NCD980602163_19950425_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_US-EPA OSWER Environmental Justice Task Force - Draft Final Report-OCR

!
' I
i
Thu page is intentional left blank.
RECE I ~D \
JUN -1 1994
SUPERFUNO SECTION I
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
TASK FORCE REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
ON OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE .................................. I
A. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ruSTICE EXECUTIVE ORDER ................................................................. 1
C. HUMAN HEALTH ISSUES AND ENVIRONMENTAL ruSTICE ............................................... 3
D. GOALS FOR OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL ruSTICE TASK FORCE ......................................... 4
CHAPTER2
OSWER TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP AND OUTREACH EFFORTS .............. 7
A. OSWER TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP ........................................................................................ 7
B. INTERNAL OUTREACH ................................................................................................................ 7
C. EXTERNAL OUTREACH ............................................................................................................... 9
D. STAKEHOLDERS .......................................................................................................................... 10
E. COMMUNICATION ISSUES ........................................................................................................ 10
CHAPTER3
OSWER-WIDE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES
AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 11
A. ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ...................................... 11
B. TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT ..................................................................................... 12
C. CUMULATIVE RISK .................................................................................................................... 16
D. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) ....................................................................... 17
E. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS ..................................................... 18
F. ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................ 24
G. CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND LABOR ....................................................................................... 26
H. FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COOPERATION ............................................................................ 30
I. NATIVE AMERICAN/fRIBAL ISSUES ....................................................................................... 35
J. INTERNAL TRAINING, ORGANIZATION AND
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................. 38
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER4
PROGRAM-SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................... 41 I
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA) ............................................. 41
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND LIABILITY
ACT (CERCLA), or SUPERFUND ............................................................................................... 49
C. OIL POLLUTION ACT (OPA) ·········································:···························································· 56
D. UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (UST) ............................................................................. 57
E. CHEMICAL EMERGENCY PREVENTION AND PREPAREDNESS OFFICE (CEPPO) ........ 60
F. TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION OFFICE (TIO) ........................................................................... 64
G. FEDERAL FACILITIES ................................................................................................................ 66
II
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ON
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK
FORCE
A. INTRODUCTION
Over the last decade, concern about the impact of environmental
pollution on particular population groups has been growing. There is
a widespread belief that minority populations and/or low-income
populations may bear disproportionate high and adverse human health and
environmental effects from pollution. This belief has resulted in a movement to
assure environmental justice for all populations.
Several studies have been conducted by a variety of organizations (e.g.,
National Law Journal, United Church of Christ) which conclude that certain
communities are at special risk from environmental threats. The authors of
these studies have concluded that the implementation of key environmental laws
have not historically provided protection to all citizens and that certain
populations are more vulnerable than others to health threats from environmental
pollution. These studies suggest that vulnerabilities may stem from multiple
exposure situations exacerbated by other social and economic factors, such as
poor health care and lack of adequate nutrition. Many groups have concluded
that the government must take these issues into account in its decision-making
processes, research and data collection.
Early in her tenure as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA) Administrator, Carol Browner, designated the pursuit of environmental
justice as one of the Agency's top priorities. In response to concerns voiced by
many groups outside the Agency, the Assistant Administrator of the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), ElliottP. Laws, on November
29, 1993, directed the formation of a task force to analyze environmental justice
issues specific to waste programs and develop recommendations to address
these issues. President Clinton signed an Executive Order on Environmental
Justice (February 11, 1994) (Executive Order) which focused the attention of
Federal agencies on environmental justice issues. EPA is currently developing
an Agency-wide strategy pursuant to the Executive Order. The requirements of
the Executive Order provide extra emphasis to the mission of the OSWER task
force.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE EXECUTIVE ORDER
President Clinton's issuance on February 11, 1994 of the Executive Order
12898 on Environmental Justice and its accompanying Presidential Memorandum
marked a significant step toward focusing the attention of Federal agencies on
1
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE EXECUTIVE ORDER
2
environmental justice concerns. The Order requires certain Federal agencies, to the
greatest extent practicable and pennitted by law, to make environmental justice part of
theirmission by identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects on minority populations and low-income populations.
To help meet this objective, the Order calls on covered agencies to develop environmental
justice strategies. These strategies must include (but are not limited to) a list of agency
programs, policies, planning and public participation processes, enforcement, and/or
rulemakings that should be revised to, at a minimum: 1) promote enforcement of
environmental and health statutes in areas with minority populations and low-income
populations; 2) ensure greaterpublic participation issues; 3) improve research and data
collection relating to the health and environment of minority populations and low-
income populations; and 4) identify differential patterns of subsistence use of natural
resources among these populations.
Other key elements of the Executive Order include: establishes a Federal
Interagency Working Group; directs federal agencies not to discriminate in programs,
policies and activities; directs human health research to include diverse segments of the
population; mandates federal data collection and maintenance and analysis to assess
environmental and human health risks borne by populations by race, national origin or
income; requires agencies to collect, maintain and analyze infonnation on populations
who rely principally on fish and/or wildlife for subsistence; instructs agencies to
provide for public involvement; and applies the Executive Order equally to Native
American programs.
The Executive Order reflects the priority this Administration places on the goal
of achieving environmental justice. In addition, the Presidential Memorandum that
accompanied the Executive Order emphasizes several provisions of environmental,
civil rights and other statutes that provide opportunities for agencies to address
environmental hazards in areas with minority populations and low-income populations.
It directs agencies to take immediate and specific actions under the enumerated
statutory provisions as part of the Administration 'sefforts to prevent these communities
from being exposed to disproportionately highandadversehmnanhealthorenvironmental
effects. OSWERhas a major role to play in contributing to the success of the Agency's
implementation of the Executive Order, since many of the issues raised by environmental
justice advocates relate directly to OSWER activities. By creating a program-specific
environmental justice task force, OSWER has already taken a major step toward
implementing the requirements of the Executive Order within the programs for which
OSWER has responsibility. As the OSWER environmental justice task force mission
statement points out (see section on OSWER Task Force goals), OSWER intends to
explore ways to better respond to environmental and public health problems facing
minority populations and low-income populations. Thus, OSWER's actions will
directly support the goals and objectives established by the EPA Administrator and
President Clinton.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
C. HUMAN HEALTH ISSUES AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
C. HUMAN HEALTH ISSUES AND ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE
Many of the concerns about environmental justice are associated with waste
disposal sites. Several incidents that occurred during the 1980s indicate this. In 1982,
demonstrations against the proposed site for a polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) landfill
in Warren County, North Carolina, received national attention. In 1983, a General
Accounting Office study found that three of four hazardous waste sites investigated in
the southern United States were located in primarily African American communities.
In 1987, the United Church of Christ's Commission for Racial Justice released
a nationwide study on the demographics of populations living near commercial
hazardous waste facilities. The study found that the proportion of racial minorities was
significantly greater than in communities without such facilities.
Environmental factors play a key role in human development, health and
disease. The science base formany issues in environmental health is not well developed.
The National Academy of Sciences reported in 1984 that the available information base
for 82 percent of major industrial chemicals does not include even minimal testing for
their toxic properties. The most difficult challenges for environmental health today
come not from what is known about the harmful effects of agents; ratherthey come from
what is not known about the toxic and ecologic effects of the use of fossil fuels and
synthetic chemicals in modern society. Even less is known about chemical mixtures,
which is how most chemicals present themselves.
High blood lead levels are among the most prevalent childhood conditions and
the most prevalent environmental threat today, and is preventable. Lead exposure may
be associated with learning problems, mental disabilities, mental retardation, reduced
IQ scores, delayed development, impaired hearing, birth defects, seizures, coma and
death.1
One in eight Americans live in families with incomes below the federal poverty
level. Twenty-five percent of children underthe age of six live below the federal poverty
level. Formanychronicdiseases(e.g.,cancer),peopleoflowincomeareatgreaterrisk
than people of higher income. African Americans are the largest minority group in the
U.S., and make up 12% of the U.S. population. One in three African Americans lives
in poverty. African American men experience a higher risk of cancer than non-black
men and high blood pressure, poornutrition, alcohol and drug abuse are more common
among African Americans than caucasians. 2 Hispanic Americans face the most varied
set ofhealth problems of any group. For example, Mexican Americans have lower rates
of strokes while Puerto Ricans have the highest rates; infant mortality is highest among
Puerto Ricans and lowest among Cubans. Asian and Pacific Islander Americans are
the third largest minority group in the U.S., and the most heterogeneous. There is the
least amount of health data for this group than for any other group. American Indians
3
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
D. GOALS FOR OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE
4
and Alaskan Natives are the smallest of the minority groups, consisting of over 400
federally recognized nations. Poverty is also a major risk factor among this group. 3
D. GOALS FOR OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
TASK FORCE
The OSWER AssistantAdministrator(AA) created the OSWEREnvironmental
Justice Task Force and established its mission on November 29, 1993. The OSWER
Task Force's effort within the programs administered by OSWER is to be undertaken
in conjunction with the Administrator's effort to develop an EPA-wide environmental
justice strategy.
In keeping with EPA Administrator Carol Browner's goal of achieving
"Environmental Justice for All," the AA stated that the mission of the OSWER
environmental justice Task Force is to:
" ... examine how (OSWER) could better address the concerns of minority populations
and/or low-income populations about the manner in which EPA manages public health
and environmental risks under the jurisdiction of OSWER programs .... The Task Force
shall assess options and make recommendations on how EPA can more effectively
address environmental justice issues across all OSWER programs."
The OSWER Environmental Justice Task Force examined a variety of goals
suggested by the participants and focused on the two goals developed by the Agency-
wide Environmental Justice Task Force. The Agency-wide goals as currently drafted
are:
GOAL I Achieve Environmental Protection for All
Achieve environmental protection for all, so that no segment of the population,
regardless of race, national origin or income, bears disproportionately high and adverse
effects of environmental pollution and that all peoples benefit from clean and sustainable
communities.
Objective 1 : Using input from environmental justice stakeholders,
identify and prioritize affected communities and populations.
Objective 2: In partnership with the affected communities and
populations, address disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental impacts.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
D. GOALS FOR OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE
GOAL II Educate and Empower Affected Communities
Educate and empower affected communities, community and othernonprofit
organizations, Federal, tribal, state and local governments, academic institutions,
business and industry to ensure early participation in environmental issues, form
partnerships, achieve environmental justice and tohelppromotesustainablecommunities.
Objective 3: Enhance outreach, communication and partnership.
Objective 4: Promote development of sustainable communities
and increase access to financial assistance.
Objective 5: Build on existing minority academic institutions
programs to provide for increased participation of affected communities
within the Agency.
Objective 6: Achieve environmental justice at all levels of
government.
No conflicts were seen by the OSWER Task Force members between the
Agency-wide goals and those being examined by OSWER. Out of this examination,
the Task Force began to develop an overall OSWER strategy and to identify major
OSWER environmental justice issues. Six key areas were the focus of the Task Force's
recommendations. They were:
1) Empowering communities, improving OSWER programs'
communications with these communities, and establishing trust of EPA
in the communities;
2) Incorporating environmental justice concerns into all OSWER decision-
making and eliminating any potential for discrimination;
3) Increasing the priority of consideration of environmental justice issues
on a national and Regional basis and in our relationships with States;
4) Incorporating environmental justice issues into OSWER risk
assessment and risk management processes, including consideration
of multiple/cumulative risk;
5) Integrating consideration of economic redevelopment and job creation
with environmental justice;
5
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
D. GOALS FOR OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE
6
6) Developing employees and new job candidates who are well-trained
and sensitive to environmental justice issues.
Healthy Peo,ple 2000: National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention
Objectives, U.S. Department of Health and Human Seivices. October 1990.
2 lblil-
3 lblil.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
CHAPTER 2
OSWER TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP AND
OUTREACH EFFORTS
The OSWER Task Force sought input from a broad array of stakeholders
in developing their recommendations. An essential component of this
effort was to involve a broad spectrum of stakeholders from the
beginning of the OSWER Task Force's deliberations and establish a direct line
of communication so that environmental justice issues addressed in this Task
Force report received scrutiny throughout its development. This final draft will
be shared with EPA' s Environmental Justice Federal Advisory Council for their
review and comment.
A. OSWER TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP
The OSWER Task Force was comprised of 67 members representing all
OSWER programs, other EPA offices (i.e., Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ),
Office of Communication and Public Affairs (OCEPA), Office of Enforcement (OE),
Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, (OPPE),
and Office of Research and Development (ORD)), Regions 3,4,5,6,7,8, and 9, the
National Association of Remedial Project Managers, and the National On-Scene
Coordinators Association. Representatives of the Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry (ATSDR), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) also served on the OSWER Task
Force.
The OSWER Task Force met seven times and discussed its outreach strategy
at each meeting. The members provided contact names and suggestions for outreach
activities. Extensive amounts of infonnation were shared at the meetings and the
OSWER Task Force members, in tum, kept their parent programs infonned.
8. INTERNAL OUTREACH
1. REGIONAL VISITS
The OSWER Task Force visited Regions 3, 4, 6 and 9 to engage in dialogue
on environmental justice issues. 1beseRegions were selected because the environmental
justice issues they have encountered represented a wide array of issues considered
throughout the country. These visits included meetings with Hazardous Waste Division
Directors and other senior Regional managers, the Regional Environmental Justice
Coordinators, Regional environmental justice Advisory Boards, Regional OSWER
Task Force Members, and Regional environmental justice Quality Action Team
members. In addition, the OSWER Task Force contacted the following groups:
· Community Relations Coordinators
7
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JumcE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. INTERNAL OUTREACH
8
· Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Public Involvement
Network
· On-Scene Coordinators
· Remedial Project Managers
· Superfund Branch Chiefs
· RCRA Branch Chiefs
· Site Assessment Managers
· National Priorities List (NPL) Coordinators
· Chemical Emergency Prevention and Preparedness Office (CEPPO)
Coordinators
· Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title Ill
Coordinators
· Technical Assistance Grant (TAG) Coordinators
· Indian Coordinators
· Waste Management Division Directors
· Regional Counsels
· Regional/Deputy Regional Administrators
· Federal Facility Coordinators
· Public Affairs Staff
· Congressional Affairs Staff
The Regional visits provided a valuable opportunity to exchange infonnation
on various Region-specific environmental justice issues. The Regional visits also
offered insight to the OSWER Task Force's deliberations in developing an effective set
of recommendations.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
C. EXTERNAL OUTREACH
2. Meetings with OSWER Task Force Chairman
The OSWER Task Force Chainnan met with each of the six OSWER Office
Directors and with Senior Managers from the Offices of Environmental Justice,
Enforcement, General Counsel, and Civil Rights to solicit their input on the OSWER
environmental justice Strategy.
3. Other Internal Outreach Efforts
The OSWER Task Force reviewed the OSWER-related environmental justice
activities which were conducted by each EPA Region during FY 1993. The Task Force
chainnan discussed the draft strategy development status with Regional Waste
Management Directors at their quarterly meeting on January 20, 1994, in Santa Fe,
NM, and with Superfund Branch Chiefs on February 22, 1994, in New Orleans, LA.
OSWER staff discussed the status of the development of these recommendations with
Regional Community Relations Coordinators in Philadelphia, PA, on February 1, 1994
and at the National Site Assessment Conference in Albuquerque, NM in April 1994.
