National Environment Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) Virtual Public Meeting November 10 2021


U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL (NEJAC)

VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING

NOVEMBER 10, 2021

1

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS

NEJAC PUBLIC MEETING EPA PRESENTATION MATERIALS	8

PREFACE	9

MEETING SUMMARY	10

WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS, & OPENING REMARKS	10

WELCOME, EPA UPDATES, & DIALOGUE	12

DRAFT FY 2022-2026 EPA STRATEGIC PLAN 	244

THE DRAFT FY 2022-2026 EPA STRATEGIC PLAN PRESENTATION FOCUS ON
GOAL 2: TAKING DECISIVE ACTION TO ADVANCE ENVIRONMENTAL

JUSTICE AND CIVIL RIGHTS AND UPDATES ON JUSTICE40	255

NEJAC RESPONSE TO FY 2022-2026 EPA STRATEGIC PLAN PRESENTATION. 37
NEJAC OPEN BUSINESS MEETING REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION MOVING

FORWARD INCLUDING NEJAC WORKGROUP UPDATES	49

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD	62

NEJAC WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED FOR 11.10.2021 MEETING

	96

NEJAC WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED CONT	121

CLOSING REMARKS & ADJOURN	 12222

NEJAC MEMBER BIOS NOVEMBER 2021 - APPENDIX A	136

2

-------
ATTENDEES LIST

SPI.AKI.RS AM) FACILITATORS



FRED JENKINS, JR., PhD.

DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICER (DFO)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(EPA)

MATTHEW TEJADA, PhD.

DIRECTOR, U.S. EPA OFFICE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

JANET MCCABE

DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(EPA)

LINDA DORKA

EXTERNAL CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLIANCE
OFFICE

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(EPA)

VICKI ARROYO

OFFICE OF POLICY

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(EPA)

PHILLIP FINE, PhD

OFFICE OF POLICY

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(EPA)

NATIONAL I NMUONMI N 1 AL.Il SI l( I.
ADVISORY ( Ol N( II. (NT-MAC) MK.MBKR
(HAIRS



SYLVIA ORDUNO

MICHIGAN WELFARE RIGHTS
ORGANIZATION

NEJAC MEMBER CHAIR - EPA REGION 5

MICHAEL TILCHIN

JACOBS ENGINEERING

NEJAC MEMBER - VICE-CHAIR - EPA

REGION 3

ACADL.MIA GROl P



JILL LINDSEY HARRISON, PhD

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO BOULDER
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 8

JAN MARIE FRITZ, PhD, C.C.S.

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 4 & 5

BENJAMIN J. PAULI, PhD

KETTERING UNIVERSITY
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 5

in SINI.SS & INDl STRY (iROl P



VENU GHANTA

DUKE ENERGY

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 3

3

-------
VIRGINIA M. KING

MARATHON PETROLEUM
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 6

(O.M.Ml.MTY ISA SKI) ORGANIZATIONS
CUOl P



REV. DR. AMBROSE CARROLL, SR.

GREEN THE CHURCH

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 9

LETICIA COLON DE MEJIAS

GREEN ECO WARRIORS
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 1

JEROME SHABAZZ

JASTECH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC.
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 3

CEMELLI DE AZTLAN

LA MUTER OBRERA

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 6

PAMELA TALLEY

LEWIS PLACE HISTORICAL

PRESERVATION INC.

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 7

SOFIA OWEN

ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUNITY &

ENVIRONMENT (ACE)

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 1

NONC.OVI. UN M IN 1 A1 VI.WI UON M IN 1 A1,
(;uoi l»



ANDY KRICUN

US WATER ALLIANCE
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 2

AYAKO NAGANO, JD

COMMON VISION

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 9

JEREMY F. ORR, JD

SAFE WATER INITIATIVE NATIONAL
RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 5

JACQUELINE SHIRLEY

RURAL COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE
CORPORATION

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 6

BRENDA TORRES BARRETO

SAN JUAN BAY ESTUARY PROGRAM
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 2

TRIBAL/INDICKNOrsCOVKKN'MKNTS
AND ORGANIZATIONS GROl P



JOHN DOYLE

LITTLE BIG HORN COLLEGE
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 8

JONATHAN PERRY

BECENTI CHAPTER

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 6

JOY BRITT

ALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL HEALTH
CONSORTIUM

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 10

4

-------
SCOTT CLOW

UTE MOUNTAIN UTE TRIBE
NEJAC MEMBER - REGION 8

ST.VIT7I,()('AI, (iOYKUN.MKNT (iKOl'P



CHARLES BRYSON

CITY OF ST. LOUIS CIVIL RIGHTS
ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 7

FELICIA BELTRAN

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 9

MILLICENT PIAZZA, PhD

WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF
ECOLOGY

NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 10

KAREN SPRAYBERRY

SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
NEJAC MEMBER - EPA REGION 4

5

-------
AGENDA

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
ADVISORY COUNCIL
FULLY VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING
November 10, 2021
1:00 P.M.-6:00 P.M. EDT

DAY 1: WEDNESDAY November 10,2021

1 :CG cm -1:30 pm

WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS, & OPENING REMARKS

:• Fred Jenkins Jr., PhD, Designated Federal Officer -

U.S. EPA

o Matthew Tejada, PhD, Director, Office of

Environmental Justice - J.S, EPA
o Sylvia Orduno, National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council Chair - Michigan Welfcre Rignts
Organization

o Na'Taki Osborne Jelks, PhD, National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council Vice Chair - West Atlanta
Watershed Alliance and Procter Creek Stewardship
Council

o Michael Tilchin, National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council Vice Chair - Jacobs Engineering

1 ;3Q pm - 2:00 pm

WELCOME, EPA UPDATES, & DIALOGUE

o Janet MeCobe, Deputy Administrator - U.S EPA

2:00 om - 2:30 pm

The Draft FY 2022-2026 EPA Strategic Plan Presentation
focus on Goal 2: Taking Decisive Action fo Advance
Environmental Justice and Civil Rights and updates on
Justice40

o Matthew Tejada, PhD, Office of Environmental

Justice- U.S EPA
o Lilian Dorka, External Civil Rights Compliance Office

2 30 om - 3:15 pm

NEJAC Response to FY 2022-2026 EPA Strategic Plan
Presentation

SfiPSilfc

Iff /

-

A

\

6

-------
3:1 5 Dm - 3:30 pm

Break

3:30 Dm - 4:15 Dm

NEJAC OPEN BUSINESS MEETING REFLECTION AND
DISCUSSION MOVING FORWARD INCLUDING:

o NEJAC Workgroup Updates:

¦	Community Air Quality Workgrcuo

¦	Farm Worker anc Pesticides Workgroup

¦	Financial and Investment (Justice40)

¦	NEPA

¦	F'FAS/PFOA/ PFOS

¦	Wafer Infrastructure

4:15 - 5:55 pm

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

Note; Members of me pubt:c will be g'ven three (3)
minutes to present comments on their issue or cone ern to
the NEJAC.

5:55 pm - 6:00 pm

CLOSING IEMARKS & ADJOURN

o Sylvia Ordufio, National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council Chair - .Michigan Welfare Rights
Organszafon

o Fred Jenkins Jr., PhD, Designated Federal Officer -
U.S. EPA

Note: Please be ad
disc ussion for ere t
For further informal
meeting, Frea Jenk

vised that agenda times are aporc'imate; w^er tne
QDic is completed, discussions fort~e ne4 topic wll; begin,
on, please contact tne Designated Federal Officer for tnis
ins Jr.. DhD, at "erikins.free.gjepa.gov.

7

-------
NEJAC PUBLIC MEETING EPA PRESENTATION MATERIALS

All the EPA presentation materials in this public meeting are posted in the public docket for this
meeting available at www.regulations.gov via under docket number EPA-HQ-OA-2021-0671.

8

-------
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.

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

•	Members must be selected and appointed by EPA.

•	Members must attend and participate fully in meetings.

•	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.

•	The advisory committee must provide independent judgment that is not influenced by
special interest groups.

EPA's Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) maintains summary reports of all NEJAC
meetings, which are available in the public docket for this meeting at www.regulations.gov under
docket number EPA-HQ-OA-2021-0671 and on the NEJAC web site at
https.VAvww.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/national-environmental-justice-advisory- council-
meetings. Copies of materials distributed during NEJAC meetings are also available to the public
upon request. Comments or questions can be directed via e-mail to NEJA€@epa. gov.

9

-------
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING
NOVEMBER 10, 2021

MEETING SUMMARY

The National environmental Justice Advisory Council convened via Zoom meeting on
Wednesday, November 10, 2021. This summary covers NEJAC members' deliberations during
the meeting and the discussions during the public comment period.

WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS, & OPENING REMARKS

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., Designated Federal Officer (DFO), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), opened the meeting, welcomed everyone and introduced the instructions for an
opportunity to hear from meeting attendees outside of the public comment period, using the
Q&A features and he reminded the audience that preregistered oral public commenters, will be
invited to speak later in the meeting during the public comment period.

Dr. Jenkins stated that there is a public docket for this meeting, EPA-HQ-OA-2021-0671 that is
accessible via regulation.gov. He also noted that all meeting information and materials can be
found in the public docket, and on the NEJAC website. He also informed everyone that the
meeting is recorded, and he lastly introduced Dr. Matthew Tejada, the Director of the Office of
Environmental Justice.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ), Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), thanked the supporting team and informed everyone that OEJ is
supporting both the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) and the White
House Environmental Justice Advisory Council (WHEJAC).

Dr. Tejada explained that the NEJAC has been the longstanding advisory committee on
Environmental Justice (EJ) for EPA, and that EPA's Office of Environmental (OEJ) is also
supporting the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council (WHEJAC) which

10

-------
provides EJ recommendations directly to the chair of the Council of Environmental Quality. Dr.
Tejada provided an overview of the meeting agenda and handed the meeting over to Ms. Sylvia
Orduno, the NEJAC Chair.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, announced then ten new members to the Council,
established that quorum was met, and the meeting was ready to begin. After which she turned the
meeting over to Dr. Tejada.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ, stated that at some point in 2022, they may 1 be able to
come together for an in-person NEJAC meeting at some location to be determined either
Washington D.C. or some other location in in one of the EPA regions.

Dr Tejada informed the Council that Administrator Michael Regan will be embarking upon the
first leg of his "Journey to Justice Tour" during the following week of November 15, 2022. He
explained that Administrator Regan is traveling around the United States to communities with EJ
concerns, especially to connect with legacy communities that have had some of the toughest EJ
challenges for generations.

Dr Tejada then invited Ms. Vicki Arroyo, JD, and Dr. Phil Fine to introduce themselves.

Ms. Vicki Arroyo, Associate Administrator, Office of Policy, EPA, explained to the NEJAC the
importance and implications of the EPA draft multiyear strategic plan specifically in how it
informs EPA's budget, staff and manager's performance evaluations, and all the work that the
entire Agency does with communities and the regions as well as the National Program offices.
Mr. Phil Fine, Principal Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Policy, EPA, stated that he
was looking forward to receiving the NEJAC's feedback and recommendation on the Agency's
draft multiyear strategic plan and they are looking forward to their feedback.

-------
WELCOME, EPA UPDATES, & DIALOGUE

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ, introduced Ms. Janet McCabe, JD.

Ms. Janet McCabe, Deputy Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: It is great
to be with everybody. Thank you all for letting me take a few minutes of your meeting. I know
that today you're going to focus significantly on talking about the proposed strategic plan. We're
really looking forward to your input on that. So, I thought I would take a few minutes to talk
about a few other things to just sort of kick things off, and then to see what questions that you
guys have.

So, the first thing I'd like to do is to say a great big thank you and welcome to the ten new
members of the NEJAC. So grateful for your willingness to serve on the NEJAC. I've served on
a couple of FACAs myself in the days when I didn't at EPA. I know that is a labor of love. You
are fitting it into your already busy lives, and you do it because you care about these issues, and
we're just ever so grateful. We know that your contributions are going to make us more
successful, our work more successful, and remind us and help us pay attention to the right things.
So, thank you all, and thank you again to those of you who are continuing to serve.

Administrator Regan really did want to be here with you today, but as I'm sure you know, he's in
Glasgow this week. He can't really do anything about the schedules. They're not in our control.
It sounds like it's been really exciting over there, and there's a lot of amazing conversations
happening. So, he'll be back soon and back on the road.

In fact, literally, he will be back on the road because next week, he will be on the first leg of
what he's calling a "Journey to Justice" where he is going to travel to the states of Mississippi,
Louisiana, and Texas to continue because he's done some of these visits already, but to really
start a concerted effort to have conversations with the people who live in the neighborhoods in
the communities around this country. In particular, the neighborhoods that are burdened with
significant levels of pollution, whether it's air, water, land contamination, lack of access to open
space, and the kinds of resources that we should expect and that everybody in this country should
be able to count on as part of living in this country to support healthy and productive lives.

-------
I want to highlight a couple of really important points with this trip. As I said, this is not one and
done. I've had conversations with him personally where he's expressed how important it is for
him to get out of Washington and to see the communities where we do our work in terms of
working with entities that are creating the pollution burden and meeting with the people who live
in those communities. So, that is really, really important to all of us.

Second, we've been working with the communities that he's visiting to arrange the details of
these visits. So they're happening in the places and in the ways and with the people that the
communities would like to be part of this. They're not photo ops. They're not just a publicity
tour. It's really lifting up the administrator's deep appreciation for the need for folks like him,
folks like me from inside Washington D.C. to engage directly with communities on their terms.
We have heard from community leaders throughout the year that Administrator Regan has been
in EPA and from you on the NEJAC about the need to improve the way we plan the
administrator's community engagements. We're working very hard to do better at that, to include
people the way we should, to make people aware the way we should. That's not to say we won't
still misstep. We do it all the time. Our intentions are very, very good here, and hopefully, we
are getting better, and we will continue to get better as we do that.

As some of you may know, I split my time between Washington D.C. and Indianapolis, although
it's not an even split. I'm in Washington more than Indianapolis. That's where I live. The
Martindale-Brightwood, and Team Park neighborhoods are no more than a stone's throw from
my home in Indianapolis. These are communities that are neighbors. And I've had the privilege
of working closely with people in those communities when I was working at Improving Kids
Environment a number of years ago now. I was part of a community action for a renewed
environment grant to Martindale-Brightwood, a CARE grant. What a great program that was.

That's a neighborhood where the high concentration of abandoned property, high poverty, poor
infrastructure, few of the necessary community resources, such as grocery stores or pharmacies.
There was an extraordinarily high, still is, concentration of brownfield sites in that neighborhood
that were high levels of lead in the children's blood in those neighborhoods, and the care grant
allowed the neighbors themselves to learn about the environmental conditions in their

-------
community to make their own decisions about which were the highest priority. It built capacity
and a sense of ownership and empowerment among the residents. It was their project.

So, through this project and others I've worked on, I've seen environmental injustices in my very
own home, city, and I've talked with the people in those communities. I've tried to learn what we
can do to really empower communities to have a voice in decisions that are made and to guide
the decisions that happen to improve conditions in those communities. This is really, really,
really hard work, and it takes a long time.

On behalf of Administrator Regan and all of EPA and myself, for sure, I want to reaffirm how
committed we are to doing our best to ensure that overburdened communities are protected from
exposure to dangerous pollution, that illegal omissions and emitters are called to account, that
these communities have equitable access to resources and opportunities and that funds go to the
places of greatest need to solve these legacy issues, which are holding communities back from
being healthy, prosperous and hopeful places to live. I think we have some hopeful signs; I was
going to say on the horizon, but they're really on the doorstep here.

I'll mention the most recent one right now, the Bipartisan Infrastructure deal. This is an
unbelievable opportunity. Unbelievable. Less frequent than once in a lifetime really.
Unprecedented support to critical EPA programs, such as drinking water and super fund and
brown fields and bus replacement. So much of it is going to be focused on communities that
have been overburdened with pollution for too long. Through the president laying out his
expectations through programs like Justice40, through Administrator Regan's focus on centering
the EPA mission on achieving justice, we will be able to use these resources to help communities
and to direct resources to achieve meaningful and lasting improvements to these critical needs in
our nation's most overburdened and vulnerable communities. Of the $60 billion, EPA's current
budget is about $15 billion.

So, just think of that. I mean, it's just remarkable. Justice40 is going to be an extremely program
to help us prioritize these resources, and as it happens, many of the programs that will be
receiving the most significant funding from the infrastructure deal are already a pile of programs
under Justice40. So, that means no delay in trying to figure out how to prioritize the funding.

-------
We're actively working that out right now. So, that's really good. We're really happy about that.

We're also looking forward to hopefully Build Back Better bill passing with additional
substantial resources, and, of course, the coming FY'22 baseline budget. Both of these have yet
more resources that will allow us to really drive our ability to build capacity, provide technical
assistance that we know, we've seen, and we've heard demanded across the country from
communities and their local partners and issues that the NEJAC has raised over the years very
clearly.

So, our relationship with you and the advice and the guidance that you all can provide to us is
going to be absolutely essential to our thinking and implementation of these new resources and
programs and they vary, right? I mean, a lot of the money is going to programs that already exist
where the system we're getting money out into the community are already pretty well
established. What we're going to be doing is making them 2X or 3X the level that they are now
and using programs like Justice40 to make sure that the resources are directed to the most
needful areas.

There will also be a number of new programs that are a very, very exciting opportunity for all of
us to figure out how to design these things in order to have the greatest impact, especially in the
communities where the need is greatest. So, way, way, way more to come on that. We're not
losing a minute in getting organized to be able to get these resources out the door in the way that
Congress and the president intend them.

So, shifting gears a little bit. I know you haven't had very long to review the administrator's
response to the NEJAC's 100-Day Letter, a couple weeks I think you've had it. It's very lengthy.
It provides a lot of information. That's why it took us a minute to get it out to you, but I hope
that you'll see when you had a chance to look at it, what the breadth of the efforts across EPA on
environmental justice issues, which are underway in this administration. I hope what will come
through to you from that lengthy response is the deep and fundamental commitment of those of
us at EPA right now to take on the hard work of centering our mission on environmental
injustice and the administrator reminds us of that every single day.

-------
I think that the scope of our envision is also clearly evident in the draft strategic plan. I'm not
going to spend much time on that because that's where you're going to spend your time today,
but I think including a second goal that focuses so directly on environmental justice is another
signal that this administration is serious about a different approach to making progress on
environmental justice, then prior administrations.

So, very much looking forward to your feedback and input on that, that there's been a lot of
conversations within the Agency about how we will live out, how we will put down on paper
what that Goal 2 means and how we will accomplish it and we need your input and help on how
to make sure that we do that. Let me say just another minute on the Justice40 initiative because,
I mean, it's just so revolutionary and impactful: a government approach to delivering 40 percent
of the overall benefits from certain federal investments to disadvantaged communities.

As I said, we've already got programs that are considered pilots for Justice40 that includes the
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, lead and drinking
water, brownfields, superfund, and the Diesel Emissions Reduction (DERA) Program, which
provides funds to convert dirty old diesels into less or nonpolluting vehicles. So we know that in
order to actually implement Justice40 in the appropriate way, we have to be mindful of the
realities and demands of the communities themselves. That means we have to be willing to
engage anywhere and everywhere.

But we also recognize that engagement itself can be a burden on communities, and I think we've
all experienced some of that in our eagerness to make sure that we're communicating with
community groups and individuals and groups like NEJAC on an ongoing basis with so much
going on at the Agency that we don't want to burn people out or make it difficult for people to
feel like they can contribute because they have a few other things going on in their lives as well.
So we're working to be as smart and sensible and sensitive about that as we can to reduce the
burden but to create and sustain consistent, meaningful, and manageable methods to stay
engaged with you.

Again, this is another area where your input on how to do that most successfully is most
appreciated. So, we've convened a variety of engagement efforts. We've hosted community

16

-------
engagements on a biweekly basis with a special focus on Justice40. So, far, I think we've had a
couple thousand people attend these calls. So, we'll continue. We have a call coming up on
November 30th focused on tribes and indigenous people. So, please let us know how we can do
better on that.

As you know, there's just so much going on at EPA, and, when we have a big rule or a big
program to announce, we want to get the word to you. When we are looking for ongoing input
on things, we need to engage with you, but we also realize that there's only so much time in the
day and so much bandwidth that people have to be constantly hopping on calls with EPA.

Just quickly, a couple other things I want to mention. We have some opportunities out right
now. A few days ago, we announced two school bus rebate opportunities. One under DERA,
the 2021 DERA school bus rebate program and the 2021 American Rescue Plan electric school
bus rebates. This is for a total of $17 million and will be used to help schools and bus fleet
owners to replace older, highly polluting diesel school buses. This will, of course, improve air
quality in and around schools and the communities that they drive through, right at ground level.
It will reduce greenhouse gas pollution, better protect children's health overall, and everyone
who comes into contact with those sources.

I've worked with schools that are eager, eager, eager to get this money in. They're so excited,
and this is the kind of the thing where you sort of count it bus by bus, right? School systems may
only be replacing one or two buses a year. They're very expensive. If they get an electric bus,
boy, are they excited. It's just such a signal of the clean energy transportation world to come and
what better place to have that be demonstrated than in our school yards and school bus barns.

So, I encourage you to spread the word about that. We'll soon be announcing the EJ
collaborative problem-solving agreements. These will be largely funded through the American
Rescue Plan funding. They'll provide $200,000 directly to community-based organizations and
tribes across the U.S. to support environmental justice efforts. We've got selections that we'll be
announcing imminently, and we also will be announcing the EJ small grant recipients. So when
you put all these things together, these EJ grants, this will exceed, I'm told, the amount of EJ
funding EPA has given out in the previous decade. The amount of resources available for these

-------
programs is just demonstrably greater than it has been in the past, and what an opportunity that is
for this country.

So, we're just so excited about the prospect for communities to be receiving support early on in
the administration so that we can continue to work with communities and deliver the most for
every one of those dollars and see those efforts through. We're also in the final stages of putting
together a request for proposals for our $20 million air quality monitoring grant. This is
American Rescue Plan funds again. These grants will be available to states, tribes, local,
government, and community organizations to receive funding for priority air monitoring needs. I
know the air office has significantly engaged with many partners including community
organizations to talk about the details of the grant opportunities.

So, we're looking forward to putting that out and starting to get feedback from people about the
kinds of projects that they are hoping to get funding for. Of course, the areas that are most
burdened with air pollution are the areas where we hope that these resources will go. I think we
understand how much of our air pollution burden these days is in sort of micro neighborhood-
scale environments and very hard to have enough monitoring resources to go around. So that
RFA will be coming out in the next few weeks. If you want to make sure you don't miss it, sign
up for EPA's environmental justice's list or follow us on Twitter where we'll also produce the
news of this.

A couple more things or maybe one more thing, I want to make sure that you knew that EPA's
draft strategic plan to reduce lead exposures and disparities was released on October 28th. So,
that's a draft because we are looking for comments from external stakeholders. This strategy
builds on the goals and objectives of the existing Federal Lead Action Plan. That was developed
by what's known as the President's Task Force Lead Reduction Subcommittee.

So, this is also in furtherance of President Biden's executive order on advancing equity for
underserved communities. I'm really proud of this draft lead strategy. It certainly is in all of
EPA's strategy, and it has some cross-agency cooperative efforts as well. There's really a first of
its kind groundbreaking emphasis on eliminating racial and socioeconomic disparities and blood
lead levels and promoting environmental justice with actions from pretty much every part of

-------
EPA that will help disproportionately impacted communities. And so please do give us your
thoughts on this.

This is an issue that's a great personal passion for me having worked on it for many years and
just been dismayed at the fact that we still have children in this country whose lives are affected
in significant ways by being exposed to this pollutant where we know where it is. We know
what it takes to get rid of it, and yet, we can't seem to do it. So, I know you have a full agenda
today and never enough time. So, I'm going to stop and just say thank you. I want to thank Fred,
George, Piyachat, and the entire OEJ team for the support that they provide to the NEJAC. It
takes a team to put together calls like this and also to make sure that we're doing right by the
NEJAC. I appreciate how members of the NEJAC have always not always been - not held back
from speaking powerfully both to us and publicly and in their communities about environmental
justice in our nation.

We have a responsibility to live up to our words and mission and we're doing our utmost every
day to do that. So, thank you, again. And Matt, if there's time for a few questions, I would love
to take them and either answer them or have others help me answer them.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ: Asked Ms. Orduno to facilitate the question and answer
session between Deputy Administrator McCabe and the NEJAC.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: Thanked Ms. McCabe for bringing an abundance of
updates, on behalf of the administrator and for her commitment to environmental justice and to
the work of this Council. Ms. Orduno also expressed excitement about all that Ms. McCabe
outlined and to learn about the Administrator's Journey to Justice visit in the south, and she also
expressed enthusiasm about what Congress has now approved to help make many of these
promises possible.

Ms. Orduno indicated this is a very monumental time for what is possible. The council is looking
forward to learning more about the Strategic Plan and more engagement, especially around the
Justice40 initiative, including issues related to financial transparency, and whether money is

-------
reaching impacted communities and being used as intended with the meaningful participation of
the impacted residents. Ms. Orduno wanted to acknowledge that the Council has received a
response to the 100 Day Letter and our work groups will be looking more closely at that and
responding earlier next with feedback to your responses. She added that this Council appreciated
that the Administrator agreed its important for this Council to be in conversation with the
WHEJC and have had a couple of meetings already and are looking forward to more
engagement, especially around the Justice40 initiatives. In fact, one of the NEJAC's work groups
is focused on issues of finance and investment and is something we're very much interested in
following to make sure it's getting to our impacted communities and getting used as intended.
Ms. Orduno reminded the NEJAC if the wanted to provide feedback to Deputy Administrator
McCabe they, can do so in writing at a later time. Ms. Orduno, called on a new council member
Dr. Harrison.

Dr. Jill Harrison, NEJAC Member, thanked Deputy Administrator for prioritizing
environmental justice at the Agency. Dr. Harrison said she heard that there are a lot of important
investments being made into disadvantaged communities which is crucially important. She asked
Deputy Administrator McCabe about how EPA can change the ways that regular decision-
making is made in terms of core regulatory work so that the council can figure out how to make
sense of all of these important investments into communities with the environmental justice
concerns with ongoing approvals at the federal, and state level regarding issues like pipelines and
really hazardous facilities.

Ms. Janet McCabe, Deputy Administrator, EPA indicated that the agency has been learning
about the research that Dr. Harrison does into the challenges that government agencies find in
actually putting into practice what they say about what they want to do in terms of environmental
justice. It's been incredibly eye-opening work so thank you for doing that work. She added that
the agency is mindful of this, but in the moment it is sort of overshadowed by the number 60
billion and the infrastructure bill, stating we won't get where we need to be as a country if we're
not also tending to the way we write rules, the way we make permitting decisions and all of the
day-to-day work of the Agency, both at EPA and at the state environmental agencies where so
many of the decisions are made.

-------
Ms. McCabe noted that one of the obligations under President Biden's equity executive order is
to develop a plan for how we're going to do that work better and more meaningfully at the
Agency, and the agency has done an initial quite extensive effort to evaluate the barriers within
the Agency to think about the things they need to do in order to change the culture, change the
understanding of our legal authorities, change the procedures that we use, change the standard
operating procedures that we have, whatever we need to do, where do we need more science so
that questions of cumulative impact which, for example, has been identified as the number one
need for us to understand better about and how to fit that into our statutory authorities which
aren't necessarily written from a cumulative impact perspective, how to work through all those
things. That work is absolutely under way and the only reason I didn't mention it in my opening
is because everything is kind of overshadowed with infrastructure right now. You should feel
free to remind us on a regular basis that we need to be doing that work as well.

Mr. Andy Kricun, NEJAC Member: Thank you Administrator McCabe, for all that EPA is
doing to push forward environmental justice. It's such a welcome relief. Mr. Kricun stated his
carer has been in water infrastructure and he's so pleased to see the upcoming investment in
infrastructure and recognized this to be a once in a generational opportunity. He asked Deputy
Administrator McCabe how to make sure that the funding gets to underserved environmental
justice communities because often environmental justice communities lack the resources, which
would really be transformational for them. He saw in Camden, New Jersey that they didn't have
grant wirters but with a little bit of assistance, they get the funding that they need. Mr. Kricun
stated knowing that environmental justice funding is a top priority for EPA he would like to offer
some suggestions later about how to help.

Deputy Administrator Ms. McCabe indicated that she welcomed suggestions and, she noted
that there are some pots of money that are specifically earmarked to help build capacity, she
noted that EPA understands that this is going to be a big part of being successful; to not only put
out grant opportunities but to figure out how to support groups and communities that maybe
haven't been able to seek grants before and to be able to do it. She further noted that so much of
this funding is going to be issued through the state revolving fund programs, but that's one
reason there are pilot programs under EJ Justice40, so that EPA can really think early about
how to try to train those resources in a lawful way within our authorities into those communities

-------
that really need it.

Mr. Kricun further asked about the elimination of lead service lines and he noted that a
generation of school children can be saved in the coming ten years and if lead awareness
initiatives implemented can also get out to encourage people to install filters in or run their
water for two minutes and try to protect them while we replace our lead service lines in parallel.

Deputy Administrator McCabe indicated that not one child should become lead poisoned right
now when we know what you need to do in order to not have that happen. EPA always has
supported those kinds of efforts, done them themselves, worked with states, and public health
agencies but there's just always more that can be done.

Ms. Leticia Colon de Mejias, NEJAC Member: stated she was inspired by reading the strategic
plan and wanted to bring attention to the one area that she has seen in travels across the United
States, which is lacking currently in the strategic plan is the initiative to really engage, inspire,
and move communities to understand climate change. Ms. Colon de Mejias stated that there's a
lot of really great work in the strategic plan around strong demands and making infrastructure
improvements but it's so hard for people to be meaningfully engaged and come to the table and
have conversations when they're just not being informed in any way, shape, or form in public
arenas and public schools in their communities, which makes it very hard for them to understand
the importance of the infrastructure changes. This consequently makes it hard to engage them.
I'm moved by the plans effort to bring people to the table and help them deal with the systemic
issues that need to be addressed and are long-standing.

Deputy Administrator McCabe thinks many people would think that strategic planning is one
of the more boring things that you could do with your time but that's not the approach that we
took in developing this strategic plan and that it is a true expression of what this administration
thinks needs to be done in this country and how EPA can help do it and adding equity is one of
our four pillars, which is the three pillars of follow the science, follow the law, and be
transparent. That has been EPA's pillars since Bill Ruckelshaus was the first administrator (or
after that), but EPA is now adding equity as a fourth pillar that is on equal footing with those and

22

-------
adding environmental justice as its own goal. Our hearts and souls are in that strategic plan.
Educating people on climate change -1 couldn't agree more and when I talk to science experts
about climate change and say, 'what's the most important thing that the people can do?' The
answer is usually, talk to people, communicate with people and your neighbors, the people that
you meet in the grocery store on the soccer field or a church or whatever. Ms. McCabe also
stated that the EPA needs other voices out there. She'd love to hear other ideas on how to do
that. For example her home in Indianapolis; where the local paper is full of these huge fights at
schools about what's getting taught in the schools, and whether they're going to have vaccines
and all that sort of thing, some of these places are kind of hard to crack.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: says that the same thing had been noted in the 100-Day
Letter and very important in the youth climate justice report and this Council has been concerned
about. Ms. Orduno reminded that the workgroups are going to be looking more closely at some
of these initiatives that EPA is going to be doing with its budget and among those, with the water
infrastructure work group, that we've got our concerns about SRF funds and how they're used in
criteria, priorities, and the concerns that there's a larger focus on having the strength of the fund
being more important than the use of the fund for EJ communities in particular. We'll provide
more feedback on that later. Thank you for being here with us.

-------
DRAFT FY 2022-2026 EPA STRATEGIC PLAN

The Draft FY2022-2026 EPA Strategic Plan is available in the public docket for this public
meeting at www.regulations.gov via under docket number EPA-HQ-OA-2021-0671.

24

-------
I lll DRAFT FY 2022-2026 EPA STRATEGIC PLAN PRESENTATION FOCUS ON
GOAL 2: TAKING DECISIVE ACTION TO ADVANCE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
AND CIVIL RIGHTS AND UPDATES ON JUSTICE40

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, invited Dr. Tejada to continue on with this conversation
about the strategic plan, and he would introduce the External Civil Rights Compliance Office
Director, Attorney Dorka.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ: Started by saying that advocates have been asking for a
long time to bring together the environmental justice program and the Civil Rights Compliance
Program at EPA and that didn't happen for a long time. One of the reasons why it didn't happen
for a long time was because there were a lot of issues to work out in the external Civil Rights
Compliance Office. He added that he gives a huge amount of credit to Lilian and her staff. The
CRCO staff have made incredible progress over the last five or six years at untying a lot of
historic issues that they found when they came into that program and starting to put that program
on a footing where we are now going to be coming together as an EJ program and external civil
rights program, while still staying distinct.

Dr. Tejada further said they are very distinct programs, very unique things that we both do
between environmental justice and external civil rights, but this administration and both OEJ
CRCO are committed to bringing our programs together in that mutually supportive and unified
way to back up one another and to drive forward on equity injustice between what we do.

Ms. Lillian Dorka, Civil Rights Compliance Office, EPA said she was thrilled to be here
because they are finally able to have a really open and honest conversation and dialog about what
we all need to do to move forward the integration of environmental justice and civil rights
throughout all EPA programs. Ms. Dorka added it is also thrilling to be able to finally work with
Dr. Tejada, with Mr. Charles Lee, and the rest of the OEJ staff to really push forward this
administration's agenda. Finally, they will be able to come together and really leverage what the
programs do for one another, fully understanding as this body has already acknowledged that
Title VI is probably the most powerful tool in the arsenal for environmental justice, and we do
not take that for granted. We have a lot of work to do and really need your help.

-------
Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ: Thanked, Lillian. The presentation is for all the folks who
have joined us in the public and also for some of the NEJAC members through attendance at one
of our national engagement calls, which we have been having every other Tuesday for some
months now.

Dr. Tejada said that they have presented most of this information nationally before, but they
wanted to make sure that the NEJAC members had all this information to begin with because
want to have some really detailed feedback from the NEJAC members on the EPA Multi-Year
Strategic Plan. The formal public comment period for this plan ends on Friday.

Dr. Tejada indicated that they are going to talk a little bit at the end of this conversation about
trying to come back and have some more detailed opportunity for the NEJAC to weigh in when
it will still be not as ripe as it would be now, but still during a period where we will be making
decisions and finalizing this plan before it is handed up and hand out of the Agency later this
winter. Dr. Tejada wanted to acknowledge that they are just focusing this presentation on Goal 2
of the strategic plan, and as many of our NEJAC leadership has pointed out, there is a lot of EJ
and other parts of the strategic plan. Dr. Tejada further stated that we do not want to limit the
conversation today to anything that the body wants to talk about in terms of EJ, but he and Ms.
Dorka are only responsible directly for Goal 2. They will focus the presentation on Goal 2 but
are open to talk about any other parts of the strategic plan.

Dr. Tejada said that we now have a whole chapter that we have been able to craft for the Agency
that brings together environmental justice and the external civil rights shop, those things are
together are fundamental for the Agency and is a big step forward for the government. It doesn't
have the meaning yet of turning that into progress on the ground for communities, but this is a
step that had to be taken to get to that progress that communities are looking for. So, we are
going to go through just some of the basics here just to make sure folks understand, but they're
important words right now. Obviously, this is coming right from the administrator. His top
priority is environmental justice. We hope you very clearly see that reflected in what he is
signing the Agency up to focus on for the next four years. This is what goes into people's annual
performance agreements. This is what people get reviewed on and what they get their bonuses

26

-------
on. This is what we asked Congress money for. The strategic plan dictates what the Agency will
do for the next four years. It is important and really significant that the administrator is centering
the mission of the Agency on Environmental Justice and Civil Rights, and he's showing that in
the strategic plan. So, there are several key elements of it. You'll see most of these going through
in our mission statement, our principles. There are cross-agency strategies. They're things that
every part of the Agency needs to be focused on. Then there are strategic goals, and we'll explain
in a minute the seven strategic goals we have for EPA in this strategic plan. Those strategic goals
are broken down kind of into strategic objectives. So, you kind of chunk those out into more
manageable pieces. The thing for me that is most important are the long-term performance goals
(LTPG) are the actual commitments. Those are the measurable things we are committing the
Agency to measure year over year and fully achieve by the end of the strategic plan, which is
September 30th, 2026. We work on the fiscal year cycle. The fiscal year ends on September
30th.

