, including this Introduction.
Section 2.0, Remarks, summarizes the opening
remarks of the acting chair and the DFO. Section
3.0, Theme Discussion: The Relationships Among
Water Quality, Fish Consumption, and
Environmental Justice, summarizes presentations
about and discussions of the topic of water quality
and fish consumption. Section 4.0, Presentations
and Reports, presents an overview of other
presentations and reports received by the
subcommittee, as well as discussions carried out
and comments offered by members of the
subcommittee. Section 5.0, Presentation by the
Thailand Delegation, summarizes the presentation
made by representatives of Thailand to the
subcommittee. Section 6.0, Action Items,
summarizes action items adopted by the
subcommittee.

2.0 REMARKS

Mr. Charles, acting chair of the International
Subcommittee, opened the meeting by welcoming
the members and Ms. Graham, the DFO. Mr.
Saldamando, chair of the International
Subcommittee, was unable to attend because he
had accepted an opportunity to work with the United
Nations to organize a conference on human rights.
Mr. Tseming Yang, Vermont School of Law and vice-
chair of the International Subcommittee, was unable
to attend because of conflicts in his schedule.

Mr. Charles described the new deliberative format for
meetings of the NEJAC that, he said, is intended to
allow collaborative work between the NEJAC and

Exhibit 6-1

MEETING
OF THE

INTERNATIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE

Members Who Attended the Meeting
December 5, 2001

Mr. Larry Charles, Sr., Acting Chair
Ms. Wendy Graham, DFO

Mr. Philip L. Hillman

Mr. Jose Matus
Ms. Dianne Wilkins

Members
Who Were Unable To Attend

Mr. Alberto Saldamando, Chair
Mr. Tseming Yang, Vice-Chair
Mr. Fernando Cuevas
Ms. Caroline Hotaling
Mr. Cesar Luna

EPA. He emphasized that one of the principle goals
of the new format is to influence the policies of EPA,
with the intention to increase the influence of the
NEJAC and integrate environmental justice into all
decisions formulated by EPA. Mr. Charles stated
that he welcomed comments and suggestions from
members of the subcommittee about further
improvements to the format.

3.0 DISCUSSION OF THE RELATIONSHIPS
AMONG WATER QUALITY, FISH
CONSUMPTION, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

This section summarizes the discussion by the
members about the theme for the meeting: the
relationships among water quality, fish consumption,
and environmental justice. That discussion included
the presentations to the subcommittee that are
described below.

3.1 Environmental Justice and Indigenous
Peoples in the Great Lakes Region

Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental
Network, provided information about the connection
between environmental justice, indigenous peoples,
and transboundary issues in the Great Lakes region.
Mr. Goldtooth, former member of the NEJAC,
explained that affected tribes include indigenous

6-1

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

peoples who reside in both the United States and
Canada. In the early colonial time, he continued, a
political boundary established an "invisible border"
between Canada and the United States. The
indigenous peoples, however, continued to function
socially, economically, culturally, and spiritually as
one nation despite the political boundary, he pointed
out. Therefore, said Mr. Goldtooth, many issues of
environmental justice of concern to indigenous
peoples living in that area are international issues.
He emphasized that pollution, especially persistent
organic pollutants (POP), does not respect political
boundaries. POPs, he said, tend to migrate from
warmer climates to colder climates; as a result, they
accumulate in the northern Great Lakes region.

Mr. Goldtooth explained that environmental
protection and the health of indigenous people are
tied to treaties. Treaties address the rights of
indigenous peoples to land and resources and their
rights to hunt, fish, and gather, he pointed out. For
that reason, he said, indigenous peoples differ from
other people of color who are affected by issues of
environmental justice. Mr. Goldtooth emphasized as
well that indigenous peoples have a strong spiritual
connection to the land. He added that testimony
offered during the public comment session held on
December 4, 2001 demonstrated that there is a lack
of communication and collaboration with Canada's
First Nations and the indigenous tribes of the United
States. Such problems, he continued, create
complications in efforts to protect their environment.

Mr. Goldtooth distributed to the members of the
subcommittee copies of a report titled
"Environmental Justice in the Great Lakes Water
Quality Agreement" that had been presented to the
International Joint Commission. He explained that
the United States and Canada had formed that
commission to assist governments in resolving water
quality issues in the Great Lakes region. The
commission was established under the 1909
Boundary Waters Treaty in recognition that each
country is affected by the other's actions, he said.
The report distributed by Mr. Goldtooth addressed
contamination that affects human populations and
the ecosystem and biodiversity in the Great Lakes
region. Mr. Goldtooth stated that the report raises
the question of who is responsible for protecting the
environment of the Great Lakes region. He
questioned whether environmental protection is the
responsibility of the federal governments of the
United States and Canada or of the state and
provincial governments of the two countries.

Mr. Goldtooth stated that indigenous people have
demanded an opportunity to hold a seat on the board

of directors of the International Joint Commission.
Currently, he pointed out, indigenous peoples are not
represented on that board. He urged that indigenous
peoples should have a role in that decision-making
body, which influences the future of their people, the
protection of habitat and biodiversity, and
environmental policies.

Mr. Goldtooth then encouraged the members of the
subcommittee to discuss issues related to climate
change during future meetings. He stated that
climate change is an international issue about which
consultation with indigenous peoples has been
lacking in the United States. Climate change causes
changes in the environment that in turn affect the
relationship of indigenous peoples with the land, as
well as the hunting and fishing rights granted to them
under treaties, he explained. Mr. Goldtooth also
stated that indigenous peoples are affected
disproportionately by the effects of climate change,
noting in particular increases in the cost of electricity.

The members of the subcommittee endorsed Mr.
Goldtooth's call for the inclusion of the voice of
indigenous peoples in discussions of environmental
issues, both in the United States and internationally.

Ms. Dianne Wilkins, Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality Pollution Prevention Program,
then spoke about obstacles that prevent
collaboration between government agencies at the
state level and indigenous peoples. She
emphasized the need to identify a process for
ensuring tribal participation in decision making. Mr.
Charles then pointed out that existing collaborations
between tribal groups and state governments are
based on personal contacts and networking.
Continuing, he stated that there is difficulty in
identifying individuals from indigenous tribes to
interact with state and federal governments,
suggesting that there is a need for a mechanism,
such as a database, that can be used to identify
such individuals. Mr. Jose Matus, Indigenous
Alliance Without Borders, stated that the indigenous
peoples of his tribe historically have had no voice in
the development of legislation related to various
issues. In addition, the Yaqui Nation, he said, has
no representative or organization that addresses
environmental issues.

3.2 Transfrontier Risks Posed by POPs and the
Global Treaty on POPs

Ms. AmyFraenkel, EPAOIA, addressed transfrontier
risks posed by POPs and reported on the content of
the global treaty on POPs completed under the
United Nations Environmental Programme, as well

6-2

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

as the treaty's progress toward adoption. Ms.
Fraenkel pointed out the connection between the
treaty and the theme of the current meeting of the
NEJAC, noting that four of the five contaminants that
cause the issuance offish advisories are POPs, she
stated.

Ms. Fraenkel first explained that POPs generally are
a group of chemicals that have four characteristics in
common:

They persist in the environment.

They bioaccumulate in the food chain.

They are toxic.

They are capable of traveling long distances.

The potential impacts of POPs include links to
reproductive, developmental, behavioral, endocrine,
and other health effects, continued Ms. Fraenkel.
Humans are exposed to POPs primarily through
consumption of food, she said. Populations exposed
to potentially higher than average risks, she added,
include indigenous groups who rely on subsistence
diets that include large amounts offish.

The treaty initially addresses 12 chemicals, known
as the "dirty dozen," and includes a mechanism for
considering additional chemicals that may be POPs,
continued Ms. Fraenkel. The United States has
taken significant steps to regulate the initial 12 POPs
addressed by the treaty, she added. She then stated
that international action would be necessary to
address the problem fully because the use and
manufacture of the chemicals in other countries will
affect people and the environment in the United
States.

Ms. Fraenkel then described an effort underway to
identify the effects on the United States of the
transportation of such chemicals by air currents.
Noting that air modeling is not an exact science, she
then presented a chart that illustrated the transport
by air of POPs from Russia to the Pacific Northwest
region of the United States. She stated that there is
a need to examine how the rest of the world affects
air systems in the United States.

The global treaty on POPs, said Ms. Fraenkel, has
been endorsed by the President and was signed by
EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman on May
23, 2001. The treaty currently is awaiting ratification
by the United States Senate, she added. The treaty
requires that each signatory country develop a
national action plan. EPA OIA plans to ask the

NEJAC to provide to EPA its views on the
implementation plan for the United States, which is
in early draft stage at EPA OIA, continued Ms.
Fraenkel. The members of the subcommittee
expressed general agreement that commenting on
the development of the plan would be an opportunity
for groups concerned about environmental justice to
influence implementation of the treaty. Ms. Fraenkel
pointed out that the POPs treaty obliges the federal
government to consult with indigenous groups and
involve them in its implementation.

Ms. Fraenkel then stated that some countries do not
have the resources necessary to meet all their
obligations under the treaty. A capacity-building and
financial provision of the treaty states that the United
States will assist other countries in meeting those
obligations, she said, adding that OIA hopes to
obtain financial support from Congress to assist
countries that need such assistance.

The members of the subcommittee members
acknowledged that air and ocean currents cause an
international connection between contamination
produced in one country and health effects in
communities in another country. The members of
the subcommittee also acknowledged that the
NEJAC's fish consumption report does not address
this international link. The members then agreed
that there is a need to revise the report to recognize
international sources of contamination of water and
fish.

Ms. Marva King, EPA Office of Environmental
Justice and Program Manager for the NEJAC,
suggested that the members of the subcommittee
form an informal work group to work with members
of the Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee to prepare
comments to EPA's implementation plan for the
proposed treaty on POPs and present that plan to
the Executive Council of the NEJAC.

3.3 Report on EPA OIA and Biodiversity

Ms. Eileen Henninger, EPA OIA, whose work
involves international issues related to biodiversity,
reported that OIA has been working with
international agencies to protect biological diversity
and resources. She explained that her work involves
the Convention on Biological Diversity, an agreement
signed at the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil in 1992. The ongoing convention, she
continued, is the first global agreement on the
conservation and sustainable use of biological
diversity. She added that EPA OIA is working
increasingly frequently with the World Conservation

6-3

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

Union, an international body that assists societies
throughout the world in conserving the integrity and
diversity of nature and in ensuring that the use of
natural resources is equitable and ecologically
sustainable. She then requested that the members
of the subcommittee provide comment on issues of
biodiversity.

Ms. Henninger also reported that EPA OIA is
recruiting culturally diverse individuals and is
providing opportunities for upward mobility within the
agency.

3.3 Overview of the Effects of POPs on the
Indigenous Peoples of Alaska

Ms. Katy Taylor, Community Health Service, Alaska
Native Tribal Health Services, presented an overview
of that organization's study of POPs and their effects
on indigenous peoples of Alaska. Alaska Native
Tribal Health Services is an organization of the
indigenous tribes in Alaska, she noted. The group,
she continued, is studying the presence of industrial
organic pollutants and the effects of POPS on
indigenous peoples in the populations of the arctic
regions of Alaska, Canada, and Greenland. The
problems identified through the study are
international issues of environmental justice, she
pointed out. Migratory species carry contaminants
as they move throughout the oceans; contaminants
are distributed by air currents, as well, she reported.

Ms. Taylor explained that Alaska Native Tribal Health
Services attempts to demonstrate the health benefits
of the traditional subsistence-based diet, while
examining the possible exposure of indigenous
peoples to pollutants through their diet. She
explained that her group currently was studying the
indigenous people of the northern slope of the
Aleutian Chain in the Arctic Ocean. She stated that
EPA funds a major portion of the study, which
focuses on organic pollutants and heavy metals
accumulated in the bodies of indigenous women and
children.

Ms. Taylor then presented a chart that illustrated the
various types of subsistence foods consumed in
areas of Alaska. Such foods, she said, include birds,
plants, shellfish, fish, and marine mammals. The
chart demonstrated that the percentage of each type
of food consumed varies by region. Ms. Taylor then
presented a graph that illustrated the movement of
ocean currents. Because of the pattern of the
oceanic current, she pointed out, warmer oceanic
waters pick up pollutants and deposit them in the
colder Arctic Ocean. Once the pollutants have been
deposited in the Arctic Ocean, they persist for an

extended period in marine mammals and fish, she
explained. Eventually, those mammals and fish are
consumed by the people in the area, she said.

Ms. Taylor then demonstrated how the distribution of
pollutants is biomagnified throughout the food chain,
beginning with krill and plankton, which are in turn
consumed by fish and shellfish. Seabirds and
marine mammals then consume the fish and
shellfish, she continued. The contaminants
eventually accumulate in people who rely on a
subsistence diet. The study, she stated, has
concluded that, among the population groups
affected, unborn babies pick up the highest
concentrations of contaminants consumed.

Alaska Native Tribal Health Services encourages the
traditional diet, Ms. Taylor declared, adding that the
organization presents the results of the study to
participants in the study and allows those
participants to make decisions about their dietary
intake. Weighing the benefits of the traditional diet
against the suspected, but not yet fully understood,
risks posed by contaminants, continued Ms. Taylor,
the group recommends continuation of traditional
diets, while recognizing that there is a need to
provide dietary advice that supports informed
choices. The group also highly recommends a
traditional diet because of the cost-effectiveness of
the practice, she said. Ms. Taylor also explained
that, when indigenous people consume a
nontraditional diet, the incidence of diabetes and
cancer increases. The positive effects of the
traditional subsistence diet include the consumption
of essential fatty acids that help ensure the proper
development of unborn babies and prevent some
neurological problems, she said. The study
concluded that fatty acids are higher in concentration
in areas of Alaska in which the levels of consumption
offish are higher than the average for the state, she
added.

3.4 Transportation of POPs in the Arctic Area
and Contaminated Military Sites in Alaska

Ms. Pam Miller, Executive Director, Alaska
Community Action on Toxics, provided to the
subcommittee information about the significance of
long-range air and oceanic transportation of POPs in
the Arctic and contamination present at U.S.
Department of Defense (DoD) sites in Alaska.
Alaska Community Action on Toxics is a statewide
grassroots organization dedicated to achieving
environmental health and justice, explained Ms.
Miller. The group works with indigenous tribes to
resolve environmental issues ranging from POPs to
contaminants originating from military sites, she said.

6-4

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

Ms. Miller explained that contamination resulting
from the long-range transportation of POPs and the
contamination originating from military sites pose a
threat to the health of people who include significant
amounts offish and marine mammals in their diets.

The Arctic area has become an atmospheric sink for
POPs, including industrial chemicals and pesticides,
Ms. Miller pointed out. Many of those POPs
originate thousands of miles distant from the Arctic;
they travel northward in air and ocean currents and
are captured in the cold Arctic environment, she
explained. Some industrial chemicals and pesticides
have been banned in the United States, but no such
action has been taken in other countries, she added.
Those contaminants also end up in the Arctic region,
she said. Ms. Miller cited a study conducted by Dr.
Barry Commoner, Center for the Biology of Natural
Systems, that used atmospheric transport models to
link sources of dioxin in the United States, Mexico,
and Canada with deposition of dioxin in the Arctic
region. The study, said Ms. Miller, concluded that
facilities in the United States contributed 70 to 82
percent of the dioxin deposited in the Arctic region.

Continuing, Ms. Miller stated that adoption of the
global POPs treaty is essential to protect the health
of Alaska's indigenous people and that of future
generations of those people. Ms. Miller urged that
the subcommittee work to ensure that the Senate
ratifies the treaty and to encourage the addition of
other chemicals to the initial list of 12 currently
addressed by the treaty. She also urged that EPA
release its final dioxin reassessment and that the
United States implement regulations that eliminate
exposure to dioxin. She urged further that the
subcommittee encourage the NEJAC and EPA to
support limitations on the production of dioxin to
reduce levels of exposure to the contaminant. She
added that evidence is sufficient to support the
taking of the precautionary approach that will
eliminate sources of pollution and therefore future
adverse effects.

Ms. Miller then explained that the effects of DoD
sites in Alaska have international implications
because of their geographic locations and the
transport of contaminants through air and ocean
currents. She stated that, in Alaska, there are five
Superfund sites and approximately 700 formerly
used defense sites (FUDS), many of which are
located on the Arctic coast. Many of those sites are
located in close proximity to other countries, she
continued. For example, she said, St. Lawrence
Island, a heavily contaminated DoD site, is located
only 40 miles from Russia. Contaminants from those
sites include polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), heavy

metals, fuel, radioactive material, and solvents, she
reported. She added that there are a number of
weapons testing sites in Alaska, one of which is the
size of the state of Kansas. Ms. Miller then
suggested that EPA should hold DoD responsible for
the cleanup of FUDS, rather than merely the
identification of such sites, as is currently the case.
For example, she said, the world's largest
underground nuclear test site is located in Alaska.
Radioactive waste had been injected into a fractured
underground cavity in an area in which levels of
seismic activity are high. Despite evidence of the
leaking of radioactive material into the Bering Sea,
she charged, the U.S. Department of Energy refuses
to implement monitoring or address the implications
ofthe problem.

The members ofthe subcommittee agreed to draft a
letter to EPA OIA to express the subcommittee's
support for the global POPs treaty and to express
support for ratification ofthe treaty by the Senate.

4.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS

This section summarizes the presentations made
and the reports submitted to the International
Subcommittee about other issues.

4.1 Update on the Activities of EPA OIA in Africa

Mr. Lionel Brown, EPA OIA, discussed various
activities EPA OIA is conducting in Africa. Those
activities focus on public health issues related to
rapid urbanization and industrialization, he reported.
During the past two years, he continued, the Agency
had addressed two concerns: safe drinking water
and the phasing out of leaded gasoline. Mr. Brown
stated that EPA OIA also had been working to
promote environmental awareness in Africa. The
office initiated an information access program that
provides training and computer education related to
hazardous chemicals and climate change. The
office conducted training in the areas of access to
information, basic computer skills, and the use of
electronic mail and the Internet to teach people in
Africa how to obtain access to environmental
information.

Continuing, Mr. Brown stated that the training
program also involves bringing participants together
with mentors who assist the participants in learning
how to work with both government and industry
entities to resolve issues of environmental justice.
Participants prepare projects for environmental fairs
during which they compete for the opportunity to
travel to the United States to work with counterparts
working to achieve environmental justice. During the

6-5

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

December 2000 meeting of the NEJAC, Mr. Brown
noted, EPA 01A had presented to the International
Subcommittee a proposed program that would use
environmental justice to promote environmental
awareness. The program presented at that meeting
has been funded by EPA and currently is educating
African women of high school age, he announced.

Mr. Brown then stated that, in parts of Africa, fish
makes up a significant portion of the diet of the
population. As they experience rapid
industrialization and urbanization, he explained,
African countries are beginning to encounter issues
related to water quality and consumption of fish that
are similar to issues discussed during the NEJAC
meeting. Mr. Brown stated his support for the
addition of consideration of international issues to
the fish consumption report. He emphasized that
EPA OIA places a high priority on environmental
justice and wishes to work with the NEJAC to link
issues of environmental justice that affect Africa with
such issues that affect the United States.

The members of the subcommittee then
recommended that EPA OIA circulate the fish
consumption report in countries in which OIA is
engaged to encourage the development of strategies
for communities in other countries.