C. EXTERNALOUTREACH
EPA held a meeting/teleconference on January 10, 1994, at Headquarters with
representatives from several organizations that have expressed an interest in discussion
of environmental justice issues. The OSWER Task Force chainnan also sent letters to
over 500 concerned environmental justice stakeholders, asking them to identify their
key environmental justice issues, recommendations, and proposed solutions for EPA' s
consideration. This outreach method proved very effective and the various comments
were incorporated into the environmental justice strategy. Responses were received
from 17 external organizations. The distribution list included:
· National Community Groups
· Local Community Groups
· State & Local Governments
· National & Regional Tribal Representatives
· Industry Representatives
· Trade Associations
· National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology
(NACEPT) Community Issues Workgroup
9
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
D. STAKEHOLDERS
10
In addition, outreach efforts were extended to include the Department of Justice
(DOJ) and various health agencies (Indian Health Service, A TSDR, NIEHS and the
Bureau of Primary Health which includes the National Health Service Corps (NHSC)),
and DOJ. OSWER Task Force members also briefed key Congressional staff on the
major recommendations contained in this report.
D. STAKEHOLDERS
The OSWER Task Force, for purposes of this report and its recommendations
considered the following groups to be stakeholders in considering environmental justice
issues:
· Community Organizations
· Nonprofit Organizations
· Environmental Organizations
· Business
· Industry
· Academia
· Federal, State and Tribal Governments
· Labor
E. COMMUNICATION ISSUES
OSWER will continue to reach out to ourmany and varied stakeholders on how
best to address environmental justice issues with regard to waste programs. OSWER
expects the dialogue to continue as implementation plans are developed by Regions and
Headquarters waste programs to address the major recommendations of this report.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
CHAPTER 3
OSWER-WIDE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Issues and recommendations related to the following ten subject areas are
included in this chapter: 1) establishing guidelines for environmental
ustice; 2) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act; 3) cumulative risk; 4) Geographic
Information System (GIS); 5)intemal and external outreach, communications
and partnerships; 6) economic redevelopment; 7) contracts, labor and grants;
8) Federal Interagency Cooperation; 9) Native American/fribal issues; 10)
internal training, organization and program implementation. Each of these
areas has implications for all OSWER programs and recommendations pertaining
to each of them will be addressed in implementation plans.
A. ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Background
The Agency is working to create parameters to define environmental justice
concerns. The Agency is currently using and evaluating several tools to create these
parameters. These tools, such as the Geographic Infonnation System (GIS) and other
infonnation management systems focus on demographics, pollution sources and
geography.
~ Need for a means to identify circumstances that raise environmental
justice issues.
Establishing means to identify sites that raise environmental justice issues is
critical to addressing environmental justice concerns.
Bemmmendatiop: Establish guidelines for identifying communities with
environmental justice issues that ensure a measure of
flexibility while contributing consistency across the
Regions.
Interim guidelines that promote a measure of consistency, but still provide for
Regional and programmatic flexibility, are warranted. The guidelines would be used
by the Regions to identify sites that either raise or would be likely to raise environmental
justice issues. Guidelines could take the fonn of specific questions that EPA officials
would consider on a site-specific basis. Questions could address existing environmental
risksandhealtheffects,theracialandethnicmakeupofanaffectedcommunity,relative
income levels, educational backgrounds, past regulatory practices, and the perspective
provided by local community leaders. The guidelines might also list various scenarios
that would tend to indicate an environmental justice situation, such as the filing of a Tide
VI complaint Under this proposal, areas detennined to fall within the guidelines would
11
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
12
be targeted for additional public participation and outreach efforts, pilot initiatives,
multi-media compliance and enforcement efforts, and, to the extent practicable,
OSWER-directed grants.
First, this recommendation would help facilitate the development of unifonn
practices and procedures while avoiding the use of inflexible definitions that do not take
into account site-specific dynamics. Second, it would give priority to areas that need
it most, and could help erase perceptions of bias associated with past regulatory
practices. Third, it is consistent with discussions taking place within the EPA's
Environmental Justice Policy Wolk Group. Fourth, it would not detract from prior
practice within the Regions, but rather, would seIVe as supporting guidance. Fifth, this
recommendation would not involve allocation of new resources and could ultimately
bring about reduced costs by attempting to address potential problems before they arise.
B. TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
Background
Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act generally requires that any program or
activity receiving Federal financial assistance be implemented in a non-discriminatory
manner.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides that:
No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, ornational origin,
be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
Although Congress enacted Title VI during a period of great concern with public
school desegregation, the statute is not limited to discrimination in education; Title VI
also directs all Federal departments and agencies to effectuate its provisions through
the issuance of rules, regulations or orders of general applicability.
Under EPA' s implementing regulations, recipients and applicants are required
to assure compliance with Title VI in order to receive EPA financial assistance. Title
VI requires that any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance be
implemented in anon-discriminatory manner. OSWER programs administer a variety
of grants and cooperative agreements through which EPA financial assistance is made
available for State and local programs and activities. Applications for EPA financial
assistance must contain compliance infonnation regarding the recipient program or
activity to be funded.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
On February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898
entitled "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations
and Low-Income Populations." The order directs federal agencies to conduct their
programs, policies and activities "that substantially affect human health or the
environment" in a manner that ensures they do not have the effect of subjecting persons
to discrimination on the basis of race, colorornational origin. However, Section 6-608
of the order states that "federal agencies shall implement the order consistent with, and
to the extent permitted by, existing law."
~ OSWER needs to develop a strategy to respond effectively when
OSWER funded State programs or activities are challenged as
violating Title VI.
Several Title VI complaints have been filed predicated on claims that State-
implemented RCRA programs have produced discriminatory effects. The Office of
Civil Rights (OCR), which has primary responsibility for the Agency's implementation
of Title VI, has recently accepted these complaints for investigation.
A Title VI complaint could affect federal funding of authorized State permitting
programs fornew hazardous waste facilities. In the case of anew facility, OSWER may
retain authority over issuance of a portion of the required permit, and, pending a Title
VI investigation, might be called upon to make the final determination concerning
issuance of a permit.
In making permitting decisions, OSWER does not have the authority to
consider allegations in a Title VI complaint that are not related to protection of human
health and the environment. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
does not give OSWER authority to consider purely socio-economic impacts when
making a permitting decision. Section 3005(c) ofRCRA provides that EPA "shall
issue a permit" to a facility in compliance with the requirements of RCRA. Section
3005(c)(3) requires EPA to add to a permit such terms or conditions necessary to
protect human health and the environment. EPA has interpreted this latter provision
to authorize denial of a permit to a facility in extraordinary circumstances where EPA
determines that there are no additional permit terms or conditions that would address
unacceptable risk that would be posed by a facility's operation. Thus, where
complaints or comments alleging discrimination concerning a RCRA facility are
related to adverse effects on human health or the environment, EPA has authority to
consider and respond to those concern generally by adding more restrictive operating
conditions.
The criteria for denying a permit under RCRA do not include claims of bias
based on race or income that are not related to risk to human health or the environment.
In light of this situation, OSWER officials --particularly those implementing RCRA
--need guidance on how to respond when Title VI claims arise. A statutory amendment
to RCRA, however, would be required to allow EPA to base permitting decisions on
13
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
14
environmental justice concerns that are unrelated to protection of human health and the
environment (e.g., allegations of purely socio-economic discriminatory effects).
Rerommepdatiop: OSWER programs should establish a strategy to respond
effectively to environmental justice complaints raising
health-related concerns.
Title VI claims raise issues that stretch beyond the scope of OSWER programs.
Ultimately, the Agency as a whole must develop a strategy for how its offices should
respond to these types of complaints. Thus, OSWER should work closely with other
officials across EPA to help develop a strategy that takes into account OSWER's
unique perspective. Concurrently, however, OSWER must proceed to develop interim
solutions that will provide the Regions with the guidance needed to respond effectively
when confronted with Title VI complaints that affect waste program activities.
Some experience in addressing the derivative effects of a Title VI complaint
already exists in the context of the RCRA permitting program. Recently, Region 6
requested guidance on how to respond to environmental justice-based challenges to the
issuance ofEP A's portion of a RCRA permit. In response, OSWER Headquarters sent
a memorandum stating that the Region should be prepared to address all environmental
justice comments before arriving at any final permitting decisions.
Based on RCRA standards, OSWER programs have a duty to evaluate new
permits to ensure that they would not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the
environment. Thus, where complaints or comments alleging discrimination concerning
a RCRA facility are related to disproportionate effects on human health or the
environment, EPA has authority to consider and respond to those concerns in taking
action on a permit application. Since environmental justice complaints are often based
on the threat of unhealthy environmental exposures, OSWER would be justified in
refusing to issue a new permit pending full consideration of potential health effects.
During the interim period of evaluation, several options exist.
Rerommepdatiop; Encourage mediation and possibly discussion of alternate
siies, and, in serious cases, consider performing risk
assessments, in the absence of an existing risk assessment.
Pending full evaluation of threats to human health, RCRA permit officials
should attempt to work closely with the State to encourage dispute settlements among
stakeholders which would involve mediation and could focus on explaining the actual
levels of risk posed and could include discussion of alternative sites. Bringing all parties
to the table and attempting to resolve dispute through this manner of facilitation is the
most desirable first step. Before issuing a permit, the state and EPA should review
environmental justice concerns and the level of public involvement to ensure consistency
with EPA and State standards and policies.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
8. TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
Where the affected community is already burdened with significant levels of
exposure based on the presence of multiple pollution sources, consideration should be
given to performing or encouraging the State to initiate a risk assessment, in the absence
of an existing risk assessment. In cases where a risk assessment has already been
performed by the State or permittee, OSWER would review the contents to ensure its
accuracy and assess the incremental risks. OSWER could also, in appropriate
circumstances, use its authority under RCRA Section 3013 or 40 CFR 270. lO(k) to
compel the permittee to carry out a study or risk assessment This option may not be
well received by the community due to low community confidence in a risk assessment
performed by the permittee.
Itis important to note that given the fact that facilities must operate within strict
regulatory limits, a risk assessment on a facility operating in compliance of RCRA
regulations would not be expected to routinely demonstrate that the facility is outside
an acceptable risk range. Furthermore, in the event that a risk assessment demonstrated
unacceptable risk to human health or the environment, EPA could impose permit terms
or conditions beyond those in the regulations to address such risk. Only if EPA
determined that no additional permit terms or conditions could be designed that would
protect human health and the environment, could EPA deny the facility a permit.
Remmrnendatiop: Explore the possibility of using early baseline health
evaluations, as appropriate.
One approach OSWER should explore further is whether, as appropriate,
baseline evaluations of community health could serve as a screening tool for determining
where risk assessments may be appropriate. To the extent this proves feasible, such
evaluations should be performed at the earliest possible point in the permitting process,
when the public has an opportunity to participate in the discussion. Under this proposal,
where public health evaluations revealed serious public health concerns in the vicinity
of a proposed facility, OSWER might opt to perform or require a risk assessment that
focused on the incremental health risks associated with the new facility, in the absence
of an existing risk assessment. There are resource concerns associated with this option,
although the use of public health evaluations as a screening tool might help limit costs.
Remmrneodatiop: The Regions, OSWER, OGC and OCR should routinely
communicate pro-actively on Title VI issues.
OSWER and the Regions should stay in close contact with the Office of Civil
Rights (OCR) and the Office of General Council (OGC) since the majority of Title VI
environmental justice related claims received by EPA have been made in association
with OSWER related programs. OSWER, the Regions and OCR should consult
regularly to determine what ideas and resources can be leveraged to resolve complaints
informally and obtain compliance by recipients.
15
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
C. CUMULATIVE RISK
16
Remmmemlatiop; Perform periodic reviews of State-authorized programs to
ensure compliance with Title VI.
As a preventative measure, OSWER could help finance OCR and other EPA
programs periodic Title VI compliance reviews of recipient programs and activities.
EPA' s implementing regulations allow for Agency review of recipient programs and
activities for compliance with Title VI. Such oversight activities could address
potential Title VI concerns before complaints are filed. Resource limitations could
severely restrict the frequency of such review.
Remmmemlatiop; Require States to comply with Title VI as a condition for
referral or authorization under Superfund.
As part of any referral or authorization, OSWER, in accordance with Title VI,
must insist that States avoid discriminatory implementation of the cleanup program.
C. CUMULATIVE RISK
Background
Cumulative risks may be the result of exposures to single or multiple
contaminants from one or more sources. OSWER and other Agency programs have
generally considered site-specific risks without considering current exposure to other
(non-site specific) pollution sources. An Agency effort is now underway to explore
cumulative risk from a given source or facility when background risk levels for that
population in the vicinity of that facility are at or near levels of concerns for health.
Additional discussion of cumulative risk can be found in the Superfund section of this
report in the Program-Specific Chapter.
~ Inadequate science to measure cumulative risk.
Answers to the following · questions will enhance the Agency's ability to
measure cumulative risk:
What are the appropriate risk assessment methods for cumulative risk?
How should cumulative risk be considered in making (site-specific) pennitting,
siting, national priorities listing, remediation, and enforcement decisions?
How should cumulative risk be considered in making regulatory decisions?
How can infonnation such as total pollution loadings, be used for decisions in
the interim before cumulative risk methods are developed?
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
D. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS)
Remmrnepdatiop; Support Agency efforts to develop scientifically valid
standards for measuring cumulative risk.
First, OSWER supports amendments to Superfund that would fund
demonstrationprojectsdesignedinparttofashionappropriatecumulativeriskassessment
techniques. This approach has the attraction of providing OSWER and the Agency
with the time needed to experiment with various models and select a sensible analytical
approach with potential for widespread future application. Second, OSWER has
requested that the newly established Science Policy Council include cumulative risk
analysis as one of its top priorities. Third, OSWER should work in cooperation with
other EPA offices and other Federal agencies to help craft viable methodological tools
to be tested under the auspices of future demonstration projects.
D. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS)
Background
Developing a strategy for the use of GIS to identify communities with
environmental justice concerns is the focus ofamajor Agency-wide effort. InFall 1993,
EPA held a three-day GIS conference in Washington, D.C., at which officials from
across EPA headquarters and the Regions attended. The major objective of the
conference was to establish common protocols, definitions and implementation plans
for use of GIS. OSWER officials have participated actively in the process of
developing GIS capabilities.
With GIS, EPA can access spatially referenced data bases of demographic and
economic information, sources of pollution and pollution burden on the environment.
Using this information, EPA analysts can identify known sources of pollution, spatially
relate these sources to demographic information, and identify geographic areas where
sources of pollution appear to have a disproportionately high and adverse health or
environmentaleffectsonminoritypopulations,low-incomepopulationsandeducationally
disadvantaged populations.
Toe uses of GIS for environmental justice analysis stem from its ability to
organize and present detailed demographic information on all types of sites and
facilities from Superfund to RCRA. Channeling this ability into applications for
environmental justice work within OSWER creates a powerful tool for both
communication and analysis.
Presentationofbasic demographic data ( e.g., ethnicity, race, income level, age,
etc.) describing the population characteristics surrounding sites and facilities of interest
17
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JumcE TASK FoRcE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS
18
is the typical service provided by GIS within Agency Headquarters. These demographic
data fonn a springboard for detailed policy analysis.
~ Need for consistent GIS data.
Until all Regions and programs have access to GIS infonnation, we will not
be able to screen for communities with potential environmental justice concerns. The
issues involved in attaining this capability include resources for equipment, trained
personnel, improved location longitude and latitude coordinates for facilities and sites,
and agreement on acceptable analysis techniques and procedures.
Bemmmeudatiop; Support OARM and ORD in developing GIS capability
throughout the Agency.
OSWER should support EPA' s lead offices, the Office of Administration and
Resources Management (OARM) and the Office of Research and Development
(ORD), in developing GIS capability throughout the Agency. They are developing
national GIS support. This national database will work toward more consistent data
and GIS tenn definitions for Headquarters and Regions.