Dr Tejada explained that all of these big performance goals, part of the process, happens after we
finalize the strategic plan and then we break those long-term goals down into annual pieces so
that we make progress every year towards the ultimate achievement, the 100 percent
achievement of those goals by September 30th, 2026. Then within those long-term goals, there
are other annual goals that help us to achieve those long-term goals. So, two new things, and
again, Janet mentioned this. For a long time, EPA had three principles, follow the law, follow the
science, and be transparent. Administrator Regan added advanced justice and equity as a
principle of the Agency. Then also, traditionally, if you look down at those bottom boxes,
traditionally, EPA strategic plans would just have goals three through seven. And those line up
with our big national programs.

Goal 3 is OECA, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. Goal 4 is the Office of
Air and Radiation. Goal 5 is the Office of Water. Goal 6 is the Office of Land and Emergency
Management. Goal 7 is the Office of Research Development. The big change in this is Goal 1.
Goal 1, climate in previous strategic plans was kind of tucked inside of the air strategic goal. It
now gets its own, recognizing that all the Agency needs to focus on climate change and Goal 2
where we have environmental justice and civil rights as a core goal for all of the Agency. So they
cut across, but we now have a goal just for them.

-------
Dr. Tejada also wants to make sure folks understand that all the civil rights functions in the
Agency were all in one shop under Ms. Dorka and they took the external civil rights compliance
function, Title VI, and compliance with other civil rights requirements for recipients of EPA
funding. The other civil rights things that EPA still must do internally like compliance with the
Equal Employment Opportunity Act, our internal hiring and other things, are in another office.
That office is still called the Office of Civil Rights. We're not talking about that office here.

We're talking about the external Civil Rights Compliance Office.

We've talked about at NEJAC, Janet just mentioned all of you have been aware, there is a lot of
things happening Justice40, Executive Order 13985 on racial equity, the Inspector General's
Office, U.S. Commission on civil rights have issued dozens of reports and recommendations,
NEJAC has issued many more dozens of reports and recommendations. We are always engaged
with and receive feedback from communities. We're trying to tie a lot of that together in Goal 2.
So, even though these things are showing up in Goal 2 of the strategic plan, we have attempted to
tie together a lot of threads from this administration and from things that we've heard or have
been told to us over the years into the strategic plan. Some of the things to think about as we go
through this presentation today as you really think about the strategic plan, do you think the
goals we have are the best way to track our progress? Do you think the goals we make are going
to be transparent and offer accountability to all of EPA? Is it going to help hold us accountable
for doing the hard work of really advancing justice and rights across our practices? Do you see a
connection between the things your organizations or your communities are concerned about?
And how we could make progress on those in the commitments we're making? Do you think
there are other things, other actions we need to take to address your concerns within the goals or
with other goals, the most important thing is by the end of the strategic plan, we want the Agency
to have very clear commitments to the change the Agency is focused on making things happen
on the ground and to provide the public ways to hold us accountable even beyond the strategic
plan.

Dr. Tejada said that some examples of clear commitments that you think would be compelling
for your communities for those that you work with and represent, real commitments to change on
the ground that we could hold the Agency accountable to moving the needle year over year. So,

-------
here's the overview for Goal 2, take decisive action to advance EJ and civil rights. There are
three objectives in it, objective 2.1 is looking outside of EPA. It's looking at states. It's looking at
tribes. It's looking at our support for communities. It's what are we going to do on EJ outside of
the four walls of EPA. Objective 2.2 then looks inside the four walls of EPA. What do we do
with our permits, with our rules, with our decisions, with how we engage communities? What do
we do inside of EPA? And importantly, both those two, 2.1 and 2.2, we're making commitments
for both EJ and external civil rights compliance in both of those. Because we want to make sure
that we are advancing both together mutually beneficial, mutually supporting both of these things
because they are so interrelated. Objective 2.3 is specific to the external Civil Rights Compliance
Office because they've got a lot of things. They have a lot of ground that they want to make up a
lot of things that they want to achieve specific to evolving and maturing the external Civil Rights
Compliance program throughout all of EPA. So, they have their own objective just to make sure
that programs specifically drive forward through the strategic plan. 2.1, has a few real priorities
here, building the capacity of communities for things like climate resilience for the benefits
received by overburdened underserved communities. Again, kind of in line with the executive
orders that the president signed. Things like Justice40. So, really, what do we do to support
communities directly. Then, what do we do to support our other partners, other federal agencies,
states, and local governments to help their efforts to achieve environmental justice and civil
rights advances through their program implementation?

Then integrating EJ principles into how we actually protect human health and the environment in
tribal areas and indigenous areas. So, speaking specifically about that relationship, our
relationship with the tribes, but also our responsibility to still ensure that everyone in the United
States has their health and environments fully protected.

So, these are the actual long-term performance goals. So, these are the commitments. These are
the things that we are going to measure. Again, it says by September 30th, 2026. That's
boilerplate. That's pro forma. They're all going to say that. It doesn't mean we do nothing until
August of 2026 and figure it out. These will all get broken down so that we make annual
progress towards achieving 100 percent of what we sign ourselves up for. You will also
sometimes see Xs in here. We haven't put clear numbers in some of these areas because we really
wanted to hear from communities, from our partners at the state, tribal, local level from other

-------
stakeholders. What do you think a significant and ambitious but reasonable goal should be for a
number or for a percentage to achieve? So when you see those Xs, it doesn't mean we don't
know.

The first one is the fact that we want everyone in the Agency, if an EPA program has some sort
of responsibility or function where they seek feedback from communities to make a decision or
to implement their programs, that program should offer capacity-building resources to
communities to understand what in the world we're doing, to understand our programs, to
understand the statutes, to understand the opportunity. It's saying everyone in the Agency that
engages, you can't just open the door and expect people to walk through. You got to draw the
map. You've got to make sure they got a car. You got to make sure they can find you and show
up and tell you what we need. The second one is about our written agreements with states and
with tribes. When we delegate our authorities, there's a range of different ways that we actually
write down and agree to, here's our delegated authority. You're going to run the Clean Air Act.
You're going to run the Resource Conservation Recovery Act.

We want to make sure that when we write these agreements and transfer our authority to other
levels of government that they are being responsive to environmental justice but also that more
importantly that they're addressing disproportionate impacts and you'll see disproportionate
impacts in here a couple of times. To us at EPA, the disproportionate impact is the bigger term.
It was one of the critical terms in Executive Order 12898. Some communities are
disproportionately impacted. It includes cumulative impacts. The cumulative impacts are maybe
the biggest part of disproportionality, but there are other communities that are still
disproportionately impacted maybe by just a single source, and there are still communities with
an EJ concern. So, disproportionality to us is the more inclusive term to make sure that the actual
thing we care about is that communities are overburdened and are vulnerable, but that's what is
showing up in our agreements with states. The third goal here is looking at, in some tribal areas,
we have delegated our authority to the tribe and the tribe is responsible for protecting the health
and environment of anybody living in their tribal lands.

For the majority of tribes and tribal lands across the United States, EPA is still holding the
responsibility for ensuring that the health and environments of those folks are protected. So, this

-------
is important that not only are we saying that we're going to set a goal for ourselves of making
sure we're protecting the health and environment of folks living on tribal land but that we're
going to consider doing so part of our environmental justice mission. Because those folks who
live on tribal lands, they're typically vulnerable. They are typically overburdened. So, protecting
their environments, protecting their health is part of environmental justice.

Ms. Lillian Dorka, EPA: says that number 4 reflects commitments that we've also made in
response to the Inspector General report that came out in 2020 about the lack of full
implementation of Title VI. And so, there are some very basic non-discrimination program
requirements that EPA's non-discrimination regulation requires of every recipient of federal
assistance from EPA. We normally call these the non-discrimination program.

Those are those requirements that apply to recipients for ensuring that they have notice of non-
discrimination, ensuring that they have a non-discrimination coordinator, ensuring that they have
grievance procedures for the purpose of receiving and resolving, investigating civil rights
grievances themselves. They also cover things like ensuring meaningful access for persons with
limited English proficiency to the recipients of all of their programs and activities as well for
persons with disabilities, that their public participation programs are also consistent with the
federal civil rights laws.

So, all of those things that we call the federal non-discrimination program requirements is what
we're talking about when we refer to the foundational civil rights programs in place. We want to
make sure that the intent of Title VI is really being carried out at its most basic requirements.
That is that the federal money does not go to recipients who are discriminating, especially as we
carry out our pre-award reviews because there is a pre-award review process that does include
some civil rights requirements. We want to make sure we are looking at that program.

We're revamping and revising that program to ensure that all recipients, all applicants for federal
money from EPA have in place these very basic and fundamental programs. We have annual
goals that will get us to the 2026 goal, which is that all state recipients will have these programs
in place. Some states have more than one program. We have jurisdictions sometimes over not
only state departments of environment, but also over state Departments of Agriculture and other

-------
types of state agencies.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ: that they have some actions to make sure that folks know
we're not just waiting for things to take off. They have some actions that they have lined up to
get started on this year to start making progress on this. So, things like providing more capacity-
building grants and technical assistance directly to communities. That's been something a lot of
folks, obviously, are talking about in this time with all these resources.

They are committed to getting more grants and technical assistance out to communities. Even if
it weren't in this time of trillion-dollar numbers being thrown around, this is something that they
want and understand must happen. Developing a lot of other resources, immediately to make
sure that communities have the capacity, have the information, have the opportunity to
meaningfully engage with the Agency including launching a nationwide approach of building
capacity, building centers across the United States. Again, this is an idea that is out there.

A lot of EJ leaders and communities are talking about this. They have been in contact with a lot
of those folks talking about this and wanting these things. Budgets permitting, they are
committed to building these sorts of capacity building centers, kind of a hub-spoke approach to
capacity provision across the United States. They also want to bring folks into the Agency. It's
been a long time since they have had broad, paid opportunities for young folks to come into the
Agency. It's important to develop our next class of leadership and staff inside of the Agency.

It's also important for those young folks who maybe never come to work for us permanently to
go back to their communities with insight and understanding of how government works
including how EPA works. So getting those paid internships or fellowships, or whatever they
are stood up in an aggressive way is another thing we're committed to doing. Also, really
institutionalizing this approach of communities with EJ concerns have multiple challenges that
are interrelated. Nobody from EPA should be showing up to a community with EJ concerns only
focused on the one little thing that they want to do there.

They have got to approach, all of us, communities with EJ concerns, understanding that whatever
the community brings to us, it's our responsibility even if it's not our job. It's still our

-------
responsibility to go back to EPA, to go back to other federal agencies, to go back to states or
local governments saying, I was out here to fix the water, but they've got some paint issues.

What can we do about it? Not just to go back home thinking, well, I did their water thing. They
should be happy.

They are committed to making progress immediately. We have several things here now looking
inside of EPA about our policies, our decision-making, our ability, our capacity inside of the
Agency to support this work. On to the next slide are the actual commitments we have in
objective 2.2 inside of the Agency. Dr. Tejada said they started to make this commitment in the
EJ 2020 action agenda from several years ago that was never formally implemented, that the
Agency has got to start making commitments to how they are moving the needle on the ground.
What are the very clear and meaningful improvements that our efforts are achieving for
communities with EJ concerns? This is just saying that by 2026, they will have identified 10 of
these very clear measures. In some instances, the policies don't support it but maybe contradict
our ability to do it. They have a lot of work to do, but by the end of the strategic plan, we want
the Agency to clearly make compelling commitments of change on the ground that they are
accountable to. The second one, looking at the significant actions with the EJ complications
across the Agency, permits, rules, records of decisions for cleanup, resource allocation, the big
decisions that they make have got to clearly demonstrate how decisions are responsive to
concerns, the concerns that adhere to meaningful engagement and actually show the work, why
the decision changed and how they have heard from this community.

They have got to start showing that our decisions address disproportionality. It's about unlocking
cumulative impact and what is happening on the ground, with our permits, our rules, our big
decisions have got to start being responsive to that. Really holding ourselves accountable to that.
The next one, again, going back to that community-driven approach, that any part of the Agency
that engages with the community that shows up and does what we call community work, but
they're doing that in a community-driven way. It has to be collaborative with other partners and
ensure anything that they do in a community is supporting the vision of that community for what
they want to see happen. They are going to continue to show up with answers and not worrying
if they conflict with the community's answers. Our answers must be the community's answers.
They must get those answers from the community, and they have got to support them in what

-------
they want to see happen in their community. This is where we want some feedback. Do you all
think it's 50 percent? Do you all think it's 100 percent? Do you all think it's something in
between? We need to hear from folks about where to set these percentage goals for us. Then
again, Lillian, on number four.

Ms. Lillian Dorka, EPA: says this is where they articulate as an agency that civil rights
vigilance is an EPA-wide responsibility. It's an EPA-wide responsibility. They are asking all
regional and program offices to identify and implement areas of opportunity to achieve civil
rights compliance, but in their planning, in their guidance that they issue and policy directives,
monitoring and review activities, such as permitting.

One of the very prominent commitments that they have made in our response to the Inspector
General's Office is, that they in 2022 are going to issue guidance to our recipients about what
does it mean to have a disparate adverse impact on the basis of race, color, national origin and
including cumulative impacts. They will be strengthening the guidance that they already have out
there on the civil rights analysis to include clearer and stronger guidance for recipients on what it
means to do that before making these critical decisions like permitting. Questions like, what do
you need to consider from a civil rights perspective with respect to adverse disparate impacts that
your decisions may have on certain communities on the basis of race, color, and national origin?
What they are doing through goal 4 is that they are asking EPA-wide to focus on efforts to
identify all of those opportunities to raise the importance of the civil rights analysis and
specifically where these critical decision points could possibly have an adverse disparate impact
on the basis of race, color, national origin, and disability.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, said that some of the actions that they have come up with is looking at the
strategies and the data, and the practices for cumulative impacts. This is one of the top priorities
of the Agency. It's one of the top priorities in the United States. A lot of states, a lot of other
levels of government are all looking at cumulative impact.

This is something they are focused on at the very beginning of all this, while they are still
figuring out the long-term strategic plan, they are doing serious work inside of the Agency trying
to figure out, how can we really wrap our arms around cumulative impacts in a way that we can

-------
start to apply to things like rules, to things like permits? Looking at the EJSCREEN tool and
coming up with cumulative scores for it. EJSCREEN has never done that. They have never had
the request and the support to do that. They have pulled together through a contract, a group of
academic experts on EJ from across the United States to help us think through it. What is the
index? How can we do a different cumulative index in the EJSCREEN? Looking at those
decisions that EPA is making that already account for cumulative impacts. There are a few
already out there so they want to start lifting those up so other parts of EPA and other parts of the
environmental regulatory endeavor in the United States can see those examples.

Having a training program across all of EPA to make sure everyone in the Agency understands
equity, EJ, and civil rights and what it means for them and doing in a way that is public. This
allows the public to see how EPA trains at EPA. This training will be made available to state and
local government. We want to do it in a public way. Looking at the actual process, and the action
and development process. This is the actual step by step of how they should make big regulatory
decisions like rules. EPA did some work on this in Plan EJ 2014. They have got to go way
beyond EPA Plan EJ 2014, updating that development process, the actual nuts and bolts, of
making our decisions, to include the civil rights compliance, our language assistance, our
disability assistance programs, making sure right they are putting in place the support, the
contracts, the vehicles, whatever is needed to make sure everything EPA does is completely
accessible on a basis of language needs or on a basis of other disabilities.

Ms. Lillian Dorka, extended an invite to all to look at the response to the Office of Inspector
General (OIG), which they issued on September 20th of this year, because it has much more
specific actions that we're taking in response to OIG's audit that they conducted. Basically, 2.3
focuses on the strengthening the civil rights program. This is a commitment that Administrator
Regan made to Congress, realizing that in the past, they have not fully implemented the authority
of Title VI. That they have not been fully implementing disparate impact analysis and
considering cumulative impacts in our analysis. This has been made clear based on public
commitments for a need to strengthen the civil rights program, so some long-term performance
goals have been created on a number of them, including, for example, pivoting from a mainly
reactive program that they investigate and resolve complaints, to a more proactive program,
including initiation of affirmative compliance reviews and specifically with respect to and in

-------
communities that are environmentally overburdened. They are developing and implementing
clear and strong civil rights policy guidance and the corresponding technical assistance deliveries
to increase recipients' understanding and compliance with the federal civil rights laws. This
includes adverse disparate impacts, cumulative impacts, all within the permitting context. You
won't see a long-term performance goal on there, but that's why I wanted to highlight it for you
because we have made a separate commitment to the Office of Inspector General to issue that
guidance. The first set of guidance they are going to issue, by the end of this fiscal quarter, by the
end of December is guidance carrying those fundamental non-discrimination program
requirements that all recipients need to have in place. They are going to then move to strengthen
the pre-award review process, working on other guidance to strengthen and really clarify the
responsibilities that recipients have to look at disparate adverse impacts and how to remedy
those.

Ms. Dorka says they are focusing on the timely ineffective investigation and resolution of
complaints, of complaint investigation, and ensuring that they are utilizing the full extent of the
regulatory authorities that they have at their disposal to ensure that they are not just addressing
disparate treatment, but that they are addressing when appropriate resolution investigation and
resolution of adverse disparate impacts effects, adverse effects on individuals on the basis of
race, color, and national origin and that includes, of course, cumulative impacts. They are trying
and making efforts to enhance communication and engagement with environmentally
overburdened and disadvantaged communities.

We have committed to a certain number of stakeholder engagements by year, leading up to the
2026 long-term performance goal. EPA started and had a listening session on the 27th of October
where they just wanted to make themselves available and listen to those who wanted to comment
both orally and in writing about what external stakeholders thinks the EPA needs to be doing
within the office, within the external civil rights office to strengthen and to set priorities. EPA is
trying to increase the transparency in the program because that is one of the fundamental
commitments that EPA has for all of its programs. What EPA is trying to do is to affirmatively
provide information to the public on our complaints, on our resolutions. They are trying to post
additional documents online that traditionally were not accessible, other than through the
Freedom of Information Act requests.

36

-------
Finally, they are working closely with other federal partners and other federal agencies, with
DOJ to strengthen the inner agency collaboration and coordination across the federal government
to enforce the federal civil rights laws knowing they can really assist each other, the agencies can
in leveraging the impact, particularly on overburdened communities, and some real measures
through the strategic plan to ensure that they think of civil rights as an organization-wide, an
agency-wide endeavor. It's everyone's responsibility to see it forward and to make sure that they
are walking the talk, in fact, providing meaningful access to persons with limited English
proficiency, to persons with disabilities, to all of our EPA programs, as they are requiring
through the federal civil rights laws, our recipients to do as well, trying to ensure the
accountability of our programs can truly affect the conditions and the environmental injustice
that exists in many of our communities.

NEJAC RESPONSE TO FY 2022-2026 EPA STRATEGIC PLAN PRESENTATION

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: Thanked Dr. Tejada and Ms. Dorka, saying that the NEJAC
Steering Committee has had a chance to provide feedback a couple of times, but Ms. Orduno
now wants to spend at least the next 25 minutes for the rest of the NEJAC to offer some
feedback, noting from the beginning that we recognize this is not enough time. There's going to
be a request for a continuation of the review of the strategic plan when NEJAC gets to the
business meeting portion of this public meeting. Ms. Orduno asked if anyone was interested to
offer any comments or questions, to please raise your hand there, in the box.

Ms. Orduno thanked Ms. Dorka for this visionary work and stated that she was one of these
people who really doesn't work so well from goals and is interested more in objectives and
outcomes. How do you do this? There have been a lot of criticisms over the past to your office
that incremental changes don't get enough of really developing a civil rights program. So, can
you help us understand what is different this time around? She stated that when she looked at the
long-term performance goals and objective 2.3, that by 2026, EPA will initiate 15 civil rights
post-awards compliance reviews; the next bullet, 100 audits annually; the next bullet, 25
information-sharing sessions over five years. The first one is only 3 per year; the second, 20 a
year; the third, 5 a year averaged out. She is trying to get a sense of what is fundamentally

-------
different. What is this opportunity now with this administration and the funding that will make it
different? She indicated that she is not understanding, what they are proposing in the long-term
performance goals.

Ms. Dorka explained what is changing dramatically, also as responded to in the 100 Day Letter,
is the elimination of the backlog of cases, which is fundamentally unfair, justice delayed is
justice denied. They are on track to efficiently and effectively in a timely manner address
complaint. Starting from that, they have a responsibility to initiate their own activities in a
compliance review. Ms. Dorka stated that this is one real difference between a compliance
review and a complaint investigation, that the Agency is initiating. It may not seem like a lot, but
quite frankly, they have never done them before, and they have never done them effectively and
substantively. So, it's huge progress in that area, and they are talking about procedural matters,
but about initiating compliance reviews on some of these very substantive issues about adverse
disparate impacts that affect overburdened communities. So, when you're talking about the
number of affirmative compliance reviews, for example, it's above and beyond all the complaint
investigations and resolutions that EPA is doing on the non-discretionary responsibility that they
have to respond to complaints, and they are getting an increasing number of complaints. They
have been habitually underfunded and understaffed. EPA has a critical need, if this
administration's budget goes forward then this will be addressed, and they will be receiving an
influx of staff. It is about moving the program forward through affirmative compliance reviews,
and the guidance that we need to issue proactively, and it won't say that in the strategic plan
long-term commitments because that's not something that's as easily measurable. But the
guidance that we have committed to issue in 2022 is groundbreaking.

For the first time, this Agency is going to be talking about and clarifying for recipients what it
means when the civil rights regulations, our EPA regulations say that you may not know,
through methods of administration subject persons to revocation on the basis of race, color,
national origin that have the effect. You may not take actions or methods of administrations that
have the effect of subjecting persons to discrimination. Or significantly impair their opportunities
to benefit from the program or activity that's being funded and the program or activity that's
being funded, we're talking about the protection of human health and the environment.

-------
Without intent, our recipients, the federal financial assistance, taking actions that subject person
to discrimination, that have discriminatory effects or that have the effect of substantially
impairing the benefit of the protection of human health and the environment for all persons.
EPA has never issued guidance that has been that strong. They have come close. We have some
guidance that was issued under the Obama administration in 2017 that clarified what the civil
rights analysis is with respect to different treatment and disparate impact, what they are and how
do you apply them, they need to make it very clear, as a very fundamental point. EPA needs to
make it very clear that compliance with the environmental laws does not necessarily mean
compliance with the civil rights laws, and that is a critical point. EPA is talking to states. They
have been talking to ECOS (Environmental Council of the States). They are going to be talking
to them increasingly and with all of our external stakeholders but having these very critical
conversations with the states about what that means when the substantive environmental laws do
not require you to go beyond, and it doesn't mean that they prohibit you from doing so either.
Where there is that discretion, you may need to go beyond what the environmental laws requires
to fulfill the civil rights responsibilities or to remedy some civil rights violations that have been
created either through the effect of your actions or the intent of your actions.

Ms. Dorka asked if there's something that's not in there that EPA needs to do to capture through
these long-term performance goals, they absolutely need to hear back because on top of
everything else, they have this really unprecedented opportunity to work so closely with our EJ
partners in the regions and in headquarters to integrate when they're out doing environmental
justice engagement, they will be able to identify whether there are civil rights issues that need to
be addressed, and vice versa, bringing them into our engagement when they are trying to address
civil rights issues as well.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: Thanked Ms. Dorka and acknowledged that that helped in
the answering of her questions. She recognized they have got 20 minutes at best for this next set
of questions and responses and seven folks have their hands up. She asked the members to do
two people at a time just to get questions out and then see how to go about with the responses.

Ms. Ayako Nagano, NEJAC Member, said that she had two questions: one for Mr. Tejada and
one for Ms. Dorka. The question for Mr. Tejada is what it does for the next four years and will

-------
that be the basis for the staff annual reviews. She thought this a critical point, the staff should be
held accountable for achieving goals, and that these goals are tied to their salaries and bonuses.
Can he speak a little bit more about what that mechanism is? Because this is the first-time
getting confirmation that that's true.

She asked Ms. Lillian Dorka if she can speak a little bit in the granular about the National
Environmental Protection Act, and, from a NEPA lens, how can she envision that Title VI can be
brought in and rolled out.

Dr. Jan Fritz, NEJAC Member, stated that she had a few points to make. She said she analyzed
the national action plans for the Central Inclusion of Women and Girls, some of this is coming
from that. Point number one. Matt talked about the annual reviews. She said she searched for
annual review and yearly review in the document, and she didn't see anything about that. She
stated that that's important to see that that's in there. Two, she said she didn't see a timeline. So,
if they're going to do annual reviews, when does that start? Second major point, monitoring. The
monitoring is mentioned 43 times in the document, and it didn't the clear involvement of civil
society and being able to do that monitoring. She found on one page there was something about
how the public can assist in the monitoring. She thinks that's very important as part of that plan
that goes on and how that's going to be and whether NEJAC has a part in that. Her third point
was that the regional offices were mentioned six times. "Region" is mentioned 37 times. This is
coming from these analyzing the national action plans. She really urged them to have a section
that talks about EPA offices coordinating with regions, coordinating with programs, along with
mentioning improvements and things that work well. Her fourth point was that NEJAC is only
mentioned three times. She thought NEJAC should be part of that monitoring and some other
things and she would like to see that strengthened. Her fifth point was that she found when
people write these plans - she works on national action plans based on a security council
resolution and ten supporting resolutions - nobody can ever find what they're supposed to do
because things are written in different places. So, what she'd like to see in the document is that
somebody is going to go through and say this is what programs should do, and this is what
regional offices should do, or any part of the EPA is supposed to do. One of the things she'd like
to see in there is that they write down that the regional and the program will always have a
representative to attend part of the NEJAC meetings. The part she's thinking about are the public

-------
testimony or the business discussion of NEJAC.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ, responded to the questions and points made. Stating that
every year, everybody in EPA, political staff, senior executives, manager staff, we must write
down a very detailed list of, here's what we're going to do this year. Here's what we're going to
hold ourselves accountable for. That is somewhat structured by the Agency, but it absolutely
flows from the strategic plan. Everything they say they're going to do has to hook into a very
clear way into what they did in the strategic plan. They can even go beyond that and can dictate,
and they must have something on this part of the strategic plan. He stated that they don't have
that commitment in the strategic plan. They might've written that commitment and somebody
took it out, but he would like to have everybody in the Agency have at least one thing that hooks
into EJ and the strategic plan. He explained that there is a whole process and timeline around
those annual reviews. NEJAC's only seeing the top of the bureaucratic iceberg. What is already
starting to happen is they're taking this strategic plan, and they break it down into annual national
program guidance that says, you do this, and you do this, and you do this, and you do that. He
stated that there is another bureaucratic process that follows this one, but this sets the frame. This
sets the goals. Then just under citizen science, that was the number one thing as they were
crafting this. They thought about putting it in there in a very clear way, and folks were like, we
have so much in here. Knowing that they've spotted it as well, maybe they need to go back and
do something clear on citizen science here.

Ms. Lillian Dorka, EPA, addressed the question about NEPA and civil rights, and she thought
that is a critical question. As with everything else, they're looking at the NEPA program itself
and where EPA has a significant responsibility. With respect to NEPA, they want to make sure
that those decisions as well are taking into consideration civil rights requirements and civil rights
considerations of disparate impact. She stated that they have been working very closely with
DO J, and specifically the civil rights section of DO J, these are critical convenings with federal
agencies. What about NEPA and Title VI and how do we clarify that part of the review? It's not
just an environmental impact analysis that includes considerations of Title VI. They're trying to
make recommendations to DOJ about what would be helpful from a federal government-wide
perspective, what would be helpful to the agencies for DOJ to issue to clarify some of those big
points. She mentioned that with respect to ensuring environmental justice, compliance with the

-------
environmental laws is not compliance; it does not equate compliance with Title VI. They're
looking to make that clear from an EPA perspective to our recipients, but they are very strongly
recommending that DOJ make that very clear federal government-wide and all recipients of all
federal aid perspectives.

Ms. Karen Sprayberry, NEJAC Member, stated that thinking about the DOJ, one of the things
that your office needs to look at with DOJ is restitution towards communities. They look at
restitution towards everybody else, but sometimes they forget about communities, and then the
communities offer advice about what they think would be fair restitution but seems they don't
get want they want out of it. She said she'd like to see that strengthened. She added that with
your long-term performance goals, those goals all look like they were all external goals for
outside the Agency, but they need to add one that's internal to the Agency and it needs to be
something like how many people are trained on environmental justice or collaborative problem-
solving or the skills that they need internally that these goals are getting met. She stated to
change the culture within, they're going to have to bring their champions together and kind of
support them and give them what they need to go against upper management, but just be the
advocate or the champion for others within their program areas. Those will be people not in the
office of OEJ, but within other program areas that would champion a discussion. She suggested
that she probably needs more funding and more staff to meet all these goals that are going to try
to be achieved. She continued with bringing to what states' needs are. As they look more towards
states, they're going to also need additional training, but also funding to support them as they
look towards states for additional help.

Ms. Felicia Beltran, NEJAC Member, said that she really appreciates that there is a line here in
the strategic goals to have EPA collaborate with other federal modes or federal agencies. From a
state perspective, she knows when they review for environmental justice or even for Title VI
between the federal agencies, they're not talking the same language. There are different
definitions. She added that there's a different analysis that they do to measure for disparate
impacts or even cumulative impact, and she felt like they're not talking the same language;
therefore, they're never going to really get the heart of trying to ensure environmental justice and
even compliance with Title VI. She appreciated that being considered and written down as a
strategic goal. If everyone could just all talk the same language, they can make some moves with

-------
regards to Title VI and environmental justice.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ, said that, on the restitution piece, they already have some
commitments out there from the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance on the way
that the supplemental environmental project policy is and from the federal government. He added
that they'll see if the administration overall, including DOJ, goes back to the SEP policy, but
their criminal office, especially over in the enforcement office, is very focused on victims'
benefits. They've been helping them for a number of years now to set up a more robust victims'
benefits program through the enforcement office. They had a couple different things in here
about training, about just getting every member of EPA staff, regardless of what you do, out into
a community over a certain amount of time. There's nothing like engaging directly with the
impacted community to really make it real and change behavior. That's not in here right now.
That's something that they can go back and push to see if they can get something about really
getting at that culture change, that behavior change in the strategic plan.

Ms. Lillian Dorka, EPA, said they have made commitments to the Office of Inspector General.
They will see that they've committed to internal training to ensure that the civil rights, not just
knowledge of the civil rights obligations, but knowledge of the way that they're supposed to all
be contributing to civil rights enforcement. She added that they've made commitments for
training. They've already started embarking on some of those trainings. They are making a much
bigger effort to also include the environmental justice perspective into those trainings.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ, stated that, when they write those commitments about
defining things, sometimes they kind of pucker up because they're like, we're going to admit we
don't have these things defined in 2021? So, they're owning up to that and saying, well, these are
some fundamental things that we still need to do for everyone across EPA, and hopefully, there
are some other efforts across the entire government to do the same.

Ms. Lillian Dorka, EPA, agreed that the federal government needs to get it together in terms of
sending a unified message to states. They need action and so much from the states and the last
thing they want to do is add to the pressures and the resource strain and have ten million different
requests going in different directions and that is the commitment that DOJ has made specifically

-------
the federal coordination compliance section of DOJ has very regular meetings with all of the
agencies that are implementing and taking environmental justice measures as a committee, the
Environmental Justice Committee. She added that they've been very effective in bringing them
together, and they have been, engaging as never before. Their office has three new cases where
they are coordinating with different federal agencies where complaints have been filed with
multiple agencies, and they are coordinating the resolution of those complaints.

Mr. Charles Bryson, NEJAC Member, responded to the point that Ms. Dorka had made. In the
document, it talks about the foundational civil rights as it relates to states. He wasn't sure what
that meant. His concern was that there were going to be states where it's going to be very
difficult for them to address civil rights issues due to the political climate, and how will that
affect the cities and rural communities as a recipient of federal funds? His second part was
regarding the document and the EJ40 project. Forty percent of overall benefits from certain
federal investments to underserved communities, but the grant process says that they must have
at least a 25 percent match. The problem with that is, if you are a local entity and you don't have
the 25 percent match, but you're doing the work or you're capable of doing the work, what's
going to be the relationship between EPA and those local community organizations that don't
have the 25 percent match, but can show they can do the work?

[BREAK]

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, stated that she hopes that the meeting can stay on schedule.
She notified everyone that they may go over time because there are many public speakers. She
flagged that the quorum needs to be maintained. She also reminded everyone that conversations
happening in the chat will not be a part of the public record. Nothing can be discussed in the chat
box unless it's simply for logistical purposes. She called on Ms. Dorka to respond to what Mr.
Bryson raised before the break.

Ms. Lilian Dorka, EPA, clarified Mr. Bryson's question about, what does EPA mean by
foundational civil rights requirements and what the EPA does concerning states, where the
climate does not necessarily support civil rights enforcement? Foundational civil rights
requirements are that, within the regulations, it's required that all applications for and recipients

-------
of financial assistance from EPA have in place certain fundamental civil rights programs and
they are noticing a very prominent way that they will not discriminate based on race, color,
national origin, disability, sex, and age. That they will, within that notice, make sure that that
notice is accessible to persons with limited English proficiency, persons with disabilities. The
regulation very specifically also requires that programs or recipients and applicants for EPA
money who have 15 or more employees are required to have what's called a non-discrimination
coordinator in place and that is the person that would coordinate the receipt of any civil rights
complaints on Title VI and others should come to their attention, and that they have in place
what's called civil rights grievance procedures that members of the public can use to file with
those agencies' civil rights complaints and civil rights concerns. They need to have in place a
program, a process, a procedure to ensure that they are providing meaningful access to persons
with limited English proficiency concerning public participation. She continued, access to vital
documents that the Agency has in place, including vital processes like the environmental
complaint processes, and types of vital programs are also accessible to persons with disabilities.
And finally, it also requires that the public participation program that they run be consistent with
the federal civil rights laws. They have to keep in mind the fact that they can't offer different
types of public participation depending on the race, color, or national origin, or English
proficiency, or disability, or nature of the communities that they're addressing and that they
proactively address those needs before public engagement and public participation. That is what
is normally called the non-discrimination program. It is in the regulations, and they have been
interpreting it consistently with this day and age. The regulations say, to be prominently posted,
they must include it in all their publications. Well, that's the '80s. By today's standards, they
include their homepage. The homepage of their website is a prominent publication. The Agency
has determined that what they need to do is tighten the process that they have in place to review
applicants for assistance from EPA.

They have a process in place that uses this thing that they call a form 4700-4, and it is a
requirement that it goes out to all applicants for EPA money, and they must fill it out
completely. This form asks questions about the non-discrimination program that they have in
place whether they have notice of non-discrimination, whether they have grievance procedures,
a coordinator, a plan for LEP and disability access. And that form needs to be completed fully
and signed. The enforcement of that and the Agency's review of the form hasn't always been

45

-------
consistent and clear. So, if Mr. Bryson wants more information and specific clarity on this, she
invited him to review their September 20th response to the OIG because they do detail it. By the
end of this fiscal year, they're going to issue what they are calling a "dear colleague letter and
guidance" to their colleagues who receive federal financial assistance, and they are going to
apply regarding our pre-award review process. The Agency is going to be very clear about what
the regulations require concerning the non-discrimination program. Once they issue that at the
end of this calendar year, then that will kick off this six-month period in which they are going to
conduct extensive training for their staff, meaning all of our EPA staff, because many of these
applications for federal money are processed through the Grants and Debarment Offices in the
regional offices. They don't come directly to headquarters, and so they have folks in ten regional
offices who assist them with that process of reviewing those forms to determine whether they are
fully completed and the applicant for EPA money has responded to all of those questions. So,
after that six-month period, they're retraining everyone. Everyone's been put on notice about the
dear colleague letter and guidance.

If instead of giving information about the grievance procedures that they have in place for
external civil rights compliance, the group gives us a reference to EEO process. The Agency
would then get back to the other entities that are filing these forms, and the Agency would
provide input to them. They would be told, by writing or email, that they haven't completed the
form correctly, and they would have then a six-month period to come into compliance. If they
don't, then the Agency will, of course, not award the federal financial assistance. The Agency is
working out all the details of that guidance. They're working pretty closely with the Office of
Grants and Debarment to put in place the full process and how they will handle that coordination
and that give and take with states and other entities out there of what they need in place.