4.2	Cultural Diversity Within EPA OIA

Mr. Brown provided some insight into the action EPA
OIA is taking to address the lack of cultural diversity
among the staff of EOA OIA. Mr. Brown expressed
concern that most of the people with whom staff of
the office deal, are people of color, but the staff does
not include an appropriate number of people of color.
In his experience in working with international
groups, Mr. Brown said, he had observed that
individuals readily identify with EPA staff with whom
they share a cultural link.

Mr. Charles suggested that the subcommittee
encourage EPA OIA to deploy culturally diverse
teams to represent EPA in international discussions.
He stated that the United States can take advantage
of its cultural diversity to form relationships with other
countries, adding that EPA OIA should make cultural
diversity a priority. Mr. Charles then proposed that
the subcommittee draft a letter to EPA OIA to
encourage the use of culturally diverse teams in
international discussions.

4.3	Update on U.S.-Mexico Border Activities

This section provides updates from various EPA
regional offices and the Southwest Network for

Environmental and Economic Justice (SNEEJ)
related to activities underway in the border areas of
the United States and Mexico.

4.3.1 EPA Region 9

Mr. Enrique Manzanilla, Director, Cross-Media
Division, EPA Region 9, first distributed materials
that presented background information about the
activities of EPA Region 9 related to border issues.
For the benefit of the new members of the
subcommittee, he presented a brief overview of
those activities, including those related to hazardous
waste, water and air quality, and response to
emergency situations. He stated that the presence
of the political boundary between the United States
and Mexico creates obstacles to environmental
protection.

Continuing, Mr. Manzanilla explained that, during the
development of the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) in the early 1990s, specific
institutions were created along the border to examine
such infrastructure issues as drinking water,
wastewater, and solid waste. One such institution, he
continued, is the Border Environmental Cooperation
Commission (BECC), which deals with infrastructure
projects on both sides of the border. The North
American Development (NAD) Bank is a funding
institution designed to leverage and fund
infrastructure development through loans, he added.
In addition, he said, the International Boundary
Water Commission deals with wastewater sanitation
issues along the border. With the creation of such
institutions, said Mr. Manzanilla, the need for
outreach to communities along the border became
apparent to EPA. EPA Region 6 and Region 9
established offices in locations near the border; the
primary role of those offices is community outreach,
he added. The outreach offices attempt to improve
EPA's ability to interact with the communities and
communicate the agency's activities to communities,
he noted.

In 1999, at the request of the International
Subcommittee, EPA held a Border Roundtable
meeting in San Diego, California, Mr. Manzanilla
then explained. During that meeting, participants
expressed concern about hazardous waste; lack of
cleanup; and other problems that are not strictly
environmental issues, such as issues related to labor
policies and patterns of migration. Mr. Manzanilla
stated that the proceedings of the roundtable
demonstrated the complexity of environmental and
socioeconomic issues and the interplay among them.
The agency has continued dialog with individuals
who participated in the roundtable, he said, adding

6-6

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

that both regional offices have developed border
environmental justice plans.

Mr. Manzanilla stated that there is a need in border
communities for a more deliberative process of
engagement for examining issues of disproportionate
and adverse environmental effects. There are
issues in the border areas that are not encountered
in other places, he pointed out. That circumstance,
hedeclared,indicatesenvironmental injustices affect
the border areas. EPA, he continued, is attempting
to engage and support environmental justice
communities on the border. He added that the
agency had made a special effort to reach out to the
indigenous tribal communities in border areas
because EPA recognizes that the political border
ignores family and community connections among
members of indigenous tribes.

4.3.2 EPA Region 6

Ms. Olivia Balandran, Environmental Justice
Coordinator, EPA Region 6, presented an update on
the activities of the Region 6 border outreach office
in El Paso, Texas. She stated that, as a follow-up to
the roundtable meeting held in San Diego in 1999,
stakeholders wished to participate in another
roundtable meeting to discuss how the issues
confronting EPA Region 6 were being addressed.
The follow-up roundtable meeting was held in
January 2001, she reported; 25 stakeholders
participated in it. The issues brought up at that
meeting include the need to create an environmental
justice commission that would foster binational
participation, as well as issues of concern to
indigenous populations, such as lack of funding to
support the participation of tribal members in
discussions of border issues.

Ms. Nelda Perez, Small Grants Coordinator, EPA
Region 6 Office of Environmental Justice, presented
information about grant activities in the border area.
The grants awarded in the border area are intended
to increase participation by members of
environmental justice communities located in the
border area, she said. She reported that, of the 12
total grants awarded by EPA Region 6, 2 were
awarded to programs underway in the border area:

Project Bravo focuses on environmental justice
in neighborhoods. Its primary mission is to
increase knowledge and capacity in low-income
communities to foster effective problem-solving
and involvement in issues of environmental
justice that affect those neighborhoods. The
project also provides training related to

environmental justice and tactics for "fighting city
hall."

Casa de Colores in Brownsville, Texas
addresses the needs of the primarily Hispanic
low-income youth in the Brownsville area. The
grant focuses on problems related to water
quality and quantity in the lower Rio Grande
region. The grant also trains young people in
environmental issues and leadership.

To address the issue of a lack of funding for
individuals to travel to and participate in community
meetings, she reported, the BECC had awarded
$30,000 to pay the travel expenses for
representatives of environmental justice community
groups who otherwise could not afford to attend such
meetings.

4.3.3 Update on the Activities of Grassroots
Organizations

Mr. Richard Moore, Executive Director, SNEEJ and
former chair of the NEJAC, discussed the concerns
of grassroots organizations about issues pertinent to
the border areas of the United States and Mexico.
SNEEJ is a collection of grassroots organizations in
six states located in the southwestern United States
and in Mexico. He emphasized that the members of
the subcommittee have a great responsibility to
ensure that issues of environment justice pertinent to
the border areas are addressed. Mr. Moore praised
the commitment of the staff of the EPA Region 6
border outreach office, stating that the members of
the staff are highly qualified and experienced in
addressing issues of environmental justice.

Mr. Moore presented letters written to EPA
Administrator Whitman to request that a meeting, be
held in the Southwest, between Administrator
Whitman and representatives of SNEEJ. He stated
that the organization had not received a response to
the letter by the date by which such a response had
been requested. Mr. Moore reported that SNEEJ
also sent a letter to President Bush about NAFTA,
the FTAA, and issues of environmental justice that
affect the border areas. He also discussed the
effects of increased militarization along the border
since the September 11 terrorist attacks. Before
September 11, explained Mr. Moore, President Bush
and Mexico's President Vincente Fox had met to
discuss border and trade issues. Mr. Moore then
expressed concern about the lower priority status of
issues related to immigration and environmental
problems along the border.

6-7

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

Mr. Moore informed the members of the
subcommittee that the recommendations developed
during the 1999 roundtable meeting in San Diego
had been provided to the International
Subcommittee, along with a request for a response
within 30 days. He then reported that the
subcommittee had not completed its response. Ms.
Graham stated that the vice-chair of the
subcommittee, Mr. Yang, who had been unable to
attend the current meeting, had spearheaded the
work on the report. She stated that the
subcommittee expects that work to be completed by
January 31,2002.

Mr. Moore then requested that the subcommittee
also complete its work on the report of the Farm
Worker Work Group. The subcommittee expects to
complete that work by January 31, 2002, as well,
said Ms. Graham.

Concluding his presentation, Mr. Moore suggested
that the NEJAC fish consumption report should
address areas of the Rio Grande River, the New
River in California, and the Colorado River that are
affected by issues related to water quality and fish
consumption. Mr. Charles requested that Mr. Moore
put in writing his recommendations and comments
on the report. Mr. Charles also requested a meeting
with Mr. Moore to discuss his specific concerns
related to environmental justice in the border regions
of the United States and Mexico.

5.0 PRESENTATION BY THE
DELEGATION FROM THAILAND

EPA's United States-Asia Environmental Partnership
sponsored the participation of four delegates from
Thailand in the current meeting of the NEJAC. EPA
is working with Thailand as that country reauthorizes
its environmental laws, develops an administrative
court, decentralizes its their authorities, creates a
process for public participation, and establishes a
new environmental ministry.

Mr. ApichartThongyou, Secretary General, Thailand
Research and Action for Development Institute,
discussed efforts undertaken in Thailand to reduce
effects on environmental justice caused by
modernization and the development of heavy
industry. Mr. Thongyou explained the structure of
the government of Thailand: the population is 63
million, and the country is divided into four regions;
north, south, east, and west. There are three levels
of government: central, provincial, and local
municipal administrations. The central and provincial
leaders are appointed, and municipal leaders are
elected, he continued.

Mr. Thongyou then presented general information
about Thailand. Modernization began in the 1950s,
he said, and, as that process progressed, the gap
between rich and poor widened. In approximately
1990, Thailand adopted a new industrial policy and
became "the fifth tiger" in the Asia economy. In
1997, he continued, the country experienced an
economic crisis, and environmental problems
increased throughout Thailand, especially in the
eastern portion of the country where the heavy
industries are located. The government, he
reported further, has experienced problems with
management of the industries; such poor
management unfortunately has included human
exposure to contaminants, he said. Mr. Thongyou
also stated that several shortfalls and limitations
affect the public participation process. Government
procedures do not encourage public participation, he
observed.

Mr.Thongyou enumerated the following examples of
environmental injustice in Thailand:

There is unfairness in the use of natural
resources. Industry, he charged, has taken
natural resources from communities for its own
use.

Forests, rivers, oceans, and other pristine
habitats are becoming dumping grounds for
industrial waste. Mr. Thongyou stated that he
had been working on a study with the fisherman
of the eastern seaboard area of Thailand, an
area in which the government has encouraged
extensive industrial activities. Since 1990, more
than 60 species of fish and marine organisms
reportedly have disappeared from the area. The
shrinking of the marine population has had an
adverse effect on the way of life of the
fishermen. Through his research, Mr. Thongyou
reported, he was attempting to map the marine
resources and investigate why the species have
disappeared. Those involved in the study also
train the younger generations by linking them
with the fisherman. Mr. Thongyou also noted
that an artificial coral reef has been created to
improve the marine environment.

To reduce operating costs, industries have
forgone protective environmental measures. For
example, releases from petrochemical factories
cause water pollution. Refineries, some of
which are facilities owned by American
companies, produce harmful emissions. The
government gives foreign investors such
privileges as tax incentives. The introduction of
industrialization in a manner that does not

6-8

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

address issues related to environmental justice
has brought "disharmony" to communities and
their way of life, observed Mr. Thongyou.

In some areas, the diversity of small local
industries has been diminished. Farmers and
fisherman have been replaced by low-wage
factory workers. The oceans have become
polluted, and local landowners have sold their
land to large industries. During the economic
collapse in 1997, many people were left without
jobs orthe resources necessary to farm and fish,
he said.

Mr. Thongyou then stated that, to develop an
acceptable environmental justice model, Thailand
must have more cooperation and exchange of
information.

The members of the subcommittee discussed
whether members of the communities in Thailand
can make their voices heard with regard to issues of
environmental justice. Mr. Amnat Wongbandit,
faculty of law, Thammasat, Thailand, responded that
residents can voice their opinions to the lower level
of government, but their voice often goes unheard at
the higher levels of government. He said that, in
recent years, the public increasingly has demanded
the opportunity to comment on development projects
and issues of environmental justice.

The members of the subcommittee then discussed
whether EPA could bring pressure on the
government of Thailand to influence that government
to consider public opinion. Mr. Burt Akkaraporn,
Thailand Pollution Control Department, stated that,
when the government does consider public opinion,
environmental regulators in Thailand do not have
enforcement authority. He added that EPA currently
is supporting 20 projects in Thailand, many of which
are operated through his pollution control
department. Some, he added, are operated through
local authorities, and others through non-government
organizations. He stated that EPA provides training
to people in Thailand and supports the elimination of
use of leaded gasoline by providing subsidies to
reduce the cost of unleaded gasoline.

The members of the subcommittee also discussed
other activities that EPA could undertake to provide
assistance to Thailand. The delegates from Thailand
stated that, in the future, increased environmental
education for communities about protection of
natural resources would be helpful. People often are
unaware of the harmful effects of their actions on the
environment, they pointed out. The delegates also
suggested that a system of information networks

would help give Thailand access to the information
resources the country needs.

Mr. Charles asked about the types and sources of
contamination of water that Mr. Thongyou had
identified through his study. In response, Mr.
Thongyou reported that the study had identified
heavy metals, nitric acid, and mercury. He added
that, from a legal perspective, it is difficult to identify
the sources of such pollution. Ms. Wilkins then
observed that, when she traveled to Bangkok,
Thailand, she had noted that heavy industry is
located in the communities, characterizing the
situation as "a conglomeration of life and industry."
Ms. Wilkins also suggested that the subcommittee
explore avenues of collaboration with participants in
other international roundtable discussions sponsored
by EPA OIA, such as the Pollution Prevention
Roundtable that facilitated discussion of issues
related to pollution prevention and international
environmental justice.

6.0 ACTION ITEMS

This section summarizes the action items adopted by
the subcommittee. The members of the International
Subcommittee agreed to adopt the following action
items:

/ Recommend to the Executive Council of the
NEJAC that the draft fish consumption report be
revised to acknowledge the international
consequences of the pollution of water in a given
country that affects human health in
communities in other countries.

/ Encourage EPA OIA to circulate the final fish
consumption report to the members of the
NEJAC, stakeholders, and representatives of
countries in which EPA OIA is engaged.

/ Draft a letter to EPA OIA that expresses pride in
the volume and breadth of the accomplishments
of OIA. Some of that work, the members of the
subcommittee agreed, will bring about major
worldwide reductions in the amounts of key
harmful chemicals (POPs) in use in farming and
industry.

/ Endorse the deployment of culturally diverse
teams to represent EPA in international
discussions by encouraging EPA OIA to
continue and increase the use of that strategy
for field teams to engage members of
communities in treaty discussions and to work
with other countries to share resources.

6-9

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

International Subcommittee

/ Collaborate with the Indigenous Peoples
Subcommittee to provide to EPA OIA
information about the planning process for
implementation of the global POPs treaty.

/ Prepare a draft documentthat outlines principles
of environmental justice for multinational
corporations based in the United States.

/ Complete by January 31, 2002 the
subcommittee's response to recommendations
developed at the 1999 Roundtable on
Environmental Justice on the U.S.-Mexico
Border and the report of the Farm Worker Work
Group.

/ Explore avenues the subcommittee might use to
collaborate with participants in other
international roundtable discussions sponsored
by EPA OIA to facilitate discussion of issues
related to international environmental justice.

6-10

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
MEETING SUMMARY

of the

WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE

of the

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

December 5, 2001
Seattle, Washington

Meeting Summary Accepted By:

Reiniero Rivera	Veronica Eady

Designated Federal Officer	Acting Chair


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

CHAPTER SEVEN
MEETING
OF THE

WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee of the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(NEJAC) conducted a one-day meeting on
Wednesday, December 5, 2001, during a three-day
meeting of the NEJAC in Seattle, Washington. Ms.
Veronica Eady, Executive Office of Environmental
Affairs, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, served at
that time as the acting chair of the subcommittee.
Mr. Reiniero "Rey" Rivera, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER), serves as the
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the
subcommittee. Table 8-1 presents a list of the
members who attended the meeting and identifies
those members who were unable to attend.

This chapter, which provides a summary of the
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee meeting, is
organized in five sections, including this Introduction.
Section 2.0, Activities of the Subcommittee and Its
Work Groups, provides updates on the activities of
the subcommittee's work groups. Section 3.0,
Presentations and Reports, provides an overview of
each report and presentation made to the
subcommittee during the meeting. That section also
presents a summary of questions and comments
made by participants in the subcommittee meeting.
Section 4.0, Summary of Dialogue about the
Strategic Plan , sets forth a summary of the
suggested preliminary projects to be considered by
the subcommittee for its strategic plan. Section 5.0,
Action Items, lists the action items agreed upon by
the subcommittee members.

2.0	ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND

ITS WORK GROUPS

This section summarizes the discussion of the
accomplishments of the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee in 2001 and describes the activities of
the various work groups of the subcommittee.

2.1	Year in Review

Ms. Eady presented a synopsis of the
accomplishments of the Waste and Facility Siting
Subcommittee during 2001. During fiscal year 2001,
she reported, the members of the subcommittee met
at least monthly by conference call. The calls were
intended to provide a venue for the subcommittee to

7-1

Exhibit 8-1

WASTE AND FACILITY SITING
SUBCOMMITTEE

Members
Who Attended the Meeting
December 5, 2001

Ms. Veronica Eady, Acting Chair
Mr. Reiniero "Rey" Rivera , DFO

Ms. Denise Feiber
Mr. Robert Harris
Mr. Melvin "Kip" Holden
Ms. Donna Gross McDaniel
Ms. Mary Nelson

Members
Who Were Unable to Attend

Ms. Katherine McGloon
Mr. Harold Mitchell
Mr. David Moore
Mr. Mervyn Tano
Mr. Michael Taylor
Mr. Neftali Garcia Martinez

conduct its regular business and to develop a plan
for addressing the several topics on which it had
chosen to focus during the fiscal year. Those issues,
she said, included Brownfields revitalization,
relocation under the Superfund program, and land
use. Initially, she explained, each of those issues
had been addressed by a separate subcommittee
work group. It was decided later in the year that a
single work group would address the broader issue
of land use because the subcommittee had termined
that land use is a comprehensive issue that
encompasses most of the work of the subcommittee.

Since the meeting of the NEJAC in December 2000,
Ms. Eady reported further, the subcommittee had
made much progress in becoming more efficient in
its pursuit of goals related to land use. Brownfields
revitalization and Superfund sites, as well as issues
related to solid and hazardous waste, she pointed
out, present issues related to environmental justice
in large part because of their proximity to minority
communities and low-income communities. Ms Eady
then stated that under the direction of the previous
chair, Ms. Vernice Miller-Travis, member of the

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

Partnership for Sustainable Brownfields
Development, the subcommittee had made progress
in redefining its work to address the central issue -
land use. In Spring 2001, she continued, the
subcommittee had completed a detailed work plan
that would enable the subcommittee to make the
most effective use possible of its existing products,
while providing advice to EPA about decisions
related to siting that make use of institutional controls
governing land use. Crucial to that progress, Ms.
Eady pointed out, was the understanding and
support of the senior management of OSWER,
including former Assistant Administrator Timothy
Fields, Jr. At the end of the fiscal year, said Ms.
Eady, the members of the subcommittee had
decided to reassess its priorities and develop other
topics on which to focus their attention.

Since the transition into the new administration in
OSWER, the departure of Ms. Miller-Travis from the
NEJAC, and the appointment of a new DFO,
continued Ms. Eady, the subcommittee had begun to
engage the new Assistant Administrator and other
senior managers of OSWER and to re-examine the
direction of the subcommittee. Ms. Eady also briefly
discussed the meeting that took place in November
2001 between her, OSWER senior managers, and
representatives of the EPA Office of Environmental
Justice (OEJ) to discuss the new directions of the
subcommittee and the expectations from OSWER.