Bemmmeudatiop; Develop compatible and appropriate Agency-wide
approaches.
Regions and Headquarterprogram offices should useGIS and otherinfonnation
systems such as CERCLIS, RCRIS and RELAI to proactively identify and address
potential environmental justice concerns.
OSWER should work closely with other EPA offices and the Regions to
develop compatible Agency-wide approaches to GIS, which utilizes the appropriate
GIS systems based on the needs of the analysis.
E. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATIONS AND
PARTNERSHIPS
Background
OSWER has functions devoted to external outreach spread throughout each of
the program offices.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS
1. External Outreach and Communication
~ Current outreach may not effectively communicate to all stakeholders.
A variety of external stakeholders have expressed the view that waste programs
in EPA have not always fully communicated their actions and activities to affected
communities.
Remmmepdatiop: Develop a public education and outreach program for
communities likely to have OSWER-related environmental
justice concerns
OSWER with the Regions should consider developing a public education and
outreach program for communities likely to have environmental justice concerns in the
proximity of OSWER-regulated facilities. As a model, OSWER has initiated a pilot
program with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP) to assist in communication and facilitation of issue resolution with minority
populations and low-income populations.
Remmmeudatiop: Ensure community outreach by locating most accessible
forms oflocal media.
To ensure effective community outreach, OSWER community relations
officials should evaluate local media to identify the publications, radio stations, and
television outlets that enjoy the broadest exposure. For example, Region 4 has found
the strategy ofidentifying popular media outlets to be critical to its successful response
activities in Tift County, GA.
Bemmmeodatiop: Develop program-specific and community/minority specific
publications strategies.
OSWER should examine its publication process to determine how to build in
consideration of different types of stakeholders, such as sensitivity to the type of
language and photographs used, vocabulary and level of complexity, the ability to
easily translate the document, means of distributing the document, and discussion in the
document that directly address environmental justice issues where applicable.
In addition, OSWER programs, for example, should develop outreach
materials that identify and communicate policy for responding to environmental justice
issues associated with their activities, providing a consistent Agency message. These
materials could also highlight success stories and profile ongoing environmental justice
activities.
19
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS
20
Rerommeudatiop; Explore ways of expanding translation services.
Currently, the Agency depends substantiallyoncontractorsupponfortranslation
services, panicularly when dealing with Asian communities. EPA should explore
hiring translators to work on Regional community relations staff versus continuing to
use contractor suppon.
Regional offices should be encouraged to rely on local volunteers to help
communicate with the community, review documents for accuracy and target appropriate
media. In one instance, a local resident warned Region 9's community relations
officials not to issue Spanish language fact sheets since illiteracy was widespread in his
community. As a result, infonnation was broadcast over Spanish radio and television
and effective communication was achieved.
OSWER and the Regions may consider reevaluating existing publications for
translation needs, developing an Emergency Translation Service Capability and
including translation services in response action contracts.
Rerommeodatiop; Conduct Regional environmental justice public forums.
Each Region should conduct an environmental justice public forum open to all
interested stakeholders. The Regional forum meetings will be scheduled biannually,
and will address implementation of OSWER 's environmental justice strategy, as well
as site-specific concerns arising within each Region.
Rerommemlatiop; Coordinate with recently established Subcommittee on
Waste of the first National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council on environmental justice to focus on
implementation of the OSWER Task Force's
recommendations.
The Agency has announced the fonnation of the first National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council. OSWER has worked with OARM to create a subcommittee
on waste. OSWER will work with the Agency-wide council as well as the subcommittee
on waste. OSWER should direct the subcommittee to address the following objectives:
1) advise OSWER in the implementation of environmental justice Task Force
recommendations; 2) identify opponunities to demonstrate recommended actions; 3)
advise OSWER on issues that arise at specific sites; and 4) evaluate the success of
OSWER's activities. This recommendation will funher strengthen our external
outreach and communications activities on environmental justice.
Rerommeodatiop; Explore use of Regional environmental education grants to
promoteenvironmentaljustice education.
EPA' s Office of Environmental Education Grants funds grants for $5,000 or
less by Regions for environmental education. Local education agencies, State
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS
education agencies, colleges or universities or not-for-profit organizations and other
groups are eligible recipients. The law requires that a specified percentage of appropriated
funds be awarded for these grants. OSWER should explore using these Regional grants
to get education money to organized community groups on environmental justice issues.
In addition, the Office of Environmental Justice also funds small grants to local entities
for these purposes.
Recommemtation; Future contracts to staff EPA hotlines should include a
requirement of access to translation services for non-
English speaking persons.
OSWER has a toll-free hotline to disseminate up-to-date infonnation to the
public on Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Superfund, Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know (EPCRA), and Underground Storage Tanks
(usn. The hotline' s central functions are to field questions and provide infonnation
on federal EPA regulations. The present contractor has always employed a Spanish-
speaking person, although this is not required by the contract. For future contracts to
staff the hotline, OSWER should require that the contractor provide access to multi-
lingual translation services.
Recommendation; OSWER should more effectively communicate the limits of
its authority.
In discussions conducted with various Regions as part of the OSWER
Environmental Justice Task Force activities, the following message arose repeatedly,
and should fonn an integral part of all outreach activities: OSWER needs to more
effectively communicate the limits of its authority and resources; that is, what it can and
cannot do. This issue bears particular relevance to the Superfund program since it must
undertake more aggressive community outreach and is often the only point of contact
communities have with EPA officials. This recommendation notwithstanding, where
reasonable requests are made that merely require the attention of other parts of EPA or
other Federal or State agencies, OSWER officials have a responsibility to direct
citizens to the appropriate parties (see section on Federal Interagency Cooperation).
2. Partnerships
Background
Given the key role of business, industry, labor and other stakeholders in waste
programs, OSWER has begun to explore how it can work more effectively in
partnership with these entities. OSWER believes that such partnerships have relevance
to addressing environmental justice concerns.
21
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS
22
lssw:,; Need to increase business and industry role in addressing
environmental justice issues.
As previously discussed, EPA and States are often limited in authority and
resources in their ability to respond to environmental justice concerns. Industry,
however, may have more flexibility within the community to develop cooperative
programs to resolve environmental justice issues.
Remmmepdation; Develop guidance for making business and industry a key
player in addressing environmental justice issues.
If OSWER were to bring business and industry explicitly into the dialogue on
environmental justice issues, OSWERmay be able to ensure that community, business
and industry views are mutually shared. Creative solutions to environmental justice
issues may result from this dialogue. The OSWER Task Force recommended that a
guidance be developed to address joint partnerships with industry.
Specifically, the OSWER Task Force suggested the followingjoint activities:
Initiate focus groups with all stakeholders, and promote communication
between EPA, business and industry on environmental justice issues. Conduct a
conference that brings community representatives and other stakeholders together with
industry to discuss what each side can do to address environmental justice concerns.
Select specific facilities where industry and business are willing to meet
directly with community leaders. Representatives should discuss and listen to
community concerns and recommendations. Industry and business should also be
willing to discuss risk, siting and other environmental justice concerns. OSWER soould
analyze the results of these activities and incorporate the lessons learned into guidance
development
Examine cases where communities have been able to encourage industry to
modify their approach to address environmental justice issues.
Based on what is learned through these activities, OSWER should develop
guidance for addressing environmental justice issues where industry and business are
major players.
lssw:,; Need to consider role of labor groups
Labor groups offer valuable infonnation on matters of worker health and
safety, worker training, and identification of combined residential/industrial exposure
scenarios. Labor groups have indicated to the OSWER Task Force their desire for
OSWER to factor their input into this report's recommendations.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JumcE TASK FoRcE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS
Bemrnmendatiop; Enter into partnerships to resolve issues that do not fall
exclusively under OSWERjurisdiction.
Like the above discussion, 0SWER should explore partnerships with labor
and other stakeholders to help resolve issues that extend beyond 0SWER' s jurisdiction
and resources.
~ Need to expand opportunities for community participation.
Many communities near hazardous waste sites, including low-income, minority
and tribal populations, may not have had an opportunity to fully participate in the
cleanup process. These communities believe that remediation programs do not address
local concerns adequately when addressing riskordetenniningthe method and level of
cleanup. Further, local community members may not have had the educational and
training opportunities to be able to fully participate in the economic benefits of cleanup.
BemllllQCQdatiop; Expand environmental workforce curriculum and develop
pilots with community colleges, labor organizations,
universities and other worker training groups.
One of the most effective means of assuring local involvement in the cleanup
decision-making process is to train residents for potential environmental employment
opportunities. Community colleges provide an existing avenue for achieving that goal.
The Environmental Workforce Initiative that EPA is piloting at Tri-C in Oeveland,
OH, to develop an environmental cleanup curriculum will be expanded through the
Hazardous Materials Training and Research Institute HMTRI to other community
colleges in environmental justice communities around the nation. These will be linked,
whenever possible, to brownfields pilots, offering in some communities a holistic
approach to economic redevelopment.
In addition, unions have been leaders in hazardous materials training for
worlcers and community members. 0SWER needs to evaluate these programs as
models for expanding our current training efforts.
3. Internal Outreach and Communications
Background
0SWER wants to ensure effective internal outreach and communication with
regard to environmental justice. This involves policy development and regulation
development
23
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
F. ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT
24
~ Need to ensure attention is focused on environmental justice in policy,
regulatory and guidance development.
The Agency, as amatterof policy, requires the consideration of environmental
justice in policy and regulatory development OSWERhasnotconsistently implemented
this policy.
Remmmepdation; OSWER to issue a directive requiring consideration of
environmental justice in all policies, guidances and
regulations
The Assistant Administrator of OSWER will sign a directives instructing
program offices within OSWER and the Regional waste programs to consider
environmental justice issues in developing policies, guidances, and regulations.
F. ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT
Background
Economic development opportunities may arise and should be explored in
conjunction with many activities that also promote environmental justice. This section
primarily addresses opportunities for economic redevelopment (i.e., returning
contaminated sites to economically productive use). Such efforts are increasingly
blocked by uncertainty about future tort, third party and Superfund ( or RCRA, UST,
or other) liability, as well as uncertainty about costs, cleanup standards and time
involved in cleanup. This uncertainty causes many potential investors to avoid
developing the sites. As a result, the affected communities suffer such adverse
economic effects as declining property values and increased rates of unemployment.
This phenomenon has been termed the "Brownfields dilemma."
~ Patterns of Environmental "Redlining" and ''Landbanking"
The practice of banks refusing to provide loans for sites they perceive as being
contaminated is known as "redlining" and may be a major driving force behind the
brownfields dilemma. Lenders allegedly "redline" a property because, in the absence
of reassurances to the contrary, they may anticipate enforcement action on any
previously industrial site. In addition, "landbanking" occurs when property owners,
from small businesses to large corporations, decline to either expand operations on
existing property or try to sell property they own because site contamination and
remediation costs may exceed the value of the property.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
F. ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT
Remmmendatiop: Explore the use of enforcement tools (in coordination with
the Office of Enforcement) to stimulate browntields
development.
One option for combating this phenomenon that EPA is already considering
under its Superfund Administrative Improvements initiatives, is to expand its use of
agreements that would give prospective purchasers a covenant not to sue. To
accomplish this, EPA may want to consider modifications to "Guidance on Settlements
with Prospective Purchasers of Contaminated Property" (OSWER Dir. 9835.9).
Pursuant to this Guidance, EPA has limited its use of prospective purchaser covenants
not to sue to sites at which "enforcement action is anticipated" A limitation ofliability
would lend some certainty regarding the investment/remediation costs a new investor
is likely to face at a contaminated site.
OSWER may also want to consider responding to requests for covenants at
sites where EPA does not anticipate enforcement action with a letter suggesting that the
Agency does not currently anticipate enforcement action at this site. While such a letter
would fall far short of a covenant not to sue, it may provide lenders with some assurance
that the given property is not likely to be subject to an enforcement action by the United
States.
ItshouldbenotedthattheprospectivepurchaserlanguageintheAdministration's
proposal to reauthorize Superfund would, if passed, alleviate much of the current
burden on parties that qualify as a "bona fide prospective purchaser" by providing a
mechanism by which they could be exempted from Superfund liability.
mw:.:, Uncertainty with environmental assessments.
Environmental assessments are conducted routinely on commercial property
prior to sale in order to identify any environmental contamination on the property.
Environmental assessments have become a routine part of commercial real estate
transactions as a resultofSuperfund liability. Section 101(35) of CERCLA states that
in order for an owner of real property to qualify for the "innocentlandowner" defense,
the party must have undertaken at the time of acquisition "all appropriate inquiry into
the previous ownership and uses of the property ... " The statute does not, however, offer
a precise definition of what would constitute "all appropriate inquiry."
Remmmepdatiop: OSWER should support private efforts to conduct and
define "all appropriate inquiry."
Several private professional groups are currently developing standards for"all
appropriate inquiry." At some future date OSWER may want to consider evaluating
and commenting on the adequacy of those standards. OSWER should also inform
private parties trying to obtain information about the previous ownership and uses of
a property of publicly-available information sources, such as permitting data and
CERCLIS (and GIS information as it becomes available).
25
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
G. CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND LABOR
26
Recommendation; Continue to implement "brownfields" pilot projects.
'The Cleveland "Brownfields" pilot to return contaminated inner-city properties
to productive use is another example of using partnerships to address environmental
justice needs. This project is founded on a strong partnership between EPA, the State
of Ohio, the Cuyahoga County Planning Commission, and the communities surrounding
the pilot sites. By recognizing the common interest these parties have in revitalizing
inner-city Cleveland, this project will help overcome the obstacles that have kept these
blighted areas from thriving. The pilot funds the assessment of hazardous substances
and potential sites within the brownfields area.
Building upon the example of the Cleveland pilot, the OSWER Task Force
recommends expanding the brownfields pilots to include seven additional areas.
G. CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND LABOR
Background
Communities throughout the nation, through public forums and other means,
have clearly expressed a desire for EPA to do what is necessary to increase employment
opportunities for local labor and to generally reduce the economic and social "stigma"
associated with Superfund sites and other waste facilities. It is the policy of the Federal
government that a fair proportion of government contracts and subcontracts be placed
with small and disadvantaged businesses.
To ensure that small and disadvantaged businesses obtain a fair proportion of
contract awards, agencies together with the Small Business Administration (SBA) set
percentage goals for small and disadvantaged business awards. It is important to note
that these are goals and not rigid quotas, and the extent to which the goals have been
met is reported to Congress each year. Public Law 101-507, EPA 's Appropriations Act
of 1990, requires that 8% of federal funds for contracting be made available to small
and disadvantaged businesses. In 1992, EPA actually awarded 15.7% of its total
contracting dollars to small and disadvantaged business concerns.
Local labor typically tends to consist of small businesses, and there are various
mechanisms described in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) to promote
contract awards to small and disadvantaged businesses. These include "set asides,"
which enable agencies to reserve contracts for award only to a designated group, and
can be total or partial. Also included are the Section "8(a)" program and policies
favoring "labor surplus areas," both of which are extensively discussed in the FAR.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
G. CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND LABOR
While many Federal government acquisitions are too large for small businesses
to participate as prime contracts, they may be able to participate as subcontractors.
Thus, several policies have been developed to encourage the maximum possible
participation by small business subcontractors.
Agencies may include an incentive clause in negotiated contracts under which
a contractor may increase its profit by a designated percentage of the extent to which
the actual awards to small businesses exceed the percentage negotiated and included in
the clause. FAR 52.219-10.
A Sl,lbcontracting plan, typically included by EPA in its contracts for site
cleanup, must include goals for the use of small and disadvantaged business and small
disadvantaged business concerns, along withotherinfonnation and assurances relating
to the contractor's planned efforts to utilize small business to the maximum extent
possible.