Dr. Millicent Piazza, NEJAC member, stated that she is glad to have heard from both Director
Dorka and Director Tejada about the strategic plan because what she heard today were key
pieces that she did not see reflected in the strategic plan that she had a lot of concern about. The
pieces that were brought up today were the more robust guidance around states. She wanted to
affirm what other NEJAC members have said about the clarity around internal EJ training and
Title VI accountability internally at the EPA. That's not only important to see that EPA's doing
that, but it's a strong signal and a unified federal message to recipients like the states when that

-------
is reflected in the Agency.

While the Agency, of course, understands the strained capacity and resources there is such
inconsistency in oversight by several federal authorities. The different things that are supposed
to be reporting on is unclear. The strategic plan needs more elevation or direct content on the
role of recipients for state agency. She added that there are gaps in understanding, and she has
convened a regional team for 15 years and she gets the need for centering community and
vigorous enforcement in those compliance reviews, but there are gaps in understanding and a
lack of clarity about what compliance even looks like. Some people are so invested in this work
and want to do good and just really don't know how to do it such as in the strategic plan basic
civil rights elements. The procedure checklist, how is that going to lead to the promised results
of more equitable siting and permitting decisions and better health outcomes from impacted
communities? She didn't see that connection with posting of signs and edicts, and other things
that are super fundamental, she didn't see the connection with the very real disparate outcomes.
Dr. Piazza wrapped up with a hope for a clearer commitment on a plan that partners with
recipient agencies on training and support, on filling out the 4700 form, on the procedural
checklist, and more importantly, civil rights analyses.

Mr. Andy Kricun, NEJAC Member, stated EPA could help the states with some fundamental
institutional problems that the states may have in enforcing some regulations concerning
environmental justice. He talked about Camden, NJ and the lack of odor control violations from
a wastewater treatment plant because the state didn't have enough time to verify the odor with
limited staff time. Could the EPA assist in trying to come up solutions to better protect EJ
communities by working with the states where there could be some solutions of best practices
for other states to use that might solve their issues. Could other states that may have already
filled that gap with their own products share that knowledge, best practices - basically a gap
analysis for the states where there's missing EJ regulations? Could EPA be a convener/fulfiller
that helps to close those EJ regulatory gaps? Regarding the 25% local match and what Mr.
Bryson said earlier, that's a big problem. Let's say an EJ community gets a 75 percent grant,
could they take an SRF loan out for the other 25 percent? It's a favorable set of circumstances
than having cash on hand or a typical bank loan. It's 20 or 30 years spread out, and it could be
the thing that plugs that resource gap for EJ communities.

-------
Dr. Jill Harrison, NEJAC Member, stated that one of the key findings from her research in the
past ten years, on environmental justice reform efforts is resistance internally by staff to do
environmental justice reforms. They don't see it; some staff members don't see it as consistent
with their responsibilities as good public servants and good environmental stewards. She
wanted to emphasize the value of bringing in some of that language that apparently got cut out
of the strategic plan around accountability for staff in terms of their annual performance reviews
but also accountability for offices. All elevation is crucial, but that needs to be followed up both
with the training of staff, accountability of staff, and working some of these changes into
specific decision-making processes, especially around permitting and rulemaking and allocating
of funds. She said on pages 26 and 27 of the strategic plan, there's a lot of concrete detail about
which types of work processes are required for bringing in these environmental justice reforms,
and she has some suggestions within Goal 2 of the strategic plan of where some of that
specificity can be strengthened elsewhere.

Ms. Leticia Colon de Mejias, NEJAC Member, added that she had a few thoughts as it relates
to being equitable and the civil rights requirements for avoiding exclusionary practices. Will
there be a way that these items that are required are pre-packaged and accessible for small
organizations to guide them ensuring they can meet the requirements that are changing and
being imposed as they relate to civil rights in Title VI regulations? Small organizations often
don't have a HR coordinator or someone to receive those complaints; and then sometimes the
amount of paperwork that would allow them to apply for funding resources that would allow
them to build capacity or reach further into communities of color, they're excluded
unintentionally because they don't have the capacity to offer those resources.

Secondly, will there be metrics imposed on states or people who are receiving EPA funding to
ensure that the supports are being provided to communities of color and vulnerable at-risk
communities who have been historically underserved to this day? It's impossible for that to
happen unless a metric is in place that requires a certain percentage of resources to go to
communities of color. The minority of small organizations are oftentimes asked to partner with
larger organizations and are told that they should use those organizations as fiscal sponsors.
Those larger, white-led organizations absorb 90 percent of the funding that is provided. Only 10

-------
percent of the funding goes to the smaller community-led minority organization, which is why
historically those community-led minority groups don't get to do the work they need to do.

She wanted to bring that forward that nothing changes unless there's a metric that's specific to
ensuring communities of color that have been historically underrepresented and thus historically
underserved and disconnected to both the problem and the potential resources to save
themselves, that cannot change unless we put a specific metric around that. If they were the lead
organization on that then they should have some set of requirements. My suggestion is 51
percent or more of their allotted funding should go to another organization underneath them, or
they should have to represent that the money is going directly to support the community of color.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ, had a few thoughts. On the training stuff, for matching,
can EPA remove restrictions? If a restriction is statutory, can they use other things to satisfy it?
Absolutely, Ms. Colon de Mejias. Looking at the details of that state relationship, how far can
they push the things that the Agency's going to require of themselves with those states. That's
why there's a commitment to open up that space to try to push as far as they can in working with
states, those are absolutely on point. To Dr. Harrison's questions, even if this isn't reflected in
the details this is the tip of the bureaucratic iceberg. The Agency gets even further and further
into the details when we do national program guidance when there are implementation plans. So,
if there is more that the Council wants to say with the details and it's so important, the Agency
needs to know all that stuff.

Ms. Lilian Dorka, EPA, added that to Ms. Colon de Mejias comment, the Agency is very
sensitive about the issue of small organizations for grantees and how the civil rights laws are
going to have to carry out any burdens anticipated. The Agency hopes to touch on that with the
guidance that's going to be issued.

NEJAC OPEN BUSINESS MEETING REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION MOVING
FORWARD INCLUDING NEJAC WORKGROUP UPDATES

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, transitioned to the business meeting. She acknowledged that
the Council would do its best to make sure that all the public comments are heard. She stated

-------
that the Council has heard a lot about the strategic plan, Goal 2 in particular. Currently, there are
six work groups, and the Council will hear some updates from them. In order for the Council to
have a plan after this meeting to address the strategic plan, and what it has to say about
environmental justice, we need to have a new short-term strategic plan workgroup approved.
The workgroup would take what was heard specifically around Goal 2 — a lot of what was
shared already to put in a more coherent report - and will offer feedback and recommendations
to the strategic plan, and then take that to a future meeting to deliberate. Any of the work that is
done for the workgroup has to take place in an official meeting, a public meeting. The Council
has to determine if it is going to be an official public meeting or a public business meeting. It's
going to need to be done by January, which means that between now and the end of the year this
work has to be done by a group of volunteer members, but the council would need to support the
formation of the workgroup. Before checking for support, Ms. Orduno acknowledged Ms.
Owens' desire to speak.

Ms. Sofia Owen, NEJAC Member, said she understood the need for the short-term response to
the plan but asked if the focus of the working group could be more broadly around Title VI and
civil rights just overall concerning EPA.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, said that while the council has talked about wanting to do
that, there isn't time to do it right now with the EPA's priority needs of this council. We can
look at that after the new year but the focus needs to be specific to the strategic plan before that
window of opportunity is lost.

Dr. Matthew Tejada, Director, OEJ, agreed with the focus for now so that the council can open
up a little space to get work done but in their response to the Administrator they stated they
wanted to engage the NEJAC in a civil rights workgroup.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, asked that Ms. Owen keep the Council on point with that
and not let them forget.

She asked that the Council turn on their video so they can do a simple vote to indicate if Yes, the
member supports the formation of this short-term working group. There was a strong consensus
in support. The Committee will start an email chain the day following this meeting to assemble

50

-------
the working group. She stated that the workgroup reports will follow but reminded members that
Chairs are needed to help with the division of labor. She stated that each group will spend maybe
three to five minutes giving updates on new information and direction or redirection that will be
pointed out since the August meeting. She shared some questions ahead of time with the chairs
of the group. There is a need to have new participants, especially from any stakeholder groups or
communities that could help with moving the work along and they will be able to look at what
was presented for Goal 2 in consideration to what this new work group is going to be doing.

Mr. Michael Tilchin, NEJAC Member, stated that he is in the Business and Industry
stakeholder group within NEJAC and located in Region 3. For the status of the work group, they
had an excellent meeting with more than ten of the leaders within the Office of Air and
Radiation back on August 23rd. That conversation focused on programs that are going to be
funded by the American Rescue Plan, including a strong focus on community air monitoring
activities going on under the Clean Air Act Advisory Council. The group met again on
November 4th. That meeting focused on priorities and added some new members. There was an
excellent response from the new NEJAC members interested in the work group. They're meeting
again on the 18th, and we'll spend more time refining their priorities and digging into both Goal
2 and Goal 4, which is the ensure clean and healthy air goals under the strategic plan.

One focus area is in response to the strategic plan focusing on Goals 2 and 4, and here are some
elements of the cross-agency strategies that deal with citizen science, having a strong link to
community air monitoring. Another focus area is the accessibility and availability of air quality
data. The group is looking at the issue of cumulative impacts including issues related to land
application of biosolids and odor. The group is looking at data quality issues, and how to merge
citizen acquired data with regulatory quality data to expand and enhance the network of air
quality information making that accessible to communities. Related to that is the integration of
community monitoring, citizen science, and workforce development.

The next priority is to establish a liaison between this NEJAC workgroup and the Clean Air Act
Advisory Committee. They want to focus on the issue of climate change that's strongly linked
not just to air quality, but the notion of improving environmental education and environmental
literacy around climate change in communities. The group needs a co-chair. They need some

-------
expertise related to air monitoring sensors and how those are deployed, the complexity of having
those essentially being citizen community-driven operations, and issues related to the quality of
the data.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, thanked Mr. Tilchin for stepping up to fill the role that is
needed in leadership for this workgroup after losing folks that transitioned off the last council.
For the next workgroup report from Farmworkers and Pesticides, the chair also shared her
appreciation to Ms. De Aztlan who stepped up to provide leadership as its chair.

Ms. Cemelli De Aztlan, NEJAC Member, represented the Farm Worker and Pesticide Working
Group. They are still looking forward to having their first official meeting. The group has just
two NEJAC members and seven farmworkers and needed to request translation. They finally
solidified a date, the first of December, to have their inaugural meeting. She reported that they
have had three conversations with the farmworkers unofficially. Pesticides and Roundup came
up a number of times, how the children and women are getting affected, specifically regarding
reproductive health and how to collaborate with the schools. The group is planning on collecting
testimonials from the farmworkers' groups, and a question did come up regarding the Justice40
initiative, will it help to address farmworker communities. She also thanked OEJ Staff for
translating the previous letters to the administration regarding farmworkers and pesticides.

Those were hefty letters that underwent translation. Thank you for getting that done so that the
farmworker women could have access to that information.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, also thanked the OEJ staff for managing the interpretation
services that will be needed to be able to have those workgroup meetings.

Mr. Jerome Shabazz, NEJAC Member, represented the Finance and Investment workgroup,
also known as the Justice40 group. The group started with two overarching goals and outputs.
One was to establish a visualization tool to track how resources are being spent and where
they're going, and to ensure there is some matrix for identifying revenue flow is going to the
communities that need it most.

The second overarching goal was to follow the issues and the problems to resolution. The group

-------
is looking at tracking systems for measuring if an issue is being addressed, if there are
appropriate means to see whether or not solutions are being identified, and to see those solutions
in real-time. He added that the group started with four framing issues. The first framing issue
was to understand and track the finances that are involved in addressing environmental justice
issues nationally. The second framing question was to understand and leverage the EJSCREEN
tool, which was part of the methodology for our tracking strategies. The third was understanding
the Justice40 mandate in general, and the fourth was to push for resolutions of the justice
concerns that they've been talking about those resolutions throughout the entire discussion
today.

The group had a chance to meet with OEJ's budget office team led by Ms. Sheila Lewis, and
they met with the EJ grants coordinator Mr. Jacob Burney. Ms. Lewis was instrumental in
talking about the ideas of at least experimenting with the thoughts or conceptualizing the
thoughts around community capacity building centers to help fulfill some of our initiatives, and
the idea of looking more closely at equity resource partnerships and what they may represent in
long term strategies. He shared that on the EJSCREEN side, the group met with Mr. Tai Lung
and he was able to help them to understand how EJSCREEN is being used currently and that
there are some possibilities of being able to create more layers to EJSCREEN to help them
identify and track some of their concerns around how Justice40 dollars would be utilized. The
group also had an opportunity to go deeper into the funding initiatives around how the money
would be utilized to get to their communities. The group met with Mr. Ed Chu from the EFAB
(Environmental Finance Advisory Board). He was very instrumental in encouraging the group
to create charge questions that would enable them to integrate the same level of thinking they
have in NEJAC on the EFAB.

The group is looking at the idea of what those charge questions would represent, how to
structure them, and to make sure that they're consistent with the outcomes that they're seeking
from not only NEJAC but from EFAB as well as the Justice40 initiatives. He continued with on
the Justice40 mandate to see how they can better coordinate their work with WHEJAC so they
can identify interagency relationships in making certain that there are agency representatives
throughout the federal government that are taking into consideration environmental justice, not
as an afterthought, but as a very deliberate part of their decision-making process. He concluded

-------
that the group is looking forward to having a second meeting with Mr. Chu to follow up on how
they're going to connect with EFAB, to create these questions around charge questions that his
group can address. Finally, the group is also working on a letter that will be brought back to the
full NEJAC Council so that they can address some of the issues and findings of their work.

Dr. Millicent Piazza, NEJAC Member, represented the NEPA workgroup. The workgroup
continues to meet every two weeks, and they are six members strong at this point. Per the
questions about additional capacity or membership skill set or knowledge, the group would
welcome any additional members who are interested in this NEPA work, but particularly
someone who has familiarity with Section 309 of the Clean Air Act as that was something very
helpfully articulated in the 100-Day response letter. The actual objectives of the workgroup is to
focus on empowering the public comment and engagement process to affect better decision-
making through the NEPA process. It's important having that consistency and integrity in what
is included in EJ analysis and having that influence the decision making in a NEPA
environmental impact statement processes and analyses, and then training and guidance on what
EJ analysis should look like particularly when it comes to disproportionality and impact reviews,
the Title VI nexus with the NEPA process and how we can leverage Title VI to support
environmental justice and pro equity outcomes through the NEPA process is also important.

She added that the group is meeting every other week and taking a thoughtful approach which is
a positive thing because of the commitments that were clearly articulated in the earlier half of
today as well as the 100-Day Letter response and the strategic plan. There is so much richness
that the group had been focusing on which was the role of the interagency working groups,
CEQ, as well as the WHEJAC, and then learning today about the Department of Justice
coordination; and then coordinating across the federal family. She concluded with there is so
much content there that they're trying to bring in expertise to help them explore more strategic
ways that they can add value as a workgroup to EPA's thinking to potentially elevate concerns
that they see as practitioners for the NEPA process. It's an evolving development of what their
outcomes and developments will be with a really dedicated group.

Dr. Benjamin Pauli, NEJAC member, represented the PFAS workgroup and standing in for Dr.
Sandra Whitehead. Our first need is that they are looking forward to meeting with the Office of

-------
Chemical Safety. They hope to receive a briefing on the EPA's new PFAS plan and the
integration of environmental justice considerations into that plan. The group is hoping to receive
information on the whole of government approach to PFAS, including the actions and policies of
the CDC, OSHA, and any other federal agencies who have a finger in the PFAS pie. They would
really benefit from new members who can speak to these kinds of priorities or who have been
working on PFAS locally, especially in BIPOC communities, anybody working on water issues,
and has an interest in PFAS.

Ms. Ayako Nagano, NEJAC Member, represented the Water Infrastructure Workgroup. She
stated that she was standing in for Dr. Na'Taki Osborne Jelks, chair of the Water Infrastructure
Group. The primary recommendation comes from the NEJAC's letters and such that called for
the EPA to build a coalition of federal, state, local, and community stakeholders to work
collectively. The top priority should be to secure more funding from Congress for clean and safe
water infrastructure investments and programs than allocate them first to environmental justice
communities. Emergent water infrastructure issues include addressing challenges to water
infrastructure caused by changes in climate patterns such as frequent flooding and droughts. The
Water Infrastructure Workgroup has begun gathering other concerns about issues in particular
communities include getting more engaged with ensuring resolution to the water issues in
Benton Harbor, Michigan as well as following up with Flint and learning more about the
drinking and wastewater problems and violations affecting people imprisoned at the Parchman
State Prison in Mississippi. In terms of the needs of the workgroup, they do need additional
workgroup members from any sector. They are looking for a co-chair to serve alongside Dr.
Na'Taki Osborne Jelks. She concluded that their workgroup reviewed the strategic plan, and the
workgroup will greatly benefit from the objectives in Goal 2.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, invited councilmembers to give feedback. She also
reminded members that there is an expectation that all members participate in at least one
workgroup.

Ms. Jacqueline Shirley, NEJAC Member, stated that her comment is concerning the 100-Day
Letter that was drafted up and sent to the administrator. The Council had mentioned their
concerns in these workgroups, and the administrator sent a response that's a 14-page letter. She

-------
still needs to have time to read the administrator's response in its entirety and even process what
it means to the Water Infrastructure Group. She added that the infrastructure bill that was just
passed this weekend, what does that mean? Have some of the group's issues and things been
resolved? Sometimes it's not resolved 100 percent to our liking for the group to use. What is the
next priority? She suggested in the steering committee those new members could call into any of
the workgroups and listen, to just be on a learning and listening mode, to see if this is the
dynamic group they would like to join and be able to free time to float through all the
workgroups to help make their decision.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, agreed that they haven't really had time to review it
collectively or process it, but it is something that they're going to need to see about how to pick
up at least in pieces through the workgroups. She will be following up with the folks that were
part of drafting the 100-Day Letter to see how they might be able to respond in some way in
consultation with the workgroups.

Mr. Andy Kricun, NEJAC Member, stated that he would like to possibly join the water
infrastructure and the Justice40 workgroup. He suggested there ought to be a brownfields group
for contaminated sites potentially.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, thanked Mr. Kricun for his inclination to join a couple of
the workgroups. She commented on his idea that, in the past, there has been work specifically
around brownfields. She reminded the Council that they can start a workgroup at any time if it
believes that there is a sense of urgency, that there is a need to provide specific feedback or
recommendations to the EPA, especially if it feels like a space where those conversations are not
happening, and that it's done with recognition about work capacities and time issues. But as
we're going through the Strategic Plan we can see if some issues can be addressed in part
through that or, as some councilmembers have noted, that there will be a need for future work
groups and we can look at existing ones and what the process may be to continue or conclude
them and decide where we go from there. We would need to look at what the work this council
has done already on issues like Brownfields or Climate Justice and what new information we
want to contribute to.

-------
Ms. Leticia Colon de Mejias, NEJAC Member, thought that it's critical to acknowledge that the
strategic plan for the EPA acknowledges our desire to deal with climate change and climate
action, the working groups don't reflect that, and they should have a climate group. There isn't
an energy group, and everything can't be talked about unless they talk about energy. Oftentimes
people so rarely think about energy, just like they don't think about air until there's an air
problem or we're not having access to air. She added people don't think about energy until
there's an energy problem, and we're having problems with that. Since most folks in the United
States don't think about energy as it relates to climate, it would be important, since there are so
many environmental justices directly related to our energy demands and our demand, the
Council consider that as a new working group.

Ms. Jacqueline Shirley, NEJAC Member, reminded the Council that workgroups could
conclude because they haven't received a charge from the EPA for a while. Sometimes the EPA
does charge the NEJAC to do something like develop a report, so it needs to be kept on our
docket and made clearer the work the EPA wants us to do. She also agreed the climate and
energy change should be woven into our fabric of EJ. Let's keep the docket open and hopes that
the EPA would come to the NEJAC with some charges.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, reminded the Council that the workgroups that they have
right now are what the Council has determined are issues that they have been working on, have
been concerned about, and have heard significant public comments regarding. These were
spaces that were needed to continue the conversations, investigations, and consultations with
EPA and with other members as part of those Tier 3 workspaces. There can be new workgroups,
but at this point, they need to try to get a sense of, as new members are joining the workgroups,
what it is that is the prerogative. She added that they've heard some of the updates tonight about
what has been going on so far. If there is an interest in doing any kind of priority shifting or
additions to the workgroup or changing them, any changes will have to come through the
Council. She suggested that they at least work with the parameters that were set so far, get going
on that strategic plan and, hopefully, that will help sharpen some of the focus about where they
need to go next.

Ms. Jaqueline Shirley, NEJAC Member, reminded the Council that the workgroups are guided

-------
by public comments and what they bring to the Council.

Ms. Karen Sprayberry, NEJAC Member, reminded the Council that they did have a superfund
workgroup that addressed brownfields, and they might want to look at that report because it
addressed brownfields into that superfund report. That can give you a better understanding of
what was done around that so far.

Mr. Jerome Shabazz, NEJAC Member, stated that Ms. Sprayberry just touched on his concern
if we can develop a method or a strategy of tracking even these more recent requests for working
groups. The superfund has a lot of information that may cover some of the concerns the people
have about brownfields, it would be wonderful if they can find a way to make sure that they
don't allow the issues to just get past them. For now, there are seven working groups, but it
looks as if there are a couple more that people are interested in. He asked how can NEJAC make
sure that every meeting always goes back to our seven working groups to get reports out on it?
But how can they make sure that those other areas where members are concerned about, whether
it's brownfields, whether it's climate justice, that they're still making sure that those issues are
part of their conversation? He wanted to make sure that they're not losing contribution because
they're tracking it.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, agreed that they've been trying to figure that out. She asked
if that can be something that they can take back to their workgroups and offer suggestion for
tracking and then they can take it up with steering.

Mr. Jerome Shabazz, NEJAC Member, stated that it's more of a structural tool for tracking
performance within the workgroup. He said that they can go back and look at it, but he wanted
to highlight it because he's seen over the years some issues get lost. He stated that they keep
reviewing similar concepts because people may not have been around when those issues were
being discussed. They do have a better methodology for identifying those concerns.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, stated that it's definitely at the Council here where they
would be making those decisions and how they want it to work with the formation of those
groups even if it can be in the form of some kind of letter or something that can be done in a

-------
different kind of process or charges that come to them from the EPA itself. So, what is set up
are workgroups based on information that has been acquired that is necessary to provide input to
the EPA. It might be that there's something within that that could be the beginning of a charge
to the Council, or they could figure out how it can evolve. She added that right now the
workgroups are working at different paces and in different intensities. So, this opportunity,
having new councilmembers, gives them the chance to maybe do a little bit of reflection about
where they're at with those workgroups and if there need to be any kinds of changes. If they're
modest and can be incorporated in what the work is so far, then they can proceed, but, if they're
substantive, then we'll have to bring it back to the Council to change what that workgroup is or
form a new one.

Mr. Jerome Shabazz, NEJAC Member asked if she's thinking more about some of the new
recommended areas can be incorporated in existing working groups first.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, answered that some things are more obvious that can be
incorporated into the workgroups. They can figure out what are other mechanisms for them to be
able to figure out how they want to be responsive. But these are the priorities of this Council.

Ms. Leticia Colon de Mejias, NEJAC Member, asked Ms. Orduno if things are coming from
the public and that influences workgroup creation, what if folks have been uninformed and
disengaged on climate and energy, what then? They would not know to bring that to anyone or
to raise the concern. Is there a way to ensure that, when something comes up, that it's put into a
system that can be discussed as a group about the importance of that or a vote to inform
ourselves and make decisions about where NEJAC needs to focus their energy? She stated that
she's concerned that they meet so infrequently, and workgroups are working separately, and, if
they don't have a larger discussion broadly to determine their trajectory as it relates to this
strategic plan they're commenting on, she's worried that won't happen and that will get lost in
the conversation. The Council will focus on very specific areas versus systemic areas that might
be broader.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, answered that workgroups are not formed solely based on
public comments. They're a combination of what priorities have come before the Council

-------
through public comments and through other engagements that councilmembers are having in
their respective regions or through organizations. So, much of the priorities are shaped by the
members who are here themselves. This was just a report out from the workgroups on what
they're working on now. She continued with the groups that haven't had the opportunity to
engage with new councilmembers in terms of what are some of those other issues. There isn't
time set aside at this agenda for it, but it's something that they could put in the future meeting.
Part of it gets shaped in steering meetings, so they can figure out how to also have the time and
opportunity for more engagement as we figure out what the next public meeting agenda will be.
However, again, the workgroups are important spaces for them between the public meetings
because it's where they continue to do the work, and just honestly our workgroups are uneven.
She stated that they know that this is an important space in which many of us participate with
much intentionality, but they know that there are lots of other things that are competing for the
members' time and energy. They are trying to be realistic about what additional workloads they
put on themselves, especially through the workgroups. Part of the way to add more work is
being successful about the work they've got on their plate right now. She mentioned that
figuring out how they can engage new issues in the context of the workgroups and then having
those conversations in those spaces to figure out if that can be incorporated or if they've got to
figure out how to create something new, they've got to make sure that it's part of their scope of
manageability.

Mr. Jerome Shabazz, NEJAC Member, asked is it possible that, since the strategic plan
working group doesn't have a solid mandate, they can look at other issues beyond the report of
strategic benefit to NEJAC? If people have questions about areas of interest, that new working
group might be able to field those questions. In other words, it allows fielding a question in a
working group that's broad enough. It's strategic planning. It's broad enough to cover it.
Maybe it'll feel a little better that they put something in place to at least address the concerns of
folks who are issuing those concerns.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, answered that there could be an opportunity through that
strategic plan workgroup. They can make it what they want it to be, but the Council has to
recognize also that there are less than 60 days to do that. The immediate need is to provide the
EPA our feedback on what the strategic plan could look like or specific recommendations. The

60

-------
Council could also say, as part of this process, they also are finding the need for additional
workgroups or additional ways to address specific issues that go beyond just that plan and are
beyond the priorities of this Council. NEJAC will use that process as part of the determination,
and, when they come back in the new year, they've got a better sense of what their next public
meetings are going to be. Then we can figure out how they get shaped to recognize some of
these emerging issues. She deeply apologized to the public commenters who have been waiting
and thanked them for allowing the Council to have this conversation.

61

-------
ORAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO, stated that public comment period is going to start. NEJAC
members may provide feedback after their remarks.

Mr. Michael Tilchin, NEJAC Vice-Chair, spoke about wanting to have a robust dialog between
our public commenters and members of the Council, but councilmembers are restricted to two
comments per public commenter. The members are listening to the public comment that they get
today, think about that in the context of their workgroup and how that new input can be pulled
into the issues addressed within your workgroup.

Mr. Roddy Hughes, Public Commenter: Good afternoon, my name is Roddy Hughes, I'm a
campaign representative of the Sierra Clubs Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign. The fracked gas
industry has proposed more than 20 LMG export terminals primarily along the gulf coast in
Texas and Louisiana. The oil industry is trying to advance four deep-water oil export terminals
and other onshore export facilities that would drive increased extraction and send oil around the
world. If built, these facilities would justify a dramatic increase in fracking in Texas and New
Mexico and compromise the health and well-being of the communities along the frack cycle.

I have the honor of working with black, brown, and indigenous communities along the gulf coast
that are suffering the impacts of the oil and gas industry, the petrol chemical industry, and
suffering the impacts of our changing climates. The gulf coast needs its own working group in
the Region 6 office. They need to know what's in their air and water and need their concerns to
be heard and acted upon by the EPA. We need for the EPA to engage in the permitting and
enforcement processes for facilities that will impact environmental justice communities. The
EPA must deny permits to any oil refinery, crude, or LNG export terminal, petrochemical plant,
pipeline, and any other facility that could have a disproportionate impact on human health or the
economy or adversely impact communities of color and low-income neighborhoods. The
permitting processes must consider whether communities like Port Arthur, Texas or Lake
Charles, Louisiana are already overburdened with infrastructure including facilities without
considering what other facilities are already impacting air and water quality and public health.

62

-------
Ms. Leticia Colon de Mejias, NEJAC Member asked for follow up with written comments and
any supporting documents that the NEJAC can utilize in their work.

Ms. Ayako Nagano, NEJAC Member said, we hope that EPA staffers are listening and that
there will be phone calls. EPA staffers do talk about these issues and internally within NEJAC,
and we will continue to advocate on your behalf.

Mr. Darryl Malek-Wiley, Public Commenter: I'm the environmental justice organizer with the
Sierra Club based in Louisiana. I've been working in Cancer Alley for over 30 years, and I'm
tired of all the reports we receive like the one that just came out by ProPublica detailing maps of
cancer hot spots in the United States. We have reports that come out from EPA all the time
talking about what's wrong in Louisiana, but we have no action by EPA to correct the problem
in Louisiana. Our Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality should receive no funds
from the Environmental Protection Agency. Forensic Architecture also has put together an
extremely good presentation on the impact of air pollution in Louisiana, and I wonder why we
have non-profits doing these types of presentations and we don't see it from EPA. EPA puts out
hard maps, not interactive, and it makes it harder to understand what's going on. We want EPA
to step in and review the proposed permit fine against Nucor Steel, which the company polluted
the air for six years and impacted the community, cut their air monitoring equipment off for over
a year, and the Department of Environmental Quality is talking about a fine of $82,000. In
addition, we have companies like the proposed Formosa Plastic Plant that will triple the
pollution in Saint James Parish. It's time for EPA to set up an environmental justice task force
in Louisiana to take active motions.

Dr. Jan Fritz, NEJAC Member: I just wondered if you made that suggestion to the regional
people about having an EJ task force?

Mr. Darryl Malek-Wiley, Public Commenter: We have worked with Region 6 on a number of
occasions. They have good EJ staff, but it doesn't have weight within the whole process.

They're good at responding to things but they have not been able to change EPA policy to more
reflect what's happening with the environmental injustices happening in Louisiana, Texas, New
Mexico, and Oklahoma.

-------
Ms. Jan Boudart, Public Commenter: What is an environmental justice community? The term
describes situations where multiple factors including both environmental and socioeconomic
stressors may act cumulatively to affect health and the environment and contribute to persistent
environmental health disparities. It's important to understand that environmental justice
communities live near all aspects of the U.S. fishing venture from the Manhattan Project due to
today's upgrade of our nuclear arsenal. This includes communities near mining, milling,
processing for the gas UF6, fuel fabrication, and experimental activities for fuel fabrication.
Communities and U.S. military personnel victimized by depleted uranium, that steadily releases
ionizing radiation in the form of alpha, beta, and gamma rays and forms hot particles in ground
dust and in the air. Military personnel are further exposed to uranium 238 in tank bodies and
ordinance exploded near them in ground battles. Local jurisdictions have no say during COVID
as to whether these people hosteled in their mostly small communities and ate in the restaurants
and bars. EJ communities victimized by the U.S. fission venture also involved waste
instillations. Including waste from the military explosions dating back to World War II in both
the U.S. and the former USSR, experimental reactors, and merchant electric power plants that
exploit fission to produce heat. This radioactive waste includes military low-level nuclear waste,
greater than class C waste. The gloves, booties, and hazmat suits, debris, and irradiated metals
from the discarded reactor vessels when merchant plants close and high-level radioactive waste
like spent radioactive fuel. We have 11 active merchant reactors in Illinois and four of them are
the Fukushima design, and almost 100 nationwide, some of which are like the Fukushima
design. But their emergency zones have been reduced to the area occupied by the reactor itself
if they are ever built on the theory that an accident is a non-credible event. So, there are lots of
environmental justice communities, and they are becoming more numerous as we continue the
folly of pursuing radioactive methods to produce energy.

Ms. Karen Sprayberry, NEJAC Member: EPA has these technical assistance grants, and they
provide the problem-solving grant, helping these communities get that funding so they can begin
to address some of the issues and I really like the idea of having a task force. In South Carolina,
we have some sewage discharges going on in our river, and it's good to bring all the
stakeholders together. I hope you will advocate for a task force.

Mr. Scott Clow, NEJAC Member: Last month Matthew from the EPA's EJ office gave a

-------
presentation to the nuclear regulatory commission who is grappling with their environmental
justice policies. They have a long way to go at NRC to understand environmental justice, and
one of the things I think as we embark on what Leticia was talking about with climate and
energy as a potential workgroup or a focus of other workgroups then we need to keep the idea of
nuclear energy in there and the fact that people are looking to it as a solution to our climate
change issue. There's also a Department of Energy strategic uranium reserve proposal on the
table, and so there's a lot of issues around the uranium industry that are all sort of converging
right now. I hope that the NEJAC will pursue your needs and the needs of everyone in those
communities.

Ms. Leticia Colon de Mejias, NEJAC Member: I think more people should take that action and
come forward with their thoughts and ideas to help us formulate a plan for the United States of
America as it relates to environmental justice. I hope that you'll submit your comments in
writing along with any supporting documentation so that we can discuss them further in our
working groups.

Ms. Millicent Piazza, NEJAC Member: You know, this also had testimony at our last meeting
related to the legacy of nuclear contamination from uranium mining and I just wanted to draw
that other connection because as we're dealing with emerging technologies, particularly what
I'm reading about lithium production we don't want these emerging technologies and the
environmental and health impacts to be the nuclear legacy we hope that the NEJAC delves into
things that are coming on the horizon as opposed to trying to play catch-up with all the
contaminations.

Ms. Jan Boudart, Public Commenter: We have submitted extensive comments to the DOE on
uranium reserve, and I would be glad to send you my comments, Terry Lodges comments,

Wally Taylor's comments, and Sara Fields' comments in this matter.

Ms. Jacqueline Echols, Public Commenter: My name is Jacqueline Echols, and I am board
president of the South River Watershed Alliance in Atlanta, Georgia. In 2010 DeKalb County
and the Environmental Protection Agency reached an agreement on the DeKalb County consent
decree. Residents of South DeKalb County believe this action would bring about an end to

-------
sewage pollution that has plagued neighborhoods and fowled neighborhood streams and the
South River since 1961. Today, residents of South DeKalb County are still being denied a safe
and clean environment free from sewage spills and polluted waterways. The source of the
problem is language in the consent decree that describes South DeKalb County as non-priority.
From July 2014 through March 2020, almost 800 spills totaling more than 32 million gallons of
sewage spilled into non-priority areas, most of which are in South DeKalb County. The absence
of a deadline to eliminate spills in this area violates the Clean Water Act. It also assigns an
unmistakable lack of importance to an environmental justice community of over 400,000 black
residents, one of the largest in the country. The use of non-priority language demonstrates a
level of callousness unbecoming the federal agency that is charged with ensuring environmental
equity. If there is one certainty at this point in our nation's history, it is that words matter. How
a community is viewed by those responsible for fixing the problem and those responsible for
ensuring the problem is fixed matter. The county estimates repairing the sewer system will cost
$1 billion. This cost will be borne by all residents' priority areas and non-priority areas alike
through higher water and sewer rates. This means South DeKalb residents will pay for fixing a
sewer system in other neighborhoods while their neighborhoods continue to be dumped on with
no end in sight. The outcome of the South River Watershed Alliances case challenging the
absence of a deadline for eliminating sewer spills in non-priority areas is pending before the 11th
Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision by the court will set a precedent. The matter for
consideration by this Committee and EPA itself is a review of the Agency's actions that
challenge the clean water act on the basic right afforded by the large self.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: I wanted to ask if maybe what you heard earlier by way of
the strategic plan and how it is that this administration is really trying to figure out how to be
different, how to walk the walk, how to really be intentional. Is there anything that you
might've heard that you think would be helpful in terms of the implementation, the actualization
in terms of the changes that are needed that you might have thought of at the time or that you
could maybe share with us? I think, to shape the conversations around what is some of the
structure of racism around some of these problems, and if there's a way that maybe you can help
us think that through a little bit more.

Ms. Jacqueline Echols, Public Commenter: I didn't listen to the strategic plan discussion, I

-------
mentioned in my comments, my concern is the complicity of EPA in perpetuating the
environmental justice that's going on in the DeKalb County. The river itself over the past ten
years and particularly in the last couple of years has received a lot of attention. And there was
an opportunity to correct this issue to a modified consent decree about three months ago, and
EPA scuttled that opportunity.

Ms. Jaqueline Shirley, NEJAC Member: My question is more towards our EPA folks, I was
wondering has EPA considered pulling in some EJ communities, some EJ cases as the
demonstration project, to implement the strategic plan and the goals for climate change and
environmental justice and civil rights? Pulling in EJ communities to work within these amassed
case studies and practice fieldwork on how to implement the strategic plan.