Closing her discussion, Ms. Eady expressed the
hope that the members of the subcommittee would
meet fairly soon after the new year to acquaint new
and standing members and to take up the work of
the subcommittee. She added that the Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee welcomes the transition
as a turning point and an opportunity to continue to
provide pivotal documents as those it had prepared
in the first six years of the subcommittee. Such
works include the reports, A Regulatory Strategy for
Siting and Operating Waste Transfer Stations,
published in March 2000; and Environmental Justice,
Urban Revitalization, and Brownfields: The Search
for Authentic Signs of Hope - A report on the "Public
Dialogues on Urban Revitalization and Brownfields:
Envisioning Healthy and Sustainable Communities,"
published in December 1996.

Ms. Eady stated that one of the goals for the current
meeting was to develop a subcommittee progress
report to be submitted to the NEJAC Executive
Council during its meeting on the following day. Ms.
Nelson suggested that the subcommittee
recommend that the NEJAC adopt the topic of
federal facilities as the focus of its meeting in 2003.
It was explained to Ms. Nelson that the federal

facilities issue will be addressed by the NEJAC
Federal Facilities Working Group, and that the topic
for the 2003 National Meeting would be pollution
prevention.

2.2 Subcommittee Historical Overview

Ms. Linda Garczynski, Director, Outreach and
Special Projects Staff (OSPS), EPA OSWER,
presented a historical overview of the role played by
the NEJAC Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
during the past five years. Reporting about the
collaborative efforts of that work group, Ms.
Garczynski lauded the productive history of the
subcommittee, noting that it had produced several
influential documents. She pointed out that the
subcommittee historically has served as a sounding
board for new OSWER policy. That effort, she
observed, had produced new policy on
environmental justice in OSWER's waste programs.
OSWER also had instituted an action agenda for
addressing environmental justice in OSWER's
programs, both at the headquarters level and in the
EPA regions. Public dialogue meetings conducted
by the NEJAC facilitated EPA's initial work under the
Brownfields program, she continued. After holding
five meetings in various areas of the country, with
more than 500 people attending, she said, the
subcommittee had produced a reportthatdocuments
the comments the subcommittee had received about
the redevelopment and revitalization of brownfields
properties.

In addition, Ms. Garczynski continued, the dialogue
had brought attention to and action on several
significant issues, including:

The development, under the Brownfields
National Action Agenda and Showcase
Community effort, of models of coordination and
collaboration for communities in which
brownfields properties are located; to date, that
effort has garnered more than $900 million in
investments for 28 communities

Social aspects of the siting of waste facilities,
with EPA advising state and local governments
about social issues related to the siting of such
facilities, rather than focusing solely on
geophysical and structural issues

The locations of waste transfer stations, an
extremely controversial issue in New York City
and many other large cities; the work group had
prepared a report on EPA's work in concert with
the National Solid Waste Management
Association that described guidelines for best-

7-2

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

practices to be used by the waste management
industry when siting, building, and developing
waste transfer facilities

Continuing, Ms. Garczynski stated that the work
group had addressed the issues she mentioned in an
effort to advise EPA about the general direction of its
policy. Among other issues that had been raised,
she added, was compliance by federal facilities with
environmental statutes. Mr. Brandon Carter, Federal
Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO),
EPAOSWER, she noted, leads the Federal Facilities
Work Group that addresses federal facilities and
compliance issues related to such facilities. See
section 2.3 of this chapter for a summary of the
activities of that work group.

Ms. Garczynski then stated that the subcommittee
and EPA had reached "a turning point." In the
Agency, she explained, there is new sense of
direction related to the future efforts of the waste
program. The Agency, she continued, is developing
a new agenda in response to that new sense of
direction. Ms. Marianne Horinko, newly appointed
Assistant Administrator for OSWER has a very clear
sense of the mission of OSWER and its new
direction, said Ms. Garczynski.

2.3 Update on the Federal Facilities Work Group

The subcommittee was briefed by Mr. Brandon
Carter, DFO for the NEJAC Federal Facilities Work
Group, which had been created by the NEJAC
Executive Council to specifically address issues
related to federal facilities that had been raised at
previous meetings of the NEJAC. Following Mr.
Carter's presentation, the members agreed that, due
to the close correlation between the work of the
subcommittee and the Federal Facilities Work
Group, both should developed a closer working
relationship. Mr. Carter began his presentation by
posing the question "What are federal facilities?"
Federal facilities, he then explained, are properties
currently or formerly owned, managed, or controlled
by an agency or department of the federal
government. Such facilities include military
installations that house firing ranges; weapons
production, storage, and disposal operations; nuclear
laboratories and facilities; and formerly used defense
sites, he said. The contaminants that are typical of
such sites are radioactive waste; chlorinated or
brominated solvents, such as trichloroethylene
(TCE); JP-8 jet fuel; other jet fuels; diesel fuel; heavy
metals, such as lead and mercury; and PCBs, he
added.

Issues related to federal facilities are complicated,
continued Mr. Carter, because of varying
responsibilities of different lead-agencies,
implicationsthataffect national defense, components
related to economic development, and the large size
of many of the facilities. The Federal Facilities Work
Group was formed, he said, in response to ongoing
substantive comments offered during NEJAC
meetings by citizens and members of communities
who have expressed concern about the scope of
cleanups at federal facilities and the activities
associated with such cleanups.

The objectives of the work group, said Mr. Carter,
are to:

Identify and evaluate key issues of concern

Provide a forum for dialogue between members
of communities and representatives of
government agencies

Compile a list of resources available to
communities and stakeholders to support public
participation

Formulate a set of recommendations to the
NEJAC.

The recommendations, he added, should include the
development of a best-practices document that will
improve cleanups from the point of view of the
community and suggestions for ways in which the
NEJAC can address issues related to federal
facilities.

Continuing, Mr. Carter stated that the work group
plans to achieve its objectives through the
substantial involvement of EPA's partner agencies,
such as the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), the
U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. General
Services Administration (GSA), and the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD). In addition, he said, the work group was to
evaluate five case studies, develop general
principles based on examples from actual sites, and
prepare a final report for submission to the NEJAC.
The case studies would exhibit geographical
diversity and ethnic, cultural, and racial diversity,
added Mr. Carter, noting that the studies also would
spotlight the roles of federal agencies, community
groups, and grassroots organizations and will be
selected for universality among the issues they
involve.

7-3

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

Mr. Carter then listed the specific steps the work
group had taken and would take to accomplish its
objectives:

Organized its membership

Convened a meeting in January 2001 to scope
issues

Assisted EPA in getting a memorandum of
understanding signed with partner agencies

Develop a case study methodology

Select sites to be included in the case studies

Reconvene by conference call according to a
regular schedule

Begin gathering data

Conduct two face-to-face meetings, including a
business meeting in Washington, D.C. and a
meeting at a selected facility or community

A draft report of the results of the case studies
should be ready for distribution at the next meeting
of the NEJAC, added Mr. Carter. Mr. Charles Lee,
Associate Director of Policy and Interagency Liaison,
Office of Environmental Justice, EPA, DFO for the
Executive Council of the NEJAC, and former chair of
the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee, will
assist the workgroup in developing its strategic plan.

In closing, Mr. Carter, along with Dr. Mildred
McClain, Executive Director, Citizens for
Environmental Justice and a former member of the
International subcommittee, and Ms. Doris
Bradshaw, Executive Director, Defense Depot
Memphis TN Concerned Citizens Committee, offered
a presentation about how they view the role of EPA
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office
(FFRRO) in affected communities.

3.0 PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS

This section summarizes the presentations made
and the reports submitted to the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee of the NEJAC.

3.1 Update on the Activities of the Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response

Mr. Michael Shapiro, Principal Deputy Assistant
Administrator, EPA OSWER, discussed the mission
of OSWER and described the vision Ms. Horinko had
brought to the office about how its programs were to

move into the future. Ms. Horinko, he explained, had
originally identified five priorities or initiatives that she
intends to implement. A sixth initiative recently had
been added to the agenda, he noted. The initiatives,
in no order of priority, he continued, are:

One Cleanup Program to Better Integrate
Cleanup Information: The next generation of
cleanup programs will be increasingly consistent
and transparent to the public, said Mr. Shapiro.
He explained those goals would be
accomplished by using a common terminology,
data, and information that will be available
through the Internet to the public at any time.
Such information will include the status of the
site, the entity that is responsible for the
cleanup, the entity that is responsible for
overseeing the cleanup, and sources of
additional information.

Expanding the Brownfields Revitalization
Concept Revitalization and reuse should be a
core component of all cleanup programs
conducted by EPA, stated Mr. Shapiro. The
results of lessons learned under the Brownfields
program are being adopted by other programs,
including the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) program, the underground
storage tank program, and federal facility
programs, he said. In addition, they are being
incorporated into both private and public
programs, he added. Mr. Shapiro then
announced that Mr. Stephen Luftig, former
Director of the Superfund Program, would
manage the effort under the new administration.

Recycling and Waste Minimization: The efforts
of programs under which both hazardous and
non-hazardous waste streams are managed will
focus on energy recovery, recycling and waste
minimization, declared Mr. Shapiro.

Retail Initiative: As part of this initiative to
encourage the consumers to make
environmentally sound purchasing decisions,
EPA will endeavor to increase awareness of the
environment among the public, said Mr. Shapiro.
In addition, he said, EPA will examine ways to
build partnerships and conduct pilot activities
designed to reduce source contamination and
encourage environmental stewardship.

Workforce Development and Succession
Planning: To meet the challenges of the future,
EPA will address issues related to diversity in
the workforce and will prepare current staff to
take on emerging issues, said Mr. Shapiro. It is

7-4

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

estimated, he pointed out, that 50 percent of the
current leadership of EPA will retire over the
next five years. It imperative, he stated, that
EPA train current staff and hire new staff.

Enhancing Counter-Terrorism Program: In the
future, Mr. Shapiro continued, EPA will face the
challenge of combating the biological and
chemical threats that, he noted, are becoming
increasingly frequent.

In closing, Mr. Shapiro said that the initiatives he had
described, while not new, are broad themes on
which Ms. Horinko wishes the OSWER program to
focus. Those themes, he added, had been
"percolating" within OSWER for some time.

After thanking Mr. Shapiro for his briefing, Ms. Eady
discussed the "enormity" of the challenge facing the
subcommittee, noting that the members of the
subcommittee were fortunate to have OSWER as a
member of theirteam. Referring to testimony offered
during the public comment period of the previous
evening, Ms. Eady stated that the issue of federal
facilities was a recurring one. She then suggested
that a subcommittee work group be formed to
consider how the subcommittee might assist the
Federal Facilities Work Group on that controversial
issue.

3.2 Update on Mossville, Calcasieu Parish,
Louisiana

Mr. Samuel Coleman, Director, Compliance and
Enforcement Division, EPA Region 6, reported on
the progress made in Mossville, Calcasieu Parish,
Louisiana. Mossville, said Mr. Coleman, is a "very
small and disproportionately industrialized town" in
the suburbs of Lake Charles, Louisiana that, until
recently, had not been enumerated separately on the
census rolls of the state of Louisiana. Yet, the
community has been affected adversely by the
industrial complexes located in its midst, Mr.
Coleman stated. He then provided an overview of
the events that had transpired in the three years
since residents of Calcasieu Parish had approached
Mr. Jerry Clifford, Deputy Regional Administrator,
EPA Region 6, with data on blood dioxin levels.

The data, Mr. Coleman reported, had included
information on pooled samples and samples taken
from 11 individuals living in Calcasieu Parish. He
stated that, at Mr. Clifford's request, the Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
had prepared a health consultation on the basis of
the data. EPA then followed the activities of ATSDR
closely as that agency began a dioxin exposure

investigation in Mossville, he said, adding that
ATSDR, EPA, the Louisiana Department of Health
and Hospitals (LDHH), and the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) held a
public meeting in the Lake Charles area to discuss
the results of the exposure investigation. Louisiana
Governor Mike Foster (D) then announced the
formation of a joint task force made up of
representatives of the four agencies and the
community that was to report to the Governor within
90 days, he stated.

EPA and LDEQ are taking an active role in assisting
residents of Mossville and Calcasieu Parish,
continued Mr. Coleman. Because of the close
proximity of many residences to major petrochemical
facilities, EPA, along with other state, local and
federal agencies, is investigating air quality, as well
as the quality of ground- and surface-water. He
stated that environmental data indicate exceedances
of the state's ambient air quality standards for 1,2-
dichloroethane, as well as elevated levels of 1,3-
butadiene and benzene. In addition, LDEQ
considers the Lower Calcasieu watershed a priority
concern, said Mr. Coleman. Fishing advisories are
in effect in portions of the watershed because of
elevated levels of toxins, including
hexachlorobutadiene, he added. According to data
in EPA's Emergency Response Notification System
(ERNS), industries in Calcasieu Parish every year
report "emergency releases" to the air, land, and
water that exceed a total of 500,000 pounds.

Because of potential public health threats in the
area, continued Mr. Coleman, EPA is engaged
actively in a broad multi-program, multi-agency
initiative to address not only the concerns of the
residents of Mossville, but also the concerns of the
larger community of Calcasieu Parish.

Mr. Coleman then stated that, since the issues
surfaced in 1996, several significant
accomplishments related to the community and the
industrial complex had been achieved. Through an
industry association, the Lake Area Industrial
Alliance, and the LDEQ, the community, he reported,
have been able to accomplish four major goals:

To significantly increase and enhance air
monitoring efforts in the area. Specifically, the
community has secured local, state, and federal
monies for the installation of four additional
monitoring stations, three of which monitor for
the presence of dioxins.

To secure the performance of follow-up
screening and interviews by ATSDR. ATSDR

7-5

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

returned to the community on November 26
through 29, 2001 to conduct the screening,
along with private interviews to discuss any
health issues that might be of concern to
individuals. ATSDR also had agreed to conduct
a parish-wide dioxin screening study that will
begin in 2002.

To secure a voice for the community in dealing
with industry. Concern about that issue has
been expressed among members of the
community and a community advisory council
has been established to deal with issues specific
to Calcasieu Parish. The council held its first
meeting in November 2001, and has been
successful in raising a number of issues related
to hazardous waste, including the incineration of
hazardous waste and the remediation of
groundwater contamination that each of the
facilities in the area was undertaking.

To secure the presentation of a health
symposium for the medical community and
health providers. The symposium, which is
scheduled for February 2002, will help health
care providers learn to adequately diagnose and
treat adverse effects of environmental hazards
or ailments caused by environmental exposure.
The symposium will be closed to the general
public so that emphasis can be placed on the
medical and health care community.

In closing, Mr. Coleman stated his view that EPA and
LDEQ believe that community involvement and
meaningful public participation in the decision-
making process are integral parts of any effort to
deal with environmental concerns. The multi-agency
workgroup, he said, has made every effort to involve
the entire community of Calcasieu Parish in efforts to
resolve environmental problems. EPA has met on
numerous occasions with members of the
community and representatives of environmental
groups, including Mossville Environmental Action
Now, Inc. (M.E.A.N.), to discuss the Agency's
direction and activities. The multi-agency work
group also is attempting to schedule a public
meeting and will continue to meet throughout 2002
to identify and carry out any follow-up action items,
said Mr. Coleman. The effort will include
investigations of air, surface water and sediment,
groundwater, soil, and food pathways in an effort to
identify the source of the dioxin exposure, and, if it is
a current source, to eliminate it.

Mr. Kip Holden, Representative, Louisiana
Legislature and a member of the subcommittee,
thanked Mr. Coleman for the work that Region 6 had

been doing in Calcasieu Parish, stating that the
successes cited by Mr. Colemen proved that the
involvement of members of the community with local,
state, and federal agencies had brought about a
positive and meaningful dialogue. Mr. Holden added
that such a positive result had occurred at a time at
which historical mistrust had marred the relationships
among the community, LDEQ, and the Louisiana
Office of Public Health.

Ms. Mary Nelson, Bethel New Life, Inc. and a
member of the subcommittee, added that the
experience of the Calcasieu Parish community is an
excellent example of good happening in a
community. She then asked Mr. Coleman to identify
the factors that had helped change the sense of
hopelessness the residents of Mossville had
experienced. Mr. Coleman identified four factors that
had helped empower the community, as follows:

The federal government came to the community

Quarterly meetings were held to give the
community a voice

The community was provided with the sampling
data when those data became available and was
given a "whole-picture-scenario" explanation of
the data

EPA headquarters assisted actively with funding
and direction

Mr. Coleman then stated that the atmosphere in
Mossville is positive, but noted that the community
continues to face serious issues. Overall, he noted,
the community is very pleased with the level of
communication that has been established with local,
state, and federal government agencies.

3.3 Brownfields Minority Worker Training
Program

Ms. Sharon Beard, National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), provided
an update on the accomplishments of her agency's
Brownfields Minority Worker Training Program
(MWTP). Ms. Beard announced that, to date,
NIEHS' Brownfields MWTP had provided training at
more than 20 sites in 11 of 16 Brownfields showcase
communities. During the first year of the program,
reported Ms. Beard, 405 students were trained, and
approximately 225 students have been placed in
jobs. The job placement rate, she noted, is 64
percent, adding that the gender breakdown among
trainees is 86 percent male and 14 percent female.
NIEHS had received $3 million from EPA to

7-6

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

implement the Brownfields MWTP, reported Ms.
Beard. Exhibit 8-2 describes the MWTP.

Exhibit 8-2

	

BROWNFIELDS MINORITY
WORKER TRAINING PROGRAM

The Brownfields Minority Worker Training Program
(MWTP) was established in September 1995 by the
National Institute of Environmental Health Science
(NIEHS) to provide a series of national pilot
programs to test a range of strategies for the
recruitment and training of young persons. The
targeted young people are individuals who live near
hazardous waste sites or those in the community who
are at risk of exposure to contaminated properties,
with the specific focus of preparing such individuals
to work in the environmental field. The program
encompasses s a broad geographic area and reaches
several urban populations in high-risk contaminated
areas.

The projects, all focused on environmental careers,
are developed within the context of other social and
health needs of the community. The various
programs provide pre-employment job training,
including training in literacy and life skills,
environmental preparation, and courses in
construction skills; environmental worker training,
including training in abatement of hazardous waste,
asbestos, lead; and safety and health training. Some
training also includes enrollment in apprenticeship
programs for construction and environmental
remediation workers. In addition, particular emphasis
is placed on establishing a mentoring program
designed to enhance the participants' problem-solving
skills and understanding of individual self-esteem and
teamwork in the application of technical knowledge to
environmental and related problems.

The program promotes partnerships with academic
and other institutions, with a particular focus on
historically black colleges and universities, and with
public schools and community-based organizations
located in or near the affected area to provide pre-
mathematics, science or other education to
participants in the program before or as they enter the
training program. The first cooperative agreements
provided funding for seven programs for training
minority inner-city youth to enter the environmental
field.

NIEHS' Worker Education and Training Program
(WETP), of which the MWTP is a part, has provided
training to targeted populations in all regions of the
country, continued Ms. Beard. During fiscal year
2001, that program had delivered 4,806 courses,

reaching 78,665 workers. That training, she said,
represents more than 1 million hours of health and
safety training. An initiative has been added,
continued Ms. Beard, to provide training to
individuals working at the site of the World Trade
Center disaster.

Ms. Beard then stated that the WETP had
established a successful pre-apprenticeship program
for minority communities. Since 1995, she said,
approximately 2,000 young minority adults have
been successfully trained, with 9,000 hours of
training and 122,000 contact hours last year. The
overall job placement rate was approximately 63
percent, she added.