Small and Disadvantaged Businesses
Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act authorizes SBA to enter into contracts
with other Federal agencies and to perfonn those contracts by subcontracting to
"socially and economically disadvantaged small business concerns."
"Socially and economically disadvantaged small business concerns" means
anysmallbusiness:(l)atleast51percentownedbyoneormoresociallydisadvantaged
(e.g., presumptively including African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native
Americans, Asian Pacific Americans, and Subcontinent Asian Americans) and
economically disadvantaged individuals; and (2) whose management and daily business
operations are controlled by one or more of such individuals.
Under the 8(a) program, SBA assists disadvantaged small businesses in
contracting opportunities with the Federal government. SBA helps procuring agencies
identify potential 8(a) contracts and match the needs of 8(a) finns with potential
contract opportunities. 8(a) contracts under $3 million may be awarded on a non-
competitive basis, whereas 8(a) contracts exceeding $3 million (exceptformanufacturing
whichhasathresholdof$5million)mustbeprocuredcompetitively. The8(a)program
offers an effective means to stimulate growth of small and disadvantaged businesses
over a period of time so that these finns may be self-sustaining, competitive entities in
the market place.
Policies Favoring "Labor Surplus Area" Concerns
"Labor swplus area" means a geographical area identified by the Department
of Labor as an area of concentrated unemployment or underemployment or an area of
labor surplus. The contracting officermay set aside the entire amount of a procurement
for laborswplus area (LSA) concerns when there is a reasonable expectation that offers
27
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
G. CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND LABOR
28
will be obtained from a sufficient number of responsible LSA concerns so that awards
will be made at a reasonable price. LSA requirements can be met through contractors
or subcontractors.
lmK:, Need to find ways to increase use of local labor.
Toe issue, simply put, is how can EPA do more to achieve greater small
business and local labor content from a contracting perspective, while remaining in
compliance with the FAR and other relevant requirements. Despite the mechanisms
currently in place there is a widespread belief among both the public and many EPA
personnel that more must be done to encourage the use of local labor and to increase
education efforts in the communities.
Regmuneudatiop; Evaluate po~ible changes to the award pr~ which
would promote increased use of local and small and
disadvantaged businesses
OSWER, working with the Office of Acquisition Management, should explore
possible changes to the bidding process that would facilitate greater participation by
small and disadvantaged businesses and benefit local communities. For example, 1)
establish during contract perfonnance local "fair share" disadvantaged business goals
under the small disadvantaged goals of the subcontract plan agreed to at time of contract
award; 2) decrease bonding requirements for local finns; and 3) have prime contractors
provide 30-day advance notice to local companies bypublishingsubcontractopportunities
in local newspapers.
These initiatives would promote increased use of local minority and
disadvantaged businesses, yet may require deviations from the FAR or amendments to
the EPA Acquisition Regulations.
Regnnmepdatiop: Use existing FAR provisions to benefit small and
disadvantaged businesses.
For all new contracts, the Regions should consider adding language into their
Request for Proposals (RFPs) that give more points to those finns that would
subcontract to small disadvantaged businesses and have the TEP criteria reflect this.
OSWER could also expand reliance on existing FAR provisions that establish
monetary incentives for subcontracting with small and disadvantaged businesses. For
example, OSWER could draft incentive clauses allowing contractors to increase award
fees to the extent smaIVdisadvantaged business utilization exceeds negotiated percentage
goals. OSWER should encourage greater use of FAR 52.219-10, the incentive clause
in negotiated contracts which provides clear monetary incentives for contractors who
exceed their contract subcontracting goals to small and small disadvantaged business
concerns.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
G. CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND LABOR
Beoommendation; Require contractors to keep track of money spent in the
community.
In addition, OSWER could require Waste programs' contractors to report
amounts of small and disadvantaged business awards in local communities, which the
Agency could then incorporate into progress reports issued to the public. OSWER
could also take steps to research local community capabilities and increase community
interaction outside of the contracting process. Once again, this could help promote use
of local businesses.
However, it might lead to higher costs as contractors seek to pass on the
reporting expense. In addition, EPA would need to obtain 0MB clearance, under the
Paperwork Reduction Act to implement a new reporting requirement.
Beoommeodatiop: Establish a dialogue with contractor groups.
OSWER will establish a dialogue with contractor groups regarding
environmental justice issues and solicit their support in use of local labor to augment
the economic base of the communities (e.g., Hazardous Waste Action Coalition).
OSWER will also begin a dialogue with the Office of Enforcement to detennine the
feasibility of considering environmental justice and employment of local labor in
settlement discussions with the potentially responsible parties.
Beoommendatiop: Establish local consultation committees.
OSWER will explore: 1) establishing local consultation committees that
include representatives from minority businesses and the Chamber of Commerce that
would help EPA identify local employment opportunities and publicize potential
contracting opportunities; 2) using the committee to define scope and pattern of work
in a manner that facilitates opportunities for small and disadvantaged businesses; 3)
working with the Office of Enforcement on the possibility of including provisions in
consent decrees at Superfund sites that require either EPA or responsible parties to
complete, at the 50% remedial design point, an evaluation of availability and capabilities
of the local labor pool.
Berommeodatiop: Fully implement the Mentor-Protege Program.
OSWER will work with EPA' s Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization (OSDBU) to fully implement the Mentor-Protege Program, which is
currently being piloted in Superfund Response Action Contracts. This program, which
is administered through the OSDBU, is designed to stimulate the participation of small
disadvantaged businesses in EPA contracts by fostering long tenn relationships
between large contractors and small and disadvantaged businesses.
The Mentor-Protege program provides incentives to large contractors to share
their managerial and technical expertise with smallerfinns throughout perfonnance of
29
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
H. FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COOPERATION
30
a contract, to help such finns develop the necessary expertise to compete successfully
for future EPA prime and subcontract opportunities.
OSWER's Mentor-Protege program currently focusses on perfonnance-fee
type contracts where EPA can evaluate and recognize a contractor's perfonnance
assisting a protege finn. In addition, contractors may receive additional credit in
evaluation for contract award for participating in this program. OSWER expects
participation in this program to foster a broad range of experience that can be applied
across other Agency programs.
Rerommepdatiop; Consider regulatory and statutory changes.
OSWER should in the long tenn: (1) evaluate the results of the above efforts
in increasing use of local labor and promoting environmental justice goals; and (2)
explore implementing stronger actions as appropriate (e.g., seek statutory authority,
and deviations from FAR requirements, executive order, etc.) to fully meet environmental
justice objectives.
Rerommepdatiop; Include language that gives priority to Environmental
Justice concerns in grants and cooperative agreements.
OSWER will work with the Grants Administration Division to explore
incorporating special conditions for contracting goals (not set asides), if the impacted
community is directly benefited by meeting these goals, e.g., site-specific cooperative
agreements. Minority Business Enterprise/Women Business Enterprise goals are
currently included in grants under 40 CFR 31.36(e).
H. FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COOPERATION
Background
There are a many other Federal agencies with whom EPA must work to
accomplish our responsibility of protecting human health and the environment. Some
of these agencies are: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR),
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences (NIEHS), Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment(HUD), Department
of Agriculture (USDA), Department of the Interior (DOI), and the many other Federal
agencies that own or operate facilities regulated by OSWER. With the issuance of the
Environmental Justice Executive Order, the Federal government will increase the
emphasis on interagency cooperation.
Certain examples of how OSWER is working together with other agencies to
ensure environmental justice already exist At the RSR Superfund site in West Dallas,
I
i r.
l
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
H. FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COOPERATION
TX, the Superfund program has joined forces with HUD to work with the Dallas
Housing Authority to abate indoor and outdoor lead contamination. EPA Administrator
Carol Browner and HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros have both visited the site to bring
attention to this effort. This partnership is an example of the kind of work that can and
must be done to alleviate environmental risks in low income and minority communities.
There are atleast two majornational health agencies that have a designated role
in the Superfund program and that also have the intent, interest, and ability to assist in
addressing many of the outstanding environmental justice health science issues. The
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) was created in 1986 to
implement the health related sections of CERCLA (as amended). The health mandate
is the basis for the Agency's mission "to prevent or mitigate adverse human health
effects and diminished quality oflife resulting from exposure to hazardous substances
in the environment" The National Institute of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS),
one of the National Instirutes of Health, is a world center for research into human health
effects from chemical pollutants.
A TSDR has in place a Minority Health Program which addresses the possible
impacts on minority populations from potential exposure to hazardous substances. The
goals of this program are: (1) to develop a comprehensive demographic profile of
communities living near hazardous waste sites and other sources of hazardous
substances; (2) to determine the relationship between identified adverse human health
outcome and hazardous substances in minority communities; (3) to develop and execute
environmental risk communication and education programs and to mitigate and prevent
adverse health effects from chemical toxicants in minority communities; and (4) to
develop, promote, and support public health partnerships with Federal/State/fribaV
local government, citizens, and health professionals and enable them to work together
to prevent, or mitigate adverse health effects and diminished quality of life resulting
from exposure to hazardous substances in the environment.
The mission ofNIEHS is to reduce the burdenofhuman illness and dysfunction
from environmental exposures by understanding each of three elements -environmental
exposures, individual susceptibility and time -and how they interrelate. NIEHS
achieves its mission throughmulti-disciplinary biomedical research programs, prevention
and intervention efforts, and communication strategies that encompass training,
education, technology transfer, and community outreach.
Emphasis is placed on: research into the basic mechanisms of environmental
disorders; research into the environmental causes of diseases of public health import;
clinical studies on clinical research; and enhanced science base for public policy
decisions and health programs.
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (1986) authorized
NIEHS to conduct grant programs for basic research and worker health and safety
training for hazardous substance handling and emergency response. The basic research
component is a unique program of basic research and training grants directed towards
31
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
H. FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COOPERATION
32
understanding, assessing, and attenuating the adverse effects onhwnan health resulting
form exposure to hazardous substances. Grants made under this program are for
coordinated, multicomponent, interdisciplinary programs.
~ A void possible duplication of effort between EPA and health agencies.
There are anwnberof common goals relating to environmental justice that are
being pursued by both the health agencies and EPA: obtaining more demographic
information about the residents living near hazardous substance sites, ensuring that
health professionals are adequately educated about effects of hazardous substances,
filling data gaps about toxic substances, using more outreach to locate workers in
communities with environmental justice concerns who need training, removing
impediments to training workers in communities with environmental justice concerns,
and building trust among the communities. However, without close coordination and
cooperation, the effort to achieve these goals will be duplicated, time and money wasted
and the attainment of trust within the communities thwarted.
Becommeudatiop; Improve coordination between the agencies.
Coordination is an important way to avoid duplication of effort. The
Interagency Working Group mandated in the Executive Order will ensure coordination
on Environmental Justice issues among Federal agencies. OSWER will participate in
this effort. The OSWER Task Force recommends that someone be appointed as an
Environmental Justice liaison for OSWER, designated to coordinate with, at a
minimwn, ATS DR and NIEHS. Duties of the liaison should include communicating
regularly with the liaisons from the other two agencies, distributing information to
people within their own agency regarding activities in the other agencies, and acting as
a point person for information.
OSWER may also help facilitate increased coordination of exchange of
exposure data that EPA, ATSDR and NIEHS have for the purpose of the Geographic
Information System (GIS).
Bemmmeudatiop; Explore other means of cooperation with other Federal
agencies
An effective future strategy for environmental justice will require an increase
in cross-programmatic and interagency cooperation. The Environmental Justice
Executive Order recognizes this by calling for interagency model projects that show
cooperation among agencies. Thus, OSWER should continually seeks ways to leverage
the resources and authorities of other Federal, State and local agencies.
EPA 's experience at Superfund sites in particular highlights the need for such
partnerships. Communities frequently request services that the Superfund program
does not have authority to provide. One of the most frequently requested items is
medical treatment to address health problems associated with exposure to contamination.
{
(
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
H. FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COOPERATION
Citizens in affected communities may also ask for responses from Superfund officials
that would most appropriately be directed to other EPA program offices such as the air
and water programs.
The Administration's Superfund reauthorization proposal addresses this in
part by calling for the funding of demonstration projects addressing multiple sources
of risk linked to HUD and USDA empowerment zones. Under this proposal, EPA
would leverage the resources of other agencies participating in the HUD and USDA
empowerment zone initiatives in an effort to provide more far-reaching, multimedia
solutions to communities' environmental problems.
OSWERshouldexploreoptions with HUD and USDA empowerment zones in
as many ways as possible. The money available through this HUD and USDA initiative
might be used to help fund multimedia cleanups, innovative new approaches to risk
analysis, lead abatement initiatives, pollution prevention efforts, public education and
training, economic redevelopment efforts, and enhanced community involvement.
OSWER should also work with HUD to explore the potential of collaborating
on HUD' s new Step-Up initiative. This initiative combines the resources of organized
labor with the needs of the community to train new workers from the contaminated and
impoverished communities to improve housing, lead base paint abatement and other
hazard abatement. HUD has already formed collaborations with DOL, DOJ and HHS
and they welcome EPA' s participation.
OSWER should also aggressively explore the range of authorities available
throughout the Federal government to examine whether, under such authorities,
communities impacted by exposure to contamination could receive health benefits
currently beyond EPA' s authority to provide. Joint projects with ATSDR can serve as
one avenue of enhancing delivery of health services. The Administration's proposal to
free up Superfund money for health benefits on a demonstration basis also represents
a step in the right direction. OSWER also needs to aggressively explore other less
traditional partnerships as well, however, with emphasis on HHS authorities. Thus,
OSWER should determine what benefits HHS can provide communities suffering from
environmental health effects.
For example, OSWER should also explore other options that may be available
through the Public Health Service. The National Health Services Corporation and the
Maternal Child Health Programs may have resources available to respond to communities
plagued by medical problems associated with toxic exposure.
~ Community's solutions are beyond EPA 's authority.
In many of the communities impacted by OSWER-regulated facilities, there
are concerns that often go beyond the scope of the environmental statutes we are
administering, such as health and housing issues. In order to address these concerns,
other Federal agencies need to be involved.
33
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
H. FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COOPERATION
34
Remmmendatiop; Regions establish environmental justice pilot projects
working with another Federal department or agency and
explore development of interagency Regional Councils.
The OSWER Task Force recommends that each Region explore ways in which
we can work cooperatively with one or more other Federal agencies and include State,
Tribal and local governments, as appropriate, to address the environmental, but also
other citizen concerns (e.g., housing, health care, employment) in a specific community.
This increasedfocuson partnerships willensuremorecompletesolutions to communities'
environmental, human health, and related needs.
In addition, OSWER should encourage Regions to develop Regional Councils
comprised of such Federal agencies as HUD, USDA, HHS, Department of Labor
(DOL), Department of Commerce, Department of Interior (001), Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA), DOD, ATSDR, the Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers
to respond to community needs at Superfund sites. Region 6 has already initiated such
an effort as a result of the problems routinely faced by the region's Superfund program.
Similar efforts could be undertaken in other regions.
Remmmendation; Continue to participate in ATSDR's minority health
program (e.g., Mississippi Delta Region Project).
