NCD980602163_19991012_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_USEPA - Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_US-EPA Region IV Interim Policy to Identify and Address Potential Environmental Justice Areas-OCR

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
October 12, 1999
TO: State Directors, Waste Management Programs
I am pleased to provide you with the enclosed document entitled, Region 4 Interim Policy
to Identify and Address Potential Environmental Justice Areas (Interim EJP). One of the
appendices of the Interim EJP contains the Region 4 potential environmental justice (EJ) maps.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 personnel utilizes the Interim
EJP as a baseline tool to identify and address potential EJ areas. The Interim EJP is a "living
document" and will be modified as national policy guidance is developed and finalized. The
Interim EJP is intended solely for internal use by Region 4 personnel. As such, the Interim EJP
and supplemental materials are provided subject to the following disclaimer:
DISCLAIMER
The demographic information, methodology, and potential environmental justice
area designation herein do not represent a final Agency decision and are intended
solely to improve the internal management of EPA Region 4 with respect to
environmental justice. They are not intended, nor can they be relied upon, to create
any rights, benefit, trust, or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural,
enforceable at law or equity, by any party in litigation with the Agency. EPA
officials may decide to follow the methodology, and designations presented in
herein, or to act at variance with the Interim EJP, based on an analysis of specific
cite circumstances. Compliance with this policy will not be justiciable in any
proceeding for judicial review of Agency action. The Agency reserves the right to
change this Interim Policy at any time without public notice.
We appreciate your interest in learning more about environmental justice. Please feel free
to contact me at 404-562-8633, if you need further assistance.
Sincerely,
Rosalind Brown
Chief, Office of Customer Service
Waste Management Division
Internet Address (UAL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable 011 Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postconsumer)
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
October 12, 1999
TO: State Directors, Waste Management Programs
I am pleased to provide you with the enclosed document entitled, Region 4 Interim Policy
to Identify and Address Potential Environmental Justice Areas (Interim EJP). One of the
appendices of the Interim EJP contains the Region 4 potential environmental justice (EJ) maps.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 personnel utilizes the Interim
EJP as a baseline tool to identify and address potential EJ areas. The Interim EJP is a "living
document" and will be modified as national policy guidance is developed and finalized . The
Interim EJP is intended solely for internal use by Region 4 personnel. As such, the Interim EJP
and supplemental materials are provided subject to the following disclaimer:
DISCLAIMER
The demographic information, methodology, and potential environmental justice
area designation herein do not represent a final Agency decision and are intended
solely to improve the internal management of EPA Region 4 with respect to
environmental justice. They are not intended, nor can they be relied upon, to create
any rights, benefit, trust, or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural,
enforceable at law or equity, by any party in litigation with the Agency. EPA
officials may decide to follow the methodology, and designations presented in
herein, or to act at variance with the Interim EJP, based on an analysis of specific
cite circumstances. Compliance with this policy will not be justiciable in any
proceeding for judicial review of Agency action. The Agency reserves the right to
change this Interim Policy at any time without public notice.
We appreciate your interest in learning more about environmental justice. Please feel free
to contact me at 404-562-8633, if you need further assistance.
Sincerely,
Rosalind Brown
Chief, Office of Customer Service
Waste Management Division
Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed wtth Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postconsumer)
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
'9,EPA
Environmental
Accountability
Division
(4EAD)
REGION 4
INTERIM POLICY
EPA-904-R-99-004
April 1999
TO IDENTIFY AND ADDRESS
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE AREAS
FOREWORD
This policy will be used by regional staff and management until such time that national
guidelines are developed by EPA Headquarters. However, it should also be considered a "living
document" which will be subject to modifications as new information becomes available and
feedback from Region 4 staff, management, and stakeholders is received. We welcome your
comments, suggestions, and questions on the policy. Please direct all feedback to Connie Raines
at 404-562-9671 or Sheryl Good at 404-562-9559.
This document represents the combined efforts of each division, under the guidance of the
Environmental Justice/Community Liaison Program (EJ/CLP) staff The policy was developed to
outline a process for EPA Region 4 management and staff to use when determining whether a
case should be considered a potential EJ area and if so, what course of action should be taken.
By establishing this methodology, the policy serves as a useful tool to help ensure the integration
of EJ into our daily activities.
If there are any questions in regards to the implementation of the policy, please contact
any of the current members of the Region 4 EJ cross-divisional team listed below:
Environmental Justice Community Liaison Program
Manager Connie Raines [phone]
Air, Water Division Liaison Elvie Barlow ( 404) 562-9650
Waste Division Liaison Sheryl Good [phone]
Management/Grants Assistant Deborah Carter [phone]
Grants Program Manager Gloria Love [phone]
Legal Advisor Rolando Bascumbe [phone]
EJ Division Coordinators
Air, Pesticides and Toxic Management Division Robert Bookman ( 404) 562-9222
Kellyann Belizaire [phone]
Science and Ecosystem Support Division Louis Salguero [phone]
Bill Cosgrove [phone]
Environmental Accountability Division Catherine Fox ( 404) 562-9634
Ntale Kajumba · ( 404) 562-9620
Office of Policy and Management Matthew Robbins [phone]
Wesley Lambert [phone]
Waste Management Division Brian Holtzclaw [phone]
Eddie Wright [phone]
Water Management Division Natalie Ellington [phone]
DISCLAIMER AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Environmental Accountability Division, Environmental Justice/Community Liaison
Program would like to credit the contributions of the following individuals for developing the
Interim Policy to Identify and Address Potential Environmental Justice Areas (Interim EJP):
Natalie Ellington (Task Leader), Becky Allenbach, Rolando Bascumbe, Robert Bookman,
Catherine Fox, Brian Holtzclaw, Ntale Kajumba, Wesley Lambert, Colin Mcisaac, Matthew
Robbins, Louis Salguero, and Eddie Wright. Also, recognized for their efforts in developing this
document: Rosalind Brown, Roosevelt Childress, Scott Gordon, Jewell Harper, Priscilla Oliver,
Carlton Waterhouse, and Cathy Winokur.