In addition, said Ms. Beard, a training program was
initiated in the Houston, Texas metropolitan area in
2000. The program has become established quickly
in the communities it serves, she noted, and has
garnered recognition from elected officials,
community residents, and social service agencies.
In total, 30 trainees have completed their training,
and 21 graduates (70 percent of the graduates)
currently are employed. Salaries earned by the
graduates range from $16,640 to $39,462, well
above the average salary for the Houston area, she
added.

3.4 Update on Brownfields and Environmental
Justice Pilot Programs

Ms. Garczynski reported on the current status of
brownfields pilot programs conducted by OSWER.
OSWER maintains three pilot programs for
supporting the assessment of property and
contamination, providing low-interest loans for
cleanup, and providing job training, she said, adding
that those job training programs are coordinated
closely with the NIEHS program. Currently, she
continued, 399 communities have received funds
from OSWER to conduct site assessments of
Brownfields properties. Of those, 126 communities
and consortiums organized by states, have
established revolving loan funds for their programs.
Because ofthe current economic situation, continued
Ms. Garczynski, the loans have become of great
interest to many organizations who want to borrow
money for similar programs. Ms. Garczynski then
pointed out that, in response to recommendations
offered by the NEJAC, nonprofit organizations
receive a 30 percent discount on the principal, and
government borrowers receive a 20 percent
discount.

OSWER also currently maintains 46 job training
programs, said Ms. Garczynski; statistics for the

7-7

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

programs are very similar to those reported earlier
for the NIEHS program, she added, emphasizing
that the two programs are coordinated carefully to
avoid duplication of efforts. The programs actually
complement each other, and the selection panels are
very similar, she added. Ms. Garczynski then
reported that the average job placement rates for the
OSWER programs range from 70 to 75 percent and
that average salaries range from $13 to $15 per
hour. Some individuals, she added, have achieved
remarkable success by becoming supervisors or
starting their own businesses.

The results of the brownfields cleanup assessment
pilot programs are equally astonishing, Ms.
Garczynski continued. As a result of the 2,700 site
assessments conducted under the program, more
than three billion dollars have been invested in
properties, she explained. Approximately 15,000
jobs have been generated through efforts made to
date, she said, adding that the seed money provided
by EPA for the $200,000 assessment grants is
yielding an average return of from 2.5 to 10 times on
the investment dollar. Few agencies, Ms.
Garczynski pointed out, can claim such an
extraordinary rate of return.

3.4.1 Update on Issues Related to Land Use

Ms. Garczynski reported that, in December 2001,
Congress had passed the Brownfields tax incentive.
The tax deductions provided for under the legislation
are extremely important in attracting private
investment, she said. As EPA's thinking about
Brownfields revitalization evolves, land use has
become a central issue, she continued, adding that
Ms. Eady earlier had identified land life-cycle
management as a principal theme for discussion by
the subcommittee. Ms. Garczynski explained that
life-cycle management is the concept that the use of
property evolves over time and that a given property
usually undergoes a number of uses during its
lifetime. The fact remains, she said, that property is
becoming increasingly valuable as fewer properties
are available for development. Because of the need
to preserve green spaces, farm land, and other
resources, she explained, a property may be used
for one purpose for 20 years and subsequently may
be used for another purpose. Thinking about
property in terms of life cycle management, rather
than as the single use of an individual property, said
Ms. Garczynski, is a new element in EPA's thinking.

In light of that thinking, she continued, the Agency
had worked with the Environmental Law Institute to
develop a guidebook for the redevelopment of
private property. EPA, she continued, also had

worked with a number of entities, including the
International City/County Management Association
(ICMA), to examine the issue of institutional controls
governing land use, an increasingly significant issue
in the Superfund and RCRA programs, as well as a
number of other programs. ICMA is developing a
web site on institutional controls, said Ms.
Garczynski, The web site, , which
ICMA will maintain, will be a resource that will
provide the most current information about
institutional controls on land use, she added.

Continuing, Ms. Garczynski identified a number of
innovative land use programs currently under
development, including:

The U.S. Department of Energy program for the
long-term stewardship of its properties

An information management system under
development by the Department of the Navy is
to be used in tracking institutional controls
governing land use

Guardian Trust, a program being developed by
the state of Pennsylvania as an underwriting
process through which a nonprofit trust will
guarantee the enforcement of institutional
controls

Ms. Garczynski then explained that a number of
stakeholder meetings had been held during the
summer of 2001 to considerthe Brownfields program
and the issues that should be the focus of the new
action agenda for the program. Among the issues
examined, she continued, was the need to unify
planning and redevelopment. Local, state, and
federal agencies lack long-term planning and reuse
efforts, she observed, and local redevelopment and
planning authorities do not work together effectively.
Federal regulations require that HUD, the U.S.
Department of Commerce's Economic Development
Administration, and the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) execute comprehensive
planning, she pointed out. Most communities, said
Ms. Garczynski, have comprehensive plans
developed to meet federal requirements; it is
important to determine how individual properties fit
within such plans and how redevelopment affects
those properties, she said. EPA, she then noted, is
working with the American Planning Association, the
National Association of Home Builders, and a
number of other groups to determine how long-term
planning and actual redevelopment can complement
one another. A number of design models have been
developed to support the integration of
redevelopment into the planning process, she said.

7-8

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

Last, said Ms. Garczynski, OSWER had revised its
grant requirements so that grantees under pilot
programs would be permitted to enter into subgrant
arrangements with nonprofit organizations.
Therefore, community relations and outreach efforts
now are being carried out by nonprofit entities, she
said, adding that subgrants to nonprofit organizations
have begun to play a larger role in OSWER pilot
programs than had been the case in the past.
OSWER, she stated, hopes to expand such efforts to
five or six communities in the coming year.

Ms. Garczynski then stated that OSWER also has
begun to work with the EPA Green Buildings
program to examine the issue of sustainable design
for Brownfields redevelopment. OSWER, she
continued, also was working with the EPA Office of
Water to address the issue of adverse effects of
development on watersheds. OSWER also is
working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) and other federal entities to
resolve issues related to the co-location of most
Brownfields communities with waterfront real estate.
Such co-location, said Ms. Garczynski, provides an
opportunity to improve control of non-point source
pollution as Brownfields properties are redeveloped.
OSWER also is working with NOAA and various port
authorities to address the lack of deep-water ports in
the country, she continued. Dredging, she said, is
becoming a major issue, one that involves
destabilization of fish populations and disposal of
dredged sludge. In 2002, she added, OSWER will
continue to pursue these issues.

3.4.2 Update on Brownfields Legislation

Ms. Garczynski then reported that OSWER
continued to work on the Brownfields legislation that
was passed by the United States Senate on April 25,
2001 and introduced in the United States House of
Representatives on September 10, 2001. In the
wake of the events of September 11, she said, the
legislation had not come to a vote. However, she
noted, OSWER anticipates that the House would
take up the legislation in January 2002. The
Brownfields legislation, added Ms. Garczynski,
includes several provisions that are significant to
environmental justice concerns. Among those
provisions are:

For the first time, the legislation would allow for
cleanup grants, rather than loans, of as much as
$200,000 that would be available to nonprofit
organizations, as well as to city governments.

The legislation would provide a prospective
purchaser protection from exposure to liability
under federal regulations.

The legislation would expand the role of state
programs significantly. Currently, 44 states have
voluntary cleanup programs in place; for many of
those programs, demand far exceeds capacity to
respond. The legislation would triple the amount
of funding available for such programs.

For the first time, the legislation would allow
states to use such funding to oversee cleanup of
properties.

Ms. Garczynski then reemphasized OSWER's
commitment to keeping the members of the
subcommittee updated on the progress of the
legislation and on the efforts of OSWER.

Ms. Eady asked about funding mechanisms for
public housing being demolished and at which
elevated pH levels and elevated concentrations of
asbestos, lead, and other contaminants have been
found to be present. Ms. Garczynski responded that,
currently, under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) program, a response by EPA to releases
from a structure is prohibited. However, she stated,
OSWER's interpretation of that prohibition has been
fairly liberal because of "the broken window
syndrome" - that is, once asbestos, lead-based
paint, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), or other
pollutants have been released from a structure, such
pollutants clearly are being released into the
environment. OSWER currently is using money
funded under the CERCLA program, she continued,
to respond to and address such releases that occur
outside a structure. The issue then remains, she
pointed out, whether the exclusion under section
104J of CERCLA is applicable, observing that the
legislation is "more than vague." Ms. Garczynski
then stated that HUD conducts programs that
address such issues.

4.0 SUMMARY OF DIALOGUE ABOUT THE
STRATEGIC PLAN

During the one-day meeting, the members of the
subcommittee discussed the issues described below.
They focused on potential ideas to start the
development of a strategic plan for the
subcommittee. The preliminary plan addresses four
major issues: the creation of a workforce
development committee, the addition of a
subcommittee member to co-chair the NEJAC
Federal Facilities Work Group, land use and

7-9

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

revitalization, and the role of the subcommittee in the
pollution prevention policy issue for the December
2002 meeting of the NEJAC. Additional issues
addressed in the preliminary strategic plan are the
role of EPA in fostering strategic planning by
communities for the reuse and revitalization of
contaminated sites, planning for post-cleanup uses,
and applications of lessons learned through the
demonstration projects conducted by the federal
Interagency Working Group on Environmental
Justice (IWG),and other outstanding projects.

The subcommittee recommended that the NEJAC
explore EPA's role in fostering strategic planning by
communities for the reuse and revitalization of
contaminated sites, planning for post-cleanup uses,
and using lessons learned through the
demonstration projects of the Interagency Working
Group on Environmental Justice (IWG) and other
outstanding projects. Further, the subcommittee
recommended that the NEJAC respond to the
following issues to be considered for the
development of the subcommittee's strategic plan:

Creation of a workforce developmentworkgroup

Addition of one subcommittee member to the
Federal Facilities Work Group

Incorporation of a focus on land use - that is,
revitalization and reuse - and development of
planning and reuse case studies and a list of
tools and resources

Examination of the role of the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee on the Pollution Prevention
Work Group

After some discussion, the members of the
subcommittee agreed to clarify for the Executive
Council of the NEJAC the goals that had been
identified for project idea number 3, which would
explore how EPA can have a role in fostering
community strategic planning for the re-use of
contaminated sites after cleanup. See Exhibit 8-3 for
a description of that project, as well as two other
potential projects for inclusion in the strategic plan of
the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee for 2002.

Specific goals for proposed project idea number 3
include:

Provide tools and incentives to foster
revitalization, reuse, and life-cycle management
of property

Determine whether the target audience is
community groups or EPA and other federal
agencies

Showcase five to six case studies and highlight
the challenges faced by and achievements
accomplished by the parties; specific questions
include:

—	What were the factors in the success of
each?

—	Did the project identify and use key tools for
community planning?

—	What additional tools might EPA provide to
communities?

5.0 ACTION ITEMS

This section summarizes the action Items adopted
by the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee of the
NEJAC.

The members of the subcommittee discussed at
length three pending action items for 2002. Those
action items were moving oversight of the Federal
Facilities Work Group to the Waste and Facility
Siting Subcommittee and expanding the membership
of that group; long-term planning through which
federal facilities will integrate issues related to land
use, development, and redevelopment into their
procedures; and identifying useful models, such as
the Washington Navy Yard and other sites, that
serve as positive examples of the ways in which
OSWER works with communities to achieve
revitalization and reuse. The members of the
subcommittee adopted the following action items:

/ Compile names of potential candidates to be
nominated as the new member of the Federal
Facilities Work Group, in light of the core
qualifications determined by the subcommittee.

/ Conduct a conference call to discuss the
candidates with Ms. Garczynski, Ms. Eady, Dr.
McClain, and Mr. Rivera.

/ Locate and distribute to the members of the
subcommittee a copy of "Community Planning,"
developed by the American Planning
Association.

7-10

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

Exhibit 8-3

	

STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE WASTE AND FACILITY SITING SUBCOMMITTEE

SUGGESTED PROJECTS

The central theme of the strategic planning for the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee is to address a variety of
issues identified as priorities for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER). Among those priorities are workforce diversity and development, an initiative to
encourage environmentally sound purchasing decisions, recycling and waste minimization, revitalization and
sustainability, and consistency of cleanup programs. During a meeting with OSWER on November 19, 2001,
members of the subcommittee had identified possible projects through which to advise the Agency about
environmental justice and land re-use and Revitalization. Possible projects include:

•	Idea 1: The subcommittee could advise about underground storage tanks (UST), addressing in particular the
problem of abandoned gas stations as a precursor to land re-use. Questions to consider include, "how well is the
risk-based decision-making model being used?" "How well have requirements under OSWER Directive 9610.17
(which suggests that cumulative health risks to people living in low-income and minority neighborhoods be
considered when evaluating risk and prioritizing cleanups) worked?"and "How can it work better?" The
subcommittee could evaluate a sample of low-income communities and communities of color where USTs are
key environmental justice issues. Other questions include: "Have cumulative health risks been taken into
account using risk-based corrective action?" "What are the pitfalls, surprises, etc.?" "How else can
environmental justice be incorporated into EPA's emerging UST-field program?" and "Does "streamlining" of
corrective action process negatively impact communities at risk?" The subcommittee would issue a report on the
use of OSWER Directive 9610.17 and the use of cumulative health risk factors in risk-based decision-making,
making recommendations for improvement.

•	Idea 2: The subcommittee could advise OSWER about how to achieve consistent cleanup standards and the use
of institutional controls. This advice would be in coordination with the new Superfund Committee of the
National Advisory Council on Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT). The subcommittee's efforts
would focus on institutional controls at Superfund sites and other contaminated sites in those communities of
color and low-income communities, which often host the largest number of contaminated sites. The project
could evaluate not just the efficacy and consistency on institutional controls across OSWER programs, but also
the long-term stewardship of wastes left in place. Finally, the project would identify any violation of institution
controls and any flaws in institutional controls.

•	Idea 3: Using lessons learned from the Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (IWG)

Demonstration Projects, as well as other successful projects, the subcommittee can explore how EPA can have a
role in fostering community strategic planning for the re-use of contaminated sites after cleanup. The
subcommitte could identify model projects where contaminated properties, Superfund sites, Brownfields
properties, or RCRA sites, have been reused for environmentally sound and sustainable projects. Questions to
address include: "Are there incentives EPA can use to engage communities and industry around sustainability
and waste minimization? and "Is there a way EPA can better promote innovative technologies for cleanup and
assessment in low-income and minority communities? The subcommittee would issue a report on models for
engaging communities and fostering community planning. This report would incorporate an evaluation of the
impacts on social and cultural values by environmental decision-making, including discussions about
gentrification, whether sustainable enterprises on re-used land promotes gentrification, and how communities and
EPA can avoid gentrification.

7-11

Seattle, Washington, December 5, 2001


-------
MEETING SUMMARY
of the

VIRTUAL TOUR AND PUBLIC COMMENT SESSIONS

of the

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

December 3 and 4, 2001
Seattle, Washington

Meeting Summary Accepted By:

Charles Lee

Designated Federal Officer

Peggy Shepard
Acting Chair


-------
CHAPTER TWO
VIRTUAL TOUR AND
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

1.0 INTRODUCTION

On December 3rd, 2001, a "virtual" tour of local sites
with environmental justice concerns was presented
to the members of the National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council's (NEJAC) Executive
Council. The tour was intended to provide to the
NEJAC information that is representative of the
environmental concerns of local communities in the
Seattle region. Individuals representing communities
in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska discussed
their concerns about fish consumption and
contamination.

The Executive Council of the NEJAC also held one
public comment period on December 4, 2001.
During the session, 29 individuals offered comments.

This chapter presents summaries of the testimony
the Executive Council of the NEJAC received during
the virtual tour, the public comment period, and the
comments and questions that the testimony
prompted on the part of the members of the
Executive Council. Section 2.0, Virtual Tour Held on
December3,2001, summarizes presentations made
on fish consumption and contamination. Section 3.0,
Public Comment Period Held on December 4th,
2001, summarizes the testimony offered on that date
related to fish consumption and water quality. It also
summarizes the dialogues between presenters and
members of the Council that followed those
presentations.

2.0 VIRTUAL TOUR HELD ON
DECEMBER 3, 2001

Five individuals presented information during the
virtual tour; their presentations are summarized
below.

2.1 Frank Roberts, Coeur d'Alene Tribe, Idaho

Mr. Frank Roberts, Coeur d'Alene Tribe, Idaho,
explained to the members of the Executive Council
that he had worked with the Coeur d'Alene tribe for
10 years, performing GIS work and developing
baseline information about the contamination and
consumption offish in the tribal region. Waterways
on which members of the tribe depend for
subsistence living are being contaminated with
heavy metals and lead from strip mining operations,
he said. The elders are passing away, he explained,
and, because members of the tribe cannot live off
the land's resources, the tribe's traditions and culture
are disappearing with the elders. Fewer than five
remaining members of the tribe speak the native

language, and the tribe's legacy soon will be lost,
declared Mr. Roberts. In closing, Mr. Roberts
pointed out that the government protects
endangered species and plants, but is not doing
anything to preserve the well-being of the
"endangered" Coeur d'Alene tribe.

Ms. Savonala Home, North Carolina Association of
Black Lawyers and chair of the Enforcement
Subcommittee of the NEJAC, asked Mr. Roberts
about the loss of heritage and culture among the
Coeur d'Alene people. Mr. Roberts replied that,
since the advisories tell people not to eat fish, the
people must purchase their food in stores. That
practice adversely affects the culture, he explained,
because people are not exposed to nature and tribal
heritage. It also creates a "generational disconnect,"
he stated. Mr. Roberts then pointed out that it is not
difficult to obtain money for performing studies of
contamination, but it is difficult to obtain money for
studying cultures and for preserving those cultures.

2.2 Daniel Morfin, Farm Worker, Granger,
Washington

Daniel Morfin, farm worker, Granger, Washington,
who reported that he has worked in the agriculture
industry for more than 20 years, stated that many
farm workers suffer from ailments caused by
exposure to pesticides. The water quality in
Washington is poor, he continued, and many canals
in the Aquemine Valley are polluted. Thousands of
gallons of herbicides and pesticides are applied to
the land, he stated; those materials can travel for
miles and pollute rivers far from the source of
contamination, he pointed out. Orchards often are
located near towns and cities, he added, where
population density is high. A recent medical study
conducted among residents in the valley had
revealed thatthe rates of respiratory ailments among
those residents are among the highest in the nation,
continued Mr. Morfin. Laws that are intended to
protect farm workers are not enforced, he declared.
Farm workers have tried to alert agencies about the
harmful pesticides that are being used, he continued,
but the agencies have not taken action.

Mr. Morfin stated that in Oregon and Washington,
more chemicals are used for agriculture than any
other states in the nation. Farm workers are the only
people who know exactly which illegal chemicals and
mixtures of chemicals are being used and stored, he
claimed. Those farm workers are the only people
who will tell agencies the truth, he emphasized,
because they have no reason to lie. Mr. Morfin said

2-1

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

reiterated that regulatory agencies continue to
neglect to take action.