ATSDR's Mississippi Delta Region Project's goal is to prevent or mitigate
adverse health effects on minority and disadvantaged populations impacted by
environmental hazards, including toxic waste and pollution. This goal will be pursued
jointly with other Federal agencies (EPA, NIEHS, Centers for Disease Control (CDC)),
State and local health departments, local community groups, and institutions of higher
education, particularly those that serve large minority populations. In addition to
serving as a model of cooperation among Federal, State and local health agencies, the
Delta Project will: identify environmental hazards, including toxic wastes that may
impact on the health of people in the Delta; evaluate (in association with State and local
health agencies and academic institutions in the Delta region) the public health impacts
of identified environmental hazards; increase the awareness of health care providers
who practice in the Delta Region about the adverse environmental health impact of
identified hazards; enhance capacity building in State and local health departments to
address environmental public health problems; and through collaborative effort with
the EPA, increase the awareness of environmental hazards among students at the
Headstart Centers, preschool and primary through college level institutions in the Delta
Region. Currently, the needs assessment phase of the project is being conducted in
collaboration with the Minority Academic Institutions (MAI). The Hispanic and
Native American Initiatives are preliminary starts to this effort.
The three agencies should work together to accomplish the goals of the
Mississippi Delta Project.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
I. NATIVE AMERICAN/TRIBAL ISSUES
I. NATIVE AMERICAN/TRIBAL ISSUES
Background
The unique legal status of Tribal governments requires a EPA-wide and
OSWER-wide coordination There is a current EPA-wide initiative underway to
strengthen tribal environmental programs. The Administrator's Senior Leadership
Team for Tribal Operations will be developing additional solutions to issues identified
in this section of the report. Additional program-specific issues and recommendations
can be found in the following chapter of this report.
b5w:,:. Development of Tribal capacity and/or full implementation of Federal
programs.
On Indian Lands, there are two principal avenues for environmental protection:
1 )developmentofTribal capacity and the authorizationofTribes to operate environmental
programs in lieu of the Federal government and/or 2) the implementation of Federal
programs in partnership with a Tribe. In addition, the Agency supports the voluntary
cooperation between State, Tribal and local governments to resolve environmental
issues of mutual concern. However, Tribal representatives believe that neither of the
two principal avenues have been sufficiently implemented in Indian Lands. Tribal
representatives believe that this can only be achieved through the further development
of Tribal environmental programs or the full implementation of Federal programs.
Recommeudatiop; OSWER will continue to support the efforts of the EPA
Senior Leadership Team for Tribal Operations.
OSWER should continue to support the effort currently underway by the
Administrator's Senior Leadership Team for Tribal Operations and OSWER should
develop action plans to respond to the recommendations developed bytheAdministrator's
team.
Recommendation; Examine ways to provide additional resources for and
technical assistance to Tribal governments to address
Tribal environmental protection.
OSWER should examine ways to provide funding to Tribal governments that
will enhance their capacity to implement OSWER programs. In addition, OSWER will
examine options available to fund Federal implementation of OSWER programs when
a Tribe does not implement such programs. OSWER should also explore other
alternatives for providing resources such as providing training and information on
pollution prevention, management options, innovative technologies and Regional
environmental protection networks.
35
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
I. NATIVE AMERICAN/TRIBAL ISSUES
36
Regnnmendatiop; Improve communication and initiate pilots with other
Federal agencies on Indian Lands.
Coordination and strategic resource allocation should improve the Tribal
governments' ability to implement regulatory programs. OSWER program offices
should initiate pilots with other Federal agencies, including the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, the Indian Health Service, USDA and HUD to develop the capacity of the
Tribes to address overlapping programs and environmental problems. Assistance
provided by the Federal agencies with responsibility for Tribal lands will be examined
in relation to each agency's mandate and resource base.
In addition, OSWER will explore options to improve communication and help
facilitate a clarification of authority between agencies. This may be accomplished
through a Memorandum of Agreement.
~ Need to improve EPA/Tribal communications
Effective communication between EPA and the Tribes remains difficult for a
variety of reasons. EPA should be clear about who is responsible for tribal issues within
the Agency. Tribal governments should likewise designate a single point of contact or,
in the case of smaller Tribes, an inter-tribal point of contact.
Remmmendation; Develop meaningful Tribal participation in EPA activities
on a "government-to-government basis".
OSWER should review Tribal interaction in its programs for major activities
that affect Tribal populations. In confonnance with current Agency policy, the
interaction should be on a "government-to-government" basis thereby treating tribes as
governmental entities. OSWER will also coordinate with Tribal Consortia, when
appropriate. Tribal Consortia are not governments, but official Tribal governments
have the authority to authorize these consortia to act on their behalf.
~ Need to account for special dietary habits of Native Americans in
evaluating risk
Exposure consumption patterns are different for tribes, as learned through
several studies, including the forthcoming one perfonned by the Columbia Intenribal
Fish Commission The draft report being undertaken under an EPA grant suggests some
populations face elevated health risks due to a larger ingestion of fish. In addition,
ATSDR in cooperation with EPA, tribes and State agencies is studying consumption
patterns of tribes, as well as male and female anglers and their children, in the Great
Lakes region. Fish tissue analyses are being conducted, blood samples are being taken
from Native Americans with subsistence lifestyles and fish consumption patterns are
being studied.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
I. NATIVE AMERICAN/TRIBAL ISSUES
Becommepdatiop; Support a national fish consumption analysis.
OSWERshould support ongoing studies being conducted throughout programs
in the Agency on fish consumption and factor these into their decision-making with
regard to tribal exposure patterns.
Becommepdatiop; OSWER Sponsorship of Second National Tribal
Conference on Environmental Management
On May 23 -26, 1994, OSWER will help sponsor the Second National Tribal
Conference on Environmental Management. The event is being hosted and co-
sponsored by the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, in Cherokee, NC. The first such
OSWER conference was held two years ago and about400people attended representing
90Tribes. The conference planners are expecting many more people to attend this year.
Travel assistance is being provided to Tribal representatives on an as-needed basis. The
planned agenda, with 30 sessions over three days, has been developed based on
suggestions from the Tribes.
~ Alaska Native Tribes
In Alaska there are 236 federally recognized Alaska Native Tribes that are
afforded the same general status as the Tribes in the lower 48 states. However, these
Alaska Tribes do have unique legal and environmental concerns that are not shared by
the other 309 Tribes in the lower 48 States.
Bemrnrnepdatiop; Explore options in addressing unique concerns of Alaska
Native entities.
OSWER will worlc to cultivate an increased sensitivity to the problems faced
by Alaska Native Tribes. Achieving environmental justice in Indian Lands in Alaska
will require up-front education and training of OSWER staff and management in order
to fully understand the Tribes' differentenvironmental concerns within this unique legal
status to the federal government.
37
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
J. INTERNAL TRAINING, ORGANIZATION AND PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
38
J. INTERNAL TRAINING, ORGANIZATION AND
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
1. Employee Training
Background
OSWER recognizes that it workforce is not fully familiar with environmental
justice issues.
~ OSWER needs to educate its employees and the public on
environmental justice i~ues.
OSWER and the Regions should find ways to educate their many employees
regarding environmental justice issues. Environmental justice training may be helpful
to employees at all levels based on the role and responsibilities they assume within the
organization, and the nature of their contacts with the public.
Recommendation: Educate OSWER and Regional employees on
environmental justice i~ues.
OSWER should develop a seminar or training curriculum for Headquarters
and Regional waste programs employees to sensitize them to environmental justice
issues. In addition, OSWER should emphasize how environmental justice concerns
may arise in the employees' daily work and how to respond to those issues.
2. OSWER Organizational Changes
Background
The OSWER Task Force also examined the current organizational strucmre
to determine whether improvements could be made to better addre~ environmental
justice issues.
~ OSWER's activities outreach, environmental justice, economic
redevelopment, and State/local and Tribal government relations are
spread throughout OSWER organizations.
OSWER' s current organizational structure has communications and outreach
functions, and environmental justice functions spread throughout the individual
program-specific offices. There currently is no organizational entity focusing on
economic redevelopment issues relating to all OSWER waste programs. State and local
government relations receive attention in the program-specific offices; however,
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
J. INTERNAL TRAINING, ORGANIZATION AND PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
organizations such as the National Governors Association, the Association of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials and the International City/County
Managers Association have expressed a desire for high level management attention and
input into these relationships. Tribal groups have similarly expressed their desire for
more senior management focus.
Rerommemlatiop; OSWER needs a centralized focal point and coordinator
for environmental justice issues.
The OSWER Task Force recommended the establishment of a clear focal point
with access to seniormanagementto coordinate issues related to environmental justice,
community outreach, State/local/tribal government and economic redevelopment
issues and to establish an OSWERenvironmentaljustice worlcgroupwithrepresentatives
across all programs to focus on these issues. One of the OSWER Deputy Assistant
Administrators should be designated as the senior organizational focal point for
environmental justice issues and activities. It was also recommended that a single
person be designated as an Environmental Justice coordinator for the Assistant
Administrator.
3. Program Implementation
Background
Regions are currently implementing, under the oversight of the Superfund
administrative improvements, certain creative approaches to addressing environmental
justice issues at Superfund sites.
~ Need to expand creative approaches to addressing environmental
justice issues throughout Regional waste programs.
Currently Regions are pursuing creative approaches in only one of the waste
programs (Superfund); however, environmental justice issues also arise in the context
of the other waste programs under EPA' s control.
Rerommemlation; Pilot new ideas for addressing environmental justice
concerns in a specific geographic area.
Each Region should look across their waste programs and select one additional
project to pilot creative new ideas for addressing environmental justice concerns in a
specific geographic area. Regions will nominate what will be the most appropriate
project within their Region.
39
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
TbiJ page inlentional left blanlc.
40
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
CHAPTER 4
PROGRAM-SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE
ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section of the Environmental Justice Task Force report sets forth
OSWER program-specific issues and recommendations.
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
(RCRA)
Background
Passed by Congress in 1976, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) grants the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to regulate
the management of hazardous and nonhazardous solid waste. Congress then greatly
expanded the scope of RCRA with the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
(HSW A) of 1984. Through these provisions, EPA has established a cradle-to-grave
system of rules, many of which are implemented at the State level, covering the
identification, generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of wastes.
In the RCRA Subtitle C (hazardous waste) program, EPA strives to protect
human health and the environment from the potential hannful effects resulting from the
mismanagement of hazardous wastes. One of the goals under RCRA is to minimize the
amount of hazardous waste which is generated. The less hazardous waste generated,
the less hazardous waste there is requiring management When industries do generate
hazardous wastes, the next priority under RCRA is to ensure safe management of these
wastes. This is accomplished through technical standards which govern the storage,
treatment and disposal of these wastes. In the case where hazardous wastes are or have
historically been mismanaged, the Agency then requires careful clean-up steps to be
taken.
Once generated, hazardous wastes are managed at facilities called Treatment,
Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) which are located throughout the country.
These facilities are subject to both pennitting requirements and possible enforcement
to ensure compliance with all EPA regulations.
The environmental justice issues discussed in this section relate primarily to the
siting and operation of TSDFs. EPA has come to realize that certain segments of the
population may be unevenly bearing the effects of hazardous waste management at
TSDFs. Some investigations have shown that there are high percentages oflow-income
populations and minority populations located near numerous TSDFs. Partly for this
reason, the OSWER Environmental Justice Task Force was called together and has
identified the following issues which need to be addressed in order to more effectively
respond to environmental justice concerns in the implementation of the RCRA program.
41
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)
42
The major environmental justice concerns to which the following
recommendations respond are: 1) siting of new RCRA Subtitle C (hazardous waste)
facilities; 2) RCRA Subtitle C pennits; 3) public involvement in RCRA Subtitle C
decision-making; 4) RCRA corrective action; 5) disproportionate impacts research;
and 6) RCRA tribal implementation issues.
1. SITING OF NEW FACILITIES.
Siting gen_erally has been a local land use decision carried out by State and local
governments. RCRA Section 3004(0)(7), however, does direct EPA to "specify
criteria for the acceptable location of new and existing Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Facilities (TSDF) as necessary to protect human health and the environment."
Using this authority, EPA has issued technical location standards that restrict
siting in 100-yearfloodplains, seismic fault zones, and salt dome fonnations/underground
mines and caves. Furthennore, EPA recently prepared a draft rule proposing additional
standards that would restrict siting in certain "environmentally sensitive locations,"
defined on the basis of risks associated with geologic and geographic features (e.g.,
seismic faults or areas with sinkholes). The preamble to this proposal would have
sought comment on whether and how siting restrictions could address the threat of
cumulative risk in environmentally distressed communities. The rule was never
finalized.
~ Under current regulations, EPA has limited authority to determine
where a hazardous waste facility will be sited.
ConcemshavebeenraisedthatRCRAfacilitiesmaybesiteddisproportionately
in minority communities. lbere are currently only three technical location standards
(40 CFR Part 264.18) that hazardous waste facilities have to comply with regarding
siting: 1) 100-year floodplains, 2) seismic fault zones, and 3) salt dome fonnations/
underground mines and caves.
Almost 40 States have location standards that are more stringent than the
existing three Federal regulatory requirements. Generally, States can pass siting laws
much more easily than EPA because States often have simpler statutory standards. For
example, they may not have to show that a siting standard is "necessary to protect
human health and the environment" Therefore, setback distances do not have to be
based on groundwater or air modeling data.
Setback distances, which are defined as the State-required distance from the
property boundary of a TSDF to the nearest school, church, prison, etc., may not
completely address environmental justice concerns, although some believe this to be an
answer to the RCRA facility siting issue. Setback distances potentially may have a
negative impact on environmental justice communities, and may be perceived as a band-
aid approach. For example, setback distances could force siting in rural areas outside
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)
of high density populations and such rural areas may be composed of a poor/minority/
less educated community.
In considering appropriate future actions, a variety of options exist There are
several avenues through which OSWER could attempt to influence State and local
governments in the siting area.
Remmmepdatiop: Form a siting work-group to evaluate location standards,
environmental justice issues and setback distances.
The Office of Solid Waste (OSW) should fonn a worlc. group to evaluate a
variety of siting issues such as; evaluating options for revising the technical geological
location standards; review of existing and potential standards for siting hazardous
waste facilities; environmental justice issues with siting; and the feasibility of setback
distances. The worlc. group will be involved in the next four recommendations listed
below:
Remmmepdatiop; Develop siting guidance to provide technical assistance to
State, tribal and local governments.
OSW officials, worlc.ing in conjunction with other interested parties, could
develop a siting guidance document that would provide technical assistance on how to
best site a hazardous waste facility in light of environmental justice concerns.
Although non-binding, the document could setve as a catalyst for change. In
developing this guidance, OSW would consult with State, tribal and local decision-
makers and politicians to discuss the dynamics associated with the siting of a hazardous
waste facility. Ultimately, the goal would be to educate local decision-makers so they
can make knowledgeable siting decisions that best setve the community they live in.
Remmmepdatiop; Meet with State and local government organizations about
EPA siting concerns.
OSWER could seek to highlight siting concerns in discussions with State and
local organizations such as the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials, the National Governors Association, the National League of
Cities, and theN ational Conference of Mayors. Dialogue could focus on policy options
and their limitations.
Remmmepdatiop: Compile a national summary of State, tribal and local
siting requirements with environmentaljustice
components.
Compile a national summary of all SO States on their experience with siting
issues such as setback distances, local decision-making processes, and patterns of
43
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)
44
discrimination with siting. This type of infonnation has been sought by States and
would be invaluable in providing models for their own State siting standards.
Rerommeudatiop; Include siting principles into State Capacity Assurance
Plan (CAP) guidance.
EPA guidance concerning State Capacity Assurance Plans (CAPs) could
incorporate siting principles that take into account concerns raised by disadvantaged
communities. In fact, a 1993 report prepared by the National Governors Association
and reflecting the viewpoint of State and local government, the business community,
and environmental groups, contained model language for addressing environmental
justice issues, which EPA could replicate in the CAP guidance.
Beoommeudatiop; Incorporate environmental justice priorities into annual
RCRA Implementation Plan.