Dr. Sacoby Wilson, Public Commenter: As a reminder to the NEJAC, at that last public
comment meeting just to chime in on the gulf coast conversation, the bulk of the comments from
the last meeting was folks on the gulf coast. So as part of our discussion, we talked about
potentially having three workgroups: a climate change workgroup, an energy workgroup, and a
gulf coast workgroup. We did have a plan for moving forward just for the new NEJAC
members, that climate change and energy and the gulf coast were on the docket, I will follow
through on that. Now to get into the strategic plan and comments on that, I believe for the
strategic plan to work, we've got to bring NEJAC to the people so every region should have the
EJAC. Every region should have an EJAC plan. Every region should make sure they have EJ
metrics, DER metrics on who is getting the dollars. The regional administration should do
listening sessions, and if regions are not acting right then the EPA, as part of the strategic plan,
should take away authority. What you heard from the gulf coast is folks dealing with
environmental slavery. You have folks dealing with toxic trauma. What's happening in
Louisiana is a huge problem, so you cannot have a real strategic plan unless you plan to really
address those problems. So, take away their dollars, take away their authority.

On the comment of Justice40,1 am the co-chair of the Justice40 working group. There are five
major challenges to deal with. How are we going to identify those communities? How are we
going to make sure that the money are doled out in the right way? How are we going to make
sure that the right businesses are getting the work? You can't have businesses getting the jobs to

-------
do the work if they're racists if they had bad DI records.

How do we know the workforce is from the community? You can't have people putting in the
infrastructure if they don't live in the community. Then how are we going to make sure that the
communities have the capacity to get the monies? We secure it with red tape. If they've been
identified based on how they apply grant dollars, it's their money so we've got to fix that. The
EPA needs to take a major role in providing leadership in the implementation of Justice40 and
working within these various regions. And then when we think about the strategic plan again,
Title VI and cumulative impacts have to be integrated throughout the strategic plan.

And then a couple more points before I run out of time, but I'm going to take a little bit more
time, Mike. The air quality piece as listed in the plan, we even make sure community collected
data is used in permitting regulations and enforcements and also pinpoint the communities that
need the dollars. The regulatory monitoring network is actually not that great. It's bad science,
so that cannot be put on a pedestal and say, well, we've got to make sure that complies, because
that system is really not a great system.

And the last point, when it comes to investing the dollars and showing the money, we have to
make sure that the EJSCREEN tool brings in cumulative impacts and scoring, but all state tools
need to have the same approach to scoring cumulative impacts. You can't have different
approaches, so there needs to be consistency with the EJSCREEN and consistency with tools at
the state level. I'll stop talking, thank you.

Mr. Michael Tilchin, NEJAC Vice-Chair: Thank you, Dr. Wilson. Great comments, and it is
great to hear your voice and thank you for participating.

Dr. Jan Fritz, NEJAC Member: Let me ask a question to which I think I know the answer. Are
you suggesting that the strategic plan should indicate that every region should have an EJ plan?

Mr. Michael Tilchin, NEJAC Vice-Chair: Yeah, well, and I want to credit Jan for asking a
very well-framed question.

-------
Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: I'm thrilled that you're still active on the Finance and
Investment workgroup, and so thank you again for your leadership there.

Mr. Jerome Shabazz, NEJAC Member: I'm just trying to find a way to give Dr. Wilson a little
bit more elaboration time. No, but I wanted you to speak a little more about this regional
accountability that ties into the strategic plan. Can you speak to that a little bit?

Dr. Sacoby Wilson, Public Commenter: Yes, sir. Thank you. So, one of my soapboxes, when
I was on NEJAC, I was trying to figure out how can we decentralize NEJAC? So, I think the
opportunity is let's bring the NEJAC — EJAC in every region. I think one of the points was
made earlier about how do you engage the community? So, we know we've been getting public
comments from community members. Look at those whole comments, those public comments.
Let's really recruit those community members to be part of this regional EJAC, so I think that's
an important play.

Then, as it relates to how the EPA is doling out monies. If you look at Justice40, for example,
that's the opportunity to incentivize positive EJ action. So I think what we want to be able to do
is to have this strategic plan actually get down to the people. So, it just can't stay in
headquarters. We have to hit the regions. So you look at Benton Harbor or Flint. You look at
El Paso in Region 6, what we're talking about in Louisiana. I think that type of framework will
allow for deeper community engagement, and Principles 5 and 7 are suddenly across the
environmental justice communities and people speak with their own voice.

How can communities speak too well with their own voice if they only go into our NEJAC
meetings and give public comments twice a year? So, at that regional level, we can provide
more, have more accountability, and then make sure the regional administrators are helping to
provide guidance and leadership to implement those plans, and then again, the states have to
actually connect to that larger plan. So, there's more coordination between the states in that
region with the regional office. So, I think that's what's been missing, and I think that's been
my frustration as a NEJAC member of sharing folks — like the folks of the gulf coast, the folks
from Mossville, the folks from Michigan, folks from other parts of the country — telling these
stories but then getting limited action. So, I think the strategic plan, we have a regional

-------
approach and states more engaged as part of the approach and more accountability. We can
move problems to solutions better and this is what the communities deserve. I'll stop talking.
Thank you for that, Jerome.

Ms. Naomi Yoder, Public Commenter: My name is Naomi Yoder, and I'm with Healthy Gulf
based in New Orleans, Louisiana. And I am just really happy to hear all of the people that spoke
today listing off gulf coast issues. I'm here to do the same thing, and I hope that it makes an
impression upon the NEJAC that we keep coming back and we keep having the same
discussions and we need to have some change. So, I really want to support what Roddy and
what Darryl and what Dr. Sacoby said. So, my comments are going to be very similar to theirs,
but I'll go ahead.

So please create that gulf coast EJ working group whether it be within the NEJAC or within the
EPA itself. This is needed to identify and give justice to those EJ areas across the region. As
Darryl mentioned we have new — but not new to us — data that shows the industrial corridors are
so polluted and have high cancer rates. These industrial corridors in the river parishes in
southeast Louisiana, the industrial quarter in southwestern Louisiana, the golden triangle area of
Beaumont, Port Arthur, and Port Neches, and the greater Houston ship channel area are all part
of this.

These areas have a chronic large pollution burden and higher risk for cancer and other illnesses
as well as higher death rates from COVID-19. Louisiana and Texas are oil and gas states and
despite the proliferation of the oil and gas industry across these two states fenceline communities
have very little information about what is in their air and water. These issues must be addressed
and remedied. In addition to the existing pollution burden, and associated loss of wetlands and
storm defenses from all the facilities the fossil gas industry has put a bullseye on coastal
Louisiana and Texas.

LNG, methanol, and plastics plants are all proposed in huge numbers for the already over-
stuffed chemical corridors in Louisiana. Whether or not these new facilities are located directly
in EJ communities — which most of them are — they are EJ issues. These facilities destroy
wetlands, they harm communities because those wetlands protect us from the worst impacts of

-------
storms, and they absorb carbon. These facilities also burn fossil fuels, the exact cause of climate
change. Communities of color are disparately impacted by hurricanes. Furthermore, each of
these plants and terminals has pipelines associated with it.

Pipelines are always in the backyard of people that the corporations don't care about. That is
low-income and people of color. It's appalling. This stacking the deck against people of color
in the gulf south is white supremacy and it must be changed. As I've said in previous meetings,
this is nothing short of a climate justice crisis. Please stop the sacrifice zones and stop the oil
and gas racist build-out. Thank you.

Ms. Ayako Nagano, NEJAC Member: I just wanted to comment that I'm appreciating all the
comments coming from the gulf coast and that it's just underscoring the importance that we
address these issues. Thank you.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: Thank you very much. I am appreciating the comments
from Naomi. I'm trying to think here of a couple of things. And so, we know that the
administrators planning this first leg of this national conversation and beginning in the south in
some gulf coast communities. And I think I can express that, as councilmembers, we're also
really frustrated about trying to figure out how we can be more impactful. And so, I think, in
part, what might be helpful for — especially for what you've shared and what other gulf coast
members have shared — if there's a way that, as you're listening to or participating in, if you are
at all with any of the visits that the administrator is making, if there is something by way of what
he will be conveying, what you all will be sharing, that will help us be more impactful for how
we can engage within the EPA at this Council.

And so, clearly, we've got one small button of all the different ways in which the EPA is
reached. But I'm trying to figure out is how we can try to be intentional in this Council. For
those of you who are from the gulf coast and especially since we have you here at this moment,
you can maybe help us think a little bit more strategically about that. That could be helpful too.

Ms. Naomi Yoder, Public Commenter: Yeah, thank you so much for both of those comments,
and I think that we're just going to keep coming back until something changes. We haven't

-------
been commented on by the administrator or scheduling staff. We're aware of the trip, but that's
a big glaring hole. In my opinion, we should have known about that. We should be able to have
a discussion on this trip, and so that's the first thing.

Another thing is we need some systems in place to very clearly monitor pollution after storms.
The EPA has said that it needs to do that, needs to have a system in place, and it doesn't. It's at
least inadequate if it does. So, a couple of things — and Darryl mention a couple of things as
well — don't give any money to our LDEQ, same with Texas the EQ. Those two agencies need
to be held accountable for what they're not doing, and the EPA has a role in that. So, I really
appreciate that the NEJAC has the role that you have, and I think that we'll all just keep trying to
chip away. Thanks.

Dr. Darius Sivin, Public Commenter: Okay, my name is Dr. Darius Sivin. I'm with the United
Auto Workers. I'm going to be talking about accidental release prevention under the Risk
Management Plan Program. It will be a summary of comments submitted to the NEJAC docket
two days ago and authorized by our president Ray Curry in July and submitted to the risk
management plan listening session docket at that time.

First, why is this an environmental justice issue? Well, it turns out both the location and the
harms of risk management plan covered facilities increase in zip codes in a highly statistically
significant manner both due to income and to race. So, the number of risk management plan
covered facilities in a zip code increases with the percentage of people in that zip code below
200 percent of the poverty line.

And the P-value on that is 1.9 times 10 to the negative 25. Also, the number of injuries and
illnesses due to reportable accidents under the risk management program increases with poverty,
and that P-value is 0.02. There are similar results for race, and, since my time is going fast, I'll
just add that race also correlates with property damage and the number of impact accidents. It
has been asserted both by the previous administration and by the chemical industry that
accidents are going down. But due to data presented in my written submission, you can see that
those assertions are based on highly flawed data, and in fact, from the years 2010 to 2015, there
was a non-statistically significant increase in accidents rates.

-------
And just to summarize, we would hope to see from EPA a new risk management plan role that
would require worker and union participation in incident prevention, investigation, and response
and worker training in order to facilitate safety in meaningful participation as well as
requirements for inherently safer technology and reducing the disproportionate impact on poor
communities and communities of color. Thank you very much.

Ms. Ayako Nagano, NEJAC Member: This is a question, maybe for George, I'm looking for
Dr. Sivin's written comment, and I cannot find it in what was sent to us. Could it be that it
hasn't been processed yet?

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO: It's possible he may have submitted it probably in the public
docket but, whatever public comments we'll get, we'll make sure you all get them as soon as
possible. Also, I was going to say a reminder in the meeting. Public documents that are
submitted in the docket get processed and they become publicly available immediately, so keep
your eye on monitoring the docket, too.

Ms. Stephanie Mgbadigha, Public Commenter: Hi, so good afternoon and thank you for the
opportunity to speak. My name is Stephanie Mgbadigha, and I'm the advocacy and legal
director speaking on behalf of Air Alliance Houston. I'm in the great state of Texas.

I want to start by thanking NEJAC for its commitment to environmental justice as well as the
EPA. Just for reference, I want to give a context of the City of Houston and Harris County as
well. Houston is currently ranked by the American Lung Association as the 11th most polluted
city in the nation for ozone and the 20th most polluted city for annual average particulate
concentrations.

Houstonians drive more than 140 million miles each day and tailpipe emissions from cars,
trucks, busses, add to everyday pollution. Air pollution levels are also affected by emissions
from other local sources like concrete batch plants, dry cleaners, gas stations, restaurants, pretty
much any industry that you can think of. In addition to that, Harris County is also home to the
largest petrochemical complex in the country, two of the four largest petroleum refineries in the

-------
United States, and more than 400 chemical manufacturing facilities. Now I believe 150 of those
chemical manufacturing facilities are in low-income, low English proficiency communities of
color.

And so that brings me to my first initial comment. I think it's important for the EPA and other
agencies to meaningfully discern between environmental equity and environmental justice.
Environmental equity means that no one group or community is facing a disproportionate impact
of pollution or anything like that, and environmental justice is the protection of that equity. So
environmental justice necessitates environmental equity, and we don't have that. The EPA has
these great definitions of meaningful involvement and fair treatment but, in practice, that's not
what's happening. Not with its rules and not in a trickle-down effect to states and local
government.

I would encourage EPA — especially with its new strategic plan — to be more vocal about what
is happening around the country, specifically in Texas, and I would prefer if EPA would call it
by its name which is environmental racism. And to that effect, I am asking that EPA please,
please enforce its Title VI powers and appropriately hold these agencies accountable for the
discrimination. An example of this is in Houston here, concrete batch plants, the sitting
requirements of these plants are inadequate, to say the least. And TCEQ which is the
environmental agency for Texas has openly in oral statements and written comments say that
they will not consider cumulative impacts.

So here in the fifth ward, there are I believe ten zip codes that have cancer clusters, and, in all of
those ten zip codes, they are the only active concrete batch plants. This is just an example of
what I would consider an adverse and disproportionate impact, and I would also like for EPA to
provide more guidance on what it's considering discrimination. I would like to know in more
detail what adverse impacts would be considered discrimination and what wouldn't. And so that
means enforcement of Title VI of the civil rights act is necessary to correct this long-standing
trend of concentrating these heavily polluting facilities in the environmental justice communities
that are already overburdened in pollution.

And I'll be quick because I know that my time is up. I would also like EPA to start considering

-------
remedial measures. I heard it earlier in the meeting, but I think it's time that we start fixing the
issues that EPA as well as these state agencies have caused by ignoring these harms and ignoring
the racism that is protruding with these state agencies. It's time to write grants to do things like
revamping the air systems, the HVAC systems in schools, communities, churches, and nursing
homes that are being surrounded by these industries. Again, I thank NEJAC for its commitment
to environmental justice. Thank you.

Ms. Leticia Colon de Mejias, NEJAC Member: Stephany, thank you for your incredibly
awesome comments. In my opinion, I just want you to know that, if you have a chance to read
the strategic plan, there is a whole section addressing what you're discussing here. Specifically,
I think that that would be a great section for you to comment on as I think that oftentimes what
people don't understand is that, even when resources go to communities, more often than not,
the funding doesn't go there. Earlier on, somebody made a poignant comment that often we're
measuring the disparity or the environmental injustice. I hear you, but I don't hear the plan to
resolve the problem which is frustrating because measuring a problem without taking any action
to solve it just lets you know there's more of a problem.

I don't think that we're unaware of the problems is what I'm hearing. All along with the
comments from all the commenters who called in today and got online, you're all aware of the
issues in your communities. So really what we need to do is do a better job of engaging
communities and finding a way to bring you forward and help us propose solutions to those
issues to the EPA so that we can take some actionable steps forward. So, thank you for taking
the time to call in.

I also wanted to thank another councilmember earlier for suggesting the idea of doing case
studies whereby we interview folks who take the time to provide these incredible stories and
then make a specific focus in some way to resolve those and report out which I think would also
be inspirational for other communities who have issues and may feel lost or as if no one wants to
help them.

So, thank you so much because I do believe that systemic racism is very much part of
environmental justice, and unfortunately very much part of the issues that we're seeing all across
our nation.

-------
Ms. Karen Sprayberry, NEJAC Member: Leticia, just what you were saying just a minute ago
reminds me so much of the CARE funding and the available CARE grants. And so, if you go
back and google CARE grants and what they funded, I mean, it's projects like that, and it tells
the stories and it did a great job of telling how they utilized the money. So, that's something we
need to be advocating for is the CARE funding again.

Ms. Felicia Beltran, NEJAC Member: Thank you very much, Stephany, for your comments. I
just want to make a response with regards to you mentioned Title VI. Title VI sets a foundation
that has a lot of enforcement behind it, and I feel like the strategic plan — specifically Objective
2.32 — strengthens civil rights enforcement in communities with environmental justice concerns.
That's really where this powerful arm of Title VI can be implemented to ensure that prior to
receiving any type of financial aid that they have an existing nondiscrimination program in place
as a good method for prevention. But again, thank you very much for your comment.

Mr. Charles Bryson, NEJAC Member: Thank you. As I listen to some of these comments, I
realize that one of the things we're at is the intersection between education and employment, and
some of the issues that people are bringing to the EPA belong to EPA. But they also belong to
states that are using federal resources to create some of the things that they're talking about,
whether it's a gas plant or the energy plant, whether it is giving money to the airline so that they
can have more air traffic. So, I think some of these we have to figure out, and I think Leticia
talked about this earlier. The education process has to suggest that you don't have to give up on
employment and suffer from a bad environment.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: We're near the end of what we scheduled for this Council
meeting, and so we did acknowledge earlier that we are going to have time to go over for the
public comments. I also noted that we wanted to see about trying to get the meeting completed
by 7:00 really making it sort of an objective. So, I want to ask councilmembers to again go back
to some of the framings that we had shared at the beginning, and I'll just read those again just so
you can think about how you want to respond here.

So, as we have public commenters, I'm asking that we have no more than two councilmembers

76

-------
comment per public commenter and that we limit the number of times you respond overall. So,
if you've already spoken three times consider letting someone else go who hasn't yet offered
comments from the Council.

Mr. John Muller, Public Commenter: I am John Muller, retired civil engineer in Tulsa,
Oklahoma with more than 25 years in public works engineering. Mainly water resources
engineering, and I'm an active supporter of the American Environmental Health Studies Project
by way of its Fluoride Action Network. And I first want to remind you or inform you for the
first time as the case may be for new members that I have attended and commented at the
previous NEJAC public meetings held on June 17th and also August 18th and 19th, as well as
the inaugural WHEJAC meeting on March 30th. I also attended and commented at the July 6th
Board of Scientific Councilors, the (BOSC) public.

I commented to experienced expert scientists to the BOSC in response to its current request for
nominations. Now, regarding today's meeting and the strategic plan draft, I have submitted one
very brief comment so far and I plan to submit more comments with more specifics because
there are very real opportunities for this ground-breaking strategic plan to facilitate resolving the
EPA's and the CDC's conundrum of how to end water fluoridation in light of the new evidence
showing the unacceptable risk of disproportionate harm to blacks and other vulnerable
subgroups, especially brain damage in the unborn fetus in a mother with excess fluoride
exposure and bottle-fed infants and young children, harm to the developing brains not dissimilar
at all to the harm from lead.

My comment points out that there's a need for language in the plan to include application of the
precautionary principle anywhere in the plan where values for safe human exposure are being
addressed, evaluated, and/or determined for regulatory rulemaking. And here is what Wikipedia
has to say in part about the cautionary principle. And I quote, "The principle has become an
underlying rationale for a large and increasing number of international treaties and decorations
of sustainable development, environmental protection, health, trade, and food safety. And in
some legal systems, as in the law of the European Union, the application of the precautionary
principle has been made a statutory requirement in some areas of law."

77

-------
What I request of NEJAC from this meeting is to create a special fluoridation workgroup or
assign it a priority in the Water Infrastructure workgroup and place fluoridation on the NEJAC
agenda as maybe a possibility for discussion to determine and articulate a recommendation to
the OEJ and ultimately to Administrator Regan after the NEJAC members have had time to
review and consider the submitted additional materials. I will be submitting additional materials
by email. That's all I have for today and thank you very much for this unique opportunity to
participate in your most important work. Thank you.

Mr. Scott Clow, NEJAC Member: Yeah, really briefly thank you for your comments, Mr.
Muller. In Indian countries across the United States, the Indian Health Service when they built
water systems would often install fluoridation systems on them, and so, if we do embark on
digging deeper on this, I'd like to maybe pull tribes across the nation on this and potential
epidemiology related impact. So, thank you for your comments.

Ms. Stephanie Herron, Public Commenter: I spoke with Ms. Dora Williams on the phone a
little while ago, and after the second time you called her, she told me that you were asking her to
unmute, she clicked unmute but for some reason, you couldn't hear her. But she is in. I just
spoke with her.

Ms. Dora Williams, Public Commenter: This is Dora Williams on the phone.

Mr. Kurt Ali, Curator: I just heard something really faint underneath all that.

Ms. Stephanie Herron, Public Commenter: I wonder if perhaps you could put the call-in
information in the chat or something. It's impossible to chat to the host because chat has been
disabled but maybe she could call in or other folks who are having issues. I was not able to raise
my hand on my computer so clearly, there's some sort of tech thing going on. I'm on my phone
now. Maybe if you just put the call-in number in the chat, Ms. Dora and any others who aren't
able to work it could just call in via the call-in number.

Kurt Ali, Curator: George, do you have the call-in number? Okay, in the meantime, I'm going
to move on —

-------
Mr. George Ward, Program Manager: Kurt, the call-in number is actually on her invite. If she
goes to her invite, the call-in number is there.

Mr. Kurt Ali, Curator: Thanks, George. I'll reach out to Ms. Herron in a second. Because of
the time I'm just going to move on to Hilton Kelly.

Mr. Hilton Kelly, Public Commenter: Yes, thank you NEJAC for this opportunity to speak.
My name is Hilton Kelly, founder, and director of the community in Power and Development
Association located in Port Arthur, Texas on the gulf coast. Home to the largest oil refinery in
the northern hemisphere, which is called Motiva, which puts out 633,000 barrels of oil per day.
It's also home to the Petco — petroleum coal facility called Oxbow Calcining — which dumped
tons and tons of disproportionate amounts of sulfur dioxide and heavy metals. In our request of
NEJAC, we must address the ethylene oxide issue in Texas and in other communities where it is
produced. In Port Arthur, Texas, Indorama has released large amounts of unchecked ethylene
oxide during our cold snap and yet our state has yet to address that issue.

And when it comes to cumulative impact, many people have been exposed to dangerous
chemicals like benzene, 1,3-butadiene, carbon monoxide, and other toxic chemicals in our
environment. But what we found is that we know what these types of chemicals do to the
human body and how it impacts our respiratory system. But what we don't know is what these
chemicals do cumulatively in our air. We feel that the Environmental Protection Agency needs
to put together a plan and implement that plan on cumulative impacts and create a cumulative
impact study to help us understand how our bodies are being impacted by multiple chemicals in
the air at the same time from petrochemical facilities and other big polluting facilities.

Chemical disaster rule. We would like to request that the NEJAC ask the Environmental
Protection Agency to issue stronger new chemical disaster prevention rules that include the
central components that Cedar Inc. and its ally groups have discussed back on July 29th, 2021.
The stronger rules would include companies installing safer technologies, climate preparations,
and mitigation while facilities in hurricane-prone areas also require backup electrical power, air
monitoring, access to information for the public, and Title V air permit requirements, et cetera.

-------
NEJAC has tracked this issue concerning the chemical disaster rule for many years. Now is the
time to get the rules strengthened so that life can be saved now and in the future.

I also would like to thank the Earth Justice Organization for pitching in and doing all that they
can to help grassroots organizations and to help us get to this point where that we can have this
kind of dialog. And I do believe that the EJAC, the Environmental Justice Advisory Council in
communities like Port Arthur, Texas, like Beaumont, Texas, like Houston, is a necessity. Local
governments do not do enough to help local citizens to fight for environmental justice and we
feel that it's time to put the power in the hands of the people. Thank you for your time.

Ms. Jacqueline Shirley, NEJAC Member: Just quickly, I'm just hoping our last in-person
meeting was scheduled to be in Houston, Texas, and I'm hoping that when our in-person
meetings gear up again that we'll continue with that schedule and have our next in-person
meeting in a critical place like Houston, Texas and I'm looking forward to seeing the gulf folks
in person. Thank you.

Mr. Hilton Kelly, Public Commenter: Well, I do understand that the Administrator is going to
be in Houston, Texas on the 19th, and I do plan to attend that meeting.

Ms. Karen Sprayberry, NEJAC Member: I know with some of the projects that we've worked
with, especially with climate perforations. We've worked a lot with the academia and the
community to get some information. We actually have funding for the EPA right now where
we're trying to get the community to do vulnerability assessments, to do hazard assessments,
and do capacity assessments. And so that really enables them to look at what's in their
community and how to prepare before a disaster hits. And so anyway, and the academia in
South Carolina is really helping us with this project. I didn't know if you reached out to them to
get some assistance.

Mr. Hilton Kelly, Public Commenter: No, we have not talked to the academia sector at this
particular time but, yet, that idea did come up at a few meetings and we have plans to reach out
for all the resources that may be available to us to get the chemical disaster rule put in place and
also to help those chemical companies to do a better job at protecting human health, reducing the

-------
potential for chemical releases and explosions like the TPC plant in the Groves area so that we
can save lives only now and also in the future because it's really out of control. And under the
Trump administration, it was as if we had no Environmental Protection Agency, or we had no
state regulatory agency, so we need help and we must work together now to make things change
for the better.

Dr. Brian Moench, Public Commenter: Thank you. I'm Dr. Brian Moench, on behalf of Utah
Physicians for a Healthy Environment and the 450 physicians and 3,000 members of the lay
public within the organization. I was congratulated by the administration for giving the issue of
environmental justice long-overdue attention. But the administration should not just focus on
existing injustice, it should also try to intervene and prevent projects that are destined to become
monuments of future environmental injustice. One such project being designed and given
hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money by our legislature is a Salt Lake City inland
port. This stands to be a massive Transmodal shipping hub and warehouse farm now planned
for the westside of Salt Lake City in the immediate vicinity of 250,000 people who already
suffer the most pollution and environmental toxin exposure of the two million people who live in
the Salt Lake Valley.

They suffer the traffic pollution of our busiest freeways, are immediately downwind of several
oil refiners near an enormous open-pit copper mine and smelter, are downwind of summer-long
aerial spray and pesticides and numerous industrial smokestacks, and are downwind of a major
international airport and the secondary airport whose planes still use leaded gasoline. None of
this would be tolerated on the east side of Salt Lake City, but because of lack of political clout,
the Utah legislature is shoving this down the throats of those who are already the most
victimized by our numerous pollution sources. This Transmodal shipping hub would be the
epicenter of multiple new sources of pollution, an estimated 70,000 more diesel truck trips per
day, diesel power switcher engines, 150,000 more cars, increased air traffic, more pesticide
spraying, and dozens of more train locomotives. Incidentally, one Tier 0 locomotive can emit as
much pollution as what you'd expect from 10,000 cars.

This project clearly exploits the economic and racial disadvantages of this community, and Utah
politicians remain unflinching in their determination to push it forward. Other inland ports and

-------
inhouse farms smaller than what is planned in Salt Lake are now nicknamed quote, "diesel death
zones," because of the pollution they generate. There is absolutely no reason to think that the
developing one in Utah will produce a different outcome.

This port is also intended to facilitate more fossil fuel extraction, something squarely
contradictory to the Biden Administrations' climate goals. The rationale being offered is that the
port is needed to produce jobs is a smokescreen. Utah historically has a very tight labor market.
The current unemployment rate is 2.4 percent, and most of the anticipated port employment will
be low-wage warehouse jobs. The real beneficiaries are well-connected developers and
powerful international corporations eager to exploit this community for profit. Using the Clean
Air and Clean Water Acts, several federal agencies could intervene and prevent this injustice
from happening. Dealing with the obvious consequences after the fact will only further
victimize this community. Thank you.

Dr. Jan Fritz, NEJAC Member: I didn't know anything about this project. Thank you for
telling us all of this. Can you tell me something? About how far along in the planning process
this is?

Dr. Brian Moench, Public Commenter: Well, the Utah legislature has been passing bills since
2018 to clear the way for this, and they just passed the bill that allowed a public obligation to
support this project with $150 million to start building the infrastructure for the trans-loading
facility, in other words, cement pads and huge cranes that are designed to lift shipping containers
from trains to trucks and so forth. So, it's been in the works for three years. They have
established a Utah Inland Port Authority, which is a quasi-government agency, virtually with no
oversight and acting completely autonomous. So the difficulty in fighting back on any front is
that the decision-makers are not accountable to the public in any way, shape, or form. And that
was an intentional part of the strategy.

Dr. Jan Fritz, NEJAC Member: Have you discussed this with regional EPA?

Dr. Brian Moench, Public Commenter: Yes, in fact, we have quarterly meetings with Region 8
EPA on this topic. We are trying to convince them that, in fact, the Clean Air Act and the Clean

-------
Water Act can be invoked here to perhaps forestall, if not prevent, this project. We are not sure
we have convinced them yet, but our next meeting is scheduled for January. But first and
foremost, this is an issue of environmental injustice, and so to whatever extend federal agencies
can become involved in this and aware of it, we are certainly trying to pursue that.

Dr. Jan Fritz, NEJAC Member: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Thank you.

Ms. Ayako Nagano, NEJAC Member: It's more of a comment. It's put in the chat, the EPA
strategic plan website where anybody could give feedback to the EPA strategic plan. It's only a
draft right now, and there are many wonderful aspirations in there. But there's going to be
pushback from industry, and there's going to be pushback from states. So it's really important
that the EPA hear from communities giving feedback, and it's got a lot of goals to maybe focus
on Goal 2 which the OEJ was responsible for and then maybe pick another area that's really
directly relevant to you and just focus on those two and then it would be wonderful if more
people could provide public comment. Thank you.

Dr. Brian Moench, Public Commenter: Thank you.

Ms. Stephanie Herron, Public Commenter: I really do appreciate all the work that the NEJAC
in the time right now. I do have a comment, but I just have to say in advance of my substantive
comment that on the logistics of this meeting, the public comment is not going into anything
related to the order that you shared in advance with speakers, and it is extremely confusing.
Normally the public comment list is also shown on the screen in NEJAC and WHEJAC
meetings, and it's extremely confusing to figure out who's coming up or who's speaking. A
number of people are texting and calling me very confused, and I also just want to note that the
actual time of the public comment wasn't made public until about two days before this meeting,
so for folks who couldn't reserve from 1:00 to 7:00 p.m., that's not very accessible.

And then I couldn't say any of this in the chat instead of wasting this time right now because the
chat is disabled, which came up I believe on the last NEJAC meeting. You don't have to make
it, so you chat with everyone. I know that's distracting, but you can set it so that only members
of the public can only chat the host and that would've really helped here. So, thank you.

83

-------
But onto my substantive comment. My name is Stephanie Herron, I'm the national organizer for
the Environmental Justice Help Alliance for chemical policy reform. I know I've spoken at the
last several NEJAC meetings and others in the past but since there are some new members who
I'm very excited to hear from and about, EJHA is a national network of environmental justice
organizations, primarily grassroots groups who have been working to prevent and deal with
chemical disasters in their communities for many years, some of them since even before I was
born.

Earlier today, Director Tejada said that environmental justice is the quote, "Top priority for
Administrator Regan," and I really was glad to hear that. I am here again today as I was at the
last two NEJAC meetings to remind you and emphasize and echo what Mr. Kelly and others
have said that, if EPA wants to prioritize environmental justice, they must prioritize protecting
workers and fenceline communities by prioritizing and issuing a truly protective risk
management plan or aka chemical disaster rule on the fastest timeline possible. I'm here joining
other commenters asking NEJAC to write a letter and a recommendation to Administrator Regan
and EPA calling on them to issue a strong and truly protective RNP rule that prioritizes
prevention and protection of workers and communities on the fastest timeline possible.

In the interest of time, I'm going to mostly leave it there, but I do want to direct everyone on the
Council to the comments that I made at the last two NEJAC meetings, which I have sent via
email, and also three reports that I've referenced and two that I've referenced in my previous
comments. One is the life at the fenceline reports that shows the demographics of people who
are disproportionately impacted by chemical disasters and RNP facilities. The other is the
preventing double disasters policy brief that was issued this summer about the connection
between climate disasters and chemical disasters. And a specific example about several of the
chemical releases and disasters that occurred in the wake of Hurricane Ida hitting the gulf coast
this year called unprepared for disasters. So would direct councilmembers to please look at those
things that I emailed, thank you.

Mr. Michael Tilchin, NEJAC Vice-Chair: Ms. Herron, thank you very much. And actually, I
do want to thank you for those. My heart was breaking when I was hearing about the frustration

-------
that you and other members of the public are experiencing, and your comments were very
constructive. I know I'm speaking for the OEJ team that that frustration is not what we're
aiming for. We want to avoid that and be as accessible as possible, so all of the things that you
just stated will be taken under consideration for sure. And then, of course, thank you for your
very substantive comments today and previously and for the reports you've submitted.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: Stephanie, thank you so much for raising those issues. I
know that our OEJ staff and the contractors really work hard to try to have a respectful
organized process here, and this is regularly falling apart with having to be online. So, please
know that there's no malintent at all here, and we will work better to figure this out. We will
address it as something that the steering committee will look at, so please rest assured there.
And also, just wanted to say thank you for also being a coordinator with other participants who
are having trouble getting through and taking that role.

And then just lastly, I really do appreciate the information that you've been bringing to us for
many years. You've actually helped me better understand, too, the issues about fenceline
communities, and the materials that you've shared have been significant for us. So I just wanted
to share that. Thank you.

Ms. Maya Nye, Public Commenter: Yeah, so good evening. My name is Maya Nye. I am the
federal policy director for Coming Clean which is a network of over 150 diverse organizations
working to reform the industrial chemical and fossil fuel industries so that they're no longer a
source of harm. I'm here sharing the call with Stephanie and with Mr. Kelly and others to call
for the NEJAC to send a letter to Administrator Regan and this EPA to prioritize a preventative
new risk management program rule on the fastest timeline possible. And just for some
background, I grew up in a white working-class fenceline community just across the river from
multiple high-risk chemical facilities located in Institute, West Virginia.

And that facility was built in a thriving black community with a historically black land grant
university by the U.S. government in the 1940s to support the war effort. And today this facility
is still one of the top 25 producers of cancer risk from air toxics in the country as a result
specifically of ethylene oxide alone. Over the years, we've experienced a myriad of explosions

-------
and releases of highly hazardous chemicals used in plastics, pesticides, and other agricultural
and commercial products. The cumulative effects from these events are only compounded for
black folks that are living on the fence line in Institute who also experience this as systematic
environmental racism.

So, I grew up being taught how to duct tape around the windows when the alarms at the plants
went off so that we could shelter in place like Toby the Turtle who took refuge in his shell when
things went wrong during these explosions and leaks. So that is something that no kid should
ever have to learn, but for kids who grew up on the fence line, which are disproportionately
located in low-income communities and communities of color, it's become an essential tool for
survival since we failed to prevent these disasters before they occur. I want to thank NEJAC for
lifting up the need for a fully implemented and enforced risk management program and a
chemical disaster rule in your first 100 Days Letter.

Unfortunately, the letter and the information that you cited in that letter were outdated and
fenceline communities need this rule to be stronger. They need to address what communities
across the country have been asking for decades, and I know that my community alone has been
asking for decades. These suggestions are outlined in the letter that I submitted after the last
NEJAC meeting, and I will resubmit again after this one. So we just hope that we can count on
you to send a new letter calling on Administrator Regan and this EPA to prioritize a preventative
and protective RNP rule on the fastest timeline possible. Thank you very much.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: Thank you so much for those comments, and I can tell you
that I will be sure to make sure we get that update made in the response that we give to the
administration about the 100 Day Letter that they shared with us so I can make that assurance. If
we need to, we will follow up with you to make sure that we're accurate and better informed so
thank you for that.

Ms. Maya Nye, Public Commenter: Thank you very much.

Mr. Juan Paris, Public Commenter: First of all, thank you. There's a lot of comments that
have already been made regarding the Houston area from other speakers and their comments. A

-------
couple of things I want to say is right now, to date, our ozone standards have not even been met.
The ozone standards came in 1970, and we're still under non-compliance. The other issue that
we have is when we've had two hurricanes: Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Ida. During
Hurricane Harvey, the EPA administrator from Region 6 came down here, and he personally
came to our offices and visited there.

And he told us that the biggest concern was Roundup. That was their biggest concern was
Roundup. And yet all these communities were underwater, especially in the west side of town,
the wealthy part of Houston. And our communities, the east end, we were inundated with just
all kinds of air toxins that were released, and the monitors were turned off. So a lot of us from
Houston, when we went to meet with TCQ in Austin questioning their strategies, believe it or
not, they told us that the air monitors were turned off all over Houston from here to Galveston
because they're too costly to replace.