Ms. Wilma Subra, Louisiana Environmental Action
Network and member of the Air and Water
Subcommittee of the NEJAC, asked Mr. Morfin
whether the pesticides that farm workers are using
are illegal or whether it is the mixing of the pesticides
that is illegal. Mr. Morfin replied that some of the
pesticides in use have been banned by the federal
government, and the mixing of the pesticides is
illegal, as well. In addition, he asserted, families are
being exposed to the chemicals, and many
communities are located along fields that are treated
by aerial spraying. Children living in those rural
areas exhibit high levels of exposure, he declared,
and asthma rates are elevated. Salmon in the
Columbia River are contaminated with DDT, he
stated. Mr. Morfin then said that farm workers often
have advance notice of inspections, so they remove
labels from the tanks in which chemicals are stored
so that inspectors will not be able to determine what
chemicals are present. Mr. Larry Charles,
ONE/CHANE Inc. and member of the International
Subcommittee of the NEJAC, pointed out that there
are similar cases throughout the country. The
NEJAC should make an effort to influence EPA to
address such issues, declared Mr. Charles. He then
suggested that Mr. Morfin attempt to contact the
regional administrator of EPA to solicit the agency's
assistance.

2.3 Jeri Sundvall, Environmental Justice Action
Group, Portland, Oregon

Explaining that when her tribe lost its status as a
federally-recognized Indian tribe in 1954, Ms. Jeri
Sundvall, Environmental Justice Action Group,
Portland, Oregon, stated that it's members were
expected to assimilate into the general population.
Although the tribe's status was reinstated in 1986,
she continued, it had been "robbed of its heritage."
Portland is affected by issues related to water, she
explained, and contamination has created a
Superfund site on the banks of the Willamette river.
Fishermen are developing cancers, she stated, and
Native American fishermen are more susceptible
because their rate of consumption of fish is high.
There is a "large disconnect" between Native
Americans and regulatory agencies, she pointed out.

Ms. Sundvall informed the members of the NEJAC
that her tribe currently is fighting a proposal for the
development of a highway through their community.
The issue is an environmental justice issue, she
stated, explaining that air quality in the community
already is poor. The rate of asthma in her

community is much higherthan the national average,
she continued, but the asthma rates are much lower
in the affluent section of southwest Portland. The
U.S. Federal Highway Administration currently is
examining models prepared by the state that predict
that air quality will improve by 40 percent in the
future, she explained, noting that those data are
being used to generate support for the new highway.
The problem with the models, she claimed, is that
the models assume that nonexistent, efficient
technologies will be implemented in the future. It is
not logical to base data on such assumptions, she
stated.

2.4 RosemaryAhtuangaruak, Inupiat Community
of Arctic Slope, Barrow, Alaska

Speaking on behalf of the Native Village of Nuiqsut
of Barrow, Alaska, Ms. Rosemary Ahtuangaruak,
Inupiat Community of Arctic Slope, Barrow, Alaska,
explained to the NEJAC that contamination of water
caused by the operations of the oil industry is a
serious problem in rural Alaska. There are 229
federally recognized tribes in the state, she pointed
out, and issues related to environmental justice just
recently have begun to be addressed. State
agencies often value profit over tribal beliefs and
views, she asserted. Only 500 people live in her
village, she explained, and their views often are
overlooked. Industry representatives typically have
the resources to perform studies and analyses, she
emphasized, and the results often are misconstrued.
For example, she stated, federal agencies say that
fish taken from local waters are safe to eat, but those
agencies do not account for the high consumption
rates of fish among Native Americans. She
explained that Native Americans consume parts of
the fish that are more contaminated than other parts;
the studies do not account for that practice, she
noted.

Ms. Jana Walker, Law Office of Jana L. Walker and
member ofthe Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee of
the NEJAC, asked Ms. Ahtuangaruak about the
status of fish advisories in Alaska and what
recommendations have been made about cod. The
advisories recommend the consumption of no more
than six cod per year, she replied, adding that fish
advisories are announced in relation to the actions of
the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). The
quantity and quality of fish are declining, she
continued, and their fat content is lower than it was
in the past.

Mr. Charles then pointed out that the NEJAC would
be much more effective if it could influence the way
EPA acts, as opposed to focusing on the small

2-2

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

issues brought before it. Ms. Ahtuangaruak asked
the NEJAC how she can gain access to the
resources that the NEJAC has at its disposal. Ms.
Annabelle Jaramillo, Benton County Board of
Commission and chair of the Air and Water
Subcommittee of the NEJAC, replied thatthe NEJAC
does not necessarily have resources. She explained
that the NEJAC can advise EPA to enforce existing
laws, because the laws should have an equal effect
on all communities.

2.5 LeeTanuvasa, Korean Woman's Association,
Tacoma, Washington

Mr. Lee Tanuvasa, Korean Woman's Association,
Tacoma, Washington, informed the councilthat, with
the assistance of funding from EPA, his organization
is conducting a study to determine whether it is safe
for Asian Pacific Islander communities to consume
shellfish. In such communities, consumption offish
is part of the everyday diet, he added. Mercury
contamination in fish is the principal problem. The
language barrier poses a significant problem to
informing residents about the dangers of consuming
some shellfish, he pointed out, adding that there is a
need to provide more education to the communities.
Mr. Tanuvasa requested advice about the most
effective way to present the findings of the study to
communities.

3.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD HELD ON
DECEMBER 4, 2001

This section summarizes the comments presented to
the Executive Council during the public comment
period held on December 4, 2001, along with the
questions and observations those comments
prompted among members ofthe Executive Council.

Comments are summarized below in the order in
which they were offered.

3.1 Dr. Mildred McClain, Citizens for
Environmental Justice, Savannah, Georgia

Dr. Mildred McClain, executive director of Citizens
for Environmental Justice, Savannah, Georgia,
submitted a written statement to the members ofthe
Executive Council. In that statement, Dr. McClain
stated that, despite numerous revisions, the fish
advisory that was issued for Georgia and South
Carolina several years earlier remains at a
"disconnect" from citizens who frequently fish in
waterways in Georgia and South Carolina. The
outreach activities ofthe South Carolina Department
of Health and Environmental Control, the Georgia
Environmental Protection Division, and the

Savannah River Community Advisory Board, have
"failed to substantially inform economically
challenged individuals," the statement continued.
Advisories often are written only in English, the
statement pointed out, and signs are not posted in
many of the popular fishing locations. When fact
sheets and guides are written, community
involvement is not encouraged, wrote Dr. McClain;
such documents therefore often present information
in a way that is ineffective.

Dr. McClain's statement also pointed out that African
Americans in Georgia and South Carolina are
concerned about the cumulative effect of the
consumption of contaminated fish with other
vulnerabilities. She explained that citizens are
concerned about the close proximity of water bodies
to industrial operations and federal facilities. A more
aggressive educational and outreach program must
be implemented, wrote Dr. McClain. In summation,
Dr. McClain recommended in her statement that the
pollution of water bodies by industry and military
entities be reduced and that communication of risk to
the public be enhanced. In addition, minority
communities should be involved in research, and
easy to understand toxicological profiles of
contamination in water bodies should be developed,
the statement suggested.

3.2	Chief Johnny Jackson, Columbia EPED,
Underwood, Washington

Chief Johnny Jackson, Columbia EPED,
Underwood, Washington, explained to the members
of the Executive Council that he lives along the
Columbia River and that all the members of his
family are fishermen. He stated that, 15 years
earlier, he had taken from that river a fish that had no
eyes. People today are dying of cancer and
diabetes, he continued. The soil, water, and air
along the river must be cleaned, he declared,
because the residents are suffering. People in the
region have been unable to obtain from state
agencies information about the source of the
problems, he stated. Fishing is an integral part of life
for his community, Chief Jackson emphasized, and
the issues of contamination are an environmental
injustice, he declared.

3.3	Barbara Harper, Tyakama Nation, Yakima,
Washington

Ms. Barbara Harper, toxicologist and environmental
health scientist for the Tyakama Nation, Yakima,
Washington, submitted to the members of the
Executive Council a written statement about the
water quality of the Columbia River. In the

2-3

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

statement, Ms. Harper explained that she has been
evaluating the health consequences of consumption
offish taken from the polluted Columbia River.

Tribes living along the Columbia River have lived in
the Columbia Basin for more than 10,000 years, and
salmon always have been a part of the diet, culture,
and religion of those tribes, the statement pointed
out. Tribal members historically ate two to three
pounds offish per day, and treaties between federal
and tribal governments were intended to ensure that
tribes could continue to live their cultural lifestyle,
she explained. Today, maintenance of a traditional
diet offish would be lethal, she pointed out, because
data collected recently indicate that there are high
levels of contaminants in those fish. Ms. Harper's
statement asserted that the issue is one of
environmental justice, as well as a matter of treaty
rights and federal trust responsibility.

The statement then pointed out that a lack of
technical knowledge among tribal members causes
the misinterpretation of risk assessments and fish
advisories. When evaluating the health effects of
contamination, it continued, existing health
disparities must be considered. For example, Ms.
Harper's statement continued, tribal members eat
more fish than non-Native Americans.
Consequently, tribal members may be more
sensitive to contamination physiologically, the
statement emphasized. Fish advisories do nothing
to address the problem, the statement declared; the
burden of point and non-point source pollution
therefore must be reduced. Ms. Harper pointed out
that contamination is not a necessary part of
progress or global economic expansion, and tribal
people regard contamination as an attack on their
cultural resolve. In conclusion, the statement
pointed out that tribal members will continue to eat
contaminated fish because doing so is an element of
their culture and religion.

3.4 Marcia Henning, Washington Department of
Health, Olympia, Washington

In September 2001, a section of the Duwamish River
in Seattle was declared an EPA Superfund site, Ms.
Marcia Henning, Washington Department of Health,
Olympia, Washington, reported. The Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
currently is preparing a public health assessment of
the river, she continued. To determine how people
are exposed to toxins in the river, community
members were contacted about fish consumption
habits, she explained. Initial outreach efforts
indicated that many immigrant and refugee people
eat fish and crabs from the river, she continued.

Those residents often fish without obtaining a
license, she said, and agencies must reach out to
such communities to educate community members
about environmental health issues. However, such
individuals often distrust government agencies, she
explained. Training members of the community to
conduct interviews and translate materials therefore
is an effective way to gather information, she said.

Ms. Henning added that when working with
immigrant groups, Mr. Alan Rammer, aquatic and
marine educator for the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife, offers several strategies for
success. The strategies involve identifying a
respectful approach to sharing crucial information
with communities, knowing the resource limitations
of the agency involved, keeping promises and
fulfilling commitments, asking for the views of
communities, and building honest relationships, she
explained. In closing, Ms. Henning emphasized that
community outreach and education are essential
components of the health assessment process.

3.5	Tom Miller, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish
Commission, Portland, Oregon

Stating that his organization provides legal
assistance to four Native American tribes, Mr. Tom
Miller, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission,
Portland, Oregon, explained to the members of the
Executive Council that, 146 years earlier, the tribes
ceded most of their land in the Pacific Northwest to
the federal government. The government has not
honored the agreement, he stated. Because of
contamination of waterways, he pointed out, tribes
today are harvesting less than one percent of their
historical salmon take. If tribal members continue to
eat salmon at the historical rate of two to three
pounds per day, they would die because of the
hundreds of contaminants in the rivers, he asserted.
Tribes bear a disproportionate share of the
conservation burden, he added. Mr. Miller
concluded his statement by pointing out that the
federal government recently had authorized a $500
million effort to remediate polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCB) in the Hudson River. He expressed the hope
that a similar effort will be undertaken in the Pacific
Northwest.

3.6	Joanne Bonnar Prado, Washington
Department of Health, Olympia, Washington

Ms. Joanne Bonnar Prado, Washington Department
of Health, Olympia, Washington, explained to the
members of the Executive Council that she currently
was assisting in the development of a
communication strategy for fish advisories. She

2-4

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

explained that the goal of the effort was to identify
and understand communities predominantly affected
by the issuance of advisories. It also is imperative to
promote the reduction of sources of pollution to
ensure the health of communities, she added. In
addition, she continued, dietary considerations
should be taken into account when the need for an
advisory is assessed.

3.7	Enoch E. Shiedt, Maniilaq Association,
Kotzebue, Alaska

Stating that he was speaking for the northwest arctic
region, Mr. Enoch E. Shiedt, Maniilaq Association,
Kotzebue, Alaska, explained that the people of
Kivalina, Alaska, are concerned about the health of
the Wiluk River because of contamination from a
nearby mine. Trout in the river have become
increasingly scarce, he said, and levels of mercury
are rising. Contaminated water and the decline of
fish populations in the river forces community
members to supplement their source of food, he
continued, and people are unable to rely on their
subsistence lifestyle. Food sources that once were
plentiful are becoming delicacies, he said. As a
result, he explained, people are becoming
malnourished because they must rely on sources of
food that originate in the Western world.

Mr. Shiedt declared that the culture and heritage of
Eskimos is disappearing. Eskimos kill, hunt, and
trap only the wildlife they need, he explained, and all
parts of an animal are used. Inability to harvest
game from the natural environment makes it difficult
to pass along traditions, he added. Elders are willing
to pass along information about the life they
historically led, as well as about what they have
learned from past generations, he added, but many
young people do not wish to learn about their past
history. With the decline in water quality and fish
populations, the people of the northwest arctic region
can be considered an endangered species
themselves, Mr. Shiedt stated.

3.8	Art Invanoff, Native Village of Unalakleet,
Unalakleet, Alaska

Mr. Art Invanoff, Native Village of Unalakleet,
Unalakleet, Alaska, stated that the contamination of
subsistence food is a primary concern among tribal
members. Subsistence lifestyle is not a derogatory
term, he explained, and should not be associated
with the poor. It is a spiritual and social lifestyle, he
pointed out, and harvesting involves a sharing of
tribal heritage with elders. Improving the integrity of
aquatic ecosystems is a daunting task, he said, but
tribes must work together with the EPA.

Climate change is negatively impacting people who
live in the Arctic, he stated. Mr. Invanoff pointed out
that the instability of ice in rivers due to warming
temperatures makes fishing conditions much more
hazardous. With regards to risk assessments, he
continued, the best approach is to prevent
contaminants from being released into the
environment. Persistent organic pollutants (POPs)
are accumulating in the Arctic Region, he explained,
because they don't degrade in the cold weather.

In addition, he added, fish farms in the United States
have accidentally released unwanted parasites and
pathogens into waterways. This biological pollution
has irreversible and unpredictable ecological
impacts, he stated. Mr. Invanoff concluded by
declaring that a conservative approach should be
taken when considering the impact of pollution on
the environment.

3.9 RosemaryAhtuangaruak, InupiatCommunity
of Arctic Slope, Barrow, Alaska

Stating that she is from the native village of Nuiqsut,
Ms. Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, Inupiat Community of
Arctic Slope, Barrow, Alaska, explained that her
village relies on subsistence resources for survival.
Villagers harvest only what they consume, meaning
they never waste, she said, and resources are left in
pristine condition. Few villagers work jobs in oil and
gas exploration or development, she stated, because
food is too expensive for paychecks to cover.
Without a safe supply of food for consumption, there
is concern about surviving through the cold winter
months, she explained.

Ms. Ahtuangaruak emphasized that increasing
development around the village has diminished the
integrity of the natural resources on which they
depend for survival. They are suffering because
resources are impacted by the the development of
resources the Nation needs to grow, she asserted,
adding that the village's complaints are ignored
during public meetings. The benefits of living a
subsistence lifestyle also have been overlooked, she
stated. In closing, Ms. Ahtuangaruak reiterated that
the quantity and quality of fish in the waterways
surrounding her community have declined. Overthe
past decade, incidences of asthma, thyroid disease,
and other health disorders have increased rapidly,
but no research for a cause has been pursued, she
said.

2-5

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

3.10	Wilbur Slockish Jr., Columbia River
Education and Economic Development, The
Dalles, Oregon

Telling the members of the Executive Council that he
lives along the Columbia River, Mr. Wilbur Slockish
Jr., Columbia River Education and Economic
Development, The Dalles, Oregon, explained that he
is practicing his ancestors' way of life. He has no
formal education, he declared, but he has the
knowledge that has been passed down from his
ancestors. The climate is changing, he pointed out,
and the water temperature is rising. In addition, he
continued, dams, nuclear materials, and
transportation routes are contaminating riverways.

Mr. Slockish emphasized that the absorption of
contamination by natural resources should be
studied. People are being harmed, he asserted, yet
current studies are biased to allow the release of
contaminants to continue. The environment should
be protected, he said, so that people can continue to
gain knowledge and experience by living from the
land. His people have been affected since the
1850s, and they now suffer from diabetes and
cancer, he added. Mr. Slockish pointed out that
people can harvest fish only March through October
and therefore cannot gather enough food to survive
through the winter months.

3.11	Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental
Network, Bemidji, Minnesota

Pointing out that too often in history humans have
waited for damage to occur before taking
precautionary action, Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous
Environmental Network and former member of the
Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee of the NEJAC,
Bemidji, Minnesota, stated that POPs and persistent
bioaccumulative toxics (PBT) have been
documented in wildlife and plants in the Minnesota
area. Problems associated with releases of those
chemicals into the environment could be averted if
EPA were to incorporate precautionary measures
when assessing risk, he asserted. Uncertainty has
plagued environmental regulations, he
acknowledged. Regulatory agencies are required to
develop safe standards for toxic chemicals, he
explained, but science cannot determine what is
actually a safe level of a chemical. Native
Americans and minority communities have no faith in
science, he declared.

Mr. Goldtooth stated that current actions of business
and government allow harmful practices to continue
until damages occur. Risk assessments designate
arbitrarily what is acceptable, he stated, and they

focus on only one chemical at a time, ignoring the
facts that most exposures are caused by numerous
chemicals and that effects from cumulative exposure
occur. In addition, he continued, risk assessments
do not account for sensitive populations, such as
children, the elderly, or the chronically ill, and they
evaluate only cancer risks while ignoring other health
problems.

Mr. Goldtooth emphasized that, to avoid irreparable
harm in the future, whenever it is acknowledged that
a practice could cause harm, the precautionary
principle should be implemented. That principle
mandates that practices should be prevented and
eliminated if the possibility of harm exists, he said,
stating that the precautionary principle is intended to
prevent harm before it occurs. The principle has
been embraced in international agreements that deal
with environmental concerns of limited scientific
certainty, he pointed out.

POPs and persistent and bioaccumulative and toxic
(PBT) chemicals pose a threat of serious and
irreversible damage, stated Mr. Goldtooth; the
precautionary approach provides the ideal
framework through which to address concerns
associated with such chemicals, he urged. He
emphasized that the lack of scientific certainty
should not be cited as a reason for postponing
measures that can prevent harm. The Indigenous
Environmental Network has recommended that EPA
and the NEJAC recognize the precautionary
approach as an emerging principle in the
environmental decision-making process, he said. In
closing, Mr Goldtooth read Principle 15 of the Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development,
which states, "In order to protect the environment,
the precautionary approach shall be widely applied
by States according to their capabilities. Where
there are threats of serious or irreversible damage,
lack of scientific certainty shall not be used as a
reason for postponing cost-effective measures to
prevent environmental degradation."

3.12 Kendra Zamzow, Alaska Community Action
on Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska

Ms. Kendra Zamzow, Alaska Community Action on
Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska, explained to the
members of the Executive Council that, every
summer, people from the Village of Zamuda, Alaska
go to subsistence camps located on Saint Barnes
Island. The Suqi River, which runs through the
island, once was a productive source of plants and
fish and other wildlife, she said. However, she
continued, recent contamination of the river had an
extraordinary effect on the quantity and quality of

2-6

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

fish. Samples have been taken from the river since
1994, and every sample has shown elevated
concentrations of PCBs, she stated. In addition, said
Ms. Zamzow, many samples have contained
hydrocarbons and heavy metals, and pockets of oil
are being found in sediments taken from the river.
The source for the contaminants is a nearby military
site that currently is being remediated, but the job
being done is not a thorough one, she charged. Ms.
Zamzow requested that EPA investigate the site,
because, she said, villagers have been dying from
cancer. The site should be listed under Superfund,
she asserted, and people should be able to revert to
their subsistence lifestyle.