OSWER could ensure that environmental justice priorities are included in the
annual RCRA Implementation Plan, which the Regions use to set priorities when
negotiating the State work plans and grant allocations.
Rerommeudatiop; Craft a grant condition to State grant agreements to
require States to consider environmental justice concerns
when making siting Decisions based on protecting human
health and the environment.
OSWER should attach a grant condition to State grant agreements that require
States to consider human health and environmental concerns that adversely impactlow
income and minority populations. Grant conditions must be directly related to the goals
of a statute pursuant to which the grant is awarded and thus environmental justice
criteria or conditions in the grant must relate to RCRA goals such as protection of
human health and the environment.
2. RCRA PERMITS.
~ Need to respond to environmental justice complaints that arise during
permitting process.
RCRA does not contain explicit or implicit authority entitling EPA to deny a
permit based on environmental justice concerns that are not related to risk to human
health and the environment. However, the omnibus provision found at section
3005( c )(3) allows EPA to add pennit conditions necessary to protect human health and
the environment In theory, if no permit conditions could be written that would
adequately protect against the identified risk, then EPA could justify pennit denial.
l
l
l
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)
Rem1JU11eudation; Establish strategy to respond effectively to all
environmentaljustice issues raising health-related
concerns.
As noted in the Title VI section of this report, OSWER should fully consider
health risks related to environmental justice concerns prior to issuance of a final
detenninationon the pennit. During the ensuing period, EPA could attempt to mediate
the situation through various channels of communication. In highly volatile situations,
where risks to human health and environment are found, a risk assessment could be
perfonned or be required by EPA in appropriate circumstances, presuming one has not
already been perfonned.
In order to try to identify environmental justice concerns early on, OSWER
should explore the possibility of using, in certain circumstances, public health
assessments at the outset of the pennitting process as a tool for gauging potential human
health concerns in communities affected by a proposed facility. Thus, where such
assessments revealed serious preexisting health problems, OSWER would focus on the
incremental risks associated with the facility and respond accordingly. Relevant
discussions would occur during the public involvement phase of the pennitting cycle
in order to ensure that decisions reflect community concerns. To the extent this proposal
is viable, it would not apply in every instance but rather would be considered based on
the merits of each case.
3. RCRA PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.
b5w:.;, Public involvement in RCRA siting and permitting decisions may not
be adequate.
Concerns have been raised thatRCRA siting and pennitting decisions are made
without sufficient meaningful public involvement CurrentRCRA public involvement
requirements have only two points forfonnal participation ( draftpennitandmodification
stages). Each Region has approximately one person dedicated to this function. RCRA
public involvement coordinators have similar responsibilities as the Superfund
Community Relations Regional specialists; however, RCRA has nowhere near the
resources, high visibility or suppon as its Superfund counterpan.
OSW is currently drafting a proposed public participation rule that should
expand public involvement opportunities during the RCRA pennitting process. The
goal is to encourage earlier, more meaningful community involvement In this way, the
proposal is similar conceptually to ideas raised in association with Superfund refonn.
Specific items include requiring a pre-application meeting with the affected community,
public notification upon receipt of pennit application and prior to trial burns, and
multilingual fact sheets and translators in predominately non-English speaking
communities. The rule may also require the creation of infonnation repositories within
45
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)
46
affected communities. The proposal would also request additional suggestions for
responding to environmental justice concerns.
Rerommeodatiop: Increase number of Regional community relations
personnel.
More than one RCRA public involvement coordinator is needed per region to
implement the proposed rule on increased community involvement. 1be proposed rule
should be finalized next year.
4. RCRA CORRECTIVE ACTION.
b.mt;, Need for consistency across cleanup programs.
RCRA corrective action facilities raise many of the same health and safety
issues as Superfund sites, and therefore merit comparable responses.
Beoommeudation; Examine whether priority setting method adequately
considers environmental justice concerns.
OSW officials should examine if current priority setting methods utilized for
corrective actions adequately considers environmental justice concerns.
Rerommendation; Ensure that activities are consistent with Superfund
program policies.
Remedy selection decisions and pace of cleanup at corrective action facilities
could, consistent with Superfund, factor in exposure to multiple sources of pollution,
including Federally permitted releases.
5. DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACTS RESEARCH
b.mt;, Combustion facilities' impacts on communities.
Emissions from combustion facilities could potentially add to the multiple
source exposure that some minority and low income populations experience. 1berefore,
the environmental justice impacts of siting these facilities should be fully considered.
Rerommendation; Perform demographics analysis around combustion
facilities.
OSWER should perform demographics analysis using GIS which examines
the population and income around various combustion sites. The study also could
examine the proximity of these sites to other potential sources of hazard, such as TRI
J
I
I
f
f
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)
sites, Superfund sites, etc. OSWER should seek, through the study, to infonn the
Agency's combustion strategy by better understanding the distribution of minority
populations and low-income populations surrounding hazardous waste combustors.
6. RCRA TRIBAL IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES.
~ Tribal capacity and program implementation options need to be
developed.
Program implementation by tribes is one strong indicator of environmental
justice, according to tribal representatives. As sovereign governments, tribes are the
environmental managers on Tribal lands. Achieving true progress, however, may
require statutory and regulatory changes (RCRA does not create an explicit role for
tribal implementation of Subtitle C and other RCRA programs) as well as increased
funding for tribal operations.
Reco:rnmepdatiop; Accelerate efforts to develop draft rule for Subtitle C
hazardous waste authorization to tribes.
Given the uncertainty associated with seeking legislative action to clarify the
roles of tribes under RCRA, OSW should accelerate efforts to amend 40 CFR Part 271
(state hazardous waste programs) to include tribes. OSW recognizes that Subtitle C
authorization may not be necessary or appropriate for all tribes. There are other ways
tribes can participate in the Subtitle Cprogram such as through cooperative agreements
and/or grants.
Reco:rnmendatiop; Explore methods to enhance funding of tribal operations.
EPA 's financial support is crucial in helping tribes build organizational
infrastructures, develop appropriate regulations and explore integrated waste
management alternatives. OSWER should continue to provide increased technical
assistance through in-house resources, grants and contract assistance.
~ Increased need for coordination of environmental activities among
Federal agencies leveraged resources.
To accommodate budgetary shortfalls, OSW should explore ways to leverage
resources and coordinate environmental activities with other Federal agencies.
Reco:rnmepdatiop; Expand interagency cooperation.
In order to increase interagency cooperation, OSW should: 1) promote the
fonnation of Regional inter-agency wolk groups to address waste management issues
on Indian lands; 2) develop action plans with other Federal agencies to cooperatively
assist tribes with waste management; 3) wolk with other agencies to ensure that
47
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
A. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)
48
Congressional budgetary appropriations for tribal assistance go to the most appropriate
agency; 4) promote and encourage voluntary partnerships among tribes, Federal
agencies, States and local communities in order to further leverage resources and share
expenise; 5) work with other EPA offices to provide multimedia solutions to
environmental problems confronting tribes; and 6) continue to expand its association
with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Indian Health Service (IHS) in planning
and implementing waste management activities on Indian lands.
Recommepdatiop; Expand the VISTA program to provide assistance to
Native Alaskan villages on solid waste management issues.
Currently, OSW funds four Volunteers In Service To America (VISTA) to
provide solid waste management assistance to Native Alaskan villages. OSW would
like to duplicate its Alaska VISTA project with tribes throughout the continental United
States. In addition, a National Service Project is being proposed to build on this
programmatic foundation.
~ Need to enhance training and outreach activities, seek to leverage
resources and coordinate environmental activities among Federal
agencies.
OSW is initiating outreach with the tribes to ascertain their environmental
justice concerns. Once a framework for this outreach is developed, OSW staff will
engage the tribes in dialogues through a variety of outreach activities. These
discussions should provide the additional direction needed to ensure that OS W's Indian
Program is consistent with EPA' s commitment to environmental justice.
Remmmepdatiop: Enhance tribal outreach and training.
OSW should expand outreach and training activities to enhance tribal capability.
OSW's action agenda may include continuing its Regional outreach meetings with
tribes across the country to discuss rules, regulations and laws that affect them,
providing technical assistance and ensuring that appropriate printed and electronic
information is made available to them.
Remmmepdatiop: Expand communications network between tribes and
regions.
Fourtribes are being provided access, on a pilot basis, to the State and Regional
Programs Bulletin Board. The Bulletin Board has been expanded to include Subtitle
D and Underground Storage Tank information (it currently has Subtitle C information).
Tribes will access the Bulletin Board through IndianNet, a tribal communications
network. This pilot is also serving as a model to other Federal agencies that are working
to provide the tribes with readily accessible data information. If the pilot project is
successful, OSW will expand the communications network to include more tribes.
I
1
i
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND
LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA), OR SUPERFUND
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA), or
SUPERFUND
Background
CERCLA authorizes EPA to take response action when there is a threatened
or actual release of hazardous substances or a threatened or actual release of pollutants
or contaminants which may present an imminent and substantial danger to the public
health or welfare. 1be Superfund program is responsible for the remediation of
hazardous substance sites and responds to emergencies posing immediate threats to
human health and the environment To accomplish the Superfund goals, EPA, States,
and Tribal governments coordinate site assessment, risk assessment, risk management,
and site remediation. lbeseefforts include considerable public outreach and community
involvement programs managed by EPA' s Regional Offices.
Meaningful public involvement is essential to the effective cleanup ofhazardous
substance sites. The people most affected by hazardous substance sites are members
of the communities in and around sites. Community Relations Coordinators tailor
outreach activities to meet the specific needs of each community. These may include
activities such as: learning about community needs through community inteiviews;
public meetings (with interpreters, as necessary); multi-lingual informational site
documents; open houses with site managers; environmental education for school
children; a "Superfund 101" course to introduce the Superfund process to communities;
on-scene information offices and local ombudsmen; multi-lingual regional public
involvement staff; and providing up to $50,000 per site for technical assistance grants
to community groups.
Although EPA employees, Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) and
contractors frequently interact with community members, the length and nature of these
interactions may vary. For example, during emergency response activities, an EPA On-
Scene Coordinator (OSC) and contractor may be in a community for a week or longer
and the Remedial Project Manager (RPM) will make occasional visits during site
investigation and remedy selection phases and then return during implementation of the
cleanup remedy. The remedial cleanup contractor may be on-site continually, often on
a multi-year basis. The Superfund Community Relations Coordinators in the Regional
Offices attempt to provide some continuity between EPA and the community by
establishing early contact with community members and being available, as needed.
This direct interaction of response personnel with community members is an opportunity
to identify and effectively address environmental justice issues at Superfund sites.
While Superfund's community relations program is in direct contact with
communities and therefore is most aware of environmental justice issues, all Superfund
program elements ( e.g., site assessment, risk assessment) need to be more sensitive to
49
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JumcE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND
LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA), OR SUPERFUND
50
identifying and addressing environmental justice issues. Some stakeholders have
questioned whether Superfund sites in minority communities are cleaned up as quickly,
or have remedies that are as protective, as non-minority sites. Others have expressed
concern that sensitive populations may not be adequately addressed in risk assessments.
The Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR) is evaluating some of these
concerns in a statistical and demographic analysis of National Priorities List (NPL)
sites. In addition, Superfund 's risk assessment guidance (RAGs) directs risk assessors
to detennine if any population groups may be at increased risk due to increased
sensitivity, or lifestyle/behavior patterns that may result in high exposures (e.g.,
subsistence fishing or consumption of home-grown vegetables). There is a significant
opportunity for enhancing environmental justice in Superfund by focusing on site-
specific practices and procedures, while continuing to evaluate and improve national
program policy.
Superfund environmental justice issues and recommendations are discussed in
greater detail below in six major program areas: public involvement, site assessment,
risk assessment, risk management, lead-based paint and tribal implementation. Many
of the issues raised in this section have been identified by sources outside the Agency
(see OJ.apter 3, of this report, on outreach). These issues are of great concern and EPA
will identify actions, as well as areas of research to clarify the nature, extent and causes
of environmental justice problems.
1. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
~ EPA needs to ensure meaningful community involvement, by all
affected communities, in the Superfund process.
Through outreach efforts it has come to EPA' s attention that some communities
in or near Superfund sites, especially minority populations and low-income populations
believe that they have insufficient opportunities to participate in the Superfund process.
These communities have indicated to EPA that the program does not address local
concerns adequately when assessing risk or selecting the method and level of cleanup,
especially when considering future land use. These communities also voiced concern
that opportunities for involvement in site activities come too late in the process and that
their input has little impact on cleanup decisions.
The currentSuperfundlaw and regulations provide fornumerous opportunities
and requirements for public involvement. The Superfund Community Relations
program is currently implementing many innovative techniques and using effective
tools to promote greater public participation. OERR believes that this approach helps
ensureeffectivecommunication withminoritypopulations and low-income populations.
r
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND
LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA), OR SUPERFUND
Berommendation; Implement pilot projects establishing Community Advisory
Groups at Superfund sites. Develop interim guidance on
Community Advisory Groups.
Community Advisory Groups should be fonned to promote early, direct and
meaningful public involvement throughout the Superfund process. Membership of a
Community Advisory Group should consist of community leaders and members. The
Community Advisory Group would serve as a conduit for site infonnation to and from
the affected community, assist in detennining land use expectations, and obtain greater
community input for remedial decisions affecting future land use. The Task Force
recommends that this concept be piloted on at least 10 sites across the Regions.
Interim guidance should be developed on the function, operation, and scope of
authority of Community Advisory Groups. This interim guidance should build on
existing sources (i.e., Federal Facilities Environmental Restoration Dialogue Committee
Interim Report on establishing Site-Specific Advisory Boards (SSABs), 2/93; EPA-
DOD guidance on establishing Restoration Advisory Boards for Base-Closures ( draft);
and experience at the dozen or so DOE sites with established SSABs nationwide.)
Results of experiences with pilot efforts will be factored into the development of this
guidance also.
The recommendations above are consistent with both the President's
Environmental Justice Executive Order(No. 12898) and the Administrations Proposed
Bill to Amend Superfund. The Environmental Justice Executive Order directs Federal
agencies to develop an environmental justice strategy that is designed to ensure greater
public participation, which is also one of the objectives of the Superfund Community
Involvement program. The Administrations Proposed Bill to Amend Superfund also
provides for increased public participation in the Superfund process.
There is a general consensus, both from within EPA and from the general
public, that earlier, direct, and regular community involvement would enhance the
cleanup process. However, this expanded community involvement is associated with
additional costs. An indirect cost of expanded community involvement may be delays
in moving sites through the cleanup process. A direct cost is the need for expanded
resources for EPA and, through grants, the communities. Therefore, additional
resources must be made available to implement these re~mmendations, or we may
raise unrealistic expectations of what can be achieved.
2. SITE ASSESSMENT
JaaWl:. Because Superfund relies on a passive site discovery approach {I.e.,
notification from States, communities, citizens), all of the sites In areas with
minority populations and low-Income populatlonsthat warrant Federal attention
may not be brought Into the Superfund program.
51
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND
LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA), OR SUPERFUND
52
A preliminary demographic analysis conducted by OERR suggests that, in the
communities surrounding the 300 NPL sites evaluated, some minority populations are
present in slightly higherpercentages than the national population. However, this study
does not allow the program to gauge whether there is a group of sites in areas with
minority populations and low-income populations that have not been brought to the
EPA 's attention.
Remmmepdation; Conduct a pilot proactive site assessment program.