And I hope you were hearing when I say too costly to replace, and that to me is insignificant
because we need those air monitors at those critical times to actually tell communities what they
were exposed to and maybe to address those releases, find out where they were coming from.
But that's what they told us. They're too costly to replace. All of this time that we have been
addressing a lot of people have already addressed a lot of our concerns to communities being
impacted by hurricanes and also by air toxins and by just being the frontline communities.

Additionally, to cumulative impacts, and there's a lot of studies that show we're exposed to
seven cancer chemicals every day. There's been a lot of research that has been made along the
Houston ship channel to reflect the problem, and all those reports cost literally millions of
dollars to produce. They recommend a lot to address the issues we have in Houston, and today
none of those recommendations from millions of dollars of research have been implemented.

The other major issue that we have here in the Houston area is because as Hilton and others have
mentioned, we have a lot of chemical plants and refineries along the Houston ship channel. And
the RNP's are very important. If you look at the risk of the community of who would be
impacted in what I call the inner circle of the worst-case scenario, imagine a target with a
bullseye and it's got numerous circles around the target. Well, the inner circle is the first circle

-------
by the target and the industry classifies that as death, injury, or bodily harm. And there are a lot
of frontline communities in that inner circle in that industry along the Houston ship channel
basically causing death, injury, or bodily harm under the worst-case scenario event.

Now what the industry says is that ain't going to happen. Well, it may happen, and if it doesn't
happen more power to them. But they know the risk, and that risk is not being actually
addressed. They're simply saying, well, it ain't going to happen. Again, I reemphasize the
RNPs and also the fact that those standards have not been met and that it's embarrassing and
insulting when the EPA administrator from Region 6 came to our office and said, "You know
the biggest problem we have, Juan, is Roundup." Can you imagine that?

And then when we went to the state and they turned off all the air monitors, we want to know
why they turned off monitors when they're more critical and in need of situations that we're
facing in the south. It is too costly. So, what do you tell communities that are being impacted,
that you know it's just too costly to look out after your harm and your injuries because we're
trying to save money, basically. So, we sent a letter to the EPA, and we're asking that you send
the letter to our Region 6 and try to get them to get on the ball enforcing environmental
regulations on the RNPs because we're asking that that be a serious consideration along the
Houston ship channel.

Mr. Scott Clow, NEJAC Member: Thank you, Mr. Paris, for your comments. We have a
modest air quality monitoring program here that we run, and I can tell you that the equipment's
expensive for a small tribe. But it doesn't compare to the cost of lives and the disabilities and
mutations that you're talking about around the inner circle or I'm sure the outer circle. So, yeah,
I guess what we've heard today is a lot of egregious action out of the Texas Council on
Environmental Quality and Region 6 rule with them. So, thank you and we're taking that to
heart.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: We can go down to quorum with councilmembers that are
here, and, again, I appreciate you all staying very much. The councilmembers apologize for
having to leave, but I don't want to short-change the last four or so commenters that we have, so
just in case something happens, I would ask that we have all of the public commenters make

-------
their comments first and then we offer the opportunity. I know we really like to give each
person their individual time for their comments, but I just want to make sure that we can do that.
If we lose them, then they can't have their opportunity to have it on the record, and then we can't
have this meeting properly.

Ms. Pamela Nixon, Public Commenter: I'm Pam Nixon. I'm representing People Concerned
About Chemical Safety located in West Virginia and the center of Appalachia. And thank you
for allowing me the opportunity to speak today on behalf of the fenceline communities here in
West Virginia.

West Virginia's no stranger to disasters. We have had fatal industrial disasters causing fenceline
communities to shelter in place and sometimes evacuate, and we have had extreme weather-
related flooding resulting in loss of life. This year's the 37th year after the Bhopal disaster and
31 years since the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 required EPA to develop the risk
management program.

Farther risk management regulations were being developed in the 1990s. Frontline communities
here in Kanawha County suffered through a series of chemical incidents and then there was a
fatal catastrophic tank failure that occurred in 1992 before the regulations were finalized. In
1994, the Kanawha Putman emergency planning committee publicly released the first RNPs for
our local chemical facilities. This was five years before EPA required the plans to be submitted.
In 2019, final RNP rules rescinded all major provisions of the accident prevention program
along with the public information availability provisions and it modified several other provisions
that had been in the 2017 amendments rule.

We now have the opportunity to strengthen the RNP regulations. Our recommendation to EPA
and hopefully the NEJAC will include it in your recommendation letters is to monitor toxic
chemical emissions, install alert systems, collect the data, and develop environmental regulations
that will prevent or greatly minimize health risks in fenceline communities. We ask you to
require RNP facilities to address recommendations of third-party chemical safety audits and
incident and investigations. We ask that EPA assess climate-related hazards and adopt chemical
release prevention systems that can withstand climate-related hazards.

-------
We want an improvement in the transparency of chemical hazards information for emergency
first responders, for employees and their representatives, and for community members like it was
in the 1990s when we were able to get that information. And we ask that you strengthen
compliance and enforcement regulations to require documentation of preventive maintenance
and leak detection and repair that follow industry standards to prevent chemical incidents. And
we thank you for your past and present support of environmental justice communities on these
matters. Thank you.

Ms. Jane Williams, Public Commenter: Thank you so much for the opportunity. Thank you so
much for the opportunity to speak with you today. I'm really grateful to see the amazing
dedication of the existing NEJAC members. The last time I testified in front of NEJAC was
almost eight years ago when we requested a letter on the national refinery role. We wanted to
get the Obama Administration to adopt a fenceline monitoring rule for refineries. That rule was
adopted, and NEJAC did send a letter requesting fenceline monitoring in all the refineries in the
country. Refineries are the only part of our industrial infrastructure nationwide that are required
to do this kind of monitoring and everyone who watches the refineries, everyone who lives next
to refineries, and everyone who was part of that original rulemaking as well as EPA agrees that
it has led to a massive reduction in emissions, routine emissions from the refinery infrastructure.

I'm telling you this because we are here in front of you again, many of the co-plaintiffs in that
original legal action testified to you today and are requesting the exact same thing. They're
requesting that you send a letter supporting enhanced protections from chemical disasters. This
administration has the opportunity to do a number of different things, which have been clearly
delineated to you. The most amazing and simple one would be a requirement for backup power.
When hurricanes and earthquakes and grid interruptions hit, refineries lose power to their air
pollution control devices, and this is one of the things that contributes to massive emission
releases from our petrochemical infrastructure.

It is hard to emphasize what it is like to not only live at the fence line and be exposed to routine
highly toxic emissions from the petrochemical infrastructure but then to be taught to shelter in
place, to use duct tape and plastic sheeting as your main defense against an industry that makes

-------
billions of dollars a month. These are not small mom-and-pop petrochemical refineries and
plastics manufactures and chemical manufacturing facilities. These are large mega-corporations
that make billions by putting our most vulnerable communities in harm's way. So, we are asking
you to do something extremely specific.

That is please send a letter to the administrator requesting a strengthened rule to prevent
chemical manufacturing accidents. It is remarkable that in 2021 we are still experiencing these
disasters monthly in our country — sometimes weekly. So, thank you so much for the
opportunity to speak with you today. I, again, praise you and let you know how amazing it is to
see the dedication and the grace by which you conducted the meeting. Thank you.

Mr. John Andrade, Public Commenter: Thank you very much for having me on. I've been on
since 1:00, and I've learned a lot about our country listening to everybody. I just want to bring
everybody to the northeast for a minute, the Bedford Massachusetts, Region 1. We're right in
the middle between Boston, Providence, and Cape Cod. We have the largest super pump site in
New England. We have about 30 brownfield sites, one of which I am very concerned about that
we've been dealing with for about 30 years. When we talk about systemic racism, it exists here
so badly, and the worst part about it is that I constantly talk about it at many venues, and we
don't get people to listen to us.

We don't get people to come and see, get the boots on the ground kind of thing and I'm asking.
As I asked the joint meeting of the White House Advisory Committee on environmental justice -
- the NEJAC I believe was back in February — we need you to come here. Come follow the
dollars. Come see where the money has come and they have come here by the millions, but
they're not in our community and many people have used our statistics, used the terminology in
environmental justice and got money in our names and didn't do anything with it. The EPA
workforce program that we just got money for is really something we want to be investigated
because of the way it's been operated and has operated.

We really need small cities like New Bedford of 100,000 don't get the kind of attention that is
needed from the powers that be, including all of you folk out there. You know, what happens
normally is all the big box, all the large non-profit organizations or for-profit groups get all the

-------
attention. We're lucky if we see $50,000 a year in our organization, that's how small we are.
But we're a huge community with a lot of folks, and we're all poor. And we're all trying to get
a cleaner, better healthy community, but nobody wants to listen and that includes our federal
legislation and our state legislator.

We have the executive officer of environmental justice by the state, and I just found out that they
got three deputy departments of environmental justice that we never knew even existed. So,
what are they doing? Why would they do anything? Nobody's watching them; there's no
accountability. You've got to use the word earlier about martyrdom. I wasn't sure exactly the
monitor was being done, but we need to monitor where this money is going. We need to
monitor who got the money and how. They write up the grants, we're not part of it.

And so, my big question comes to all of you — EJ Executive Order 1995, the People's March on
EJ 1995 - 1996 all that, the 1964 Civil Rights Act — what is J40 going to do that these other
things haven't done? I feel that's what we should be concentrating more on civil rights. Civil
rights, enforcing the civil rights, and including making sure that neighborhoods like ours are
getting environmental justice education stuff and also to be cognizant of the millions of dollars
that are coming in here. They're hiring people as engineers, they're training people and all that
and, we don't get those jobs.

We don't get those high-paying jobs that are either union or large companies because, well, one,
we don't have the education and training, and, two, just what I was talking about earlier,
systemic racism. Thank you.

Mr. Kurt Ali, Curator: I believe our last public commenter dropped off, so that should
conclude our commenters for today.

Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair: Kurt, I put a note in the chat, but you may have missed it.
Dr. Ben Pauli has a comment from a planned commenter who couldn't stay on but passed him
the message.

-------
Dr. Benjamin Poli, NEJAC Member: The name of the commenter is Anthony Paciorek, that's
P-A-C-I-O-R-E-K. And so, I'm just going to read you what he sent to me. He says, "I thank
you for your time and attention today in allowing me to speak to you directly. My name is
Anthony Paciorek. I'm an environmental justice organizer with Michigan United in Flint,
Michigan. I'm also a member of a community anti-ajax asphalt coalition trying to stop the
permitting of a hot mix asphalt plant in Flint, Michigan. We have been fighting and resisting the
permitting process since we found it posted on our state agency EGLE website in a dark corner
on July 1 st.

"The neighborhood that it's proposed to go in as a predominantly minority community and low-
income housing. The ward that the plant is in holds the largest amount of parks and green
spaces in the city, thirteen, including not too far away Corsley Reservoir which is a backup
source for our drinking water. My state agency tasked with informing the public failed to this
date. Residents in that community are still unaware of the plant's intention in their community.
Through the efforts of our coalition, we have been able to organize and mobilize citizens in the
city of Flint and the surrounding neighborhood of the asphalt plant. We have successfully
pushed back the permitting process five times. That's unprecedented in our state and should
show the public support in the matter.

"I wish in my job that I could propose something so unfinished and under-researched that I
would have to put it under review and to be set back five times. I would be embarrassed as a
professional. Those in these agencies as well as my governor should be ashamed. It's my
opinion that this sort of work is unacceptable in regards to environmental justice. The citizens of
Flint are going through two crises right now that highlight environmental racism: the ongoing
Flint water crisis and COVID-19. My city doesn't need another man-made crisis. I would like
to take the time to address a few points of concern.

"One, the decision to site the asphalt plant on energy drive poses environmental risks to the
surrounding community, and those risks have not been properly evaluated by EGLE. Medical
reports state asphalt fumes exposure can lead to cancer, lung cancer, and asthma. This
community is already predisposed to high rates of asthma and other issues from previously
having an incinerator plant and other industrial pollutants in the environment of their

-------
neighborhood. The decision to site the plant likely violates the civil rights of the surrounding
low-income predominantly black community.

"The plant is very close to St. Francis Prayer Center. It's 1,550 feet from River Park Apartments
and less than half a mile from Ridge Crest townhomes and is close to other meeting centers,
parks, and waterways. This community is already exposed to extremely high levels of pollution
according to EPA's EJ screening tool. No agency has considered the cumulative risks or
impacts associated with adding another facility to this front-line community. The failure to
consider cumulative risks or impacts in permitting leads to discrimination against low-income
communities of color because those communities face the biggest threat from a permitting
decision.

"Without the cumulative impact study, there is no way for the most impacted communities to
demonstrate the injustice would stem from the issue of the perm. The six violations are
preestablished in that neighborhood in environmental justice issues. Title VI violations are pre-
established here. The neighborhood had Title VI violations in 1994 regarding a tire incinerator
plant in the same neighborhood. The governor and the agency she created to deal with these
situations has a duty and responsibility under executive order 2019-6 in which she creates EGLE
and tasks it with recommending mechanisms for members of the public community's tribal
governments and groups including disproportionately burdened communities to assert adverse or
disproportionate social economic or environmental impact upon a community and request
responsive state action."

I'm sorry there's more here but I know we're short on time, so I just want to get to the request.

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO, thanked Dr. Pauli for reading the comment. He asked that Dr.

Pauli email that public comment directly to him, so he can get it as part of the record. He stated
that he will post that comment in the public docket for full public view.

Mr. Michael Tilchin, NEJAC Vice-Chair, stated that they will make sure that it gets properly
posted. He confirm that all of the public commenters have had their opportunity to speak to the
Council.

94

-------
Ms. Sylvia Orduno, NEJAC Chair, wanted to confirm because she still saw Ms. William's hand
up in the chat. They tried again to reach Ms. Williams. She instructed Ms. Williams to make a
point of trying to get her comments emailed to OEJ and, again, the recent email account
NEJAC@epa.gov.

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO, stated he will give instructions on that.

95

-------
NEJAC WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED FOR 11.10.2021 MEETING

Region 1: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont

Full Name (First and Last): Amy Laura Cahn

Name of Organization or Community: Vermont Law School Environmental Justice Clinic
City and State: South Royalton, Vermont

Brief description about the concern: With this letter, we are submitting written comments to
the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) on behalf of the Vermont Law
School Environmental Justice Clinic. As written comments, we offer the attached report entitled
Federal Dereliction of Duty: Environmental Racism Under COVID-19, authored by the EJ Clinic
with Jose Bravo and Jeannie Economos and published in partnership with Just Transition
Alliance, the Farmworker Association of Florida, WE ACT for Environmental Justice,
Indigenous Environmental Network, and Los Jardines Institute. Our report calls attention to
failure of EPA to comply with Executive Order 12898 and federal environmental justice policy
in issuing its March 26, 2020, memo entitled "COVID-19 Implications for EPA's Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance Program", which initiated EPA's deregulation of federal
environmental monitoring, reporting, and enforcement requirements, last year.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : Our report outlines a set of detailed
policy recommendations to address concerns raised by EPA's enforcement discretion policy in
place from March to August of 2020. We specifically note a critical role for the NEJAC in
ensuring that environmental justice is considered in pending audits by EPA's Office of Inspector
General regarding the impact of the coronavirus pandemic and EPA's enforcement discretion
policies on compliance monitoring, reporting, and enforcement.

Full Name (First and Last): Martha Klein

Name of Organization or Community: Sierra Club Connecticut

City and State: Norfolk, CT

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: Environmental justice needs to address climate and
energy education in the most impacted communities.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : Increase access to community solar and
increase support for energy efficiency for working families. Weatherize justly and electrify.
Stopping fossil fuel burning means less air pollution in environmental justice communities and
will mitigate climate disruption which is harming vulnerable people now.	

Full Name (First and Last): Melinda Tuhus

Name of Organization or Community: CT Climate Crisis Mobilization (C3M)
City and State: Hamden, CT

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only Brief description about the concern:
lack of climate education in K-12 schools

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? :

96

-------
There is a critical lack of climate education almost universally in public K-12 schools, and, even
worse, the fossil fuel industry is often allowed to present its own biased materials to schools
lacking the funding to create their own science-based curricula. We are trying (so far
unsuccessfully) to mandate climate education in CT schools — and I know these things are
decided mostly at the state level — but if the EPA would create materials and make them
available to schools around the country, there are many teachers — often with prompting from
students and their parents — who would bring this critical component into their lesson plans.

Dear Administrator Regan,

Thank you for your commitment to leading the United States Environmental Protection Agency
through this period of complex transitions and to strengthening enforcement of environmental
and civil rights laws in communities overburdened by the cumulative effects of concentrated
pollution and the climate crisis. Please see the attached letter on behalf of over thirty
organizations and individuals. We draw upon our collective experience as advocates and
practitioners to make recommendations for institutional change within EPA, and for ways that
EPA should strengthen its oversight and enforcement role to advance civil rights and
environmental justice.

This letter also serves as a response to the request for comments on the Draft FY 2022-2026 EPA
Strategic Plan from National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), as well as our
submission to the External Civil Rights Compliance Office's open comment period. We would
additionally request the opportunity to meet with you to discuss these matters.

Respectfully, Amy Laura Cahn | she/they

Region 2: New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands

Submitted values are:

Full Name (First and Last): Hildegaard Link

Name of Organization or Community: Resilient Red Hook

City and State: Brooklyn , New York

Brief description about the concern: Brooklyn's EJ neighborhood of Red Hook can't breathe
and soon it will suffocate under the weight of e-commerce's environmental burden. Business
giants Amazon and UPS are considered "as of right" in their rapid acquisition of real estate and
construction of last-mile mega distribution centers, but current zoning and permitting regulations
are grossly outdated and do not consider the novel externalities that these goods storage facilities
impart upon surrounding communities. The community of Red Hook is already overburdened
with truck-related environmental threats such as intensive air pollution coupled with high asthma
rates (1 in 4 residents are affected), runoff, noise pollution, damage to infrastructure and personal
property, and pedestrian safety hazards posed by traffic congestion. When these distribution
centers are operational, they will demand upwards of 1000 more trucks on the streets per
building per day. As a local school principal asked in our last community-wide meeting, "Please
ask yourselves, 'how much can one community take?"'

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : • an update to the EPA NEJAC Goods
Movement Report to include the unique demands and impacts of e-commerce, last-mile

97

-------
distribution centers, and public infrastructure use • a long overdue comprehensive traffic study
for the neighborhood of Red Hook • National and regional commitment to supporting the re-
creation of the New York Harbor regional waterborne freight network that will include business
and job opportunities and incentives for residents of at-risk waterfront neighborhoods in NYC
and beyond • a moratorium on future projects and/or special permits required prior to
construction of any sort of warehouses/distribution center such as these, especially in waterfront
neighborhoods, that have residential or mixed use zoned properties. We propose a moratorium
pending a full scale review of the socio-environmental impacts of e-commerce and last-mile
distribution trucking. Resilient Red Hook calls for the creation of a revised set of land-use
requirements, transportation guidance, and environmental control requirements to be
promulgated before beginning construction on any new or currently un-initiated e-commerce
facilities. We also insist that effective oversight (NYCDOT & NYPD) of e-commerce and last-
mile facility trucking be in place before warehouse construction is allowed to resume.	

Mr. Gorman and Mr. Baquero Tirado, Please see a Request for Reconsideration of FEMA's June
2021 Finding of No Significant Impact on the Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Utility
Repair, Replacement, and Realignment, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, DR-4339-PR, signed by
numerous organizations making up Puerto Rico's Alianza Energia Renovable Ahora and the Union
de Trabaj adores de la Industria Electrica y Riego, among others. We respectfully ask for your
prompt attention to this very important request concerning the future of Puerto Rico's electric
system. Thank you, Jenny Cassel, Earthjustice
Earthjustice

311 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 1400
Chicago, IL 60606

My Name is Ambassador Oluwaleye John please I we like if they can send me my code number
or Identification Number for Region (2) and other necessary for me, my comment

1	What are the provision plans and strategies for the region to get public office for complainer

2	The suburdnates for the region for mobilization will need to be funded ?

3	There should be a bus for movement for activities for mobilization and sanitization

Region 3: Pennsylvania, District of Columbia, Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia,

Delaware,

Submitted values are:

Full Name (First and Last): Stephanie Herron

Name of Organization or Community: Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical

Policy Reform (EJHA)

City and State: National network

Brief description about the concern: As I shared at the June NEJAC meeting, a couple months
ago I joined hundreds of others in virtually attending two EPA Listening Sessions regarding their
Risk Management Program to tell EPA that if they want to prioritize Environmental Justice, then
they MUST prioritize protecting workers and fenceline communities by issuing a truly protective

98

-------
Chemical Disaster Prevention Rule on the fastest timeline possible. I'm writing again now to ask
the NEJAC to join in that call by writing a letter to Administrator Regan and the EPA Office of
Land and Emergency Planning calling on them to issue a strong RMP rule to protect fenceline
communities on the fastest timeline possible. It's 2021 and we know that People of Color aren't
clustered together in certain areas by accident—and neither are polluting facilities. The legacy of
segregation and systemic racism run deep in this country. The "Life at the Fenceline" report,
published in 2018, showed that residents in the areas closest to RMP facilities are
disproportionately Black and Latino. As the "Preventing Double Disasters" report showed again,
these communities also tend to be located in areas that are at increased climate risk, as we saw in
Hurricane Harvey, Laura and others. We need a rule that addresses this by requiring facilities to
assess, and take ACTION to address, the increased risk of disasters caused by extreme weather,
which is only getting worse due to climate change.

Some other examples of what a strong rule would include are:

• Addressing the cumulative hazard to communities located near multiple facilities.

• Taking a hazard reduction approach.

• Requiring facilities to assess safer alternatives and go with the less dangerous
chemical or process wherever possible.

• Requiring commonsense emergency response measures like back-up power and
reliable community notification when incidents do happen.

• Involving workers in the development of Risk Management Plans and protecting
whistle blowers;

• Expansion of the Program to include more dangerous facilities and chemicals—
like the one that exploded in Rockton, IL a few days ago and the BioLab facility
in Lake Charles, LA which burned for three days and exposed to the community
to dangerous chemicals & smoke in the wake of Hurricane Laura;

• Requiring fenceline monitoring, which could help warn facilities in advance of a
major disaster AND help communities know what they're being exposed to when
one does happen. Knowing what is in the air IN REAL TIME is the only way
community members can take action to protect their families.

Basically, we need EPA to issue a RMP Rule that acknowledges the ACTUAL risk EJ
communities face, which has never happened before in 30 years of this program. Our
communities do not have luxury to not live next to these facilities or to be exposed to them one
at a time; we do not have the luxury to not live in a changing climate. We live in the real world
and that world is putting our people in danger every day. EJHA and our partners are prepared to
use our full advocacy capacity to support EPA in any way necessary to make this happen. We are
counting on EPA to do what the reality and the moment demand. Anything less will be
unacceptable. Again, we are asking the NEJAC to partner with us in this effort by issuing a
recommendation letter to EPA. Like our affiliates, NEJAC has a long history of working towards
a strong Chemical Disaster Rule that protects workers and communities. We are also asking
NEJAC to consider focusing one of your work groups on prevention of chemical disasters,
starting by transforming the RMP Program. With my June comment I also submitted copies of
the NEJAC letters on Chemical Disaster Prevention in the RMP from 2016 and 2019, as well as
a copy of the Life at Fenceline report.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : I am asking the NEJAC to write a letter
to Administrator Regan and the EPA Office of Land and Emergency Planning calling on them to

-------
issue a strong RMP rule to protect fenceline communities on the fastest timeline possible. I also
ask the NEJAC to consider focusing one of your work groups on preventing chemical disasters.

Dear Members of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, I hope this email finds
you well. My name is Uloma Uche, PhD, a postdoctoral fellow with Environmental Working
Group, a non-profit health research and advocacy organization with headquarters in Washington,
D.C . At EWG, we developed a framework that combined data from the U.S. Census Bureau's
American Community Survey, available mapped service areas for over 7,000 community tap
water systems, and results of water quality tests conducted by those systems. Using California
and Texas as case studies, this framework identified disparities in drinking water quality which
was assessed in terms of cumulative cancer risk due to the presence of multiple carcinogenic
contaminants. These case studies emphasize the importance of including a drinking water metric
in screening tools, like EJSCREEN, that currently lack them. This framework can feasibly be
applied using publicly available data to help improve drinking water quality for all communities
and advance environmental health justice priorities. This work has been published in the
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. Here is the link to the
manuscript: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/19/10401/htm. Attached to this email is the
pdf of the manuscript. Comments about this work was also provided during the NEJAC August
18, 2021, public meeting. Thank you,

Uloma Uche, Ph.D., Environmental Working Group, 1436 U Street NW, Suite 203
Washington, DC 20009

Hello,

Please find attached my written comments to NEJAC in the past two meetings (June and
September 2021), which I will reference in my comment today. As you know, EPA is has
publicly stated their intention to update their woefully inadequate Risk Management Program
Rule. Today I am reiterating my request for NEJAC to send a recommendation to EPA and
Administrator Regan to prioritize protecting workers and fenceline communities by issuing a
truly protective Chemical Disaster Prevention Rule on the fastest timeline possible. Stephanie
Herron, National Organizer, Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform

(EJHA)

Good evening.

My colleague Deena Tumeh from Earthjustice was not able to join today due to illness,
unfortunately. I am here on the NEJAC comment line to speak in her place if possible. I just
wanted to let you know because I did not hear you call on her when her time came in the order.
I'm on the phone, and also watching on video, if you're able to call on me at some point later in
the queue. Thank you very much.

Emma Cheuse, Senior Attorney, Earthjustice

Dear NEJAC Members,

Thank you for your tireless efforts and ongoing dedication to environmental justice
communities. I am writing to follow up on my comments delivered at the November 10, 2021
NEJAC meeting reiterating our August 18, 2021 request that NEJAC send a new letter to

100

-------
Administrator Regan and this EPA to prioritize a preventative and protective new Risk
Management Program Rule on the fastest timeline possible using the most updated
information, which is better protective of environmental justice communities. Details of the
request are below, and attached are our comments from the August 18, 2021
meeting. Additionally, thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment. This is an
important forum for public commenters to inform NEJAC's work. As was mentioned on the call,
there were some technical issues and barriers to participation that would be helpful to avoid in
the future. For instance, we received feedback from people in our network that there were a
number of people who signed up to comment on the November 10th meeting as well as the
August 18th meeting that were not called upon. One person commented to us:

"This is the second time they did that [didn't call on participants listed to provide
comment], LastNEJAC public comment meeting we had registered 5 of us ... myself
and 4 or our organizers... Only two of us were called on and were able to make public
comments. I did not even join this time, when I saw how far down on the list I was and
have wayyy too much to do. I was hoping to write public comments, but more
importantly we are working on [other] public comments ... so, won't have time for this."

We recognize that there are limitations and capacity issues for facilitators and those staffing
these meetings. In the spirit of making this process the most meaningful experience to all those,
and to address some of these challenges, we fully support the list of solutions to you provided by
the Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform (EJHA) and highlight
those below:

1.	Hold public comment periods at the beginning of the meeting;

2.	List the time of public comment on registration;

3.	Send out an estimated time based on the order of public comment at close of
registration;

4.	Send out a numbered list of public commenters at close of registration and follow
that order in the comment session;

5.	Display the order of speakers via a numbered list displayed on screen (rather
obviously this order should be the same as the one that was emailed out);

6.	Enable the chat features with the host or co-host only;

7.	Have an option to write in a phone number in the registration form if the
commenter is calling in;

8.	Provide more clarity in emailed instructions for those registered to speak.

Thank you for your attention to these matters and hope that they are helpful in ongoing virtual
public comment meetings. Sincerely, Maya Nye, Submitted on behalf of Coming Clean

11/10/21 Public comments:

Good evening. My name is Maya Nye. I am the Federal Policy Director of Coming Clean, a
network of over 150 diverse organizations working to reform the industrial chemical and fossil
fuel industries so they are no longer a source of harm. We are sharing in the call for NEJAC to
send a new letter to Administrator Regan and this EPA to prioritize a preventative and
protective new Risk Management Program Rule on the fastest timeline possible.

101

-------
I grew up in the white working class fenceline community, just across the river from multiple
high-risk chemical facilities located in Institute, West Virginia. This facility was built in a
thriving Black community with a historically Black land-grant university by the U.S. government
in the 1940s to support the war effort. Today, this facility is still one of the top 25 producers of
cancer risk from air toxics in the country as a result of ethylene oxide alone.

Over the years, we experienced a myriad of explosions and releases of highly hazardous
chemicals used in plastics, pesticides and other agricultural and commercial products. The
cumulative effects from these events are only compounded for Black folks living on the
fenceline in Institute who also experience this as systematic environmental racism.

I grew up being taught how to duct tape around the windows when the alarms at the plant went
off so that, like Toby the Turtle who took refuge in his shell when things went wrong, I could
"shelter-in-place" during these chemical explosions and leaks. That is something that no kid
should ever have to learn, but for kids who grow up on the fenceline, which are
disproportionately located in low-income communities and communities of color, it has become
an essential tool for survival since we fail to prevent these disasters before they occur.

I want to thank the NEJAC for lifting up the need for a fully implemented and enforced Risk
Management Program (or the Chemical Disaster Rule) in your "First 100 Days"
letter. Unfortunately, the information that you cited in this letter was outdated. Fenceline
communities need this rule to be stronger and need to address what communities across the
country have been asking for for decades. These suggestions are outlined in the letter I submitted
after the last NEJAC meeting and will resubmit after this one. We hope that we can count on you
to send a new letter calling on Administrator Regan and this EPA to prioritize a
preventative and protective new RMP rule on the fastest timeline possible.

Full Name (First and Last): Kimberly Stoner

Name of Organization or Community: New Haven City and State: New Haven, CT
Type of Comment: Written Comment Only Brief description about the concern:

Old, inefficient housing in environmental justice communities in Connecticut and other
Northeastern states. Difficulty of removing all the barriers to weatherization, planning the
process, accessing opportunities for funding, and not enough workforce to do the work. Also,
access to solar for renters and landlords. And, waste management crisis, which is always dumped
on environmental justice communities.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? :

Set up concierge or guide services, run by organizations that are part of environmental justice
communities, that can guide people who need help through the whole process of removing
barriers, weatherizing, and finding funding to support this. They also need good information
about how this will benefit them - better health, lower energy bills, and more climate resilience.
Set up national program to deal with waste management - otherwise waste gets dumped in EJ
communities - either as landfills or toxics in air and water.

Dear National Environmental Justice Advisory Committee: Thank you for the opportunity to
comment. My comments are pasted below and attached. Sincerely, Kimberly Stoner, New

102

-------
Haven, Connecticut, To the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council,

I live in Connecticut, where we have major environmental justice issues.

1. Environmental justice communities in the cities of Connecticut, including New Haven,
where I live, are full of older housing, often poorly maintained, with low energy
efficiency and barriers to weatherization like asbestos, lead paint, infestations of insects
and rats, and mold. There are so many obstacles to getting people onto a path toward
removing all those obstacles, making their homes healthier, insulating them properly so
that they are more energy efficient, spending less money, becoming more resilient to
extremes in weather, and also reducing their carbon footprint. Simply providing funding
for energy efficiency will not be enough. In Connecticut, we have talked about providing
"concierge" services to guide low income people, including renters and landlords as well
as homeowners through all the decisions, sequences of actions to take, programs
available to them that can help with funding, and providing education and encouragement
that going down this path will improve their lives in so many ways, as well as helping the
environment. "Concierge" might not be the right word, but it is the right concept — a
helpful guide. Organizations that already exist in environmental justice communities need
to be funded and trained to do this work — they need to exist in every community.

2. People from underserved communities need to be trained in all aspects of this work —
the concierge services, making renovations to remove barriers to weatherization, doing
the energy efficiency analysis, and doing the weatherization itself. Organizations doing
all this work need to know that they will have stable funding, so that they can build
capacity and build credibility in their communities for this work over the long run,
because there is a lot of work to do, and many good jobs that could be funded to do it.

3. People in environmental justice communities, whether they are renters, landlords, or
homeowners, need to have access to clean renewable energy alternatives. They need to
have access to community solar and to the advantages of rooftop solar on multifamily
buildings in a way that benefits both landlords and renters. They need to have outdoor
access to electric charging systems for electric cars or other electric vehicles like bicycles
or scooters.

4. In my state, we are very close to a waste management catastrophe. The municipal solid
waste from much of the state was being burned in a "waste-to-energy" plant in Hartford
that was producing toxic air pollution in the city. Now it is financially unsustainable and
will be discontinued within months. As a result, the waste from those towns will be
trucked, at huge expense and with lots of pollution, to a landfill in another environmental
justice community. We keep looking for local and state answers, but ultimately, waste
management is a national issue, and it has to be seen as a national environmental justice
issue. Underserved communities bear the harm — whether it is in landfills or
incineration. We need massive waste reduction on a national level — requiring
manufacturers to take back their products and recycle the packaging and the components.
We need a recycling infrastructure which can safely, without damaging the local
environment, handle the major forms of recyclable materials. We need a national
commitment to composting food waste and other compostable materials. We need to
figure out how to get all these waste materials to where they can be reused, recycled, or
composted without large numbers of highly polluting trucks. We need people trained to
do this work in a safe, healthy, environmentally sound way.