3.13	Hilda Booth, Native Village of Noatak,
Noatak, Alaska

Ms. Hilda Booth, Native Village of Noatak, Noatak,
Alaska, stated that her village in northwest Alaska
depends on the consumption of fish throughout the
year for survival. She stated her concern that her
village does not have the resources to take samples
from rivers. Ms. Booth told the members of the
Executive Council that there is chemical
contamination in the river; she urged that the council
help her identify a way to have the river tested.

3.14	Lincoln Loehr, Heller Ehrman, Seattle,
Washington

Mr. Lincoln Loehr, Heller Ehrman, Seattle,
Washington, explained that, in many cases, fish
consumption advisories have recommended the
reduction or elimination of the amount offish people
consume. Choosing an acceptable risk level is
questioned by many, he stated, and, in the absence
of relevant information, the elimination of risk is
always the preferred goal. However, he continued,
it is highly relevant when advising people to eat less
fish, because they may substitute a more risky
product for the fish. A comparison with the risks
associated with a diet that includes red meat is
appropriate to help people make an informed
decision when faced with a fish consumption
advisory, he added.

People should be provided with risk-based
information related to methods of preparing foods
that add risk, such as smoking fish, which adds
combustion polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),
said Mr. Loehr. In summation, he pointed out that
the rates of colon cancer are much higher among
consumers of red meat, compared with consumers
of fish. Risks associated with eating smoked fish
and fish that has not been smoked and red meat
should be quantified, he urged.

3.15	Bill Doyle, Sierra Club, Seattle, Washington

Pointing out that most of the evening's discussions
had focused on environmental justice issues related
to chemical pollution, Mr. Bill Doyle, Sierra Club,
Seattle, Washington, stated that, in the Pacific
Northwest, environmental justice also is being
denied because of the vast number of dams on
rivers. That injustice primarily affects Native
Americans, he stated. Salmon are protected by
treaty right for Native Americans, he explained, and
the nation has a moral and legal obligation to honor
that treaty obligation.

Environmental justice is also denied to low-income
residents of fishing communities in southwest
Washington and northwest Oregon, stated Mr.
Doyle. As fisheries have declined in those regions,
so have the local economies of those communities,
he said. Mr. Doyle explained that the bulk of the
salmon on which people in those areas depend
comes from the Columbia River Basin, including the
Snake River, but some salmon runs on the river
already are extinct, he pointed out.

For years, continued Mr. Doyle, independent
scientists have insisted that the only way to save
remaining salmon runs is to remove four federally-
owned dams on the river, he said. The four dams
were built in the 1960s and 1970s, he added, when
there were healthy, sustainable salmon runs in the
river. Since construction of the dams, salmon runs
on the river have declined by 90 percent, he stated.

Mr. Doyle emphasized that a statutory objective of
the Clean Water Act is to "restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the
Nation's waters." A river can be considered clean
only if it is supporting the life and the people that it
always has supported, he asserted. We cannot
continue to rely on failed technologies to move
salmon around the dams, he stated. Environmental
justice demands that we preserve the salmon, he
declared; to do so, all that is necessary is to enforce
existing laws. Mr. Doyle then called for the NEJAC
to recommend that existing laws be enforced.

3.16	Coleen Poler, Mole LakeSakoagon Defense
Committee, Crandon, Wisconsin

Ms. Coleen Poler, Mole Lake Sakoagon Defense
Committee, Crandon, Wisconsin, pointed outthatthe
introduction of foreign species into riverways in
northern Wisconsin is creating harmful competition
with native species. Species that are not native to
the area must not be introduced, she emphasized.
In addition, she continued, water treatment is not

2-7

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

effective. To pollute and then treat, she continued,
contradicts the premise of the Clean Water Act. All
the earth is sacred, she declared.

Ms. Poler also explained that the members of her
community rely heavily on clean water because of
their subsistence lifestyle. She stated that she is
very concerned about the health of her people. The
integrity of the water in the Great Lakes must be
preserved, she said, because it is the last great
mass of fresh water on the planet. People must
stand together to fight negative political agendas,
she asserted.

3.17	Cheryl Steele, Elem Indian Colony,
Clearlake Oaks, California

Explaining that the Elem Indian Colony is located
near a Superfund site, Ms. Cheryl Steele, Elem
Indian Colony, Clearlake Oaks, California, told the
members of the Executive Council that her
organization would like to apply for a grant to
perform a study of fish consumption by tribal
members. The colony is located approximately 750
yards from a large mercury tailing pit, she continued,
and many villages have been built on top of old pits.
Fish advisories are posted along waterways
throughout the colony, she said, and people are not
eating the fish. She explained that her organization
would like to conduct a survey to determine how
people have been affected by the advisories. Ms.
Steele requested practical advice from the NEJAC
about what actions the communities can take, given
that the fish are inedible.

3.18	Dottie Chamblin, Indigenous Women's
Network

Pointing out that the Makah tribe owns land that
adjoins the Pacific Ocean, Ms. Dottie Chamblin,
Indigenous Women's Network, noted that tribal
members rely on seafood for subsistence. She
recounted a story that originated in 1968, when a
fisherman near her village caught a large halibut, but
would not allow the tribal members to eat the fish
because he believed it was contaminated with
mercury. Recently, overfishing and contamination
has depleted the number offish in the waterways,
she said. The members of the tribe must eat fish,
she emphasized, because it is a spiritual part of their
culture. Because the tribe is unable to practice a
subsistence lifestyle, tribal spirituality is declining,
she added. Many villagers still eat contaminated
fish, she pointed out, because there is nothing else
to eat. People are dying of cancer, she continued,
and the tribe has no money to fight the polluting
entities. Environmental justice has been discussed

since 1968, she stated, but the situation only
worsens. Ms. Chamblin concluded her statement by
emphasizing that humans are part of the food chain,
as well, and that all life must be respected.

3.19	Jeffrey Thomas, Puyallup Tribal TFW
Program, Puyallup, Washington

Explaining that the land of the Puyallup Tribe is
located south of Seattle, Mr. Jeffrey Thomas,
Puyallup Tribal TFW Program, Puyallup,
Washington, stated that the tribe has reserved
fishing, hunting, and gathering rights on the
reservation, as well as some distributed throughout
the ceded lands of the tribe. The commitment relies
on the natural resources to fulfill the physical and
cultural needs of its members, he said. The health
and integrity of the waters in the Puyallup watershed
are integral to the members of the Puyallup tribe, he
added.

Salmon are the symbol of the Puyallup tribal
government, Mr. Thomas declared, and the tribe's
concerns about the plight of the salmon are evident
in the numerous federal court proceedings and
decisions associated with decisions related to fishery
management. The diminishing condition of the
salmon stocks and their habitats are an
environmental injustice, he declared. He stated
further that zero fish contamination must be the
standard, rather than total maximum daily limits.
Tribal social and cultural concerns should be
incorporated into the NEJAC's fish consumption
report, he said. In closing, Mr. Thomas stated that
the tribe recommends that the NEJAC fish
consumption report be used as the framework upon
which additional work and development of the topic
are founded.

3.20	June Martin and Jesse Gologergen, Alaska
Community Action on Toxics, Anchorage,
Alaska

Ms. June Martin, Alaska Community Action on
Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska, stated that she lives in
the Alaskan community of Zamuda, where, every
summer, the villagers attend subsistence camp to
hunt walrus, seal, whales, and fish and to harvest
plants. The villagers recently have been told to
consume less fish, she said, because of the
increasing contamination of waterways. Elders are
dying of cancer, she explained; military sites nearby
are the suspected sources of pollution, she added.
Ms. Martin emphasized that, if the wildlife are
contaminated and inedible, the community's spirit
and culture will disappear. The government should
protect people from contamination, she declared,

2-8

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

and the NEJAC should recommend that the military
site on St. Lawrence Island be listed on the National
Priorities List under Superfund. In addition, she
continued, a framework should be established so
that the rural community can take action on issues of
environmental justice.

Ms. Jesse Gologergen, Alaska Community Action on
Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska, also stated that people
in the community are dying of cancer and that birth
weights of children are declining. In addition, marine
animals suffer from lesions and other health defects,
she said. Members of the community know the
military site on St. Lawrence Island is the cause of
those problems, she asserted. Ms. Gologergen
stated that she would like to speak with
organizations or agencies that can provide
assistance to the community.

3.21 Doris Bradshaw, Defense Depot Memphis
Tennessee Concerned Citizens Committee,
Memphis, Tennessee

Stating that she had made earlier presentations
before the members of the Executive Council, Ms.
Doris Bradshaw, Defense Depot Memphis
Tennessee Concerned Citizens Committee,
Memphis, Tennessee, voiced concerns about federal
facilities. Ms. Bradshaw emphasized that EPA is not
the regulatory agency that should deal with the DoD.
She questioned the progress the federal facilities
working group of the NEJAC had made and stated
that communities are willing to wait to see what the
results will be.

Ms. Bradshaw stated that, in September 2000, while
cleaning chemical warfare out of her community,
several U.S. Army Corps of Engineers workers who
had been suited in full gear were hospitalized
because of exposure to contaminants. On January
18, 2001, mustard gas was being cleaned from soil
and taken to an unregulated dump, she alleged. She
pointed out that there is no regulated dump in
Tennessee that can accept such material. It seems
that the representatives of federal government are
terrorists, she charged. EPA is supposed to be an
enforcer and a regulator, she emphasized. She then
asked what are EPA's regulatory capabilities when
the agency deals with federal facilities. She pointed
out that there are agencies that are supposed to
help, but stated that "nothing is getting done."

3.22	Richard Moore, Southwest Network for
Environmental and Economic Justice,
Albuquerque, New Mexico

Expressing concern about environmental justice and
the NEJAC, Mr. Richard Moore, Southwest Network
for Environmental and Economic Justice,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, and former chair of the
Executive Council of the NEJAC, stated that he had
been involved in environmental justice issues in EPA
Regions 6, 8, and 9. Results of meetings with the
Deputy Regional Administrator in Region 6 have
been productive, he said. In addition, he said, he
had been engaged in dialogue with EPA
representatives in regions 8 and 9, and that activity
will continue.

Mr. Moore stated that he recently had sent a letter to
the new Administrator of the EPA, to initiate a
dialogue about EPA and its commitment to
integrating environmental justice into its programs
and policies.

Mr. Moore expressed dissatisfaction with the NEJAC
strategic plan. He took issue with the statement of
the NEJAC strategic plan that NEJAC's previous
concentration on site specific issues distracted the
NEJAC from its original mission as an advisory
council. He stated that this was an "insult" to people
who bring issues of a site-specific nature before the
NEJAC. In addition, he continued, the council
should be made up of a majority of "grassroots
people." He also questioned why the NEJAC was
the only federal advisory council that includes
members of grassroots organizations on its
Executive Council. All federal advisory councils
should have such members, he declared. If the
NEJAC is to be respected, the council should
encourage other federal advisory councils to follow
its lead.

3.23	Violet Yeaton, Port Graham Village Council,
Port Graham, Alaska

Ms. Zamzow presented a written statement prepared
by Ms. Violet Yeaton, Port Graham Village Council,
Port Graham, Alaska. The Port Graham tribe is a
federally-recognized tribe, whose village is located
southwest of Anchorage, the statement read. Port
Graham is heavily dependent on a traditional way of
life, which always has been a part of the people's
heritage, the statement continued. Knowledge of
natural resources has been passed from generation
to generation, and the tribal culture is dependent on
the health of the traditional resources, Ms. Yeaton
said in her statement.

2-9

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

Contamination of food sources has become an
emerging concern in rural Alaska, especially among
Alaskan natives who consume large amounts of wild
food each year, the statement pointed out. An EPA
study conducted in 1996 in the lower Cook Inlet
found evidence of significant levels of contamination,
the statement continued. Over the past five years,
the tribes have struggled to have meaningful
collaboration with EPA, Ms. Yeaton's statement
charged. The tribes that participated in the study do
not believe that EPA supports tribal sovereignty, the
statement asserted. It is very important that EPA
and other federal agencies place tribal concerns
above political sensitivity so that actual health risks
can be determined, the statement said.

Data on contaminants warn of a global pollution
crisis, Ms. Yeaton's statement continued, and the
long-term practice of allowing industry to discharge
pollution is detrimental to native culture.
Contamination that appears in native foods are
discharged from the local oil and gas industry, the
statement read. EPA currently allows the oil and gas
industry in Cook Inlet to operate under a National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
waiver from the national zero discharge law under
the Clean Water Act, Ms. Yeaton said in the
statement. The zero discharge waiver should be
repealed immediately, the statement declared.

3.24 Pamela K. Miller, Alaska Community Action
on Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska

Ms. Pamela K. Miller, Director of the Alaska
Community Action on Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska,
explained to the members of the Executive Council
that her organization works to stop the production,
proliferation, and release of toxic chemicals that may
harm human health or the environment.
Contaminants from military sites in Alaska pose a
serious threat to people who rely on traditional diets
offish and marine mammals, she said. She pointed
out that the arctic has become a "sink" for POPs,
industrial chemicals such as PCBs, and chemical by-
products. Many persistent pollutants originate from
thousands of miles away and travel north by wind
and ocean currents, she explained, and they
accumulate in the cold environment.

The signing of the international treaty on persistent
pollutants at the Stockholm Convention in May 2001
is an important first step toward the protection of all
people's health, Ms. Miller said. The Alaska
Community Action on Toxics, she continued,
requests that the NEJAC help ratify the treaty of the
Stockholm Convention by the United States Senate,
implement regulations to eliminate exposure to

dioxin, and expedite the inclusion of persistent
chemicals that merit phase-out and elimination. Ms.
Miller emphasized that the harmful use of pesticides
that damage the health of people where they are
produced and used must be prevented. For
example, she continued, the pesticide lindane is
toxic and persistent, but it is not included in the
current list of 12 chemicals targeted for phase-out
through the Stockholm Convention or under EPA's
Persistent and Bioaccumulative Toxic Chemicals
Initiative. Lindane is banned in numerous countries,
she pointed out, and EPA currently is reviewing
through a risk assessment process allowable uses
for lindane in the United States. Her organization is
concerned about the inadequacy and
oversimplification ofthe risk assessment for Alaskan
native peoples, she asserted.

In addition, there are five military Superfund sites
and approximately 700 formerly used defense sites
in Alaska. Many of those sites are contaminated
with PCBs and dioxins, she added, and the people
who live nearthose sites are concerned about health
problems potentially linked to exposure to chemicals.
Many of the sites that are considered remote are
actually in close proximity to Alaskan native
communities or the traditional fishing and hunting
areas of the tribes, she pointed out. Ms. Miller
emphasized that EPA must hold DoD accountable
forthe responsible cleanup of hazardous waste sites
in Alaska.

3.25 Jonathan Betz-Zall and Kristine Wong,
Antioch University Seattle, Seattle,
Washington

Stating that Antioch University in Seattle,
Washington, requires that students take a course
that deals with environmental justice, Mr. Jonathan
Betz-Zall, Antioch University Seattle, Seattle,
Washington, introduced Kristine Wong, Antioch
University Seattle, Seattle, Washington. Ms. Wong
explained to the members ofthe Executive Council
that she had worked from 1995 through 1997 as the
project director for the Seafood Consumption
Information Project. The project focused on
conducting community-based research and
education on the issue of consumption of
contaminated fish from San Francisco Bay, she
stated. Thousands of people regularly fish in the
bay, she pointed out, and most of those individuals
are people of color who typically eat what they catch.
Among Asian Pacific Islanders and Native
Americans, fish is a dietary staple, as well as an
integral part of cultural tradition, she explained. In
1994, a study conducted by the San Francisco Bay
Area Regional Water Quality Control Board indicated

2-10

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

that fish in the bay are contaminated with dioxin,
mercury, PCBs, and other harmful chemicals, she
stated.

In 1995, the Seafood Consumption Information
Project conducted a survey to document who was
fishing in the bay, she explained. The study
revealed that people of color are affected
disproportionately by contaminated fish. Minority
populations are more likely to eat the most
contaminated parts of the fish, she stated, as well as
to be less aware of health warnings associated with
that consumption. In addition, she continued, many
people exceed the consumption rates recommended
by California's Office of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment. Ms. Wong emphasized that
many terms frequently used in health warnings
should be modified to reflect the language commonly
used by those who fish for food.

Ms. Wong recommended that health risk
assessments account for people who eat the most
contaminated parts of the fish and that health
agencies study the synergistic effects of chemicals.
In addition, she continued, federal, state, and local
governments should enforce strict regulations that
work to phase out the production of PBTs.

3.26	John Ridgeway, Washington Department of
Ecology, Olympia, Washington

Mr. John Ridgeway, Washington Department of
Ecology, Olympia, Washington, commended the
NEJAC for developing its fish consumption report.
He emphasized that the report provides relevant
advice for EPA, community groups, and educators.
The report helped him educate his management, he
added, and helped his managers understand thatthe
issues of fish consumption and contamination are
important and warrant attention.

Mr. Ridgeway encouraged the NEJAC to continue
holding meetings in locations around the county and
to continue bringing pertinent issues to the attention
of policymakers. He also suggested that the NEJAC
Council change the unit "grams per day" used in the
report to "pounds per day" or "number of fish per
day" because most people do not understand grams.

3.27	Holly Welles, Pacific Gas and Electric
Company, San Francisco, California

Stating that Pacific Gas and Electric is committed to
the fair treatment of all people, Ms. Holly Wells,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco,
California, reported that her company had adopted a
formal environmental justice policy. The company

maintains a training program for employees, she
continued, and is working closely with EPA's
environmental justice working group to develop a
high-quality approach to training in environmental
justice.

3.28	Winona LaDuke, White Earth Land
Recovery, Ponsford, Minnesota

Pointing out that there are 47 lakes on her
reservation in northwestern Minnesota, Ms. Winona
LaDuke, White Earth Land Recovery, Ponsford,
Minnesota, explained that treaty rights have secured
the tribe's right to "harvest and sustain." Under the
treaties, the members of the tribe have a right to eat
fish and rely on them to feed their bodies and souls,
she stated. Because more than half the people on
the reservation live below the poverty level, she
pointed out; subsistence fishing sustains the
community. Increasing levels of mercury, heavy
metals, and PCBs in the waterways must be
addressed, she declared. However, many fish
advisories limit consumption to one fish per week,
she said. In addition, she continued, contaminated
water is affecting wild rice in the region, pointing out
that frogs that have extra legs have been found. Ms.
LaDuke expressed concern about the effects
contamination will have on her community and the
economic effects resulting from the community's
inability to harvest food.

3.29	Sara Koopman, Amazon Alliance, Seattle,
Washington

Ms. Sara Koopman, Amazon Alliance, Seattle,
Washington, submitted to the members of the
Executive Council a written statement about the
effects of fumigation of coca in Columbia, which is
funded by the United States. On July 19, 2001, the
NEJAC drafted a letter to EPA Administrator
Christine Todd Whitman that requested increased
scrutiny and public disclosure of the fumigation and
its effects, she stated. The reply received from staff
of EPA was inadequate, she declared. Ms.
Koopman requested thatthe NEJAC follow up on the
letter with another request for Administrator
Whitman.