Develop·and conduct a pilot proactive site assessment program, in conjunction
with States and local communities, that would ensure that sites in areas with minority
populations and low-income populations that warrant EPA action are identified. This
could be accomplished by encouraging States, local government and community groups
to use demographic information (e.g., LandView, GIS) and any other information tools
to locate sites with potential environmental threats. OSWER and the Regions may also
consider options including evaluation of the site inspection sites in the queue and
determine which of these are located in areas with environmental justice concerns.
~ Need for consistency across cleanup programs.
Superfund cleanups raise many of the same health and safety issues as RCRA
corrective actions, and therefore merit comparable responses.
Remmmepdation; Examine whether priority setting method adequately
considersenvironmentaljusticeconcems.
OERR officials should examine if current priority setting methods utilized for
cleanups adequately considers environmental justice concerns.
Remmmepdatiop; Ensure that activities are consistent with RCRA program
policies.
Remedy selection decisions and pace of cleanup at Superfund sites could,
consistent with corrective action facilities, factor in exposure to multiple sources of
pollution.
3. RISK ASSESSMENT
~ While risk assessment guidance requires consideration of sensitive
subpopulations, current risk assessments at Superfund sites may not
adequately address other exposure factors of concern in areas with
minority populations and low-income populations.
Superfund risk assessment guidance directs risk assessors to evaluate risks to
special subpopulations. In practice, this is usually implemented in risk assessments by
l
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND
LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA), OR SUPERFUND
examining populations for reasonable maximum exposure (RME) consumption levels
oflocally caught fish, animals, and home-grown vegetables. RME defaults are most
representative of individuals living in a small town or other nontransient community.
~ Because site remediation under CERCLA addresses only those risks
posed by the site, Superfund risk assessments currently assess only
those sources of risk resulting from the CERCLA site. Other sources
of environmental risk to populations around Superfund sites should be
identified in order to better establish/coordinate the proper federal
response.
The focus of risk assessments has been on risks caused by contaminants from
individual Superfund sites. In some cases, populations around Superfund sites are
exposed to additional sources of environmental risk, such as high levels of industrial
emissions, lead in paint, or household chemicals.
Recommendation; Superfund will develop supplemental risk assessment
guidance in coordination with Agency-wide efforts.
In order for Superfund to issue supplemental risk assessment guidance, it will
first have to worlc with ORD, A TSDR, NIEHS and other Federal health agencies to
establish exposure and risk factors which are unique to areas with minority populations
and low-income populations. Once these factors are established, Superfund will issue
supplemental guidance in coordination with Agency-wide efforts that will make those
factors available and discuss appropriate circumstances for their use, particularly at
sites with minority populations and low-income populations. Following this effort,
OSWER will develop risk assessment and risk management tools that would allow
Superfund site managers to worlc with other Federal and State agencies to create
solutions that address multiple sources of environmental risk in coordination with
Agency-wide efforts on this issue.
4. RISK MANAGEMENT
~ There are sites with populations exposed to multiple sources of
environmental risk.
The Superfund program needs to find ways to encourage Potentially Responsible
Parties (PRPs) and other Federal agencies to address the total environmental risks of
populations exposed to multiple sources of pollution (e.g. populations exposed to
indoor lead paint).
53
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND
LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA), OR SUPERFUND
54
Recommepdatiop; Establish site-specific federal coordination groups for
issues outside Superfundjurisdiction.
OSWER and the Regions will work with other Federal and State agencies to
develop model remediation projects at Superfund sites with multiple sources of
environmental risk. Such model projects should address, where appropriate, indoor
lead paint problems that add to community exposures. Superfund is currently
developing a pilot project with HUD to evaluate opportunities to address indoor lead
paint exposures in homes at Superfund sites.
lmlc;. Stakeholders have suggested that Superfund cleanup processes do not
result in environmental justice in areas with minority populations and
low-income populations.
As stated earlier, OERR is also evaluating some of these concerns in a
statistical and demographic analysis of National Priorities List (NPL) sites. OERR is
examining the demographic composition and averagemedianincome around Superfund
sites as it relates to delivery of services. The demographic characterization has been
completed for a subset of sites, and the methodologies to be used in the analysis are now
complete.
OERR is now conducting the demographic characterization of all sites on the NPL
and refining the analytic approach. Analysis will be completed over the next few
months.
Recommepdatiop; Evaluate remedy selection and speed of cleanups in
communities with environmentaljustice issues.
OERR will complete the evaluation of remedy selection and speed of cleanup
in areas with minority populations and low-income populations. Focus on sites where
remediation is in progress in order to establish "real time" data and to allow
opportunities for intervention. An additional option which Superfund may also
consider is an evaluation and a comparison of similar remedy selection processes at a
minority population site and a nonminority population site.
5. LEAD-BASED PAINT
lmlc;. Under the current statute, OSWER cannot expend Superfund money
to clean up interior lead-based paint.
The Superfund program frequently encounters sites where lead levels in soil
pose less of a human health threat than the lead levels associated with indoor paint and
dust. Yet, based on existing authorities, the program concentrates on soil cleanup while
leaving the greater health threat unabated.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
B. COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND
LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA), oR SUPERFUND
Superfund is developing a policy to ensure more holistic relief at sites. PRPs
are currently encouraged to abate deteriorating indoor lead-based paint and indoor dust
as well as the exterior lead sources.
The policy under development. however, does not currently detail response in
the absence of viable PRPs. Currently, CERCLA precludes the use of Superfund
money to perfonn abatement of indoor lead.
Rewmmendation; Encourage other agencies to coordinate efforts on removal
or control of indoor lead paint at Superfund sites.
OSWER should continue to encourage PRP action in this area. Anotheroption
would be to actively encourage other Federal, state and local agencies with appropriate
jurisdiction to worlc in conjunction with Superfund to coordinate the removal or
exposure control effort. OERR officials are currently exploring a pilotendeavorof this
kind with officials from HUD. This pilot could serve as a catalyst for additional efforts
in the future.
6. SUPERFUND TRIBAL IMPLEMENTATION
~ Tribal governments are requesting systematic Superfund changes.
Currently, OERR activities focus on providing financial and technical
assistance to help tribal governments develop environmental regulations and perfonn
hazardous substance cleanups. Indian tribes believe that future activities should
emphasize systematic changes under CERCLA that would better accommodate tribal
needs and improvements in tribal outreach and communications. Comments received
during a series of eight tribal outreach meetings conducted as part of the CERCLA
reauthorization effort were considered by the Administration as part of the process to
develop its "Superfund Refonn Act of 1994" proposal.
Remmmendation; Continue to assist tribes financially and technically and
work to build response capacity among the tribes.
OERR should continue to use financial and technical assistance to help tribes
undertake theirown cleanup activities. Through the use of the Superfund Core program
funding, OERR and the Regions will worlc with individual tribes in building this
capacity; where this proves impractical, tribal consortia, with the approval of tribal
governments, may be utilized. Tribes can apply for Core program funds, but they
compete with States for the limited funds which are available on a Regional basis.
OERR will examine options to encourage more tribal participation in the core program,
which may include setting aside funds for Indian tribes.
These recommendations will assist OERR and OSWER in moving forward
with implementation of the Environmental Justice Executive Order and gaining
valuable experience in anticipation of a reauthorized Superfund law.
55
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
C. OIL POLLUTION ACT (OPA)
56
C. OIL POLLUTION ACT (OPA)
Background
Under authority of the Oean Water Act, as amended by the Oil Pollution Act
of 1990, the Oil Program regulates prevention and response activities at facilities that
could discharge oil. The universe of regulated facilities is large and diverse, with
facilities located throughout the country in large cities, suburbs, Indian lands and in
remote areas. Regulated facilities range widely from small "end users," such as those
that store heating oil and motor fuel, to large refineries and tank fanns that supply
petroleum products to whole communities.
l5ml:i, Disproportionate Exposure to Oil Contamination
A disproportionate share ofoil storage facilities may be in ornear communities
with potential environmental justice concerns. Furthermore, many of these sites have
leaked or spilled oil. When oil storage facilities leak, they may contaminate surface
waters, ground water or soils in the community. Not only does this add to the cumulative
risk due to multiple exposures, but it may pose particular problems for populations that
rely on subsistence farming/gardening or fishing.
l5ml:i, Clustering oflndustries Around Oil Facilities
Oil storage facilities may be clustered with other industrial facilities which are
sources of pollution. Thus, environmental justice communities near oil storage
facilities may be exposed to multiple industrial sources of contamination.
1. SITE IDENTIFICATION.
Remmmepdatiop: Develop an approach to identify oil storage facilities near
communities with environmental justice issues.
1be Oil Program does not have a comprehensive list of the facilities it regulates.
In 1991, it tried unsuccessfully to adopt a regulatory r:equirement that facilities
"register" with EPA.
OSWER could make another attempt to impose this requirement, and thereby
develop a comprehensive list of regulated facilities. By overlaying census data, the Oil
Program could pinpoint facilities located in communities with environmental justice
concerns and target them for identification. This would also enable OSWER to track
new installations.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
D. UNDERGROUNDSTORAGETANKS(UST)
Even without this requirement, some progress can be made in identifying
existing facilities. The Oil Program is currently planning a statistical survey of some
30,000 facilities. The survey data will be extrapolated to the nation as a whole, and is
better linked to county census data. This will make it possible to characterize
communities surrounding the surveyed facilities.
2 PRIORITIZATION EFFORTS.
Regmunendatiop; Enhance outreach to communities with potential or actual
environmentaljusticeconcerns.
Once characterized, specific outreach and regulatory activities could be
targeted at facilities located in communities with environmental justice concerns.
Opportunities for outreach and education would include: 1) notification of and
education about facility modifications, 2) job opportunities within the plant, 3)
compliance history of the plant, including inspection and penalty history, 4) disclosure
of environmental degradation within or beyond facility borders, such as notification of
spills or leaks, 5) education about health risks posed by subsistence farming or fishing
in the area, or other issues as appropriate and 6) methods of communicating community
concerns to facilities. This proposal would require significant increase in resources and
may be inviable in light of current program constraints.
Rerommepdatiop; Explore ways to target inspections and enforcement
activities in communities with environmental justice
concerns.
Certain regulatory processes could also be altered to better serve communities
with environmental justice concerns, such as: 1) more fully considering environmental
loading and sensitive populations in inspection and other enforcement decisions, 2)
targeting inspections andotherenforcementeffortson facilities in minority communities,
and 3) requiring enhanced community participation.
D. UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (UST)
Background
In 1984, Congress responded to the increasing threat to groundwater posed by
leaking underground storage tanks (USTs) by adding Subtitle I to the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and in 1986 by section 205 of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act. Subtitle I required EPA to develop a
comprehensive regulatory program for USTs. With these UST regulations, owners and
57
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
D. UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (UST)
58
operators are required to meet four goals: prevent leaks and spills from occurring;
monitortheirtanks for leaks and spills; correct problems created by leaks and spills that
are discovered; and make sure that the owners and operators of USTs can pay for
correcting the problems created if their tanks leak.
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 amended
Subtitle I ofRCRA to create the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Trust
Fund. All states but Aorida, which has its own cleanup fund, have signed cooperative
agreements and are allocated Trust Fund monies. The Trust Fund ensures protection
of human health and the environment by helping States pay for the oversight of
responsible party cleanup and for taking state action to cleanup petroleum releases from
USTs when owners and operators are unknown, unwilling, or unable to accomplish the
cleanup.
About 1.3 million petroleum USTs and 37,000 hazardous substance USTs are
subject to federal regulations. Large petroleum companies, mid-size marlceters, small
"Mom and Pop" gasoline service stations, and convenience stores own motor fuel tanks.
Other facilities that use USTs include public and service sectors, such as airports,
schools, and transit authorities. To date, over 230,000 releases have been confinned
and EPA expects that number may grow to 400,000 over the next several years.
To manage the national program, the Office of Underground Storage Tanks
adopted a decentralized model that empowers State and local programs. The national
program provides technical support and assistance to States in streamlining their
cleanup program and in finding mechanisms to enforce leak prevention requirements.
This arrangement allows States to run programs that are tailored to the needs and
demands of their own regulated communities, while EPA offers implementation
support, including financial support, to States. EPA' s national UST program is notable
for its flexibility, focus on State customers, and emphasis on continuous program
improvement
~ Tracking and remediating confirmed releases does not currently
consider environmentalj ustice issues.
Major challenges for UST programs include ensuring that the large universe
of regulated tanks meets all technical requirements for preventing and detecting leaks
and that cleanups keep pace with the growing number of confirmed releases. These
releases add to the multiple exposure problem experienced by many environmental
justice communities. States that receive LUST Trust Fund money are required to
develop priority ranking systems for sites requiring State-lead actions. Releases that
threaten drinking water supplies or cause explosive vapors to accumulate in sewers or
basements, for example, require emergency action and are addressed before sites that
do not pose an immediate threat to human health and the environment When all other
ranking factors are equal, however, sites in environmental justice communities with
multiple exposures should get priority attention. Ranking systems should consider
environmental justice concerns as a qualitative factor.
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
D. UNDERGROUNDSTORAGETANKS(UST)
Given that the UST program is largely implemented by State agencies and
given the national program philosophy which emphasizes flexibility and avoids
directingstates,EPA must find ways to sensitize implementing agencies to environmental
justice concerns and offer suggestions to States for addressing these concerns as they
proceed with their UST compliance/enforcement and cleanup activities.
Rerommendatiop: Provide guidance for State/local agencies on considering
environmental justice as a qualitative factor in priority
ranking systems for State-lead cleanup and enforcement
activities.
Rerommendation; Issue environmental justice brochure to States and
regulated facilities.
Rerommendatiop: Outreach to States, tribes and local agencies.
The Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) could step up outreach to
State and local agencies in an effort to influence priority ranking systems for State-lead
cleanups and State compliance and enforcement strategies. Thus, the office could
prepare materials such as fact sheets that would be routinely included in information
packages distributed to State and local agencies. The material would discuss
environmental justice concerns and suggest ways to address theses issues in program
plans and strategies. This would require minimal additional resources since much of
OUST' s work involves preparation and dissemination of outreach materials. Regional
all-States meetings and national conferences would also serve as useful forums in which
to explore these issues.
Rerommendation; Incorporate environmental justice criteria into UST State
grant and cooperative agreements.
OUST could incorporate environmental justice criteria in UST grant and
cooperative agreements entered into with States. Specific clauses could require States
to consider environmental justice as they develop outreach materials and develop their
cleanup, compliance and enforcement strategies. Depending on the perceived value of
these grants and the ability to tie the conditions to the goals of the enabling legislation,
OUST may wish to be more or less prescriptive in crafting the specific language.
Rerommeodation; Encourage use of minority contractors and consultants for
State-lead cleanups.
OUST could encourage the use oflocal minority contractors and consultants
for State-lead cleanups. In this regard, OUST could ask States to include qualified
minority contractors and consultants on lists distributed to the regulated community.
59
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. CHEMICAL EMERGENCY PREVENTION AND PREPAREDNESS OFFICE (CEPPO)
60
Recommendation; Encourage minority contractors to apply for certification
and provide grant to National Association of Minority
Contractors
Furthennore, in States with contractor certification programs, OUST could
provide outreach materials to minority contractors and encourage them to apply for
certification. In conjunction with this effort, OUST would continue to provide grant
money from sources other than the National Association of Minority Contractors for
training of minority finns in proper tank installation and removal and in the use of
alternative remediation technologies.
Recommendation: Continue to identify existing US T's including hazardous
substance tanks and abandoned tanks on Indian Lands.