103

-------
Region 4: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South

Carolina, Tennessee,

Dear Chair Orduno and Council Members, Thank you for your valuable service on the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) and your important work to advance
environmental justice priorities for our nation. On behalf of Audubon Delta, Mississippi Sierra
Club, American Rivers, and Healthy Gulf, we deeply appreciate the opportunity to submit this
letter and supporting materials (attached) in advance of your virtual public meeting scheduled on
August 18-19, 2021, regarding a dangerous, destructive project being proposed in the Mississippi
Delta known as the Yazoo Backwater Pumping Plant ("Yazoo Pumps"). Our organizations
reiterate our unwavering support of EPA's Clean Water Act 404(c) authority to have issued a
veto in 2008 that stopped the destructive, ineffective Yazoo Pumps project and thus protected
tens of thousands of acres of nationally significant wetlands - 1 of 13 vetoes ever issued under
the law. Congressionally authorized in 1941, the antiquated $440 million-dollar Pumps continue
to be touted as the only solution to address flooding problems in vulnerable communities of the
Yazoo Backwater Area. Tragically, unprecedented and unlawful actions by the previous
Administration revived the project, dangling a false promise of hope to the people of the Yazoo
Backwater Area by perpetuating a demonstrably untrue narrative that the Yazoo Pumps are
designed to, and somehow magically will, protect communities from flooding. We have called
for EPA to immediately restore the 2008 veto protection that was revoked by the Trump
Administration, reconfirm that the veto applies to the Corps' current plan, and as a critical matter
of environmental justice, work with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to develop an
interagency task force to implement prompt, effective flood relief to underserved communities in
the Yazoo Backwater Area through existing federal programs. We respectfully ask NEJAC to
join us in making a similar request to EPA Administrator Regan. Specifically, this task force
could help redress a series of long-standing environmental injustices by drawing on an
alternative Resilience Strategy that our organizations have developed, which identifies prompt,
affordable, and effective flood risk management solutions that can be implemented through
existing federal programs to provide lasting, meaningful relief to underserved Yazoo backwater
communities while protecting the region's hemispherically important wetlands (see
attached). Importantly, the Resilience Strategy features elements (e.g., FEMA Building
Resilient Infrastructure and Communities and Flood Mitigation Assistance programs) that
support and advance the Biden Administration's environmental justice priorities, including the
Justice40 Initiative and Executive Order 14008 "Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and
Abroad". Studies by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) in 2020 and 2007 demonstrate
that construction and operation of the Yazoo Pumps would severely undermine the Biden
Administration's most fundamental environmental justice and social justice priorities. Further,
EPA's veto was based on an extensive administrative record of decision that remains as valid
today as it was when it was issued in 2008 (see attached, Fact Sheet, Immediate Action is
Required to Stop the Yazoo Pumps).m The Yazoo Pumps are not designed to protect people,

111 EPA Final Determination of The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Assistant Administrator for Water
Pursuant to Section 404(C) of the Clean Water Act Concerning the Proposed Yazoo Backwater Area Pumps Project,
Issaquena County, MS (8/31/2008)

104

-------
homes, or communities—and they will not do so. The Corps' own data shows that had the
Pumps been operating in 2019 (a 25-year flood event), 83% of the lands that flooded in the
Yazoo Backwater Area would still have flooded, and it would have taken more than 2 months for
the Pumps to drain the water from the remaining acres (see attached, 2019 Flood Inundation
Map)}2^ This reinforces the Corps' 2007 findings that the Pumps are not designed to protect
communities from flooding but are instead an agricultural drainage project with 80% of project
benefits coming from intensified agricultural production on marginal lands. Also, it is clear that
the vast majority of any agricultural benefits will not reach communities of color, as 83% of
agricultural producers in Mississippi are white, according to the 2017 U.S. Department of
Agriculture's Census of Agriculture.[3] The disparity is even greater in the Yazoo Backwater
Area. For example, 92% of agricultural producers in Sharkey County and 87% of agricultural
producers in Issaquena County are white. Equally alarming, the Yazoo Pumps will also increase
flood risks for highly vulnerable downstream communities, including predominantly African
American neighborhoods of North Vicksburg, by discharging 9 billion gallons of water a day
directly into the Yazoo River when the river is already at flood stage. This massive influx of
extra water also could breach the levee that protects the Yazoo Backwater Area from high water
in the Yazoo River, exposing the very same backwater communities that the Pumps are
purported to protect to the full force of a Yazoo River flood. This levee is so low that it is not
accredited to handle a 100-year flood, as acknowledged by FEMA and the Corps.[4] These
serious safety risks cannot be, and are not, offset by the alleged flood protection benefits of the
Yazoo Pumps. During the Corps' 2020 study process, more than 230 conservation groups, social
justice organizations, and scientific professionals joined over 90,000 members of the public in
urging the Corps to abandon the ineffective Pumps and instead prioritize proven, available flood
solutions to meaningfully benefit Yazoo backwater communities (see attached, 2 letters). 94%
of the comments the Corps received during the draft SEIS process expressed opposition to the
Pumps and called for commonsense natural infrastructure and non-structural approaches that are
available now to help protect the lives, property, and livelihoods of vulnerable Yazoo backwater
communities. As outlined in the Resilience Alternative, these approaches include measures such
as elevating homes and roads, flood-proofing, and paying farmers to restore cropland back to
wetlands. In closing, our organizations thank you for your consideration of our request, to ask
EPA to immediately restore the 2008 veto protection and to work in partnership with CEQ
to assemble an interagency task force to advance this alternative suite of solutions that can
provide prompt, meaningful relief and lasting benefits for Yazoo backwater
communities. Thank you for your time and attention. Please do not hesitate to reach out to us
with questions or if more details are needed. Sincerely,

Jill Mastrototaro, Mississippi Policy Director, Audubon Delta, Ridgeland, MS,

Louie Miller, State Director, Mississippi Sierra Club, Jackson, MS,

Olivia Dorothy, CFM, Restoration Director, American Rivers, East Moline, IL,
odorothy@americanrivers.org	

Full Name (First and Last): JOHN OLADEJO OLUWALEYE

121 Corps' 2020 FSEIS, Appendix C (Tables) at Table 5.3; Corps' 2020 SEIS, Appendix G (Engineering Report) at 135,
Table 2-26.

P1 U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2017 Census of Agriculture at https://www.nass.usda.gov/AgCensus/index.php
141 National Levee Database at https://levees.sec.usace.armv.miI/#/levees/svstem/5905000041/fema (accessed
11/6/2020). Lack of accreditation means that the Yazoo Backwater Levee cannot protect Yazoo Backwater
communities during flood events at or greater than the 1% chance of exceedance (100-year flood event).

105

-------
Name of Organization or Community: Gender-Based violence as a public Health Issue

City and State: Mowe

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: I submit written comment In the web, I will provide
public comments during the meeting

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : Provide Help	

Good afternoon, thank you so much for reaching out. Note: All points are in more detail in the
written comment section.

•	I am from the Route 9 area of New Castle, Delaware. Recently Fuji Film on Cherry Lane
in New Castle, Delaware obtained a permit which projected a 1,525% increase in
pollution that used the Credit System to offset this pollution increase.

•	The community has questions about whether the credits were applied accurately.

•	Even if the credits were applied accurately how can a permit be approved for 20ty years
without a plan in place to reduce or monitor pollution emission through technology.

•	This becomes an ethical issue. Can credits obtained from Southern Delaware reduce
pollution created next to the Collins Park Community along Route 9 .

And the community has no idea of how much the 1,525% increase in most of the major
pollutants are going to impact their health because no one explained it to them. Therefore, we ask
will the NEJAC challenge the way DNREC uses pollution Credits in the Future? Can the
NEJAC look into the unjust way that states are using credits to grant permits in already over-
burdened communities? The community believes that What they are doing violates the Clean Air
Act. Thank you for this opportunity . Dora Williams, GODSPEED to us all.	

Region 5: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin,

Thank you, National Environmental Justice Advisory Council.

I thank you for your time and attention today in allowing me to speak to you directly. My name
is Anthony Paciorek, I'm an Environmental Justice Organizer with Michigan United in Flint Mi,
I'm also a member of a community anti Ajax asphalt coalition trying to stop the permitting of an
Hot Mix Asphalt plant in Flint Michigan. We have been fighting and resisting the permitting
process since we found it posted on our state agency EGLE (EGLE - Environment, Great Lakes
& Energy - State of Michigan website in a dark corner on July lst.The neighborhood that its
proposed to go in is in a predominantly minority community in low-income housing. The ward
that the plant is in holds the largest amount of parks and green spaces in the city ,13, including
not to far away Kearsley reservoir which is a backup source for our drinking water. My State
agency tasked with informing the public failed to this date. Residents in that community are still
unaware of the plant's intention in their community.

Through the efforts of our coalition, we have been able to organize and mobilize citizens in the
city of flint and the surrounding neighborhood of the asphalt plant. We have successfully pushed

106

-------
back the permitting process 5 times, that's unprecedented in our state and should show the public
support in the matter. I wish in my job that I could propose something so unfinished and under
researched that I would have to put it under review to be set back 5 times. I would be
embarrassed as a professional, those in these agencies as well as my governor should be
ashamed. It's my opinion that this sort of work is unacceptable in regard to environmental
justice. The Citizens of Flint are going through 2 crises right now that highlight environmental
racism, the ongoing Flint Water Crisis and Covid-19. My city Doesn't need another man-made
crisis.

I would like to take the time to address a few points of concern.

1. The decision to site the asphalt plant on Energy Drive poses environmental risks
to the surrounding community and those risks have not been properly evaluated
by EGLE. Medical reports state. Asphalt fumes exposure can lead to cancer, lung
cancer, and asthma. This community already is predisposed to high rates of
asthma and other health issues from previously having an incinerator plant and
other industrial pollutants in the environment of their neighborhood.

2. The decision to site the asphalt plant likely violates the civil rights of the
surrounding low-income, predominantly Black community. The plant is very close
to St. Francis Prayer Center, is 1,550 feet from River Park apartments and less
than .5 miles from Ridge Crest Townhomes, and is close to other meeting centers,
parks, and waterways. This community is already exposed to extremely high levels
of pollution according to EPA 's EJ Screen tool.

3. No agency has considered the cumulative risks or impacts associated with adding
another facility to this frontline community.

4. The failure to consider cumulative risks or impacts in permitting leads to
discrimination against low-income communities of color, because those
communities face the biggest threat from a permitting decision. Without the
cumulative impact study, there is no way for the most impacted communities to
demonstrate the injustice that would stem from the issuance of the permit.

5. Title 6 violations are pre-established in that neighborhood in environmental
justice issues. The neighborhood had title 6 violations in 94 regarding a tire
incinerator plant in the same neighborhood.

6. The Governor and the agency she created to deal with these situations has a duty
and responsibility under Executive Order 2019-06.in which she creates EGLE and
tasks it with, (D) Recommend mechanisms for members of the public,
communities, tribal governments, and groups, including disproportionately-
burdened communities, to assert adverse or disproportionate social, economic, or
environmental impact upon a community and request responsive state action.

The Anti Ajax asphalt coalition understands and expects that Governor Whitmer is the One with
the power and responsibility to ensure The Environmental Justice of our community. The
Citizens of Flint Recognize that Agencies such as the EPA and HUD have been involved and We
in the city of Flint appreciate the weighing in which again, shows the support of the public. We
understand a bigger problem in our state is that there are agencies that would check such issues
but are lacking the strength to provide checks necessary to the Gov agencies tasked with the
mission of protecting us. This feels Especially to the citizens of Flint like we are repeating an
unnecessary history.

107

-------
The coalition has been holding vigil events or as members of the coalition call it "Death of the
community" if This Plant goes up in that neighborhood, many feel it will kill the community.
The Fine Particulates that would be released into the local air that is already polluted .This leads
the community to be predisposed to high rate of asthma and other conditions from previous
pollutants exposure in the neighborhood by other industries.

My Request and expectation of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council is to
Continue to show public Support in the communities ongoing Resistance of The Ajax Asphalt
plant in Flint MI and other communities like ours Facing continual environmental racism issues.
We also request the further support of the EPA continue to find ways to strengthen its agency in
dealing with Matters like ours across the nation. We also request to be put on the list of
communities to be visited by the deputy directors' visits of impacted cities. The citizens of Flint
have gone to the appropriate channels of objection, from gathering city council support, going to
township hall meetings, canvassing the neighborhood, talking with EGLE, hosting multiple issue
awareness to talking with our representatives, to taking it to the Governor herself. She ran on a
campaign of fixing the damn roads but fixing the damn roads shouldn't come at the expense of
our community or other poor and minority communities. The Governor's stance on industry
contradicts her campaign promises of being there for the community of Flint and other
environmental justice cities and we must hold her responsible. Thank you.

See attached file(s) (The comments submitted below are also in the attached PDF file called
"Jan'sTalk.Annotated(sent in).pdf"

Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2021-0671

(Forgot to introduce myself: Jan Boudart, board member. Nuclear Energy Information Service,
NElS.org, located in Chicago, IL 60647)

Thanks to Leticia for comment about the invisibility of energy. And to Scott Clow, this talk
started to be about the Dine lands, but developed into an overview of environmental justice
communities relative to the U.S. fission project.

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

What is an environmental justice community?: (from Google) The term describes situations
where multiple factors, including both environmental and socioeconomic stressors, may act
cumulatively to affect health and the environment and contribute to persistent environmental
health disparities. (Google of "Environmental Justice Community Definition".)

It's important to understand that environmental justice communities live near all aspects of the
U.S. fission venture from the Manhattan project through to today's upgrade of our nuclear
arsenal.. This includes communities near (1) mining, (2) milling,, (3) processing for the gas
UF6„ (4) fuel fabrication and experimental activities for fuel fabrication; communities and U.S.
military personnel victimized by so-called Depleted Uranium (which is obfuscating jargon for
U238, a non-fissionable isotope that steadily releases ionizing radiation in the form of alpha,
beta, and gamma rays and forms hot particles in ground dust and in the air). Military personnel

108

-------
are further exposed to Uranium 238 in tank bodies and ordnance exploded near them in ground
battles. (See footnote 9)

Among fissioning activities are included merchant, military and experimental reactors and those
used to produce medical isotopes. Refueling reactors requires about 1000 contractors from all
over the nation. Local jurisdictions had no say, during COVID, as to whether these people
hosteled in their mostly small communities and ate in the restaurants and bars. The draconian
rules that resulted were, well ... draconian.,

EJ communities victimized by the U.S. fission venture also involve waste installations,

...(Pause) including waste from the military explosions dating back to WWII in both the U.S.
and the former USSR, experimental reactors, and merchant electric power plants that exploit
fission to produce heat. This radioactive waste includes military Low-level nuclear waste.
Greater than Class C waste, the gloves, booties and hazmat suits, debris and irradiated metals
from the discarded reactor vessel when Merchant plants close and HLRW (high-level radioactive
waste), such as spent radioactive fuel (SRF). [we have 1 1 active merchant reactors in Illinois (4
Fuk-style reactors), almost 100, (some are Mark I or II, the same design as Fukushima)
nationwide. Brown's Ferry Units 1 and 2 are Mark I or II reactors and are presently applying for
an extension on their license thru the TV A]

For an understanding of the evacuation zones for these reactors in case of an accident refer to the
Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters. Yet there are plans for new projects in so-called small (they
aren't small) modular nuclear reactors. But their emergency zones have been reduced to the area
occupied by the reactor itself, if they are ever built, on the theory that an accident is a non-
credible event. Pending

So there are lots of environmental justice communities and they are becoming more numerous as
we continue the folly of pursuing radioactive methods to produce the energy we have become
addicted to. In addition, we continue our addiction to the idea that technology will solve the
looming need for more and more energy.

But we need to change our focus away from technology and pour our resources into those
environmental justice populations. Nuclear technology and engineering got us this far and it's
not a pretty picture.

I think it is a tragedy that this inland port is being considered. I would say the average citizen has
no idea what is being proposed. With how bad the air quality gets here in the valley, we cannot
encourage such an influx of trucks. If we cannot even manage the current pollution we have, why
deliberately add more. We already have high rates of asthma and other negative health effects. It
is the poorer communities who would bear the brunt of this increase, but the entire valley would
suffer as well. Please put health first above economic growth. We can learn to do without
commodities but we cannot live without health.

Region 6: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas,

109

-------
Full Name (First and Last): John Mueller

Name of Organization or Community: Supporter, Fluoride Action Network of the American
Environmental Health Studies Project
City and State: Tulsa

Type of Comment: Present Comment at Meeting

Brief description about the concern: Artificial water fluoridation needs to be addressed in a
workgroup and agenized.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? :

The following is my prepared comment I plan to read at the meeting.

Good afternoon. I am John Mueller, retired civil engineer in Tulsa, Oklahoma, with more than
25 years in public works engineering, and an active supporter of the American Environmental
Health Studies Project by way of its Fluoride Action Network. I first want to remind you, or
inform you for the first time, as the case may be, that I have attended and commented at the
previous NEJAC public meetings held on June 17 and August 18 & 19, as well as the earlier
inaugural WHEJAC meeting on March 30.1 also attended and commented at the July 6 Board of
Scientific Counselors (BOSC) public meeting. I have also nominated two experienced, expert
scientists to the BOSC in response to its current request for nominations.

Regarding the Strategic Plan draft, I have submitted one very brief comment so far, and plan to
submit more comment with more specifics because there are very real opportunities for this
groundbreaking Strategic Plan to facilitate resolving the EPA's and CDC's conundrum of how to
end fluoridation in light of the new evidence showing unacceptable risk of disproportionate harm
to Blacks and other vulnerable subgroups, especially brain damage in the unborn fetus in a
mother with excess fluoride exposure, and in bottle-fed infants and in young children, harm to
the developing brain similar to the harm from lead. My comment points out the need for
language to include application of the Precautionary Principle anywhere in the Plan where
contaminant threshold values for safe human exposure are being addressed, evaluated and/or
determined for regulatory rulemaking.

And here is what Wikipedia says, in part, about the Precautionary Principle:

"The principle has become an underlying rationale for a large and increasing number of
international treaties and declarations in the fields of sustainable development, environmental
protection, health, trade and food safety ... In some legal systems, as in law of the European
Union, the application of the precautionary principle has been made a statutory requirement in
some areas of law.["

What I request of NEJAC from this meeting is to create a special fluoridation workgroup, or
assign it priority in the Water Infrastructure Workgroup, and place fluoridation on the next
NEJAC agenda for discussion to determine and articulate a recommendation to the OEJ, and
ultimately to Administrator Regan, after the NEJAC members have had time to review and
consider the submitted additional materials. That is all I have for today's meeting. New
additional material will be sent by email. Thank you so much for this unique opportunity to
participate in your most important work.	

To WHEJAC Members, NEJAC Members and EPA facilitating officials:

Please allow me to "kill two birds with one stone" since the additional materials in this email
pertain to both NEJAC and WHEJAC public meetings in November 2021.

110

-------
Thank you again for the opportunity to contribute this public comment regarding the federal
agencies' policies for allowing and promoting artificial fluoridation of public drinking water,
best known as the Community Water Fluoridation (CWF) program of the CDC's Division of
Oral Health. I greatly appreciate your commitments of time and energy to help direct our federal
agencies' efforts to resolve and eliminate or mitigate environmental injustices as public health
issues. My commitment to this cause may require no less volunteer time and energy on my part,
now in my retirement years, to pursue what stands to be the most gratifying accomplishment
resulting from my professional engineering career, for which the first and foremost performance
criterion is to "Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public." (F.S. Merritt,
Standard Handbook of Civil Engineering, 3rd Ed., McGraw-Hill 1983). That accomplishment
will be helping end CWF and seeing the dentistry industry undertake a paradigm shift from mass
medication via our tap water, to taking dental professionals' skills and training to targeted,
disproportionately suffering, disadvantaged populations, to be instituted under new and
innovative dental caries (tooth decay) prevention and treatment programs for the underserved.
If you will, please first read my letter to Administrator Regan (2 MB pdf file attached) that I
emailed and sent the original via USPS early this year; it is just as relevant and informative today
as when sent in February. Along with the attached Annotated Bibliography containing links to
published science and relevant literature, my February letter to Mr. Regan provides supporting
information for what I am asking of the WHEJAC and NEJAC, even though I had no idea at that
time that this opportunity would present itself! The desired endpoint is for the defendant EPA et
al to graciously and honorably concede to the plaintiffs in the current TSCA lawsuit filed by
Food & Water Watch et al v. EPA et al, and presently in abeyance by the Honorable Judge
Edward M. Chen in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and awaiting final
publication of the NTP's much anticipated state of the science report on fluoride's
developmental neurotoxicity. Of particular note with this email, on page 7 of the attached pdf file
of Annotated Bibliography, is the study published in the August 29, 2019, JAMA Pediatrics,
funded by a grant from the National Institute of Environmental Health Science, which concludes,
in part: "In this study, maternal exposure to higher levels of fluoride during pregnancy was
associated with lower IQ scores in children aged 3 to 4 years. These findings indicate the
possible need to reduce fluoride intake during pregnancy." This conclusion, as with other recent
studies, begs invoking the Precautionary Principle, as new evidence of fluoride's neurotoxicity
has created an urgency that has not yet received the necessary attention. Attention should also be
paid especially to the 2015 report by the Fluoride Action Network, Water Fluoridation and
Environmental Justice, (attached ej-report-9-25-15.pdf) as it presents viable alternatives to
fluoridation as well as well documented justification for ending the practice. This report has been
included in previous materials submitted to NEJAC and WHEJAC in previous public
commenting periods, but I am attaching it again here for ready access and further consideration.
Finally, in this submittal at least, I express my deepest gratitude to Karen Spencer for compiling
the Annotated Bibliography. I know Karen and her son have suffered tremendous pain and
hardship from their individual hypersensitivities to fluoride, and she continues to work tirelessly
to educate the powers-that-be about how and why CWF needs to be one for the history books,
sooner than later. And again I thank you for this opportunity. Sincerely, John Mueller, P.E.

Tulsa, OK 74137	

Region 8: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming,

111

-------
Full Name (First and Last): Brian Moench

Name of Organization or Community: Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment
City and State: UT

Type of Comment: Present Comment at Meeting

Brief description about the concern: I'm Dr. Brian Moench. On behalf of Utah Physicians for a
Healthy Environment, and the 450 physicians and 3,000 members of the lay public within the
organization, I congratulate the Biden Administration for giving the issue of environmental
justice long overdue attention. But the Administration should not just focus existing on injustice,
it should also try to intervene and prevent projects that are destined to become monuments of
future environmental injustice. One such project being designed and given hundreds of millions
of dollars of taxpayer money by our legislature, is the Salt Lake City inland port. This is a
massive transmodal shipping hub and warehouse farm now planned for the Westside of Salt
Lake City, in the immediate vicinity of 250,000 people who already suffer the most pollution and
environmental toxin exposure of the 2 million people who live in the SL Valley. They suffer the
traffic pollution of our busiest freeways, are immediately downwind of several oil refineries,
near an enormous open pit copper mine and smelter, downwind of summer-long aerial spraying
of pesticides, numerous industrial smokestacks, are downwind of a major international airport
and secondary airport whose planes still use leaded gas. None of this would be tolerated on the
East side of Salt Lake City, but because of lack of political clout, the Utah legislature is shoving
this down the throats of those who are already the most victimized by our numerous pollution
sources. This transmodal shipping hub would be the epicenter of multiple new sources of
pollution—an estimated 70,000 more daily diesel truck trips, diesel powered switcher engines,
150,000 more cars, increased air traffic pollution, more pesticide spraying, and dozens more train
locomotives (incidentally one Tier 0 train locomotive can emit pollution equal to that from
around ten thousand cars). This project clearly exploits the economic, and racial disadvantages of
this community, and Utah politicians remain unflinching in their determination to push it
forward. Other inland ports and warehouse farms, smaller than what is planned in SLC, are now
nicknamed "Diesel Death" zones because of the pollution they generate. There is absolutely no
reason to think that developing one in Utah will produce a different outcome. This port is also
intended to facilitate more fossil fuel extraction, something squarely contradictory to the Biden
Administration's climate goals. The rationale being offered that the port is needed to produce
jobs is a smoke screen. Utah historically has a very tight labor market, the current unemployment
rate is 2.4%, and most of the anticipated port employment will be low wage warehouse jobs. The
real beneficiaries are well connected developers and powerful international corporations eager to
exploit this community for profit. Using the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, several federal
agencies could intervene and prevent this injustice from happening. Dealing with the obvious
consequences after the fact will only further victimize this community.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? :

We believe that the EPA can use tools within the Clean Air Act to prevent this project. More
specifically, the forces behind building this inland port intend to dilute public opposition evade
regulatory review and the protections that might be afforded through the CAA by building this
project piece meal. In other words, it seems that, by refusing to present the Inland Port project in
its entirety or estimate its emissions, proponents are keeping the extent and details of their
ultimate plans secret and will instead complete the project incrementally such that each of these
smaller projects will escape the review, analysis, well-informed decision making and public
participation that would otherwise be directed at the whole project. We are particularly

112

-------
concerned that the Inland Port will never be subject to meaningful review based on its impacts on
air quality - particularly on ozone and PM2.5 concentrations - and on environmental justice and
disproportionately impacted communities. More specifically, we ask the EPA: will NEPA,
general and transportation conformity (required by the Clean Air Act) and 404 (CWA) apply to
this project?

Full Name (First and Last): Alice McHugh

Name of Organization or Community: Salt Lake Indivisible

City and State: Salt Lake City

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: EPA needs to look at the cumulative implications of
decisions being made by an independent Authority concerning the development of Utah's Inland
Port. UIPA has no accountability to the taxpayers funding it; no community representatives on
its Board; and unfettered access to millions of $$ from the leaders in Utah Legislature (none of
whom live in the Salt Lake Valley). This project will further pollute the air of an impacted
community on the Westside of SLC: the only predominantly minority community in Utah. It
already has quarries, freeways, an airport, two unlined Rio Tinto tailings ponds....and the worst
air in Salt Lake Valley. Rates of asthma and autism among Westside children is off the charts.
But EPA has told us, "there is nothing we can do because you have not been damaged". Well, we
are fighting to keep from being damaged. Scarce water resources, groundwater contamination,
PM2.5 and nitrous oxides are problems that will be inexorably worsened by this Port, yet EPA
has done NOTHING to help us stop this ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICE.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : SUSPEND all government approvals of
permits and conditional uses and DEMAND that studies be completed, ( e.g. human health risk
assessment, EISs )under Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.

Full Name (First and Last): David Scheer

Name of Organization or Community: Salt Lake City, UT

City and State: Salt Lake City, UT

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: The west side of Salt Lake City is a largely Hispanic,
low-income area. Over the years it has been systematically targeted for air-polluting
developments including freeways, oil refineries, power plants, trucking hubs and the airport.
There is no question that the area's residents' lack of a political voice has allowed these
developments to occur. Now an inland port is being planned adjacent to this area that will
generate enormous amounts of air pollution from diesel exhaust that will most directly impact its
residents. This is a clear-cut case of ongoing environmental injustice targeting a disadvantaged
community of color.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? :

The Utah Inland Port Authority which governs the developing port has steadfastly refused to
conduct and studies of the potential impacts of the port on air quality. The Salt Lake alley is
already in non-attainment for ozone which the port is likely to worsen. The EPA should actively
monitor the development of the port and require the Utah Inland Port Authority to conduct
studies to assess the likely impacts of the port on the air quality in the west side community

113

-------
Full Name (First and Last): Heather Dorrell
Name of Organization or Community: none
City and State: Salt Lake City
Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: The Utah Legislature has not listened to our questions
about the environmental impact of the Inland Port. Instead, using our tax dollars, the Legislature
created its own committee and its self-appointed board members to build the Port, without public
input, from the beginning, 2018. There have been no independent, scientifically based
environmental impact studies, not one. We need to stop further inland Port development until
questions are answered. Poor air quality harms the body—the brain (IQ), circulation system, the
lungs, nervous system, life expectation.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : Please invoke power of injunction until
independent studies can be carried out.

Full Name (First and Last): Marvin Goldstein and Jeanne Leigh-Goldstein

Name of Organization or Community: myself

City and State: Holladay, Utah

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: the effect on the environment and air pollution of the
proposed Utah Inland Port in Salt Lake City

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : I'd ask for you the NEJAC to advise the
EPA to stop any further work on the port due to it's potential to inflict harms(air and water
pollution, increased road traffic, damage to the birds utilizing the area) on those of us living in
the Salt Lake City vicinity. We've increasingly noticed how it's negatively affecting our
breathing and it seems government seems ineffective in protecting our health. We're really
needing some higher governmental intervention to stop this project and the Utah legislature's
attempt to overrule to desire of the residents in the area. I believe this is a non-attainment area -
we already don't meet the standards for reducing air pollution. Why isn't the government taking
action to protect us?

Full Name (First and Last): Eileen Keen

Name of Organization or Community: Salt Lake City

City and State: Salt Lake City

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: Salt Lake City, Utah, and its surrounding area exist in
valley bordered by mountains on the east and west. This "bowl" has been trapping pollution in
the valley for years. The severity of this effect has been increasing year after year as our
population grows (Utah has been named the fastest growing state between the census in 2010
and 2020.) This last summer, several times, Salt Lake was also rated the worst city in the
WORLD for air quality by IQ Air, a Swiss-based air quality technology company.

The Inland Port Authority authorized by the Utah State Legislature in 2016 has been
controversial since its inception. Lawsuits and protests have been sparked by a lack of
transparency and rushed legislation. If not halted by a decision from the Utah Supreme Court, its
completion will irreparably damage the quality of life in nearby communities as well as a

114

-------
multitude of wildlife habitats. The increased traffic of diesel-fueled semi-trucks receiving freight
from rail transport for distribution nationwide, will significantly add to the already deadly air
quality currently experienced in our valley. The "diesel death zones" of Los Angeles County will
be exported to the Salt Lake valley.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : I ask the EPA to use its tools within the
Clean Air Act to prevent this project from being completed.

Full Name (First and Last): Rebecca Burrage

Name of Organization or Community: Member of Holladay United Church of Christ
City and State: Salt Lake City, Utah
Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: I am grateful that your group asked for input regarding
environmental injustice in Salt Lake City . Many members of my church have become more
aware during the pandemic of the dire needs of our neighbors who live in the northwest quadrant
of our county. This section of the city has a high percentage of people of color, and a lower level
of income. They are also subject to the highest levels of pollution of any local group. Research
through the University of Utah demonstrated patterns of distributive inequity under different PM
2.5 and that school children in this area are more vulnerable to asthma, ( Casey Mullen, et al.
Environmental Research. 186 (2020) 109543.) and the results are poor academic outcomes. (C.
Mullen et al. Int. J. of Env. Research & Public Health. Sept. 22,2020). Now we are faced with a
major initiative, the building of an inland port on the edge of this community. Many experts have
no doubt it will lead to even worse air quality, despite claims to the contrary, because of the
inevitable increase in diesel truck and train traffic. It's being built on wetlands of an
internationally famous bird flyway, the Great Salt Lake, where mosquitoes abound, so the
already heavy spraying of toxic pesticides will no doubt increase in this vicinity. I fear that the
children and unborn fetuses who live close by will suffer the most. We have a high incidence of
autism in young boys in our area, and it's a concern that the pesticides may be causing that
problem.

Most people oppose the inland port, yet the business interests march on with slowly getting more
money from the people in the way of bonds . It would be extremely helpful if the federal
government could help hold this organization accountable for the environmental injustice that is
exploding before our eyes. But they seem to know how to get around a requirement that many of
us want ...a health risk assessment and environmental risk assessment.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : Two weeks ago I wrote to our EPA

regional office asking for an Environmental Injustice Assessment but have not had a response.
Would you please ask the EPA to consider doing one of these assessments? Also please relay
that we are concerned about the change in the local nonattainment level for ozone, which was
changed by the EPA in response to a request from local businesses. Could this be changed back
to the original level which is consistent with the rest of the country? Thanks so much.

Full Name (First and Last): Dianne Gaschler

Name of Organization or Community: Retired person in Salt Lake City, Utah

City and State: SLC, Utah

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

115

-------
Brief description about the concern: I live one block away from I 80 freeway that runs
East/West through middle of SLC. I see, feel, smell, & hear the effects of increasingly expanded
freeway usage & bad air quality. The proposed Inland Port that would make SLC a shipping hub
has been birthed and promoted by the Utah Legislature behind closed doors, without public
details or explanation, in spite of SLC Mayor & county people being solidly against the proposal.
Other such "hubs" in LA and Oakland have turned out to be disaster areas, nicknamed "Diesel
Disasters." We live in a geographic bowl that is already easily succumbing to below standard air
quality. We can't breathe or tolerate any more polluted air.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : Can you help us? We need your EPA
tools that have some teeth in them to combat this lousy air quality we have to live in. We don't
need or want the extra congestion, Diesel engines, railroad lines that would come with this
disastrous Inland

Port. Please hear our pleas. Our Utah Legislature is determined to make us into sacrificial
lambs for their profitability. We need all and any help you can give us. Dianne Gaschler, SLC,
Utah.

Full Name (First and Last): Calverna Letts

Name of Organization or Community: Salt Lake City Community

City and State: Salt Lake City Ut

Type of Comment: Written Comment Only

Brief description about the concern: Please. We live in a bowl (mountains on both sides of the
valley). It captures tons and tons and tons of deadly pollution. Our population is exploding,
adding further to the problem. The inland port will be the literal death of our community.
Increased pollution. Overuse of water, a scarce resource. Destruction of vital habitat for
migrating birds. And more. Please make well- being of the community a higher priority than a
few white, rich men getting richer. Thank you for reading this.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : Stop the inland port in Salt Lake City
for the wellbeing of all of its citizens. Make the administration aware that infrastructure money
will likely be used to create the profound human disaster. Trucks and more trucks pouring down
our already packed highways. Pollution added to already bad air. Don't let infrastructure money
be used for a massive polluting and water sucking project. It's not just.

As a citizen of Salt Lake City I am concerned about the inland port due to the health and
environmental impact of increased pollution. Salt Lake City is one of the most polluted cities in
the country, and during inversion periods the air quality is outright dangerous. I strongly
encourage the EPA to use provisions in the Clean Air Act to stop this project moving forward
and to protect the health and safety of Utahns.

As a longtime resident of the west side I strongly oppose the development of the inland port. The
air quality of the Salt Lake valley is already some of the worst in the country and adding this port
will only compound the problem. One only has to drive through Salt Lake valley to see the
economic inequality that exists between the east and west sides. The west side is full of
freeways, a large copper mine, two airports, oil refineries, and very little green space. The port
will only further endanger the health of west side residents who are at an economic disadvantage.
Please intervene before it is too late.

116

-------
Sincerely, concerned west side resident, Miriam Bastian

I am writing to express my vehement opposition to the Salt Lake City inland port. This massive
transmodal shipping hub and warehouse farm is planned for the westside of Salt Lake City near a
quarter of a million people that already suffer from the most pollution and toxin exposure out of
the two million residents in the area. These people deal with air pollution from the busiest
freeways and a nearby international airport. They are downwind from pesticide spray. They are
next to an open copper mine and smelter, as well as several oil refineries. And now, hundreds of
millions of taxpayer dollars are going towards this transmodal shipping hub that will add to the
pollution. How much pollution? And an estimated 70,000 more daily diesel truck trips, diesel
powered switcher engines, 150,000 more cars, increased air traffic pollution, more pesticide
spraying, and dozens more train locomotives (incidentally one Tier 0 train locomotive can emit
pollution equal to that from around ten thousand cars).

These pollutive projects would never be built on the East side, but because the West side lacks
the political clout comparatively, they bear the brunt of the pollution. The West residents already
suffer from pollution, and this new project will add to their suffering (and, because of the valley's
topography, all the of the residents will be affected—although the West more-so). This project
was created by a board of unelected officials that tried to pass the plans without a public vote.
Despite citizens' outcry, Utah legislature is unflinching. Everything about this project goes
against the Biden administration's climate goals: the climate injustice, the fossil fuel extraction,
and the carbon emissions, to name a few.

Legislature argues that the inland port will create more job opportunities. However, Utah has a
robust job market, with only a 2.4% unemployment rate. Most of the new jobs created will be
low wage warehouse jobs; the ones that will profit will be wealthy developers and powerful
international corporations, all at the expense of our community. Besides that, Salt Lake valley
has notorious air quality issues, so much so that an estimated $2 billion is lost for Utah's
economy annually because of the air pollution. (People don't want to move here when they find
out how bad the air gets.) In the larger picture, adding to the pollution for the sake of more jobs
doesn't make sense. Protecting our air and improving its quality would create more jobs and
generate more money for Utah's economy. Using the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, several
federal agencies could intervene and prevent this injustice from happening. Dealing with the
obvious consequences after the fact will only further victimize this community.

The EPA can use tools within the Clean Air Act to prevent this project. More specifically, the
forces behind building this inland port intend to dilute public opposition, and to evade regulatory
review and the protections that might be afforded through the CAA, by building this project
piece meal. In other words, it seems that by refusing to present the inland port project in its
entirety or estimate its emissions, proponents are keeping the extent and details of their ultimate
plans secret and will instead complete the project incrementally such that each of these smaller
projects will escape the review, analysis, well-informed decision making and public participation
that would otherwise be directed at the whole project.

I am concerned that the Inland Port will never be subject to meaningful review based on its
impacts on air quality - particularly on ozone and PM2.5 concentrations - and on environmental
justice and disproportionately impacted communities. More specifically, I ask the EPA: will

117

-------
NEPA, general and transportation conformity (required by the Clean Air Act) and 404 (CWA)
apply to this project?

Utah's already horrendous air cannot handle a pretty such as this! You'll kill us all! Please don't
build it here, we don't have the freeways to handle this either.

As a resident of Salt Lake County, I've grown increasingly concerned with how our government
is ignoring the ugly truth of Utah's environmental crisis. Our politicians are moving forward
with plans to build an inland port despite the glaring facts that these kinds of shipping hubs have
ruined the towns around them in other cities. Because west Salt Lake County doesn't have as
much money or clout, they are constantly abused and polluted behind the visage of creating more
jobs. Utah doesn't need more jobs. We have the second lowest unemployment rate in the nation.
But we have some of the worst air quality in the WORLD. This I land port goes against
everything this administration stands for- it is environmentally and economically unjust. The
EPA has to step in and stop a corrupt government from lining their pockets while the people of
west valley choke on fumes. The Clean Air Act demands it and we shouldn't risk our future
health for temporary wealth.

Region 9: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands,

Full Name (First and Last): Matt Holmes

Name of Organization or Community: Little Manila Rising

City and State: Stockton

Brief description about the concern: Don't learn from California....we're a mess.

What do you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do? : Avoid working through state and local
gov't whenever possible.

Environmental justice is usually discussed in the context of economically disadvantaged and
minority communities being subjected to corporate, industrial pollution that would never be
allowed in more affluent, politically powerful neighborhoods. But there are also environmental
justice issues in neighborhoods that have nothing to do with industrial pollution and transcend
the entire economic spectrum.

118

-------
Doctors and Scientists Against Wood Smoke Pollution (DSAWSP) is an international
organization of pollution experts formed to raise awareness of the injustice of often intolerable,
extreme levels of pollution that victimize neighbors of wood burning devices.

https://woodsmokepollution.org

The organization was formed after the principle organizers were besieged for help by people all
over the US, and from many foreign countries, because they were being regularly inundated by
the wood smoke from neighbors; from stoves for home heat, restaurant ovens, back yard fire pits,
wood boilers, and wood burning power plants.