Ms. Koopman noted in her statement that, on a
recent visit to Putumayo, Columbia, where most of
the fumigation occurs, she was alarmed to see
children with skin sores that had appeared shortly
after the spraying was carried out and which have
persisted for more than six months. People also
suffer from constant headaches after the spraying,
she pointed out in the statement. When
representatives of the United States embassy in

2-11

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------
Written Statements Submitted During the Public Comment
Period of the NEJAC Meeting Dec. 3-4, 2001


-------
WRITTEN STATEMENT: DR. BfiRB&RA HARPER

"Columbia River Water Quality, Contaminated Fish, and Tribal Health"

Barbara Harper, PhD, DABT
Toxicologic Yakama Nation Fisheries Program1
509-967-5174; bharperfgjnwiflfonet

A Written Statement to the NEJAC at the meeting on
Relmtiomhip between water quality, fish consumption and environmental justice "
December 3,2001, Seattle, WA.

Note: This statement is a revision of a talk recently given at the Annual Joint Conference on Health

d r)0fL*iates ?e,akh Assuciati0n> WA Apartment of Health, and Yakima Health
Dt trict, Monday, October 8, 2001, Yakima Convention Center, Yaiama WA. This and similar talks and

"m-ZZhZfilt.2T™"*	Ration; 541,

Introduction. I am the toxicologist, risk assessor, and environmental health scientist for
the Yakama Nation Fisheries program, with 25 years of professional experience. I am
evaluating the health and cultural consequences of contaminated Columbia River fish,
his talk tries to explain the consequences of fish and water contamination in tribal
communities. It is formatted as lessons for health professionals, regulators and risk
communicators who need to work in Indian Country, specifically in areas of subsistence
foods contamination, fish advisories, Superfund, and environmental justice.

Background. Columbia River Tribes have been in the Columbia Basin for over 10 000
years, and salmon have always been a mainstay of the diet, culture, and relision. lt is Well
documented that they ate 2-3 pounds of fish per day, predominantly salmon. The
Treaties between tribal and federal governments were intended to ensure that tribal
members could continue to live their cultural lifestyle if they chose to do so, so the
Treaties reserved (or protected) the pre-existing rights of tribal members to fish stemming
from their original ownership and inherent sovereignty. The full exercise of Treaty-
reserved fishing rights would result in eating a traditional amount offish, or 2-3 pounds
per day Recent data on fish contamination indicates high levels of a wide variety of
chemicals in fish. If people fully exercised their Treaty rights for very long, it would
probably be lethal. So, we are facing a situation where exercising Treaty rights and
living a spiritual cultural lifestyle are not safe. We call this chemical assimilation. We
are just beginning to develop a response to this information, both in terms of educating
tribal members about health effects, and educating regulators on why revisions to water
quality standards are needed. This is an enormous Environmental Justice issue and more
importantly, a matter of Treaty rights and federal Trust responsibility.

Lesson h Know the technical details of what you are communicating very thoroughly
Lack of technical understanding can cause misinterpretation or misstatements
particularly when it implies a degree of safety that really isn't there. Risk assessment is

' While IMS text has been circulated among tribal staff, u reflects the views of the author should not be
raken as official tnbal policy. The Yakama Nation has received a NEEHS EJ grant to analyse and respond
to the fish contamination; Lynn Hatcher, Principal Investigator.

B Haiper.	Statement to NEJAC or Water, Pish, and Tribal Heal®. December 3,2001

1


-------
full of vague value words, like threat, harm, safe, danger, etc.. It is easy to misuse words
and convey a technically inaccurate message, For instance, people have a hard time
understanding why fish can be both contaminated and safe to eat, or why a fish advisory
applies to them but not to subuiban households.

Lesson 2; We always look for a cumulative and integrated approach, and we always
resist looking at fragments of problems. In the case of fish contamination, we need to
evaluate contaminants from all sources, not just the fish, and we need to evaluate whether
some people are more sensitive to the health effects of contamination. There are existing
health disparities that must be considered. There are a disproportionate number of co-riik
factors that cluster in tribal communities that could affect how they respond to
environmental contaminants. Tribal members not only eat more fish, they may be more
sensitive physiologically, as well. We have a method for evaluating disproportionate
impacts (or an Equity Assessment) that we are offering to explain at some other time.

Lesson 3; We need data about contaminants. But we also need to see action to address
Ae problem, and we need to see both happening at the same time. We should not have
to impose another restriction (the restriction of fish consumption) on people who already
bear a disproportionate health and cultural burden, no matter how well-meaning an
agency is. Fish advisories are only an unfortunate interim necessity, but do nothing to
address the problem itself, so issuing an advisory without also addressing the root
problem is unsatisfactory. At least two actions are needed from state and federal
agencies; (1) revise the water quality standards to specifically protect tribal members, and
(2) decrease the watershed burden of point source and nonpoint source discharges. The
initiatives on persistent bioaccumulative toxics are a step in the right direction, but we
have children at risk now. Water quality standards need to include Treaty-reserved levels
of fish consumption, and they also need to recognize that drinking water intake is higher
for these active lifestyles. Water is also used for cultural purposes, and must also be
clean enough for these uses as well. A tribal cultural approach to water quality standards
might be based on a broader set of criteria and principles than the federal government
uses, although we don't have time to discuss them here. We offer to make a presentation
on these criteria and metrics to NEJAC and/or EPA at a more convenient time.

What is risk communication in a tribal context? It is not simply a matter of
communicating the same message in a different language, or using tribal images on
pamphlets, or dumbing it down to the point that is condescending or inaccurate. If
anything, the communication with tribes needs to be more sophisticated, even if it is less
numencal. Tribes can't just focus on a number and forget all the cultural, nutritional,
religious, economic and other consequences. In the case of fish contamination, the goal
is not necessarily trying to influence people to reduce a risky behavior like smoking or
eating too much fish. And it is not about balancing risks of contaminants with the
benefits of eating fish. A better goal may be to understand and provide the health care
that will be necessary when people cannot follow a fish advisory. Why is this?

Lesson 41 Know the culture of the affected people. Know their history and the current
adversities that they face. The attempts to annihilate the original indigenous inhabitants

B Harper,

Statement to NEJAC oa Water, Fish, and Tribal Health. December 3,2001

2


-------
have not stopped. This history is not just water under the bridge; it is a living history. It
cannot be set aside so we can 'start over' or 'go on from here' with piecemeal actions.
I would advise learning something about wartime psychology, and grief and trauma
counseling. Counseling is provided for victims of Oklahoma City, Columbine, the World
Trade Center, and aiiplane crashes because society recognizes the intense psychological
consequences of experiencing such an event - shock, denial, anger, grief, depression,
anxiety, post traumatic stress disorder, self-abuse, domestic violence, divorce, suicide,
substance abuse, and on and on. But there axe many tribal members who have to cope
with the same thing due to the daily attacks on their rights, health, religion, resources,
bodies, and even lives. PTSD is common, and few people are unaffected, to a greater or
lesser degree. But FEMA and the Red Cross are not there. The rest of the countiy does
not rally around them, but instead often takes advantage of their vulnerability to get rid of
the "Indian problem," Tribes have little or no mental health counseling, no disaster
relief, or legal help, technical help, insurance, loans, infrastructure, advanced health care,
educational assistance, or even the simple recognition by the American people that there
is a problem at all. The Tribes are not getting billions of dollars of aid, and what little
they have been getting is likely to be reduced even further now. Since September 11, the
American people are saying how stressful it is to live with anxiety and pain and fear and
inner turmoil. But I see the same effects on tribal members who have been living under
duress for generations. They know and have come to expect that the federal government
and their neighbors will continue to break promises and attack every advance they make.
If not physically violent, this attack is waged on legal and political grounds.

Lesson 5; Tribes will not say "thanks for telling us that we need to give up another part
of our culture in order to be safe." There are many angry and disenfranchised people
who do not regard fish contamination as a necessary part of progress or global economic
expansion or industrial agribusiness. They do not think they should give up more of their
religion so someone else can make a buck. They resent risk communicators who try to
explain why white male politicians say that some amount of contamination and risk is
economically necessary and medically tolerable for indigenous people. These false
"facts" were determined without the Tribal peoples' knowledge, input, or consent. I have
talked to Tribal members who regard contamination as an attack on the food supply in
order to weaken their cultural resolve, which was an official federal policy in the past.
Their food supply has again been poisoned. Contamination can be thought of as a form
of abuse, a chemical violence. Some people believe that the contamination and the
associated government communication is a deliberate strategy where brute force has
failed to exterminate them. Some people believe that risks are deliberately hidden and
they are not being told the truth so that they will eat contaminated fish and poison
themselves, Oth®- people do not believe the information about contamination, and regard
the information itself as propaganda, an attempt to trick them into giving up more of their
culture and religion. Health Departments may say this all of is not in their scope of work,
that it is not under their control, and that they merely want people to be safer while
another agency addresses the root problems. This is why I always ask how the agencies
are working together at the state or federal level, and I seldom get a satisfactory answer.

B Haiper,

Statement to NHJAC cm Water, Fish, a*id Tribal Health. December 3,2001

3


-------
Lesson 6: Tribal members will knowingly continue to eat the fish anyway. It is an
inseparable part of who they are, what they do, and how God the Creator told them to
behave. Fishing is not just a social preference or a nutritional choice. When fish are
contaminated, there are many consequences, and they are inter-linked and inseparable.
There are not some 'health' concerns that are isolated from culture and economics and
other consequences. Health is the whole thing, including quality of life, eco-cultural
health, and spiritual health. The river is like a church with all the parishioners inside, or a
spiritual health care facility, and fish are co-participants in the shared histoiy and
ceremonies. This is absolutely required by the Creator.

•	You might as well tell the Pope to give up the sacrament and baptism because his
wine and holy water are contaminated;

•	Or tell an Orthodox Jew that following kosher practices is simply an optional
lifestyle choice that might be quaint but is standing in the way of progress;

•	Or tell a soccer mom to limit driving her children to soccer games and piano
lessons because the tires on ha Explorer are unsafe, and her children really don't
need to go to college anyway; a minimum wage job is just fine;

•	Or tell a health professional to limit her internet access because there are
computer viruses and she doesn't need CME credits or the latest health
information, in order to take a blood pressure or give a vaccination.

•	Some of these examples are religious and some are secular, but in each case I
made a judgement about the value of each practice, and imposed my values on
them without their consent, and regardless of the cost to them or to their children.

Eating fish is also a form of resistance and defiance. It expresses solidarity in the face of
federal policies that allowed the contamination to occur. It may also be a demonstration
of spirituality to knowingly ingest contaminants and accept the health consequences in
the course of practicing their religion. A high body burden of persistent bioaccumulative
toxics might be a mark of a spiritual person, or a chemical badge of courage.

We can't talk about how many fish meals are recommended, without considering how
many ceremonial meals are affected, or how the fish are an extension of the human
people. They say "We are the fish and the fish are us." Think about molecules in the
body of a person who has eaten even a few fish from the Columbia River. Some of those
molecules have been in the Columbia Basin for eons, circulating from water to fish to
people to soil to plants to animals and back to water.2 Those same molecules may have
nourished many generations of human and animal children, in an endless cycle of
sharing. Eating salmon represents ingestion of molecules that have been in human and/or
animal ancestors, a gift from those ancestors and from the fish themselves. A successful
risk communication program might be a cultural disaster if it works as intended.

Risk/benefit evaluation is also different. We can't just try to balance the benefits of
eating fish with the risk of experiencing an adverse health outcome from contamination.
This is illustrated by the attached figure. It is a bar graph with two bars. The left side

1 For example, at least 20% of the nitrogen and other minerals in the needles of Sitka spruce and other
plants near salmon spawning sites comes from the ocean via salmon carcasses. Science, 294:479 (2001);
Ecology 82:2403 (2001).

BHaiper.

Statement to NEJAC on Wats, Fish, and Tribal Health. Decembw 3,2001

4


-------
shows a short bar with two segments for suburban situations, one segment for the health
benefits of eating fish and the other for health deficits of contaminants. If the segments
are the same length, the benefits would be cancelled out by the contaminants, or the
adverse impacts of contamination are canceled out by the benefits. Both segments are
short, and are centered around a low rate of fish consumption (17 J grams per day, or a
half an ounce, or one bite per day, according to EPA data) or no fish consumption at all,
because suburban Anglo communities have a choice of eating a little fish or eating no
fish. The ancient Tribes from the Columbia River Basin do not have that choice. They
ate 2-3 pounds of fish per day, and would still do so if the fish were there. People still try
to catch and eat as much fish as they can, up to several meals and snacks per day of fresh,
frozen, smoked, canned, or dried salmon. It is also well documented that salmon (the
omega fatty acids) protect against diabetes and are good for neurological development
and cardiac function. These benefits have already been placed at risk or lost entirely by
tribes as the salmon runs have been decimated. The mainstay of the diet has been lost,
and the replacement foods are of lower quality. The economic aspects, including
commerce and trade and sharing, have largely been harmed. The ceremonial and
religious practices have been harmed. Treaty rights have been further eroded. Distrust of
federal policies has increased (or remained extremely high). The social and educational
roles of fishing have been harmed. Fishing sites and the place names and local
knowledge for them have been lost. Fishing skills have been lost. The weaning of
infants onto fish, which is or was customary, has been lost Breast milk is probably also
contaminated. And on top of all that, the few fish that remain are contaminated to such a
degree by dozens of contaminants that the Tribal people and their families and
communities who eat a lot offish are probably experiencing health effects3 If they ate as
much as their Treaty reserves the right for them to catch Mid eat, it would be lethal.

So, providing information about contaminants in fish advisories may be given in the spirit
of trying to help people make healthy choices, but Tribal members may hear just another
chemical attack on Indian people. If biological warfare, soldiers, economic policies,
land theft, boarding schools, missionaries, assimilation policies, and downright attempts
of genocide couldn't exterminate them and their culture, or make them into Anglo-
Americans, then chemicals and the law may do the job. You have to realize that on top
of all the other attacks or encroachment on their culture and lives, now they have to listen
to federal and state people tell them that they will be eating unsafe levels of chemical
contaminants. And they will continue eating the fish. Furthermore, the way our
American society is structured, Tribal people are the ones who are blamed and maligned
if they continue to live their lives as spiritual people with ancient religious and cultural
practices, once they have been told about the risks. Any consequence after that point in
time is now their own fault. After being told it is their own fault often enough, they come
to believe that they deserve to be poor and sick. I have personally observed the sense of
resignation and martyrdom and despair, as health professionals or regulators visit and
dump another load of negative information on them and then silently turn away, leaving
them to dry their tears once more and deal with the aftermath however they can.

3 This statement is supported by the database on fish contaminants in the lower Columbia River developed
by EPA (Region 10) and the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Consortium. For database access contact Pat
C»Tonr, EPA Region 10. Technical questions about tribal risks may be addressed to Dr. Haiper.

B Harper.

Statement to NEJAC on Water, Fish, and Tribal Health. December 3,2001

5


-------
Figure. The left hand panel reflects a suburban baseline fish consumption rate of 17,5 grams per day. Hie cardiac benefits of eating
more fish can be weighed against the health risks from any chemical contaminants in the fish. The right hand panel reflects the
traditional subsistence fish consumption baseline rate of 2-3 pounds per day. That ingestion rate, and all the health and cultural
benefits it provided has already been lost, and chemical contaminants merely add another negative health burden in addition to the
health burden posed by loss of the traditional healthy diet.

BF

1000

17.5

0



PUFA cardio Benefit
Suburban Baseline



Chemical Risk

*

4U m

m

Traditional Subsistence Baseline
Health impacts - lost cardio-PUFA

Health - chemical risk
Health - last diabetes protection

Health - lost neuro. Junction

Health - nutrition; poor replacement

Cultural - lost ceremonies
Cultural - lost identity, religion

Cultural - Broken Treaties; Trust

Economic - lost Income & Trade

Social - lost educational opportunity

Magnifiers: inequity, existing deficits,
clusters of co-risk factors.

	 .

Statement to NEJAC on Water, Fish, and Tribal ItaJfli.	w impacts


-------
Nit J AO ^h&fcB	uofc?f i c.	merrf~ -p^n od "D^oe-^be.-i 4 , /o-L

uor'i-Hevi ccmm^fg? ^rcrm  -^ix-'vncijz.ci LOCC— -^¦L-mn i	cv\ i4/~\ £~o j c «*v"\ i o	 tj_.-j~

-pr^ic?uo miiMivT-^ r	«- -pcJvo^v^l	-h> Ck^stid

VOUs"Ht\3^o tis-kcl O kJwj I <3 j o( ^ y5k(£J^i t^c>vc r^^jx>o4-e-c4
Scrc^-Bnu^	ipi^-bi> c	a( ii^s -^vc*~vv'00	<2 j^cf^

IVul. >'e-p ii\cr*-' y^-c^-W^A -^-C7m m kiHA. "Id  pLQ-CMg^ ^0	u.p crr\ ^j^ur	i ou-o

Le.4^" lAsrth Smofxs/i /u-^ia£q^t Jp{- Spe-M-fi'c	r€5poy\$€.s ^rcvn ,
\pU \ 5 d t rtct o^fi u- „

i to(XO ^oe^rf-Uj ^ Colo-nb^	cf

.wv^V ^ -Kis !o be-;^	^ ^ VOIW^-C*-

?e«.ct.	(Ju-lj'ol) . i i^ao abrw^l te	lodS "tVcre

WrtW v/^ ^hra^ vU-iK, Sor«

>^r 'tk^	dvw^. vXI C.K Vu %OlX

c	u o	^ ji	* G V-

V7^ ^ mt?KdK5	\Wtu cJ^o io 14 i^vue T^a,!	^

4vo^v\ \l>v£	^Wwi tcTn^V^f hx^4>ck^o ^/ac^


-------
'ys/h-H-e^	^ ^cu^l

-W &r^^0. As <,	^(Uj	^

Vixlli^M. ~h>	,	v

¦ j\$	of i~Kx VOi-hnjaoo -^y ?^cL d^Aj^cdi crr^ VJC	o.,b oW^

^Vuc e-^^V'-b	«a^- 1^4 s^-n voI+h i-i^. officii * v ColoyH^i(jL_ , l/Od- M^Ul. *h)M ~pn,aJr ^-\y^jl i^t^o sap
"^YCD$	S(3Y£-6	lO-d<5t-cl	^ cc-^ci tfCv-w^ c)Hv6-v. ^jjec ts

-W? vAiM^£^rt7^ io Wve^xt) orC^ l/y(/UL ^ nji$ujSr c§~ ilA^-j^t^cch1^

1 ^ ¦ •* ^ ^ ^

V0^4	ajrx^ | cUr\A m^u t/Wi^Vi taey?> lA^i-	-^V"CXn

+Vm* k-ind of ^,W.^ i^ r«WW6 -^'^4

o	| b&\\jwes THe<4~ -\Wj^> ^Mnmtn,|- ixxui-ctej &tz?p £

V	U- ^ fv-^ -h^ a- ^2^4-

£ iW 6^, I dov-f	< voou.14 ^	+T5

yycrJsL "fn^i"	.

| am 6^^ +t> 6^Aj -jv^i- "W tomman'rH-£$ I vVyl+ed im ^olcwtfg,^
Vl^£ bee-n	moCtK . ( draj ^

-tvTmk. »-W^ l/U^-H>i sf- ivte^e k-ids is naJ

|HiS ^ ^n DVQcn^ e^ir^m«(a| £ UW*tu cib^^^p^icl -(or-
bu^ U%	CUact i	^ p^&+-

C^ALe-r^	voon	ccx^ ^d ^

I Uj2_,

K-Oo^vn^n Sp£LnisW
-------
WRITTEN STATEMENT: DR. MILDRED MTTTAlKf

PUBLIC COMMENT
By; Dr. Mildred McClain
NEJAC
SEATTLE, WA
December 4, 2001

The Fish Advisory for Georgia/South Carolina was issued several years ago and
has undergone changes and revisions - yet the advisory is still elusive to sectors of
the population who frequently fish in the rivers and streams for both recreation and
food consumption.