EPA should continue to identify abandoned tanks on Native-American lands,
drawing substantially on the work of the circuit riders and where necessary, by using
other Agency resources.
lmu:.;, Develop tribal capacity and program implementation in Indian Country
Since Subtitle I is pan of RCRA, OUST faces the same issues regarding
improving it's tribal policies as OSW faces in the RCRA programs it implements. Due
to the limited number of tanks on Tribal Lands and the disparity in tribal capabilities
and interest in addressing an UST Regulatory program, work needs to be done to find
innovative ways of financing and implementing a program on Tribal Lands, with tribes
and EPA as partners.
Remmmendation; Find ways to provide funds and technical assistance to
tribal governments.
EPA and OUST should worlc towards obtaining the ability to treat tribes in the
same manner as States for authorization purposes. Efforts should be made to continue
to find viable mechanisms to provide sources of revenue to tribal governments that have
the desire and capacity to administer their own program.
E. CHEMICAL EMERGENCY PREVENTION AND
PREPAREDNESS OFFICE (CEPPO)
Background
The Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Office (CEPPO) was
established by EPA in December 1984. CEPPO has three goals: (1) to reduce the risks
to the public and the environment from accidental releases of hazardous materials,
I
I ~
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. CHEMICAL EMERGENCY PREVENTION AND PREPAREDNESS OFFICE (CEPPO)
through regulatory and nonregulatory programs, promotion of a community's right to
know, public education, and research; (2) to develop and maintain within EPA an
infrastructure for responding to emergencies involving hazardous materials and
environmental emergencies and to coordinate and continuously improve the existing
federal systems for emergency preparedness and response to such events; and (3) to
develop and improve the capabilities of state, tribal, and local governments, as well as
industry and other parties concerned with preparedness, prevention, and response.
CEPPO is responsible for federal implementation of Sections 301-312 of the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA --also
know as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 --
SARA Title III), the accidental release provisions of the Oean Air Act (CAA), and the
Hazardous Materials portion of the Federal Response Plan. CEPPO also plays a
support role in the Oil Pollution Act, and the Hazardous Materials Transportation
Safety Act (HMTSA).
EPCRA establishes State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs) and
Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs) that use information provided by
facilities to develop a comprehensive emergency plan. There are over 3000 LEPCs.
Indian Tribes can establish their own commissions (TERCs) or work with the SERC
and neighboring LEPCs. EPCRA gives citizens the right to know about chemicals in
their communities--the amount of chemicals present, their properties and any potential
health effects, as well as information about accidental and routine releases.
Under CAA, facilities are required to provide Risk Management Plans. These
plans contain information on how facilities manage risks posed by substances listed by
EPA. Additionally, these plans indicate how facilities are minimizing risks to the
community by preventing accidental releases of hazardous substances. Facilities must
provide the risk management plan to states and local emergency planners and make the
plan available to the public.
· CEPPO administers the emergency preparedness, response and coordinating
mechanisms for national and international major hazardous materials spills and
releases. These efforts are accomplished primarily through the National Incident
Coordination Team (NICT), the US National Response Team (NRT), and Emergency
Support Function #10 of the Federal Response Plan.
CEPPO provides training, grants, and technical assistance to SERCs, TERCs,
and LEPCs, as well as to industry to enhance their preparedness, prevention, and
response activities. CEPPO also provides tools (including CAMEO and LandView)
to assist communities to manage and use Community Right-to-Know information.
61
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. CHEMICAL EMERGENCY PREVENTION AND PREPAREDNESS OFFICE (CEPPO)
62
~ Environmental justice communities' may have limited knowledge of
information and rights under CEPPO.
The major environmental justice issues related to CEPPO programs are the
ability of economically disadvantaged and minority citizens to receive, understand, and
use the information available to them under EPCRA and the CAA. Specifically, even
though these citizens may be at substantial risk from chemicals near them in the
community and in the workplace, they may not know that they have a right to
information about the chemicals, how to get the information, and/or how to participate
in the work of LEPCs as they prepare emergency plans to protect human life and the
environment. Similarly, LEPCs in poor and minority areas --even if they are well
intentioned and committed to implementing EPCRA and the CAA --may not have the
resources to manage information, conduct a hazards analysis, develop an emergency
plan, and obtain the appropriate response equipment and personnel training.
CEPPO has already taken significant steps to address environmental justice
issues. First, CEPPO, working with NOAA, has developed the software program
CAMEO, which enables local emergency planning committees (LEPCs) to manage
EPCRA information about chemicals, list contacts during an emergency, and conduct
a hazards analysis. More recently, CEPPO has developed the software package
LandView to become part of the CAMEO system, which enables users to overlay
census block information onto computer-generated maps of specific geographic areas.
Using this program, community planners can target low income and minority communities
for the type of outreach needed to ensure they are adequately informed about the
chemical risks confronting their communities and have an opportunity to participate in
emergency planning efforts.
Since its inception, CEPPO has emphasized EPCRA 's mandate that LEPCs
have a broad-based membership. It is CEPPO's position that emergency planning
efforts should include ordinary citizens whose lives may be at risk.
CEPPO has used its grant program to emphasize environmental justice. For
example, one of the criteria used to evaluate grant applications is whether they include
environmental justice considerations. Thus, of the 26 grants issued by CEPPO in
FY93, two went to Indian Tribes and nine (totaling $400,000) went to areas burdened
by multiple environmental stresses.
CEPPO has arranged a program whereby representatives from more affluent
and better developed LEPCs visit and provide assistance to less developed LEPCs.
In developing regulations under CAA, CEPPO is attempting to ensure that
facilities provide risk management plan information in a format that can be used by
LEPCs and understood by ordinary citizens, especially disadvantaged and minority
populations.
j
I
l
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
E. CHEMICAL EMERGENCY PREVENTION AND PREPAREDNESS OFFICE (CEPPO)
CEPPO is currently undertaking a wide-ranging effort to improve the
effectiveness of LEPCs. It plans to identify environmental justice issues and take
appropriate steps to implement suggested improvements.
In preparing the guidance for the Qean Air Act accidental release provisions,
CEPPO will seek to ensure that implementation measures incorporate environmental
justice concerns.
CEPPO will apply useful prevention tools, such as chemical safety audits, in
areas where environmental justice concerns are prevalent.
Regnnmemlation; Send a letter to all Governors regarding efforts EPA is
maldng on environmental justice issues and asking them to
support us in our effort.
EPA 's Administrator should send a letter to all Governors describing EPA 's
commitment to environmental justice and inviting States to support OSWER by
encouraging State Emergency Response Committees (SER Cs) to appoint representatives
to Local Emergency Planning Commissions (LEPCs) which reflect all populations of
the local area. EPA could also provide guidance to States regarding the composition
and role of SERCs.
Reoommendation; Work with LEPCs and TERCs to ensure implementation
of EPA 's environmental justice policies.
Looking to the future, CEPPO should continue to focus on helping communities
with environmental justice concerns manage and understand Community Right-to-
Know infonnation and tocampaignforminority representation onLEPCs. Furthennore,
CEPPO should work with LEPCs and TERCs to ensure adequate implementation of
the Agency's environmental justice policies. CEPPO should also promote use of
CAMEO and LandView and explore ways of making it more available to LEPCs,
TERCs and other local institutions.
Reoommendation; Use the chemical safety audit program to promote
environmental justice.
As part of CEPPO's accident prevention program, chemical safety audits are
conducted at facilities where chemicals are stored, used or produced. The audit includes
a review of the facilities safety procedures, management practices, contingency plans
for worker protection and coordination with community emergency responders. The
audit team uses a standard procedure to conduct the audit.
CEPPO and the Regions should give appropriate attention to auditing facilities
located in areas with minority populations and low-income populations. CEPPO
should include in its standard audit procedure consideration of environmental justice
63
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
F. TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION OFFICE (TIO)
64
issues, such as ensuring that the facility's contingency plan includes provisions to
protect nearby residents in the event of a chemical emergency.
Rerommepdatiop: Work with affected environmental justice communities to
explain community right-to-know information.
CEPPO will work with economically disadvantaged and minority citizens to
receive, understand, and use the infonnation available to them under EPCRA and the
CAA. Specifically, they need to know that they have a right to infonnation about the
chemicals, how to get the infonnation, and/or how to participate in the work ofLEPCs
as they prepare emergency plans to protect human life and the environment.
Rerommepdatiop; Expand use of demographic systems.
CEPPO will lead OSWER's effort to work with other EPA offices and the
Regions to develop compatible Agency-wide approaches to GIS, which makes the
LandView system a viable option when choosing the appropriate GIS or Landview
systems based on the needs of the analysis. This topic was discussed in the cross-cutting
section of this report.
F. TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION OFFICE (TIO)
Background
The Technology Innovation Office (TIO) advocates the broader use of
innovative treatment technologies for the remediation of soil and ground water at
contaminated sites. The office seeks to remove regulatory and institutional impediments
and provide critical technology and market infonnation to potential users and suppliers
of new technology. The scope of the mission extends to Superfund sites, corrective
action sites under RCRA, and underground storage tank clean-ups. TIO influences the
use of innovative technologies by working with individuals and groups both inside and
outside EPA.
Innovative remediation technologies are defined as those which lack sufficient
perfonnance and cost infonnation for routine use. 1bey include a variety of thennal
methods, bioremediation, physical/chemical techniques and in-situ ground water
technologies. Innovative technologies do not include incineration, conventional
stabilization, land disposal technologies, or conventional pump and treatment of ground
water.
l
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
F. TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION OFFICE (TIO)
~ Treatment versus containment remedies.
Environmental justice concerns have not focused directly on innovative
technologies. However, there are issues related to the treatment versus the containment
of waste. Treatment is generally considered as providing a pennanent remedy while
containment entails efforts to isolate contamination from the environment. One of the
environmental justice goals--economic redevelopment--is directly related to cleaning-
up urban land to satisfactory levels which allow productive economic re-use. This is
generally more consistent with the treatment objective. In addition, the Tribal Outreach
Initiative on CERCLA Reauthorization expressed a preference for neutralization or
complete removalovercappingorcontainment, and promotes the use of new technology
when remedies are selected.
Bemmmendation: Encourage the development and commercialization of
innovative treatment technologies.
The objective of cleaning-up sites for reuse by treatment is best served through
the development and commercialization ofless costly and more effective innovative
alternatives to conventional technologies and through empowering communities to
participate more fully in the remedy selection process.
Additionally, environmental justice activists generally advocate treatment
versus containment of hazardous waste. TIO is continually exploring new treatment
technologies thatmayprove more cost effective in the future. Once again, these efforts
complementthelong-tenn interests of communities with environmental justice concerns.
Bemmmepdatiop: Continue efforts with SBA to promote small businesses
that focus on environmental technologies.
TIO' s outreach efforts can also service environmental justice needs. TIO and
the Office of Research and Development (ORD), on behalf of the Agency's Innovative
Technology Council efforts, have entered into a partnership with the Small Business
Administration (SBA) on new technologies and EPA programs, regulations, and
policies at Small Business Development Center offices around the country. The goals
are to promote the fonnation of small businesses that focus on environmental
technologies; assist technology developers to begin and enhance their business ventures;
assist potential customers of new technologies in identifying alternative technologies
and create incentives to purchase environmentally superior technologies; and to assist
small businesses with compliance by making regulatory infonnation available for
business planning. This effort could help foster minority business in distressed areas,
thereby promoting economic redevelopment.
TIO has developed numerous publications that describe technologies, identify
their applicability to clean-up problems, and identify business opportunities for clean-
up. Some examples include: a series of Citizen Guides to Innovative Treatment
Technologies in both English and Spanish; and the VISITT database, which provides
65
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
G. FEDERAL FACILITIES
66
vendor supplied infonnation on innovative technologies. VISITI is being modified to
designate disadvantaged and minority-owned businesses. Finally, OSWER should
further commit to providinginfonnationonnew treatment technologies at environmental
justice sites.
Recmnmendation; Revise and expand environmental justice training module.
The Environmental Justice module which is currently included in the Public
Participation training course at EPA' s CERCLA Education Center will be revised and
expanded. The module will be added to other training courses where appropriate.
Berommendation; Conduct demographics analysis of a representative sample
of the 263 Superfund NPL sites where innovative
technology was selected as a remedy.
Demographic profiles of the communities surrounding these Superfund
National Priority List (NPL) sites has been generated. TIO should analyze the
relationship, if any, of the innovative technology selected at these sites and the
demographic infonnation describing the communities surrounding the sites.
G. FEDERAL FACILITIES
Background
CERCLASection 120(a)requiresthatFederalfacilitiescomplywithCERCLA,
both substantively and procedurally, to the same extent as any nongovernment entity,
including liability under Section 107 of CERCLA. CERCLA Section 120 also makes
State laws concerning the removal and remedial actions applicable to cleanups of
Federal facilities not on the NPL. For Federal facilities or the NPL, CERCLA section
120 establishes deadlines for completion of the various steps in the cleanup process.
CERCLA Section 120 also requires that federal agencies with facilities on the NPL
enter into interagency agreements with the EPA for selecting the remedial action
establishing a schedule for completing the action. These IAGs generally are enforceable
under CERCLA 's citizen suit provisions (Section 310). Generally, response actions
at Federal facilities must comply with State cleanup standards if they are more stringent
than Federal standards.
SARA Title III: The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
of 1986 (EPCRA) establishes requirements for Federal, State and local governments
and industry regarding emergency planning and reporting on hazardous and toxic
chemicals. It is intended to encourage and support emergency planning efforts at the
State and local level and provide community residents and local governments with
infonnation concerning potential chemical hazards in their communities. While not
subject to EPCRA, Federal agencies are required, by a recent Presidential Executive
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
G. FEDERAL FACILITIES
Order, to comply with the requirements of Title III. In addition, contractors operating
Government-Owned facilities are subject to Title III to the same extent as any other
operator and, therefore, are statutorily required to comply with the full range of
requirements under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
Federal agencies generally must comply with all provisions of Federal
environmental statutes and regulations as well as all applicable State and local
requirements. In addition, Presidential Executive Orders stress the mandate for Federal
facilities to fully comply with environmental requirements and establish procedures for
ensuring that this is accomplished. Executive Order 12088 states that all Executive
Branch agencies are "responsible for compliance with applicable pollution control
standards" which are defined in the Executive Order as ''the same substantive,
procedural and other requirements that would apply to a private person."
Res;oqunendation; Utilize the Federal Facilities Environmental Restoration
Dialogue Committee (FFERDC) for cooperative
environmentaljustice decision-making between Federal
agencies.
Several of tbe issues identified by communities with environmental justice
concerns, e.g., holistic remedies for multiple and cumulative exposures, are applicable
at Federal facility sites. Lessons learned from EPA activities to date can be shared with
other Federal agencies in order to proactively prevent environmental justice concerns,
as well as, avoid unnecessary delays and duplication of effort among Federal agencies.
1be FFERDCprovides for such exchange and a mechanism for joint recommendations.
EPA will continue to play a major leadership role in FFERDC's effort to better
incorporate environmental justice into Federal facility priority-setting and stakeholder
involvement
Remmrnendation; Evaluate all base closing activities for environmental
justice implications.
These activities are ideally suitedforaddressing concerns raised by communities
with environmental justice concerns and intersect with many ongoing OSWER
initiatives, such as the economic redevelopment activity. Environmental justice
community representatives have asked that the base closure redevelopment process be
used to provide affordable housing, accessible health facilities, available training
facilities, and sustainable development in their communities.
Remmmendation; Evaluate and develop policy on cleanup priorities of
Federal sites on Indian lands.
There are a number of sites located on Indian lands that originated from
activities of Federal agencies or activities authorized by Federal laws (e.g., mining
laws). In cooperation with other offices that focus on tribal issues, OSWER should
evaluate and develop policy on tribal roles in the Federal facility cleanup process.
67
OSWER ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TASK FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT
This page intentional left blank.
68