Wood smoke is never evenly distributed in a city or neighborhood. Studies have shown that
pollution levels can be 100 times greater for homeowners who live immediately downwind of a
wood burning appliance, compared to people living just a mile away. But wood smoke is also a
surprisingly dominant source of pollution in many large cities. In Pierce County, Washington, 53
percent of PM2.5 emissions comes from wood. A study in Los Angeles showed that in the
winter, residential wood combustion there contributed 30 percent of primary organic aerosols
(probably the most important mass component of particulate pollution), more than motor vehicle
exhaust, which contributed 21 percent. In Fresno, California, wood smoke contributed on
average 41 percent of organic carbon and approximately 18 percent of total PM2.5 mass.

Wood smoke is also the most toxic type of pollution the average person ever inhales because of
several unique characteristics. The particles in the smoke are usually much smaller than those
created by vehicles and industrial smokestacks, and toxicity is inversely proportional to particle
size. And the particles are saturated with extremely high concentrations of toxic chemicals like
dioxins, benzene, poly cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and heavy metals. Burning just ten
pounds of wood in a fireplaces emits as many PAHs as thousands of packs of cigarettes. The
toxic free radicals in wood smoke are biologically active for 40 times longer than those in
cigarette smoke, and even more carcinogenic.

Despite the claims and intense lobbying of the Hearth, Patio, and Barbecue Association (HPBA),
determined to sell more stoves by pushing "change out" programs, "EPA" certified stoves are
not a solution. Analogous to the Volkswagen scandal, performance of certified stoves in the real
world doesn't match their performance in the EPA lab.

In-home performance is too dependent on the operator—airflow and fuel choice radically affect
the actual emissions. A stove poorly operated or maintained can emit ten times more pollution
than lab testing indicates. John Gulland, manager of the "pro-wood" Wood Heat Organization,
puts it this way: "People who don't care about the impacts of their actions on neighbors and are
content to remain ignorant of good wood-burning practice will make a lot of smoke, regardless
of the emissions rating of the appliance they choose."

EPA wood stoves have never been shown to reduce the amount of the most deadly components
of wood smoke, including dioxins, furans, and PAHs. Some studies have shown that EPA stoves
emit even more of these highly toxic compounds. If poorly maintained, devices equipped with
catalytic components degrade in as little as two years.

119

-------
Wood stove change out programs in Montana and Idaho have not been shown to reduce
significantly air pollution at the community level, and after extended use actual emissions were
over three times higher than the "certified" values.

The EPA program that "certifies" wood burning appliances may actually cause more than harm
than good because it has led to a widespread impression that somehow wood can be burned
cleanly, and the HPBA has jumped on the program as an excuse for increasing sales of wood
burning appliances.

Wood burning is an underappreciated example of environmental injustice. Neighbors of wood
burners routinely experience extreme levels of pollution, and in our experience, wood burners
are often refractory to appeals to reduce their impact on their neighbors.

DSAWSP asks the Council to refer wood burning to the EPA for consideration as issue of
environmental justice.

An inland port sends a strong message that we do not care for the environment or for maintaining
an inhabitable sustainable future for our children. It is unconscionable that the government would
tout espoused belief in creating a sustainable future in the media yet proceed to initiate the
creation of diesel death zone. I do not want this pollution in my backyard. I do not want my
children to grow up having to shelter indoors due to unbreathable air quality. This affects us
directly. Due to the natural geography of the land, pollution does not dissipate during the winter
months. This is due to a phenomenon called an inversion. The surrounding mounts trap pollution
in a confined space. Further pollution due to the inland port will make the surrounding area truly
dangerous to those of us who live here (let alone the larger impact to the world and global
warming). My father has asthma and cannot breath well and has trouble exercising particularly
during the winter. Do you propose to take away his limited opportunity to live a healthy life and
relegate him to a life indoors? In a place where beauty and outdoor recreation has drawn many
for decades, you are seeking to destroy. I do not support this action.

This port should only be allowed to function if it's electricity is supplied by wind or solar, it's
vehicles are electric and every effort possible is made to ensure it does not contribute to the
already poor air quality in the salt lake valley. Political leaders ask citizens to do our part and I
think there's a lot of us that are, those running this port should do theirs. Regulate, regulate,
regulate! My health and the health of my young nephews depend on it.

120

-------
NEJAC WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED CONTINUED.

To access all additional public comment materials that were submitted to EPA in
support of the November 10, 2021, NEJAC public meeting please visit the public
docket for this meeting via www.regulations.gov under docket number EPA-HQ-
OA-2021-0671.

121

-------
CLOSING REMARKS & ADJOURN

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO, reminded everyone that written public comments can be submitted
up to two weeks after the close of the meeting. Please submit written public comments in the
public docket for the meeting. For information on how to submit written public comments,
please visit the EPA NEJAC website or you can refer to the federal register notice for the
meeting. They can also be emailed to NEJAC@epa.gov, and the comments will transfer to the
public docket.

He reminded everyone that, if anyone emails their public comment to NEJAC@epa.gov, it takes
a little bit longer to process your email comment so that it can be posted in the public docket and
sent to the NEJAC. Thus, they prefer for everyone to submit their public comment directly into
the docket for immediate access and so the NEJAC can immediately access your comment. All
the comments will be provided to the NEJAC for their consideration as they prepare for the
public meeting.

Particular in new NEJAC workgroup drafts, their feedback on the drafts of the EPA plan, and
the quicker written comments are submitted to the docket, the quicker it will post in the docket
and the quicker they will be able to share with the NEJAC. He stated that all other meeting
materials associated with this meeting will be posted in the public docket including, for example,
the EPA PowerPoint presentation materials that were shared during this meeting.

He thanked everyone for an extremely productive meeting.

Mr. Matthew Tejada, OEJ, informed the Council that Ms. Eboni Cochran raised her hand and
was a late addition.

Ms. Eboni Cochran, Public Commenter: Sorry about being late. My name is Eboni Neil
Cochran, and I'm a resident of the Chickasaw neighborhood in Louisville, Kentucky.
Chickasaw's one of numerous neighborhoods adjacent to a cluster of Title V chemical facilities
commonly referred to as rubber town. For over eight decades residents have been adversely

122

-------
impacted by excess emissions, explosions, fires, nauseous odors, and acute chronic illness and
deaths some of which they have attributed to rubber town. This is not to mention rail cars
parked in the neighborhoods and other cumulative impacts.

There are quite a few examples I can put forth as to why we need effective policymaking around
chemical disaster prevention. I'll give you one related to common sense disaster measures that
need to be put into place. Several years ago, there was a storm that wiped out power, a chemical
facility had to utilize a generator for backup. Unfortunately, that generator was not working
properly which caused a huge hydrochloric acid spill. The lives of nearby residents were placed
in danger simply because the facility did not have in place what was needed to keep their
dangerous operation running properly.

While that example is related to disaster management, my ask is that you make a strong,
effective policy that prevents the many disasters we have experienced and read about in the
papers. It is imperative that the focus be on eliminating risks especially because the emergency
response and disaster management are not up to par. This is what people living at the fence line
need from agencies, but this is what we need from the agencies. We need you to bring us to the
policy table. We have first-hand knowledge of how the processes related to emergency response
actually play out.

Two, we need continuous fence line air monitoring which could lead to the identification of
leaks early on alerting facilities about potential exposure of hazardous chemicals to workers and
residents. It could also identify potential explosive hazards. The data needs to be accessible in
real-time to the community.

Three, we need you to coordinate efforts with other EPA departments such as the office of
chemical safety so that chemicals that could cause catastrophic hazards during an event are
banned. This too is a prevention strategy. The need for safer alternatives is real.

Four, we need to strengthen enforceability, corrective action, and accountability. Too many
times notices of violation are issued repeatedly for the same equipment. We need the
accountability piece to be strong to change behavior.

123

-------
Number five and the last point, I need you to realize that my family should not have to create
bug-out bags in the event of a chemical disaster at one of these facilities. My husband and I
should not have to instruct our son on which items he is responsible for along with his prefilled
backpack in the event that we have to evacuate. Your definition of chemical disaster may be
limited to fires and explosions but remember those of us living at the fence lines consider acute
and chronic exposures to hazardous chemicals as disastrous every single day.

Thank you so much for allowing me to speak today, and we're rooting for you guys to do the
right thing. Thank you so much.

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO, thanked Ms. Cochran. Mr. Tejada and Ms. Orduno tried one more
time to connect to Ms. Williams with no success. Mr. Jenkins asked her to email him directly,
and he would help her submit her written public comments.

Dr. Jan Fritz, NEJAC Member, interjected that she noticed that many of the commenters in the
last group have mentioned cumulative risk. It's very few times in the strategic plan so she wants
to put that on the agenda to take a look at that.

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO, reminded the members that they will have an opportunity to
provide that feedback in writing as the workgroups convene and get together and develop
feedback, so make sure they get those in writing as a part of a record as recommendations back
to EPA.

Ms. Stephanie Herron, Public Commenter, interjected that she talked to Ms. Williams, and she
would like someone from the Committee to contact her.

Dr. Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO, thanked everyone again. He mentioned that the meeting minutes
and the meeting summary will be completed within 90 days after the close of this meeting. He
then announced that the meeting is officially adjourned.

[WHEREUPON THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED]

124

-------
ATTENDEES LIST

First Name

Last Name

Organization

Lorna

Withrow

NCDHHS, DPH, OSWP

Nikki

Bass

USEPA

Stephanie

Steinbrecher

US EPA

Marisa

Sotolongo

Northeastern University

Deena

Tumeh

Earthjustice

Jan

Boudart

Nuclear Energy Information Service

Crystal

Lee Pow Jackson

RTI International

Mary

McCullough

OECA/OSRE

Tarn

Wheat

Boston College Law

Tina

Davis

US Environmental Protection Agency

Gianna

St.Julien

Tulane Environmental Law Clinic

Gulan

Sun

Motiva

Syeda

Husain

Office of Senator Booker

Megan

Smith

shift7

Katie

Lambeth

EGLE

Lucy

Stanfield

US Environmental Protection Agency

Richard

Pinkham

Booz Allen Hamilton

Lisa

Cooke

FAA

Jacqueline

Echols

South River Watershed Alliance

Oyemwenosa

Avenbuan

Hummingbird Firm

Willie

Scott

Sierra Club - Delaware Chapter

Sacoby

Wilson

University of Maryland College Park

Melissa

Watkinson-Schutten

Puget Sound Partnership

Carrie

Griffith

EPA

Brandi

Hall

Arizona Department of Transportation

Ali

Dominguez

Deloitte

Luz

Vargas

RB4

Janetta

Coats

EPA

Byron B

Gerard

REACT

Alessandro

Molina

EPA

Elyse

Salinas

US EPA

Ahnaf

Nur

Arizona DOT

Cristina

Villa

Department of the Interior

Andrea

Thi

DOJ

Carolyn

Slaughter

APPA

Rachel

Velthuisen

TRC

Michelle

Madeley

EPA Office of Community Revitalization

Yukyan

Lam

NRDC

Nicholas

Giles

Federal Aviation Administration

Louise

Kitamura

USEPA

Brian

Moench

Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment

125

-------
Tanya

Miller

Cenovus Energy

Stephanie

Hammonds

WVDEP-DAQ

Hilton

Kelley

Community In-power & Development Association
Inc.

Cynthia

Ferguson

US Dept of Justice / Environment and Natural
Resources Division

Deneen

Simpson

Department of Environmental Protection

Rhonda

Wright

U.S. EPA

Addy

Molina

UPR-RP

Carmen

Valdez

HEAL Utah (Healthy Environment Alliance of
Utah)

Vanessa

Shoenfelt

USDOT-FTA

Virginia

Vassalotti

EPA Region 3

Teresa

Acuna

DOL

Loan

Nguyen

US EPA

Anthony

Paciorek

Michigan United

Ashley

Mocorro Powell

None

Bryan

Davidson

TDEC

Kaitlin

Toyama

US DO J, Civil Rights Division

Patricia

Rippey

US Army Public Health Center

Lakendra

Barajas

Earthjustice

Jennifer

Valenstein

Brightwater Strategies Group

Julie

Narimatsu

USEPA

Andrew

Grainger

MELE Associates

Charles

Lee

US Environmental Protection Agency

D

Wu

NYS OAG - EPB

John

Mueller

Supporter, Fluoride Action Network

Jay

Bassett

GC&B

Danielle

O'Neil

Environmental Protection Agency

Yasmin

Yacoby

U.S. Department of Energy

Karen

Nickel

Just Moms STL

Victoria

Flowers

Oneida Nation

Leanne

Nurse

The Nature Conservancy

Zachary

Hunt

EPA

Cynthia

Sanchez

IEPA

Catherine

Kocses

Axiom Technologies LLC

Gabriel

Bellott-McGrath

House Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology

Augusta

Williams

DOL

Darryl

Malek-Wiley

Sierra Club

Chris

Pressnall

Illinois EPA

Brianna

Skinner

FDA

Maya

Nye

Coming Clean

Athena

Jolly

DCR4EJL

126

-------
Kathy

Triantafillou

EPA

Jena

Roscoe

Operation HOPE

Christine

DeMyers

Pacific Institute

Anhthu

Hoang

EPA

Chitra

Kumar

USEPA

Justin

Dula

PA Dept. of Enviro. Protection

Pamela

Nixon

People Concerned About Chemical Safety

Phillip

Washington

USDA

John

Doherty

IUPAT

Maria

Rahim

Chevron

Kim

Lambert

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Amy

Beatie

Colorado Department of Law

Lauren

Krohmer

US EPA

Jeannie

Williamson

US EPA

Samantha

Beers

US EPA

Alan

Walts

EPA Region 5

Gabriel

Pacheco

Private Citizen

Marlene

Bunch

Walker Lake Working Group

Marilyn

Vann

Cherokee nation environmental protection
commission

Sara

Lovtang

Oregon Department of Energy

Marilynn

Marsh-Robinson

EDF

Deborah

Williams

CWLP

ROBINA

SUWOL

CALIFORNIA SAFE SCHOOLS

Eileen

Mayer

US EPA

Alicia

Scott

Partnership for Southern Equity

Travis

Voyles

U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public
Works

Ryan

Crosbie

Self

Emily

Brooks

USGS

Kurt

Temple

US EPA

Patricia

Spitzley

RACER Trust

Janice

Horn

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)

Shubhayu

Saha

CDC

Drue

Pearce

Holland & Hart LLP

Kathryn

Super

Environmental Justice Health Alliance for
Chemical Policy Reform

Larissa

Mark

VDOT

Wayne

Everett

Native Green

Kenyatta

Miles

Shell

Uni

Blake

Api

Juan

Parras

Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services

Cynthia

Peurifoy

Retired

Nicholas

Ferreira

U.S. EPA - Region 2

127

-------
Nona

Harris

MEAN

A

Pratt

nonprofit

Crystal

Upperman

AECOM

Jane

Williams

California Communities Against Toxics

Juanita

Vivas Bastidas

Loyola University Chicago

Nicolette

Fertakis

EPA

Amy

Teague

USGS

Eboni

Cochran

REACT

Terrie

Green

Marin City Climate Resilience and Health Justice

David

Lonnberg

shift7

Jenn

Tribble

TDEC

Greg

Lovato

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection

Shiv

Srivastava

Fenceline Watch

Ann Marie

Gathright

Environmental Standards, Inc.

Matt

Currie

Advocates for Basic Legal Equality

Lakota

Ironboy

Leech Lake Division of Resource Management

Kevin

Smith

EPAR4

Robin

Jacobs

EPA

Kelly

Crawford

DC Department of Energy and Environment

Kenneth

Klutts

Self

Daniel

Padilla Ochoa

Ocean Conservancy

Brian

Holtzclaw

US EPA

Brad

Sims

Exxon Mobil Corporation

David

Gray

US EPA Region 6

Adesuwa

Erhunse

US EPA

Jeffrey

Norcross

US EPA- Region 1

Corbin

Darling

EPA Region 8

Julie

Lemay

Gradient

Mindy

Hill

Center for Environmental Justice

Lori

Dowil

Corteva

Kate

Wilson

Boston College Law School

Gerardo

Acosta

EPAR6

LESLIE

RITTS

National Environmental Development
Association's Clean Air Project

Francisco

Donez

US EPA

Stephanie

Rambo

Tejon Indian Tribe

Laura

August

OEHHA/CalEPA

Matthew

Greene

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Alane

Herr

IEPA

Ryan

Bahnfleth

Esri

Georgia

Simpson

HHS OASH Region 1

Suzanne

Yohannan

Inside EPA

Patty

Bowen

Conservation Voters for Idaho

Pargoal

Arab

None

128

-------
Hayley

Roy

OCT

Robin

Forman

Independent Environmental Researcher/non-
profit/Geothermal

Rebecca

Huff

EPA

Sandra

Smithers

New Castle Prevention Coalition

Jessica

Norriss

Environmental Policy Innovation Center

ADRIANE

BUSBY

Friends of the Earth

Taylor

Gillespie

EPA

Krista

Mclntyre

Law Firm

Daniel

Woodard

Southern Company

Stephen

Lee

Bloomberg

Roddy

Hughes

Sierra Club

Renee

Kramer

North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality

Dawn

Reeves

Inside EPA

John G.

Andrade

Old Bedford Village Development, Inc.

Toni

Rousey

Federal Advisory Committee Management
Division

Diane

Lauricella

Norwalk Zero Waste Coalition

Maria

Gabriela Huertas Diaz

San Juan Bay Estuary Program - ESTUARIO

Caitlin

McHale

National Mining Association

Gina

Shirey

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

Delia

Mayor

Private citizen

Coz

Lamore

Choices Interlinking Inc-Alliance

Olivia

Rodriguez Balandran

EPA Region 6

Ronald

Zorrilla

Outdoor Promise

Mala

Pattanayek

Integral Consulting

Judith

Kendall

EPA

Chad

Baisden

FDA

Lena

Epps-Price

US EPA

Monica

Brothers

EGLE

Adam

Mistier

Ocean Conservancy

Marva

King

EPA Retiree Senior Policy EJ Advisor

Nalleli

Hidalgo

TEJAS

Erica

Hall

Florida Food Policy Council/Suncoast Sierra Club

Tami

Thomas-Burton

EPA

Randa

Boykin

NCDEQ

Kiana

Courtney

Environmental Law & Policy Center

Carla

Walker

World Resources Institute

Carolyn

Yee

California Environmental Protection Agency,
Department of Toxic Substances Control

Patrick

Beckley

US EPA

Reanna

Bettencourt

TPCHD

Amelia

Samaras

PHMSA

129

-------
Jill

Vitas

NC DEQ - Division of Air Quality

Lorna

Weaver

Walker Lake Working Group

Bud

McAllister

Partners in Healthy Communities

Riley

Mulhern

RTI International

Sandra

Baird

MassDEP

Carolyn

Blocker

GAO

Dawn

Chapman

Just Moms STL

Amber

Garcia-Aranoz

EPA

Rose

Hanks

LSU

Stephanie

Meadows

API

Steph

Kim

EPA

John

Kinsman

Edison Electric Institute

David

White

SERCAP

Jackson

Green

Stop the polluting port

Gail

Scott

US EPA

Andrew

Geller

US EPA

Darius

Sivin

UAW

Melinda

Mcllwaine

Stop the Polluting Port Coalition Great Salt Lake
Audubon

Richard

Grow

US EPA Retired

Alex

Guillen

POLITICO

Sabrina

Johnson

US EPA

Naomi

Yoder

Healthy Gulf

Amelia

Cheek

IERG

John

Oluwaleye

Gender-Based violence as a public Health Issue

Deirdre

White

ASDWA

Bria

Crawford

Environmental Protection Agency

David

Brewster

PARS Environmental

Betsey

Streuli

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality

Shannon

McNeeley

Pacific Institute

George

Johnson

VA

Julie

Jimenez

None

Cassandra

Johnson

MDEQ

Jace

Cuje

EPA/ORD

Rosemary

Ahtuangaruak

Nuiqsut

Gloria

Vaughn

EPA

Stephanie

Schlea

Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies

Olivia

Glenn

NJ Department of Environmental Protection

Bryan

Parras

Sierra Club

Emma

Cheuse

Earthjustice

Drew

Costley

The Associated Press

Jeffrey

Ross

Kansas Department of Health and Environment

Mary

Gutierrez

Earth Ethics, Inc.

Noah

Saperstein

Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Ojibwe

130

-------
Sharron

Porter

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Reginald

Harris

US EPA Region 3

Taaka

Bailey

MDEQ

Staci

Rubin

Conservation Law Foundation

Morgan

Capilla

US EPA

Ronald

Moore

Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center

Susan

Alzner

shift7

Stephany

Mgbadigha

Air Alliance Houston

Erin

Broussard

Arizona Power Electric Cooperative

Maricela

Perryman

SJBEP

Yuwa

Vosper

WE ACT for Environmental Justice

Theodore

Hilton

EPA

Catharine

Fitzsimmons

Iowa Department of Natural Resources

Ericka

Farrell

EPA

Lin

Nelson

The Evergreen State College

Jackie

Toth

Good Energy Collective

Gilbert

Tellez

U.S.EPA

Shanika

Amarakoon

ERG

Betsy

Hale

KCPS

Kimberlie

Cole

Strata-G LLC / UCOR LLC

Laura

Olah

Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger (CSWAB)

SYLVIA

GRAHAM

WA Department of Ecology

Emily

Gulick

Jacobs Engineering

Elise

Doucette

MPCA

Claudia

Barragan

Communities in Practice

Christian

Torres

Comite Civico del Valle, Inc.

Emily

Coyner

NSSGA

Danielle

Mercurio

VNF

Mike

Schuster

Hannahville Indian community

Mary

Cordero

Community Action Works

Angela

Seligman

ND Department of Environmental Quality

Sonimar

Medina

EQB

Vivian

Koss

University of Washington

Ellu

Nasser

Environmental Defense Fund

Julian

Leichty

OEHHA

Tiffany

Ganthier

Van Ness Feldman

Lonnie

Portis

WE ACT for Environmental Justice

Jennifer

Kanine

Pokagon Band of Potawatomi

Carolyn

Peters

Concern Citizens of Mossville

liana

Shapiro

EPA

Patricia

Charles

CCOM

Annette

Switzer

EGLE

Iliana

Paul

Institute for Policy Integrity at NYU Law

131

-------
Paloma

Pavel

Earth House Center

Alii

Phillips

EPA

Cherry

Jochum

FEMA

PATRICE

LEWIS

Gentry Locke Attorneys

Ella

Ewart-Pierce

OASH HHS Region 6

Holly

Henderson

Duke Energy

Nancy

Weber

US EPA

Lori

Manes

NOREAS Inc

Megan

Kohler

ADEC

Kimi

Matsumoto

US EPA

Kendra

Beaver

Fairmount Indigo CDC Collaborative

Kristine

Nixon

AIM Solutions

Edward

Guster

EPA Region 2

Kara

Hoving

Clean Air Task Force

Stephanie

Herron

EJHA

Sonia

Grant

N/A

Ashley

Brewer

POWER Engineers

Dustin

Kane

Green New Detroit

Elder Jacqueline V

Norris

WomEnviro Climate Social Justice Marginalized
Community Collaborative

Sania

Tong Argao

U.S. EPA/ORD

Emmitt

Jackson

Member of Hanford Advisory Board

Kimberly

Crisafi

Environmental Protection Agency - OMS

Cynthia

Herrera

None

Lucas

Allen

American Academy of Pediatrics

Jill

Branby

USEPA

Daisha

Williams

Clean AIRE NC

Lauren

Ellis

Environmental Defense Fund

Maura

Witzel

HDR

Jeffrey

Severin

Wichita State University

Keala

Dickhens

Northeastern University

Jeannie

Economos

Farmworker Association of Florida

Ronne

Adkins

TDEC

Diane

VanDe Hei

AMWA

Joel

Minor

CDPHE

Eddies A.

Rivera

COALICION COMUNITARIA LOIZA AHORA
INC.

Analisa

Toma

National Association of Chemical Distributors

Khanna

Johnston

US EPA SAB

Holly

Harris

Climate Nexus

Pamela

Payne

HHS

Lia

Bobay

US EPA

Christine

Lewicki

USEPA

Gail

Garrett

Concern citizens of Mossville

132

-------
Tricia

Cortez

Rio Grande International Study Center

Amina

Grant

EPA

Cristina

Cabrera

Native Green

Eric

Johnson

NV5

Patty

Hill

Xcel Energy

Heather

Croshaw

St. Croix Environmental Association (St. Croix,
USVI)

Renee

Hoyos

VADEQ

Emily

Lane

University of Central Arkansas

Shiv

Srivastava

Fenceline Watch

Keisha

Long

SC DHEC

Lydia

Birk

S&ME, Inc.

Rachel

Tennis

Volkswagen Group of America

Ariana

Aragon

None

Katy

Hansen

EPIC

Matt

Holmes

Little Manila Rising

Alexandra

Hertell

Segarra Boerman Foundation

Astrika

Adams

SBA Office of Advocacy

Joyce

Stanley

US Department of the Interior

Alexis

Stabulas

EPA

Angeliz

Encarnacion

UPR

Arsenio

mataka

HHS

Shane

Palmer

Peter Damon Group

LaNicia

Clark

Public Health

Agatha

Benjamin

USEPA

Clare

Brown

WRWC

Lisa

Stuart

USDOL

Katherine

Minorini

Boston College Law School

Alex

Bansleben

Accenture

Ester

Ceja

Idaho Transportation Department

Jordan

Creed

DOI

Kevin

Lambert

NPS

LeeAnn

Racz

ToxStrategies, Inc

Dena

Adler

Institute for Policy Integrity

Rafael

DeLeon

Environmental Protection Agency

Cheryl

Kelly

DOI

Allison

Crittenden

American Farm Bureau Federation

Steve

Zuiss

Koch

Fran

Kremer

USEPA

Guy

Reiter

Menikanaehkem Inc.

Alison

Souders

EPA

Laila

Hudda

EPA

Edith

Pestana

CTDEEP

Lauren

Johnson

The George Washington University Milken

133

-------




Institute School Of Public Health

Sara

Miller

EPA

Mary

Hampton

Concerned citizens of St John

Alexandra

Berrios

Para la Naturaleza

Ramsey

Sprague

Mobile Environmental Justice Action Coalition

Sara

Johnson

NH Department of Environmental Services

Angie

Shatas

US EPA

Casey

Kalman

Union of Concerned Scientists

Isabel G.

Segarra Trevino

Harris County Attorney

Brian

Hughes

Michigan Department of Environment, Great
Lakes and Energy

Matthew

Naud

Adapt, city

Rachel

Schmeltz

US EPA

I-Jung

Chiang

US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6

Louis

Noble

EPA

Tonya

Nichols

USEPA

Rachel

Davis

Waterspirit

Kimi

Wei

The Wei LLC

Daria

Neal

U.S. Dept. of Justice

Julie

Kaplan

NA

Clea

Harrelson

NOAA Sea Grant

E

Taylor

COMMUNITY

Stephanie

Williams

MDE

Jessica

Bielecki

NRC

Olga

Naidenko

ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP

Gabriela

Baeza-Castaneda

USEPA

Elise

Rasmussen

Washington State Department of Health

Chandra

Farley

Environmental Justice Academy Alumni
Association

Brandi

Crawford-Johnson

EJ Activist

Magaly

Mendez

HUD OLHCHH

Joni

Arends

Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety

Robert

Skoglund

Covestro LLC

Shawn

O'Brien

Troutman Pepper

James

Werner

U.S. Congressional Research Service

LESLIE

RITTS

NEDA/CAP

Mary

Fasano

EPA

Julie

Simpson

Nez Perce Tribe - Air Quality Program

Mary

McCarron

Ohio EPA

Eletha

Brady-Roberts

ORD

Boris

Ricks

CSUN

Chad

Whiteman

U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Bonita

Johnson

USEPA

Carol

Bergquist

Hannahville Indian Community

134

-------
Enrique

Valdivia

Texas Rio Grande legal aid, inc

Anna

Wood

US Environmental Protection Agency

Terry

McGuire

Earthjustice

Maria

Wiseman

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Tyler

Jenkins

Senate EPW

Dinesh

Senghani

US EPA

Heleen

Bennett

FEMA

Alejandra

Ramirez-Zarate

League of Conservation Voters

Sarah

Busch

None

Colleen

Neely

Columbia University

Beth

Graves

ECOS

Jay

Baker

WESTAR

Holly

Young

EPA

David

Holtkamp

Los Alamos National Laboratory

Nadia

Ahmad

Barry University

Sarah

Sieloff

Maul Foster Alongi

David

Lloyd

EPA-OBLR

Dean

Scott

Bloomberg

Richard

Holman

Westside Coalition

Elizabeth

Cole

Montana DEQ

Suzanne

Baker

Good Energy Collective

Maggie

Striz Calnin

Michigan Clean Cities

Leslie

Hoosier

Ameren

Xavier

Barraza

Friends Valle de Oro National Wildlife Refuge

Gail

Orendorff

FAA

Ana Rosa

Rizo-Centino

One Step A La Vez

Sandra

Talley

NRC

Virginia

Sanders

National Sierra Club

135

-------
NEJAC MEMBER BIOS NOVEMBER 2021 - APPENDIX A

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

NEJAC Member Biographical Summaries
November 2021

CHAIR
Orduno, Sylvia

Michigan Welfare Rights Organization

Sylvia Orduno has been a community organizer with MWRO for over 25 years and is a strong
advocate for the rights of poor and low-income residents. She has served on many governmental,
academic, and philanthropic advisory boards and committees promoting policies and legislation for
the basic needs of low-income people, particularly on water, energy and housing affordability and
environmental justice protections. She co-organized the U.S. Social Forum in 2010 in Detroit, has
presented at several state, national and international forums on water justice, and facilitated dozens of
panels, presentations, and convenings on community rights, water infrastructure, and centering the
voices of impacted residents. Ms. Orduno is a convenor with the People's Water Board, a coalition of
three dozen Michigan environmental, social justice and faith-based groups actively working on water
affordability and the human rights to water and sanitation; is a co-coordinator for the National
Coalition for Legislation on Affordable Water; a member of the Michigan Environmental Justice
Coalition and the Water Is Life Coalition joining Michigan and Ontario, Canada grassroots
communities on Great Lakes issues. Additionally, Ms. Orduno serves as an appointee to the EPA's
Great Lakes Advisory Board and the inaugural Michigan Environmental Justice Advisory Council.

VICE CHAIR
Osborne Jelks, Na'Taki

West Atlanta Watershed Alliance and Proctor Creek Stewardship Council
Dr. Na'Taki Osborne Jelks is Co-Founder and Board Chairperson of the West Atlanta Watershed
Alliance (WAWA). WAWA is a community-based organization of residents in Northwest and
Southwest Atlanta's Proctor, Utoy, and Sandy Creek Watersheds who are overburdened with
environmental stressors and pollution but are often underrepresented at environmental decision-
making tables. WAWA was established as result of community efforts to halt discriminatory
wastewater treatment practices in West Atlanta, and it has grown to become an impactful force in
community-centered sustainable development. Many call Jelks a "Watershed Warrior". Under her
leadership, WAWA has led community efforts for 14+ years to clean up, protect, and restore Proctor
Creek, one of Metro Atlanta's most impaired waterways. Dr. Jelks was heavily involved in WAWA's
work with other community-based organizations to establish the Proctor Creek Stewardship Council
(PCSC), a grassroots organization that engages Proctor Creek residents in community-driven,
collaborative problem-solving processes, along with government, academia,

136

-------
and other stakeholders, to identify innovative, community-engaged approaches for environmental
restoration of the watershed and its people. Jelks served as one of two founding Co-Chairs of the
Council. As a part of Atlanta's Water Equity Task Force, she works to connect water burdened
neighborhoods and residents threatened by gentrification to workforce development opportunities in
green infrastructure. Jelks' and WAWA's community-driven advocacy to advance water equity
issues in Atlanta were critical in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's decision to invest in
the Proctor Creek as an Urban Waters Federal Partnership Site. Jelks has championed community
science initiatives in which she trains West Atlanta residents to be watershed researchers who
monitor water quality and investigate local environmental conditions; giving them actionable data to
press for solutions to urban watershed and community health challenges. When she's not trying to
transform toxic landscapes into healthy communities, Dr. Jelks works to teach and train the next
generation of environmental health professionals and environmental justice advocates as an Assistant
Professor in the Environmental & Health Sciences Program at Spelman College.

VICE CHAIR
Tilchin, Michael

Jacobs Engineering

Mike is a senior environmental consultant for Jacobs Engineering. He served as Jacobs' U.S. EPA
Client Account Manager for more than 20 years. Under Mike's leadership, Jacobs had a major role in
the clean up several hundred Superfund sites. In addition to supporting Superfund cleanups, the
company serves EPA's brownfields, water security, water infrastructure, research and development,
and sustainable community programs. Mike is the co-vice chair of EPA's National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) and chaired the NEJAC Superfund Working Group that prepared
NEJAC's report, Superfund Remediation and Redevelopment for Environmental Justice
Communities, with in-depth strategies and recommendations for how to make the Superfund program
more responsive and effective in protecting overburdened and underserved communities affected by
toxic and hazardous waste sites. Mike is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE) and served on ASCE's Committee on America's Infrastructure. Mike was the lead author for
the Hazardous Waste Infrastructure section for ASCE's America's Infrastructure Report Card- 2021.
Mike now serves on ASCE's Public Policy Committee. Mike is active with the American Council of
Engineering Companies (ACEC) and has a leadership role in ACEC's Remediation Work Group's
RWG's ongoing efforts to improve cleanup actions under Superfund. Mike serves on the Board of
Directors of the Anacostia Watershed Society (AWS), and was the AWS Board Chair from 2010 -
2013. AWS works with communities, the private sector, and all levels of government to restore what
was among the most polluted urban rivers in the country and is now on a path to becoming fishable
and swimmable within several years. Mike served on the Board of Directors of the CH2M HILL
Plateau Remediation Company at the Department of Energy site in Hanford, Washington from 2013-
2019. Mike attended Harvard University and received a B.S. in Geology from the University of
Michigan, and an M.S. in Biological and Agricultural Engineering from North Carolina State
University. He is a professional engineer licensed in the State of Virginia, certified as a LEED 3

137

-------
Green Associate, and is an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Natural Resources Science at the
University of Rhode Island.

OTHER MEMBERS

Baptiste, April

Colgate University

April Karen Baptiste is currently a Professor of Environmental Studies and Africana and Latin
American Studies at Colgate University. Her research interests lie at the nexus of environmental
psychology and environmental justice. Her projects have explored the worldviews to environmental
problems in the Caribbean with a focus on marginalized populations like fishers'. Her current
research project examines the characteristics of environmental movements across the Caribbean
region, seeking to understand whether environmentalism can be view through the lens of
decolonization. Ms. Baptiste received her PhD from State University of New York, College of
Environmental Forestry in Environmental policy, a Master of Science in Science for the Management
of Tropical Environments from the University of the West Indies St. Augustine, Trinidad and
Bachelor of Science in Chemistry and Management from the University of the West Indies, St
Augustine, Trinidad.

Barreto, Brenda Torres

San Juan Bay Estuary Program

Brenda Torres Barreto is a professional in the field of sustainability with vast experience in
environmental management, corporate social responsibility and public policy development through
empowerment and multisector alliances. She has excelled in leadership positions in Puerto Rico and
the United States. Her professional career has led her to be part of Governor Andrew Cuomo's
executive team as Assistant Secretary for the Environment of the State of New York. It was there that
Torres Barreto advised Governor Andrew Cuomo on environmental policy and had the opportunity
to develop the state environmental justice platform in New York. Prior to working in the governor's
office, Brenda led the efforts of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in the Northeastern United States.
From this position, she represented the interests of Puerto Ricans on the Island and Puerto Ricans in
this region of the US facing federal agencies, state and municipal governments. Among the initiatives
promoted during this period is the development of the Puerto Rican Creative Network and the
National Puerto Rican Agenda. Brenda oversaw the federal and state efforts for the revitalization and
sustainability of Vieques and for the dredging project in the Cano Martin Pena. Currently, Brenda
serves as Executive Director of the San Juan Bay Estuary Program, an initiative focused on the
restoration of water bodies in the metropolitan area of Puerto Rico, and part of the National Estuary
Program partly funded by the USEPA. Through the Estuary Program, Torres Barreto coordinates
multi-sector efforts, empowers citizens to be part of the restoration process and ensures the well-
being of residents of the metropolitan area.