Economically challenged African Americans, whites, senior citizens and new
arrivals from Mexico have not benefited from the issuance of the
Fishing/Consumption Advisory. When an informal survey was conducted
assessing the extent to which local people had seen or heard of the fish advisory,
the results indicated the outreach activities of South Carolina Department of Health
and Environmental Control, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division and
the Savannah River Site Community Advisory Board had failed to substantially
inform these stakeholders.

Several editoip of the advisory fact sheet and the guide were designed and written
in a manner unsuitable for a diverse audience which includes illiterate people and
those who only read at a 3rd grade level. Signs posted were in English only and
placed at places with big names. The siting of signs often did not include "favorite
spots" that existed as a part of the river/stream network. Review of the guide for
Georgia/South Carolina by lay people who fish regularly suggest the current
version is still complex and does not help people heed the advisory's
recommendation.

One person pointed out that the names of the fish are confusing because they do
not coincide with the local indigenous names, i.e. the guide talks of the bow fish -
which people know as mullet.

The fact sheets and guides appear to not have the involvement of communities who
both know the best way to get information out and the best language and images to
use. Therefore, the primary recommendation from the communities of Augusta,
JCeysville, Guyton and Savannah, Georgia and Blackville, Aiken, New Ellenton


-------
and St. Helena, South Carolina is to involve communities who fish in the design
and distribution of fact sheets and guide. The communities should provide
assistance in identifying the sites for signage and the content of the signage.

A major issue for African Americans in South Carolina and Georgia is related to
health. The question is "what are the health effects of eating contaminated fish
combined with other vulnerabili£fl£,For people who are suffering from various
illnesses and disease, how does eating certain amounts of contaminated fish impact
existing health conditions? Are we currently carrying toxins in our bodies because
of our consumption of fish? How are we impacted when we swim and bathe in
these bodies of water where advisories exist? If fish is contaminated, what about
other life forms in the water?

The source points of the contamination in the water and the fish are highly
questioned when,both industries and a federal facility like Savannah River Site are
in close geographical proximity. Citizens most want to know where the
contamination is coming from; in what amounts of consumed fish is harmful; how
people can tell they have been exposed and what to do. The citizens we work with
want a more aggressive educational and outreach campaign specifically targeting
those groups of people out of the ordinary loop of information dissemination-

Signs are needed in Spanish and in some areas of South Carolina, in Gullah, a
language spoken by African Americans in the Beaufort-Jasper County area. Local
fishermtn and women need to be integrated in the activities related to providing
information to those who may be at risk of consuming fish beyond the acceptable
levels.

Much can be done in our region through existing collaborative partnerships to
insure an effective implementation s trategy of the fish advisory. There are many
distribution outlets that have not been touched, e.g. churches, schools, PTA's, civic
organizations, veteran and Masonic groups. If we are serious about getting the
word out so that we can prevent the resulting negative outcomes from the
consumption of contaminated fish, it is critical that communities are involved at
every junction, from beginning to end. The National Fish Advisory effort provides
us a very easy win/win scenario for government and community.

Dr. Lynn Waishell of Rutgers University, Dr. Richard Gragg of Florida A&M
University and Citizens For Environmental Justice have gathered important data on


-------
fish consumption patterns in Georgia and South Carolina levels of knowledge
about the fish advisory, methods people prefer receiving information and most
trusted sources of information - this data could be used to further the work being
done on the fisfyidvisory in EPA's Region IV,

What are the environmental justice concerns? Very simply, those who are being
left out of the information cycle are primarily poor African Americans. The
quality of water and the quality of the seafood goes hand in hand. We are
concerned about the care of our lakes, streams, rivers and our ocean — yet our voice
is not being heard.

Through diligent efforts, we have made some progress in changing how things are
being done - but we still have questions about the water quality analysis,
contaminant profiles and community involvement efforts that directly relate to
environmental justice communities. We need to be involved in all research and
outreach efforts to distribute findings and recommendations.

Recommendations

•	Clean up water bodies to a standard set by community - in collaboration
with scientists and other experts

•	Insure that communities of color are involved in research, standard setting
and scientific processes

•	Inform communities of the real risk that is involved with current fish
advisories

•	Work closer with industries and the military to stop polluting our waters

•	Assume a zero tolerance of water contamination

•	Create easy to understand toxilogical profiles of the contamination found in
the water bodies, fish and shellfish (in collaboration with health agencies)

•	Strengthen and enforce regulations on the use/emissions of Mercury (the

- cleanup of Mercury should be a priority)

•	Identify and describe ail radionuclid^jfound in the water bodies near
military/nuclear production weapon sites, including nuclear power plants.
The description should include the health impacts of all identified
radionuclides

•	Tailor and design risk communication strategies for differing populations
based on culture and community values


-------
WRITTEN SmTEMEKTr: RICHARD MOORE

Southwest Network for Environmental & Economic Justice

P.O. Box 7399 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87194 (SOS) 242-0416 FAX (SOS) 242-5609

NETWORK

For EswoiimisI ud Economic Josiice

$u&

Richard Moore,
Executive Director
Rosa CroZ'Samudio
Joaquin Lujan
BiancaEnciaias
Roberto Conirnras
Aima G. Vizcaino
Adiii Vaidy*

Coordinating Council

Representatives

Arizona;

Teresa Lta I
Nogalw

California;

Gsri Atmanz*

San Francisco
Robtn Cannon
Los Angeles

New Mexico:

Daniel Fuentes
Sun land Park

Texas:

Susans Almanza

Austin
Brendti Moon
Dallas

Youth:

Che Lopez

San Antonio, TX

Native American
Representatives:

Carietla Tilousi

Havasupai Tribe
Jose Matus
Vaqui Tribe

Mexico:

Enrique Hcnandek

Coahuila
Jesus Emitisno

Chihuahua
Carmen VsSsdtrz
Baja California

November 1,2001

The Honorable Christine Todd Whitman
Adminisuator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.

Washington D.C. 20460

Dear Governor/Administrator Todd Whitman,

On behalf of the Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice
(SW Network), this letter is to initiate a dialogue with you concerning the commitment
of the Environmental Protection Agency to environmental jusiice and its integration
into all programs, policies, and activities of the United States Environmental Protection
Agency. Also on behalf of the Southwest Network, we would like to congratulate you
on your position as the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

The Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice is a multi-
cultural, multi-national organization comprising over 60 community based, student,
native and labor organizations throughout the Southwest and Western United States
and the Northern border states of Mexico. The SW Network formed to address
environmental degradation and other social, racial and economic injustices that threaten
our communities and workplaces.

It has been well documented that people of color and working class people in the
United States suffer from environmental racism. Children, the elderly, and women
(especially women of color) are the poorest of the poor and are paying the highest price
from pollution with increased health problems and economic devastation. As
Administrator, your role is critical in terms of implementing immediate .solutions to
address the adverse health and environmental effects that disproportionately affect
people of color and the poor of this nation.

In your Memorandum (dated August 9, 2001) you reaffirm the agency's
commitment to environmental justice as well as its pursuance in seeking that all
communities and persons across the nation are guaranteed equal access to the decision-
making process to have a healthy environment in which to live, work and play and for
this we congratulate you. In spite of the progress that has been made and even with the
best of intentions, grassroots communities remain left out at all levels of the discussion,
development, and implementation of policies. The Southwest Network sees the
development of strong grassroots organizations as essential for the inclusion of people

Building Power Without Borders - In the Spirit of Our People


-------
of color and working class people in the building of-a truly democratic process in this
country and throughout the world.

In this regard, we respectfully request a meeting, to take place in the Southwest,
between you and representatives of the SW Network and we invite you to tour our
communities. In taking this initiative, "we believe thai we speak to concerns that are
shared by millions of people throughout the United States and Northern Mexico. We
look forward to meeting with you. We would greatly appreciate a response from you by
November 29,2001. If you have any questions or concerns please contact Richard
Moore at the SW Networic Regional office in Albuquerque, New Mexico at (505) 242-
0416,

Sincerely,

"RiAr Tflnr

Richard Moore
Executive Director
SW Network

Ce~uL

Susana Almanza	Henry Clark

Co»Chair EPA Accountability Campaign	Co-Chair EPA Accountability Campaign

Austin, Texas	Richmond, California

Gregg Cook, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6

Jack McGraw, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8

Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9

Charles Lee, Associate Director, EPA Office of Environmental Justice


-------
WRITTEN STATEMENT: KRISTINE WONG

Contaminated Fish Consumption, People of Color,
and Environmental Justice

A Written Statement to the NEJAC Meeting in Seattle, WA, Dec. 3-6,2001

Submitted by Kristine Wong, MPH
Correspondence: PO Box 80082, Seattle, WA 98108
kristinewong@yahoo.com

Good evening, and thank you for taking my testimony. My name is Kristine Wong.
From 1995 - 1997,1 worked as the Project Director for the Seafood Consumption
Information Project, which focused on conducting community-based research,
education, outreach, and advocacy on the issue of contaminated fish
consumption in San Francisco Bay.

My testimony will focus on what we learned from our community-based research
and outreach efforts, and what can be done to address these problems.

Thousands of people regularly fish San Francisco Bay. Most of those out on the
piers and shorelines are people of color, and many eat what they catch. Among
Asian Pacific Islanders and Native Americans, fish is not only a dietary staple, but
a strong part of their cultural traditions as well. At the same time, a 1994 study by
the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board has shown
that Bay fish are contaminated with dioxin, mercury, dieldrin, PCBs, DDT, and
chlordane.1 These chemicals have been finked to serious health problems such
as cancer, birth defects, and dysfunction of the immune, nervous, and
reproductive systems.

In 1995, the Seafood Consumption Information Project conducted a survey of
228 people fishing from San Francisco Bay piers and shorelines.2 The purpose of
the survey was to find out who was fishing from the Bay, what their fishing and
fish consumption habits were, how aware they were of the health advisories, and
whether or not they reduced their consumption, based on the advisories.

Our survey results concluded that:

• People of color, many who are limited or non-English speaking, are
disproportionately affected by contaminated fish. They are the majority of
people fishing from the piers and shorelines, are more likely to eat the most
contaminated parts of the fish, and are less likely to be aware of the health
warnings about the consumption of seafood from San Francisco Bay. This
makes the consumption of contaminated fish a major environmental justice
issue in the San Francisco Bay Area.

1	San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (1995). Contaminant Levels in Fish
Tissue from San Francisco Bay, Oakland, CA.

2	Wong, K (1997). Fishing For Food In San Francisco Bay: Part H, The Seafood Consumption
Project at Save San Francisco Bay Association, Oakland, CA.


-------
•	When calculated at a monthly rate, 90% of those who ate fish in the last week
exceeded the consumption limits recommended by California's Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). The median of all
respondents ate fish at a rate that was 2 times more than OEHHA's
recommended amounts. The consumption rate of Caucasians was about the
same as OEHHA's limits. At the high end, some individuals reported eating
Bay fish at least once a day,

•	Current health risk assessments underestimate the risk because they

(a) do not take into account the consumption offish organs, guts, and eggs
which contain higher concentrations of contaminants than the fillet, and (b) do

not take into account synergistic effects of multiple chemicals.

•	Government-issued health warnings are not reaching the most affrected
populations. Forty-two percent of those surveyed were unaware of health
warnings. Latinos and non-English speakers were less likely to have heard
the warnings, compared to ail other groups.

Other points:

•	The majority of respondents were people of color (70%), with Asian Pacific
Islanders making up 36% of the total respondent group

•	Fishing activity increased with age

•	40% of the survey respondents ate Bay fish in the past month, with Asian
Pacific Islanders eating fish the most frequently

•	Non-fillet parts, some of the most contaminated parts of the fish, were eaten
at a high rate, especially in some of the mid-sized and larger fish, such as
perch (98%), striped bass (84%), and white croaker (77%)

This is especially significant, considering that white croaker was among
the most contaminated of all fish studied, considering their bottom-
feeding habits and high percentage of body fat.

•	42% had not heard of the health warnings about eating fish in the Bay. Latinos
and non-English speakers were the less likely to have heard the warnings
compared to all other groups.

The Seafood Consumption Information Project also conducted over 40
community education and outreach presentations at health clinics, community
centers, English as a Second Language classes. Our emphasis respected
cultural traditions by encouraging people to continue to eat the fish, but make
small changes to their cooking techniques. After demonstrating ways with which

Kristine Wong
December 4,2001

Written Statement to the NEJAC on Contaminated Fish Consumption

2


-------
WRITTEN STATEMENT: VIOLET YEATON

Public Testimony
Tribal Native Village of Port Graham, Alaska
November 27,2001

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
Renaissance Madison Hotel, Seattle Washington

On behalf of the Port Graham Traditional Village Council, I would like to thank the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council for taking the time to hear our testimony.

Port Graham, a Sovereign Federally recognized Tribe, is a rural predominately Native village. Located
225 miles southwest of Anchorage, the village is located close to the southern tip of the Kenai Peninsula,
nestled off the Cook Inlet, which is accessibly by air or by boat. Most of the "Sugpiat" or "real people" '
of the Chugach region trace their roots and heritage to the Prince William Sound and Gulf of Alaska.

Port Graham, as many rural villages in Alaska is heavily dependent on our traditional way of life, which
has always been an integral part of our heritage. This vast knowledge of the natural resources and its
environment has been passed from generation to generation and is a major component of the Native
culture. Our traditional way of life is ingrained in our very existence, our lives and culture literally
depend on the health of our traditional resources.

Wild food contamination is an emerging concern in rural Alaska, especially for Alaska Natives who
consume large amounts of wild food annually. Nowhere in the United States is wild food consumption
greater that in Alaska's rural communities. In 1996, the native villages of Port Graham and Nanwalek
joined forces in requesting that our traditional foods be tested for contaminants. What resulted was the
EPA study on contaminants of our traditional resources in the Lower Cook Inlet The study results found
evidence of significant levels of contaminants.

Port Graham, Nanwalek, Seldovia and Tyonek have been meeting with EPA since the preliminary
findings report came out in 1999, and met with EPA to discuss the final draft just a couple of weeks ago.
None of the contaminant work done so far has been easy, in fact it has been far from it. The villages have
been meeting with EPA's Region X and Anchorage area office since 1999. Meetings were scheduled to
insure that the final report would clearly define the potential risk and concerns regarding the contaminants
found. It would also include Tribal recommendations on specific areas needing more work. However,
our relationship with EPA regarding the Tribal Consultation process falls short as described in Executive
Order 13175 "Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments."

Over these last 5 years, the Tribes have struggled to have meaningful consultation and collaboration to
strengthen the govemment-to-government relationship with EPA, But consistently, time and again, the
Tribes have had to prompt EPA to initiate this consultation process to ensure meaningful and timely input
by Tribes. The Tribes involved in this study, do not feel that EPA recognizes the right of Indian Tribes to
self-government nor do we feel that EPA supports Tribal Sovereignty and self-determination. We feel
that EPA and other agencies are very concerned about the information getting out about the levels and
types of contaminants found, which could be politically sensitive. While we understand the political
sensitivity of this information, it is very important that EPA and other federal agencies place the Tribal
concerns above the political sensitivity so that we can figure out what the actual health risk may or may
not be. It is absolutely essential that these issues are clarified and communicated truthfully to us in
regards to any potential health risks from these contaminants based on the data available.

We have seen many disturbing aspects of the study results, which appear to have potential health
concerns for our people. We need everyone to understand that regardless of any actual health risk from
consuming our traditional foods that may or may not be present, significant levels of contaminants in our

1


-------
foods is simply unacceptable. We deserve and expect our traditional foods to be free of contaminants.
The very fact that our traditional foods are-contaminated, is an affront to our culture and our heritage.

We view this contaminant data at the very least as a huge red flag, warning us of what seems to be a
global, national, state and local pollution crises. The long-term practice of agencies allowing industry and
others to dump and discharge huge amounts of pollutants is obviously severely detrimental to our long-
term existence on this earth. Our Native culture finds these practices very disturbing. It is difficult to
understand how a shortsighted pollution dilemma could have ever been allowed to reach its present
condition. After all that has been revealed about significant external costs of this pollution friendly
practices, we are perplexed, disappointed and angry that the EPA continue to permit billions of gallons of
contaminated water to be regularly discharge into the Cook Inlet.

The fact that EPA allows the Cook Inlet Oil and Gas industry an NPDES waiver from the national zero
discharge law tinder the Clean Water Act, which is one of two such waivers', allowed in the entire United
States, is truly outrageous and inexcusable. We recognize that much more work is necessary to get more
information about what risk may be present from consuming our traditional foods. It is very clear that
some of the contaminants showing up in our foods are discharged from the local Oil and Gas industry.
This fact alone yields consideration that the zero discharge waiver should be immediately repealed. The
very fact that many of the chemicals used by this industry are present in levels of concern in Cook Inlet is
enough to support the zero discharge requirement of industry under the Clean Water Act. When the
NPDES permit is next up for review, Tribes that are impacted by the permitted discharge in Cook Inlet
should be directly involved, sitting at the table with EPA for the evaluation and formulation of the permit.

In closing, the Port Graham Village Council would like to urge the following recommendations to the
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council to begin to address our concerns mentioned in our
testimony:

>	When agency is consulting with Tribes, the objective of building a "meaningful
relationship" with Tribes should be upheld in its fullest intent. Recognizing Tribal
governments in a sensitive manner and respeetful of Tribal Sovereignty is essential.
Truthful, timely and concise communication throughout the process of consultation is
critical.

>	When a situation potential impacts Tribes, Tribes should be involved and participating
from initial planning to the final completion of a project, working towards consensus
reflecting the concerns of the Tribes

>	Incorporating Tribal Scientist in research & planning and implementing is imperative

Our health and safety of these traditional resources is at stake. As caretakers of our land and
environment, we will not stand by and watch as our traditional foods and the natural ecosystem that they
depend on are continually degraded and threatened. We are no strangers to straggles and difficult times.
We will work hard to join forces in this battle to help protect to insure the future of our children, our
culture, our traditional resources and the environment. We want nothing more than to restore our
traditional foods to the truly pristine state they once were for our ancestors before us and for the seven
generations to come. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Violet Yeaton/Environmental Planner
Port Graham Village Council

2


-------
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

Virtual Tour and Public Comment Period

Columbia were informed about the side effects,
those officials claimed that there was no proof that
the problems were a result of the fumigation, she
stated. If such problems were occurring in a middle-
class, white neighborhood, the government would
stop the spraying immediately, the statement
asserted. The situation is an ongoing environmental
injustice, Ms. Koopman's statement declared. She
urged that the NEJAC follow up on the issue.

2-12

Seattle, Washington, December 3 and 4, 2001


-------