138

-------
In the past, Brenda has advised government, business and community leaders in the application of
sustainability practices in their social and economic projects. Brenda is the founder of the Latino
Climate Action Network, which allows emerging leaders to take part in the discussion on climate
justice by preparing them to evaluate and propose policy briefings. Torres Barreto also led the
community revitalization effort in Williamsburg, Brooklyn through a comprehensive program
called the "Green Light District." Brenda's passion is the management of non-profit organizations for
the conservation and restoration of habitats. In California, Brenda served as the Executive Director of
the Audubon Society's third largest chapter in this state, serving 4,000 active members and more than
100 volunteers. Ms. Torres Barreto also worked as a public policy analyst for the United States
Forest Service in Washington, DC, where she evaluated mechanisms for the ecosystem assessment of
national forests in the western United States. She has served in numerous forums by providing policy
advice on major restoration projects and social projects in California, New York and Puerto Rico.
Brenda co-chairs the Climate Strong Island Network, a coalition of U.S. island entities that work
across sectors and geographies in the continental US and the nation's states and Caribbean and
Pacific territories to address the vulnerabilities and risks in the face of climate change. She
collaborates with the Puerto Rican diaspora through her volunteer work at the Roundtable of the
Center for Puerto Rican Studies at the City University of New York Hunter College. Brenda is an
Op-Ed contributor to local newspapers. Brenda is a LEED Accredited Professional for the
development of green buildings. She received a BS in Environmental Sciences from the University of
Puerto Rico and a Master's degree in Environmental Management from the Yale School of the
Environment. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in Integrated Water Resource Management
from the University of Puerto Rico.

Beltran, Felicia

Arizona Department of Transportation

Felicia Beltran is a Civil Rights Compliance Manager at the Arizona Department of Transportation's
(ADOT) Civil Rights Office (CRO) and oversees the Title VI, Environmental Justice (EJ) and
External EEO Contractor Compliance programs. In April of 2016 she started her work in the CRO,
prior to that she worked in public involvement at ADOT and at the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Her environmental justice experience started in 2007 as a
Community Involvement Coordinator at the ADEQ where she executed public involvement
requirements for groundwater, air quality and soil contamination at NPL Superfund and local Water
Quality Assurance Revolving Fund (WQARF) sites. In this position she also facilitated Community
Advisory Boards. She worked closely with EPA staff at Region 9 to ensure that participation barriers
were eliminated specifically for impacted low-income and minority groups.

Once at ADOT and in her role as a public involvement practitioner she served as a liaison between
the public and ADOT to ensure that the public had opportunities to provide meaningful input on
ADOT transportation projects. Building on her work with ADEQ she was able to expand and sharpen
her skills as a EJ practitioner in the field of public involvement and became more aware of the
historic 5

139

-------
environmental disparities specifically to low-income and minority populations when they are not a
part of the decision-making process for proposed projects within the community.

Now in her current position as a Civil Rights Compliance Manager she is most passionate about the
opportunities to educate ADOT employees and management on ADOT's civil rights responsibilities.
Her primary focus is to prevent discrimination from happening and to eliminate it when it does.

Britt, Joy

Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium

Joy Britt was born and raised in Guam. Being raised on an island located on the ring of fire, she is no
stranger to the effects of nature's most destructive forces, including earthquakes and typhoons and
the effects of environmental impacts to human health. Three years of her adolescence was spent
without running water or power due to severe storms and latent repairs to the island's infrastructure.
She lived in third world country conditions but witnessed others much worse off. Such early
experiences observing the need for access to healthcare led to her obtaining her MPH and her current
line of work. Joy is the Senior Program Manager of the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium's
Contamination Support Program. She is accountable for all aspects of project planning, grant writing,
funding, and implementation of various projects, including, the Brownfields Tribal Response
Program (TRP), the national contract with Kansas State University for Tribal Technical Assistance to
Brownfields, and the Rural Alaska Monitoring Program. Joy also participants in research and data
dissemination of food security projects within the Bering Straits and consults on scientific and
technical issues that arise through community concerns and as a contributor to the Local
Environmental Observer Network and the Tribal Brownfields Forum. She provides collaborative
technical assistance to 29 Tribal Response Programs throughout Alaska, all Alaska Tribes, and
requesting statewide entities.

Bryson, Charles

City of St. Louis Civil Rights Enforcement Agency

Charles Bryson have served in various aspects of Human Service; from a Case Worker and Case
Manager at various programs for persons who were homeless in Baltimore, St. Louis and Springfield
II, to the Director of a Head Start in Springfield II and Executive Director of a Head Start Program in
Peoria II. He also held various positions in State and City government, including Area Representative
for the Missouri Housing Development Commission, Neighborhood Development Executive, and
Senior Policy Advisor and Director of Department of Public Safety under former City of St. Louis
Mayor Francis G. Slay and Director of the Civil Rights Enforcement Agency under both Mayor Slay
and current Mayor Lyda Krewson. Finally, He sit on the Board of Earthday365, and 6

140

-------
environmental group that focuses on ways residents and businesses can play a role in addressing
environmental issue every day.

Carroll, Sr., Ambrose

Green the Church

Reverend Dr. Ambrose F. Carroll, Sr. is pastor of Church by The Side of The Road in Berkeley, CA.
He is the Moderator of the Home & Foreign Mission District Association and Vice President at
Large of the California State Baptist Convention. Dr. Carroll is also a commissioned chaplain in the
United States Navy Reserve. Prior to joining Church by The Side of The Road, Dr. Carroll served as
the youth and young adult pastor of Third Baptist Church in San Francisco; senior pastor of the St.
Paul Tabernacle Baptist Church of San Francisco; and senior pastor of the New Hope Baptist Church
of Denver, CO. In 2009, Dr. Carroll & Carroll Ministries International founded Greenthechurch.org,
which is the largest repository and catalyst for environmentalism and sustainability for the Black
church globally. Dr. Carroll earned a Master of Divinity from Morehouse School of Religion in
Atlanta GA, a Doctor of Divinity from United Theological Seminary in Dayton Ohio, and a Master
of Business Administration from Golden Gate University in San Francisco, CA. He is married to
Katresa Williams, and they have three children.

Clow, Scott

Ute Mountain Ute Tribe

Scott Clow studied environmental science and chemistry in college-with an interest in analytical
chemistry, he entered the environmental testing industry in the early 1990's. I worked in analytical
laboratories in various capacities spending the last two years of lab work doing gas chromatography
on drinking water samples- for VOC's and SOC's. Upon the closure of the laboratory, he worked and
learned of an opportunity to work for the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe in southwest Colorado as a Water
Quality Specialist. He held the position for 12 years, monitoring surface and groundwater quality,
helping the Tribe gain jurisdiction to regulate surface waters, developing a groundwater protection
plan and nonpoint source management plan, assisting in some drinking water monitoring and
operations and wastewater monitoring and operations, writing grants, and various other work that
was requested. When the opportunity presented itself to become the Director of the department he
applied and got the position. Scott has been the department director for the last 13 years. In this
capacity, he manages a staff that includes water quality, air quality, brownfields, biology, and other
various environmental initiatives. We are fully grant funded and bring in several hundred thousand
dollars per year to fund our program. Over the years Scott has become more passionate about the
Tribe's environmental issues and worked hard to garner the resources and experts to address them.
Some include oil field pollution, pollution from a uranium mill adjacent to the Reservation, surface
water pollution from various sources, drinking water and wastewater infrastructure expansion,
drinking water 7

141

-------
treatment and Safe Drinking Water Act compliance assistance, solid and hazardous waste
management, and development of a biology program to help with wildlife, habitat and species
management including threatened and endangered species. Scott represents the Tribe on the Regional
Tribal Operations Committee of EPA Region 8 tribes and is currently the Vice-Chair of the National
Tribal Caucus. He has served as an alternate on the National Tribal Science Council, serve on the
Board of Directors of two local not-for-profit organizations, volunteered for the Lower Dolores River
Working Group, and was awarded a Citizen of the Year award in the community.

Colon de Mejias, Leticia

Green Eco Warriors

Leticia Colon de Mejias is a nationally awarded energy equity speaker, building scientist, author,
educator, workforce development leader, and energy equity policy expert.

She is the Founder and President of Green Eco Warriors, an award-winning nonprofit, educational,
and research organization focused on environmental conservation, environmental justice,
sustainability, and the empowerment of youth and families. Through this organization, she has
provided culturally aware climate and energy education, reclaimed wetlands, and created a Wetland
Walk which increased the access to wetland areas for communities of color. Leticia focuses on the
interconnectedness of air, water, land, and human life. Leticia is an awarded published author; her
books and tools focus on environmental leadership, sustainability, EJ, and she created a line of
educational science-based graphic texts which feature a cast of diverse superheroes and align with
national science standards (NGSS). These books and the programs connect low-income communities
to scientific information on climate change, energy, civics, food, water, and Environmental Justice.
She is the founder of the nationally awarded company Energy Efficiencies Solutions. Her companies
have provided energy efficiency assessments and upgrades to over 14,000 households and completed
full energy efficiency retrofits in over 10 million square feet of multifamily housing. She is the
Founder and Co-Chair of Efficiency For All, a nonprofit whose workforce programs create local jobs
which lead to a stable income, create resilience in families, and develop generational wealth in low-
income communities. EFA also collects and reflects energy equity policy, planning reports, and
information to keep stakeholders and leaders informed on community impacts. EFA advocates for
the stabilization and expansion of local and national Energy Efficiency and renewable programs
which protect human health and the environment, provide local jobs, increase positive economic
outcomes, and reduce short-term and long-term energy costs while protecting human health.

She is the recipient of many national awards, including the United States of America's Department of
Energy Award for work with at-risk and minority populations, National Award Building Scientist
Hall of Fame, Minority Small Business of the year award, National Department of Education award.
Leticia has many appointed and volunteer roles including the Policy Co-Chair of the National
Building Performance Association, Chair of Latino and Puerto Rican Affairs on the Commission for
the state of 8 Connecticut Commission on Women Children Elderly Latino & Puerto Rican Affairs,
member of the Governor's Workforce Council in the Office of Workforce Strategy, and a member of
the Minority Initiative Board where she advocates for equity issues and Climate Justice,
transportation as well as diversity and inclusion. She provides input in several other local state
agencies and local nonprofits and has served as an advisor on many state and local Commissions.
She has been called to give expert testimony to Congress on Climate Change, Workforce
Development, and Green Energy Careers, and Small Business. Leticia has also raised and supported
important legislation including but not limited to the PFAS bill (CT Bill No. 926) which was signed
into law in June of 2021, Healthy Homes HB 356 in the state of Connecticut in the 2021 legislative
session. Her work focuses on lifting the voice of the underrepresented, disconnected, and disparaged,
as she seeks to empower them in the fight for survival.

142

-------
de Aztlan, Cemelli

La Mujer Obrera

Cemelli de Aztlan, born and raised in El Paso has been engaged in community organizing, advocacy
and non-profit work throughout her career. As a community organizer with La Mujer Obrera,
working alongside residents, parents and youth to organize in the barrio to address the systemic
exploitation of low-income, Spanish-speaking, immigrant neighborhoods on the border. There is a
great divide in the city of El Paso that excludes communities like Barrio Chamizal. Our geographic
boundaries are defined by environmental hazards; our neighborhood sits north of an international
bridge and east of an interstate with heavy truck traffic, west of an industrial waste facility and train
tracks and south a major highway, 1-10. The divide is not only geographical, but political. We seek to
create a dignified, sustainable, and empowering alternative rooted injustice.

Cemelli received her Bachelor of Arts in English & Religion from Concordia University at Austin,
and her master's in divinity with a focus on Women in Religious Studies & Indigenous Religious
Studies from Harvard University.

Doyle, John

Little Bighorn College

John Doyle was born, raised and continues to live in Crow Agency, in the heart of the Crow
Reservation. He is an enrolled Tribal member and has dedicated his life to addressing environmental
and social justice concerns for his people, beginning with serving as a County Commissioner for 24
years, the Director of the Tribal Water and Wastewater Authority for 15 years and continuing after
his retirement to serve through co-founding and co-leading multiple community organizations
dedicated to improving Tribal environmental health, youth environmental literacy and community
development. John Doyle is currently employed with Little Big Horn College and Montana State
University conducting collaborative environmental health research with the Crow Tribal community,
under the guidance of the Crow Environmental Health Steering Committee. John Doyle has devoted
his life to helping his people, the Crow Tribe, and in the past ten years has become active in Tribal
environmental health on a national level.

Edwards, Jabari O.

.15 GBL, LLC

Jabari O. Edwards, Sr. is a native of Columbus, Ms. He is the owner of J5 GBL, LLC, a project
management firm, majority owner of The Bridge Group, LLC, an insurance brokerage firm, BH
Properties, and North Atlantic Security Company. Having established personal and professional
relationships throughout the United States, Jabari's focus is growing his organizational brand on a
national and global level. Jabari began his entrepreneurial career in January 2000, with the opening
of an insurance agency. He was co-owner of H&E Construction, a minority owned company that
focused on residential and small commercial projects. He has a proven track record of managing
people and the timely delivery of projects. Upon the formation of The Bridge Group (larger clients
include MGM Mirage, United States Secretary of State Global Embassy Arts, Southern Company) in
2007 (purchased from Wells Fargo), Jabari worked to build a relationship with Aon (the largest
insurance brokerage and consulting firm in the world), and from there worked with management a
team in Chicago to build Cornerstone Innovative Solutions (a division that partners and mentors
minority firms). In 2010, Jabari worked with the CEO's of Wells Fargo global brokerage Dave
Zuercher and Neal Aton, along with Anne Doss (head of banking relationships) to create a business
model for Wells Fargo diversity initiative. In 2012, Jabari worked with Willis executives Kim Waller
and Phil Styles to create Willis' business model, Willis Open. Jabari has testified in State of
Mississippi hearings about ways to improve minority participation on state funded contracts.

143

-------
In 2010, Jabari saw the need for a minority firm with scalability in the construction sector, and
therefore he started J5 GBL. J5 has served as construction/project managers on many complex
projects for many global companies around the country. J5 serves as the ground and building
maintenance contract for Southern Company on their Kemper county MS Project, served civil
contractor for Kior (biofuel plant located in Columbus, MS). J5, in a contract assignment, serving as
the project management firm, has been the first minority contractor in the history of Columbus MS.
Ironically Jabari's father, Joe Edwards was the first African American elected official in the history
of the city. Jabari's mission is to build a project management firm which combines unparalleled
expertise with a commitment to real diversity. Working for the Greenfield Environmental Trust, J5 is
now known around the country as one of the premier environmental management and environmental
Justice firms in the South-East Region of the United States. Jabari also served as a director on
various boards, including Mississippi Health Trust Fund (appointed by Governor Haley Barbour this
board managed and set the budget of the billions in funds received from the tobacco lawsuit), Vice-
Chairman of Columbus Housing Authority and Chairman of the Board of Commissioners for the
Columbus Utility Board, article was written about this program, in a national utility magazine, and
duplicated by other energy providers. Currently Jabari serves on the Board of the Boys and Girls
Club, Small Business Capitol Loan Fund Board (formerly the Minority Loan Fund Board), The
North Mississippi Board for Regions bank, The Mississippi Business Finance Corporation/
Mississippi Development Bank (appointed by Governor Phil Bryant), and The United States EPA's
The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) (Appointed by EPA Administrator
Scott Pruitt in December 2017). He is married to the former Jewel Sherrod, and they have three
children: Tori, Jabari Jr., and Joe. They are active members of Vibrant Church in Columbus, MS. He
is active in his community, a Diamond Lifetime Member of the NAACP. He and Jewel started their
non-profit Bubba's Hope to further their commitment to honor Jabari's father, Joe, by serving and
help the less fortunate around the country.

Fritz, Jan

University of Cincinnati, University of Johannesburg and University of South Florida

Jan Marie Fritz, Ph.D., Certified Clinical Sociologist (C.C.S.), is a Professor in the School of
Planning at the University of Cincinnati (USA); a Distinguished Visiting Professor at the University
of Johannesburg (South Africa) and a Vising Professor with Taylor's University (Malaysia). She
currently is a Fulbright-National Science Foundation Arctic Scholar in Iceland. She is member of the
Executive Committee of the International Sociological Association (ISA), the lead ISA
representative to the United Nations and a Fulbright Specialist (consultant). She is a member of the
Mayor's Gender Equality Task Force in Cincinnati, Ohio, editor of Springer's Clinical Sociology
book series, a docent at the Harriet Beecher Stowe House in Cincinnati, Ohio and was, for many
years, a special education mediator for the state of Kentucky. She has been a Fulbright Senior
Research Scholar at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, a Woodrow Wilson Fellow in Washington,
D.C., and a Fulbright Distinguished Scholar in Human Rights and International Studies at the Danish
Institute for Human Rights. She has been given Fulbright travel awards to Sweden, the United
Kingdom and Poland. Dr Fritz's work has won a number of awards including the Ohio Mediation
Association's Better World Award and the American Sociological Association's Distinguished
Career Award for the Practice of Sociology. Her publications include: Moving Toward a Just Peace:
The Mediation Continuum; Community Intervention: Clinical Sociological Perspectives;
International Clinical Sociology; "Cities for CEDAW: Notes on Effective Intervention," "Social
Justice for Women and Girls: Global Pacts, Unmet Goals, Environmental Issues", "Environmental
Injustice and Incarceration: Notes from the United States" and "Searching for Environmental Justice:
National Stories, Global Possibilities."

144

-------
Ghanta, Venu

Duke Energy

Venu Ghanta is the Vice President of Federal Regulatory Affairs and Environmental Policy at Duke
Energy Corporation. Venu leads the company's environmental policy development and engagement
strategy with EPA, other key federal agencies, and national environmental organizations. He also
provides strategic analysis to senior leadership on the opportunities and risks related to the federal
regulation of the utility industry. Venu currently serves as co-chair of Edison Electric Institute's Air
Quality Subcommittee. Prior to coming to Duke, Venu worked in EPA's Office of Air and Radiation
(OAR), where he spent nine years designing and implementing regulations. Venu served as technical
lead in developing the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, earning an EPA Gold Medal for
Exceptional Service. He also was a key member of the Renewable Fuel Standard team, earning the
agency's Science Achievement Award. From 2010-2012, Venu served as a Special Assistant to EPA
Administrator Lisa Jackson, where he was responsible for obtaining the Administrator's concurrence
on all regulations issued by EPA's air office. Venu served as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Namibia
and Nepal. He received a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Michigan, an M.S. in
Chemical Engineering from the University of California at Berkeley, and an M.S. in Environmental
Sciences and Policy from Johns Hopkins University.

Harrison, Jill

University of Colorado Boulder

Dr. Jill Harrison is an Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Colorado Boulder, a
position she held since 201 1. From 2006 to 201 1, she was Assistant Professor of Community and
Environmental Sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She has a PhD in Environmental
Studies from the University of California-Santa Cruz (2006) and a B A in Development Studies from
the University of California-Berkeley (1997). Dr. Harrison's research, teaching, and service work
focus on environmental justice movements, environmental politics, racial environmental inequalities,
racial inequalities in agriculture, and immigration politics. She has conducted research on
environmental politics with a focus on environmental justice for 20 years. Her research focuses on
identifying the roots of environmental injustice in the contemporary United States and innovative
strategies for redressing those harms. She take seriously the concerns of members of environmentally
overburdened and marginalized communities; conduct research that helps to make visible, explain,
and address the injustices they experience; use my expertise in qualitative research methods to collect
data that sheds new light on the forms, scope, and consequences of injustice; draw on my
interdisciplinary training in environmental studies to marshal and integrate relevant scientific
evidence from many fields of study; and specify regulatory and policy reforms that would help
rectify these inequalities. She primarily collected data through in-depth, confidential interviews with
regulatory officials, community members, and other key stakeholders; ethnographic observation of
government agency meetings and activist events; participation and collaboration with community
activists; focus groups with key participants; and, occasionally, structured surveys.

Dr Harrison's projects have focused on political conflict over agricultural pesticide drift and its
public health impacts on marginalized farmworker communities, escalations in immigration
enforcement and their impacts on immigrant farm workers, and government agencies" environmental
justice reform efforts. She teaches undergraduate courses in environmental justice and the sociology
of agriculture and food, as well as graduate courses in environmental justice, environmental
sociology, and qualitative research methods. She is cofounded a graduate certificate program in
Environmental Justice to help train graduate students in EJ and foster a network of EJ scholars at the
university. She has served on the Wisconsin Governor's Council for Migrant Labor, as well as the
Wisconsin Migrant Coalition, both 12

145

-------
appointed volunteer advisory committees. She served as Chair of the American Sociological
Association's Environmental Sociology Section, a three-year elected position.

King, Virginia

Marathon Petroleum Company

Virginia M. King is the Director of Sustainability and Stakeholder Engagement for Marathon
Petroleum Company (MPC). MPC is a leading, integrated, downstream energy company
headquartered in Findlay, Ohio. Previously, Ms. King was the Environmental, Safety, and Security
Assistant General Counsel, specializing in environmental justice and the Clean Air Act. She has a
Chemical Engineering degree and Law degree from the University of Toledo. She is a patent attorney
and has worked in the petroleum industry for over 30 years.

Kricun, Andy

Moonshot Missions

Andrew (Andy) Kricun is a Managing Director with Moonshot Missions, a non-profit focused on
providing technical assistance to water utilities in underserved communities. He is also a Senior
Fellow with the US Water Alliance working on their national water equity initiative. He is also
working as a Senior Advisor at the Water Center at the University of Pennsylvania on various
projects related to the Delaware River watershed. He also serves as the chair of the NJ Environmental
Justice Advisory Council's water equity committee, and the co-chair of the Jersey Water Works water
equity initiative and is a trustee of the NJ Conservation Foundation. Andy is committed to social
justice, with a particular emphasis on water equity. He believes very strongly that everyone,
regardless of where they live or what they look like, is entitled to safe drinking water and clean
waterways at an affordable rate. He also believes that no community, household or person should be
subjected to a disproportionate environmental burden, He hopes to be able to do his part to reduce
environmental injustices and is looking forward to serving on the NEJAC to help those who need
help the most. Andy has over 35 years of wastewater and biosolids management experience. He
graduated with honors from Princeton University with a degree in chemical engineering. He also
holds a professional engineer's license in civil engineering and is a board-certified environmental
engineer as well.

146

-------
McClain, Mildred

Harambee House

Dr. Mildred McClain co-founded and currently serves as the Executive Director of the Harambee
House/Citizens for Environmental Justice, a community-based organization whose mission is to
build the capacity of communities to solve their problems and to engage in positive growth and
development. The organization was created in 1990, is located in Savannah, GA, and serves
communities at the local, state, regional, national, and international levels. Dr. McClain has been a
human rights activists and teacher for over 40 years. She has served on numerous committees,
commissions, working groups and boards. She created major partnerships with the Department of
Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, the Centers for Disease Control, and many community-based organizations, with the goals
of addressing public health and environmental justice issues and concerns. Under Dr. McClain's
leadership for the past 27 years, the Black Youth Leadership Development Institute has trained over
3000 young people to serve as leaders in their communities. The goal of the work is to develop the
capacity of communities to create lifestyles that promote health, wellness, and environmental
sustainability through community gardens, health fairs, testing children for lead poison, and soil
testing in contaminated communities, alliance, Los Jardines advocates for stronger, safer, and just
chemical policies. Mr. Moore is a recipient of the 2005 Ford Foundation Leadership for a Changing
World.

Nagano, Ayako

Common Vision

Ms. Nagano serves as Managing Attorney for Midori Law Group, P.C. and specializes in serving
Japanese American seniors. Ayako serves as Secretary of the Board for four 501(c)(3) non-profits:
Common Vision, which installs school gardens all across California; Transition Berkeley, a local
Transition Town initiative to bring neighbors together to build a more equitable, sustainable, resilient
future for Berkeley; and Nippon Kobo, which produces cross-cultural programs by luminaries in the
Japanese American community. She also serves on the boards of Transition US, the national hub of
the worldwide Transition Town movement fostering just resilience in over 1000 communities
worldwide, and Clean Water Fund, the 501(c)(3) arm of Clean Water Action, whose mission it is to
protect our environment, health, economic well-being and community quality of life. She also serves
as board chair of the NorCal Resilience Network, an organization that plans for community resilience
and promotes resilience hubs in the age of climate change. Ayako also serves on the Steering
Committees of the Green Leadership Trust, a coalition of non-profit board members of color,
promoting diversity, equity and inclusion within Environmental movement and is also co-chair of
ITRC (International Transformational Resilience Coalition) in California, working to build
widespread levels of psychological and psycho-social-spiritual resilience for the adversities
generated by climate change. She also organizes the local Plastic Reduction Working Group out of
the Ecology Center in Berkeley, California.

147

-------
Orr, Jeremy F.

Natural Resources Defense Council

Mr. Orr is an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. As a member of NRDC's Safe
Water Initiative, Mr. Orr focuses on drinking water and source water protection issues, working to
ensure that everyone has access to safe, sufficient, and affordable drinking water.

Immediately prior to joining NRDC, Mr. Orr served as the National State Program Director for
Peoples Climate Movement where he organized communities throughout the country around climate
justice issues. Formerly, Mr. Orr also worked as the Environmental Justice Coordinator for the
Transnational Environmental Law Clinic at Wayne State University Law School. In that role, Mr.
Orr also served as the Coordinator for the historic Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition. Before
joining Wayne Law, Mr. Orr was the Executive Director of the Mid-Michigan Environmental Action
Council where he led regional efforts to improve environmental and public health through river
protection and restoration, stream monitoring, storm water management, food justice, and
environmental justice programming. Additionally, Mr. Orr spent three years as a Community
Organizer with the Gamaliel Foundation where he organized around numerous social justice issues
including the cleanup of a PCB-contaminated landfill. Mr. Orr currently serves a Vice-Chair of the
Environmental Justice Committee for the American Bar Association's Civil Rights and Social Justice
Section and State Chair of Environmental and Climate Justice for the Michigan State Conference
NAACP. Mr. Orr also sits on boards of directors for multiple non-profit. Mr. Orr earned his
Bachelor's, Master's, and Juris Doctor from Michigan State University.

Owen, Sofia

Environmental Justice Legal Services (EJLS), Alternatives for Community & Environment (ACE)
Sofia is ACE's Staff Attorney. She works with ACE staff to ensure that the legal rights of people of
color and low-income residents are protected. She also provides systematic legislative and regulatory
advocacy on behalf of environmental justice communities at the municipal and state level. Sofia
comes to ACE from Community Action Works (formerly Toxics Action Center), where she provided
organizing assistance to community groups in Eastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island and built
power to address environmental racism, settler colonialism, and other systemic barriers that
disproportionately affect communities on the front lines of pollution. Previously, Sofia worked as a
Trial Attorney for the Committee for Public Counsel Services. She has a J.D. from Northeastern
University School of Law, a Master's in Environmental law and Policy from Vermont Law School,
and a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania. When not at work, Sofia organizes with the Deeper
Than Water coalition and volunteers with the Boston chapter of Black & Pink. She enjoys practicing
yoga and watching soccer, particularly the US Women's National Team and the Uruguayan national
teams. 15

148

-------
Pauli, Benjamin

Kettering University

Dr. Ben Pauli is Associate Professor of Social Science at Kettering University in Flint, MI. He holds
a Ph.D. in Political Science from Rutgers University (2014). Dr. Pauli has been extensively involved
in the response to the Flint water crisis as an activist and researcher. He is the author of Flint Fights
Back: Environmental Justice and Democracy in the Flint Water Crisis (MIT Press 2019), which
examines the role of local water activists in exposing, addressing, and constructing a narrative around
the crisis. From 2016 to 2017, Dr. Pauli worked with the Flint Area Health and Environment
Partnership on a legionella sampling project funded by the Michigan Department of Health and
Human Services. He is the president of the board of the Environmental Transformation Movement of
Flint (etmflint.org), a local environmental justice group, and vice-chair of the Flint Water System
Advisory Council. Dr. Pauli's water-related research and advocacy interests include issues of water
and trust, water governance, environmental justice, and principles of engagement and collaboration
in community-based research. On NEJAC, Dr. Pauli serves as a representative of the academic
community.

Perry, Jonathan

Becenti Chapter

Jonathan Perry is a member of the Navajo Nation and resides in the community of Becenti located
within the Eastern Navajo Agency in northwestern New Mexico. He has dedicated his life to serving
his people, protecting communities, and preserving Dine cultural and historical knowledge. Currently
Mr. Perry is serving as the Becenti Chapter President, a local leadership position, within his
community; and is considered a Naat'aanii (leader) on the Navajo Nation due to his many years of
serving the Navajo people. Prior to becoming an elected tribal official Mr. Perry was active in many
community grassroots organizations ranging from cultural preservation initiatives to the protection of
natural resources and sacred areas. Mr. Perry is notably recognized for his work in efforts to address
cleanup of areas contaminated from past uranium mining activities on and near the Navajo Nation.
As an outspoken advocate for emphasizing the importance of the involvement and voice of
communities, he created advisory bodies within the Navajo Nation government to provide
opportunity for the public be involved with policy making. Mr. Perry is a former council delegate of
the 23rd Navajo Nation Council where he served on the Law-and-Order Committee, the Resources
and Development Committee, and the Navajo Nation Sacred Sites Taskforce; he is also a former
member of the Eastern Navajo Land Commission where he worked on land and energy matters
concerning communities located in Eastern Navajo Agency; and is a former Becenti Chapter Vice-
President 16

149

-------
Piazza, Millie

Washington State Department of Ecology

Millie Piazza is the Manager of the Office of Equity and Environmental Justice for the Washington
State Department of Ecology. In this role, she works to implement the state's environmental justice
law, integrate environmental justice priorities into agency strategy, advance nondiscrimination
practices to comply with Title VI obligations, and address equity and justice challenges in
Washington. She began her work at Ecology in 1994, designing and conducting the first statewide EJ
study. She has broad experience in national and international environmental justice, and currently
serves on the Governor's Interagency Council on Health Disparities and the University of
Washington Superfund Research Program External Advisory Board. Millie received a Ph.D. from the
University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability, a Master of Environmental
Studies (MES) from The Evergreen State College, and a Bachelors in Sociology from Whitman
College.

Shabazz, Jerome

JASTECH Development Services and Overbrook Environmental Education Center
Jerome Shabazz is the founder and Executive Director of JASTECH (Juveniles Active in Science and
Technology) Development Services, Inc. A not-for-profit organization developed in 1998, to
promote environmental justice; encourage sustainable community development and to promote
public health in urban communities. In 2002, JASTECH applied for and received a US
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grant under the Clean Water Act to establish the Overbrook
Environmental Education Center (OEEC), a community-based center dedicated to preserving our
built and natural environments. Under Mr. Shabazz's direction, the OEEC completed a Targeted
Brownfields Assessments (TBA) and remediated environmental hazards from a Brownfield site in
Western Philadelphia. The OEEC has trained thousands of students on the Clean Water Act and
Toxic Substances Control Act, and other topics that reduces human exposure to toxic substances at
home and school. The OEEC is nationally known for its Environmental Justice and project-based
learning programs. Prior to working in the non-profit sector, Mr. Shabazz worked for 25years in
Water and Gas utilities. He served as Safety & Training Manager at the Philadelphia Gas Works -
LNGProcessing Division and was responsible for 49 CFR §193.2713 training in operations and
maintenance; trained personnel and contractors on safety issues, codes, regulations, departmental
standards, corporate policies and procedures. He also worked in the training, engineering, and
operations divisions at the Philadelphia Water Department. Mr. Shabazz is an adjunct professor and
educator at both Community College of Philadelphia and Penn State University. In 2017, he was
appointed to the PA Department of Environmental Protection's - Citizen Advisory Council and
Environmental Justice Advisory Board. He is also a board member on Keep Pennsylvania Beautiful.

150

-------
Shabazz earned his Master of Science in Environmental Protection & Safety Management from St.
Joseph's University and Bachelor of Arts in Organization Management from Eastern University. He
has received numerous citations and award, most recently from the PA House of Representatives and
City Council of Philadelphia for his commitment to Environmental Justice and Community
Development.

Shirley, Jacqueline

Rural Community Assistance Corporation

Jacqueline Shirley born and raised in Alaska, is a Tribal member of the Native Village of Hooper
Bay on the Bering Sea coast, is currently employed at Rural Community Assistance Corporation. She
provides training and technical assistance to Tribes, nonprofit and local agencies, to improve or
develop water, wastewater and solid waste sustainable systems and programs in rural communities
across the western portion of the U.S. She obtained her Master of Public Health (MPH) from the
University of Alaska, Anchorage. She also served 18 years in the Army National Guard as a Field
Medic. She has spent the past 40 years advocating to improve human and environmental health.

Sprayberry, Karen

South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control

Mrs. Sprayberry has worked with environmental justice communities for approximately 22 years; she
began working at the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC)
in the Superfund and Voluntary Cleanup Program/Brownfield program as a public participation
coordinator. She initially began to work with the ReGenesis and its communities in Spartanburg,
South Carolina, shortly after coming to SC DHEC; ReGenesis would later win environmental justice
and redevelopment awards because of the over $250 million revitalization effort conducted within
these communities. She attended many community and public meetings and slowly began to build
trust with that community and its leaders. When it was time for SC DHEC to oversee work
specifically within this community, a foundation of trust and understanding had been instilled so as
there was more of a collaborative, problem-solving method instilled between the various parties as
the issues were address. Mrs. Sprayberry now serves as the Special Advisor to the Director of
Environmental Affairs at SC DHEC, with her specialty being environmental justice and community
involvement; she retired in 2015 and now is a part-time employee. As well as working with the
Director, she continues to work closely with the Environmental Justice and Community Involvement
Liaisons and other public participation staff within SC DHEC. She has received both internal and
external awards for her work at SC DHEC, including receiving a House Resolution from the S. C.
House of Representatives in 2015. Another award she is proud of is from 2008, when SC DHEC was
awarded the "U. S. EPA Environmental Justice Achievement Award" due to the public participation
and environmental justice work conducted both internally and externally by her and her peers. In
2011, Mrs. Sprayberry conducted the "Fundamentals of Public Participation" training during the
EPA's Community Involvement and Training Conference. Mrs. Sprayberry has a BA degree in
Political Science from Columbia College. 18

151

-------
Talley, Pamela

Lewis Place Historical Preservation Inc.

Pamela Talley is an advanced nurse practitioner with a master's degree in nursing and a national
certification in adult psychiatric mental health nursing. She oversees both clinic and outreach
services to areas that serve the poor and vulnerable, food pantries, libraries, churches, health fairs etc.
In 2000, she co-founded Lewis Place Historical Preservation, a community-based nonprofit
organization, with two other neighbors. The mission of Lewis Place Historical Preservation is to save
this historic community that was placed on the national registry of historic places in 1979. Since
2009, Pamela Talley has served as the volunteer Executive Director. In 2007, Pamela Talley was
recognized by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation as a Community Health Leader for assisting
grandparents raising grandchildren, many of whom were facing issues of eminent domain and were
being displaced. She founded an organization, known as "Grandparents As Parents Support Project".
As an awardee, she participated in the group that conducted research on social determinants of
health. In 2011, She successfully led neighbors in an effort to drive St. Louis city government with
assisting uninsured neighbors with rebuilding their homes after the community was hit by an
enhanced fajita scale 1 tornado. In 2015, Lewis Place Historical Preservation obtained a vacant house
from the city of St. louis on one of the three blocks of Lewis Place and entered a joint venture as a
co-developer with an established developer and construction company. The home was completely
renovated and sold to a family at an affordable rate. Pamela Talley currently serves as co-chair of a
steering committee, a collaborative community group, organized to execute and implement
residential development to improve the Lewis Place and Fountain Park neighborhood.

Whitehead, Sandra F.

George Washington University

Sandra is the Program Director for the Sustainable Urban Planning Program. Sandra teaches
community-focused classes aimed at improving the health, equity and sustainability of communities.
Prior to joining GW, she worked as the Director of Partnership Development at the National
Environmental Health Association, the National Association of County and City Health Officials and
the Florida Department of Health.

In addition to her work at GW, Dr. Whitehead also works directly with community groups to
improve their health and equity outcomes. She has worked across Florida on health impact
assessments and implementing Health in All Policies and she has trained over 500 community
activists to use the language and tools of public health to change policy.

I, Sylvia Orduno, Chair of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, certify that this
is the final meeting summary for the public meeting held on November 10, 2021, and it
accurately reflects the discussions and decisions of the meeting.

Date: February 8, 2022

152

-------