In addition, the EPA Region 5 and Region 2 Offices of Environmental Justice (OEJ)
should be recognized for their assistance in developing the Region 4 Interim EJP document. They
are to be commended for creating useful regional policy guidance documents that were used as a
source of reference.
The demographic information, methodology, and potential environmental justice area
designation herein do not represent a final Agency decision and are intended solely to improve the
internal management of EPA Region 4 with respect to environmental justice. They are not
intended, nor can they be relied upon, to create any rights, benefit, trust, or trust responsibility,
substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity, by any party in litigation with the Agency.
EPA officials may decide to follow the methodology, and designations presented in herein, or to
act at variance with the Interim EJP, based on an analysis of specific cite circumstances.
Compliance with this policy will not be justiciable in any proceeding for judicial review of Agency
action. The Agency reserves the right to change this Interim EJP at any time without public
notice.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
April 22, 1999
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Region 4 Interim Policy on Identifying and Addressing
Potential Environmental Justice Areas, {Interim EJP)
FROM:
TO:
John H. Hankinson, Jr.
Regional Administrator
All EPA Employees
I am pleased to announce the finalization of the Interim
Policy on Identifying and Addressing Potential Environmental
Justice (EJ) Areas. The purpose of the Interim EJP is to outline
a process for EPA Region 4 management and staff to use when
determining whether an area should be considered a potential EJ
area and if so, what course of action should be taken. It is
also a useful tool that will ensure the integration of EJ into
our daily activities .
The Interim EJP was created to fill an immediate need to
provide Region 4 management and staff with a methodology for
identifying and addressing potential EJ areas. It directs the
user to consider the low-income and minority population of the
area and make decisions according to specific criteria. In
addition, the Interim EJP includes a number of guidelines that
provide recommendations to the user on how to address
enforcement, permitting, remediation, and community involvement
when potential EJ concerns exist.
There are inherent limitations in this Interim EJP in that
it is based primarily on an assessment of demographics and income
levels. Note that this Interim EJP serves as a first step and a
baseline tool for the user to only identify potential EJ areas.
However, as further guidance is received and finalized from EPA
Headquarters, we will incorporate methods to identify actual EJ
areas which involves a more complex level of analysis. This
Interim EJP should be considered a "living document", which will
be subject to modifications as new information becomes available
and feedback from Region 4 management, staff, and stakeholders is
received.
Several supplemental tools have been developed to help
management and staff implement the Interim EJP. They are as
follows:
• EJ Pocket Guide
• Potential EJ Area Maps
• Interim EJP Informational Sessions
Internet Address {URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable 011 Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postconsumer)
The EJ Pocket Guide is a handy tool which complements the
Interim EJP. It contains a flow-chart outlining an easy five-
step process on how to identify potential EJ areas. The maps
were developed using GIS demographic and low-income data and
illustrates the minority and low-income populations in Region 4 .
Information sessions instructing the user on the purpose and use
of the Interim EJP will be offered to management and staff in the
near future.
The Interim EJP will be available through the following
vehicles:
• Local Area Network (LAN)
• EPA library
Ultimately, identifying and addressing potential EJ matters
within Region 4 will help the region understand the universe of
potential EJ matters, afford the Agency the ability to establish
a baseline of activities occurring in low-income and minority
communities, and accurately respond to internal and EPA
Headquarters reporting requirements.
You may contact anyone from the list below for more
information or copies of the supplemental tools.
Environmental Justice/Community Liaison Program
Connie Raines
Elvie Barlow
Sheryl Good
Deborah Carter
Gloria Love
EJ Division Coordinators
Robert Bookman
Kellyann Belizaire
Louis Salguero
Bill Cosgrove
Catherine Fox
Ntale Kajumba
Matthew Robbins
Wesley Lambert
Brian Holtzclaw
Eddie Wright
Natalie Ellington
Manager
Air, Water Division Liaison
Waste Division Liaison
Management/Grants Assistant
Grants Program Manager
Air, Pesticides and Toxic
Management Division
Science and Ecosystem Support
Division
Environmental Accountability
Division
Office of Policy and
Management
Waste Mangement Division
Water Management Division
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Subject Pa1:e #
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A. Understanding the Definition of Environmental Justice .... · ............ 1
2. Purpose and Use of this Policy ...................................... 3
3. Key Concepts and Terminology ..................................... 5
4. Guidelines for Identifying Potential Environmental Justice Areas ............ 7
5. Guidelines for Addressing Potential Environmental Justice Areas .......... 12
A. Enforcement Activities
B. Permitting Activities
C. Remediation Activities
D. Community Involvement Activities
Appendix
A. Presidential Executive Order #12898 ............................. 1
B. EJ Geographic Information System (GIS) Demographics Request Form ... 7
C. Frequently Asked Questions .................................. 10
D. Implementing EJ in Enforcement Activities ....................... 18
E. Implementing EJ in Permitting Activities ........................ 26
F. Implementing EJ in Remediation Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
G. EJ and Community Involvement ................................ 36
H. EPA Contacts ............................................. 44
Region 4 Environmental Justice Coordinators
Community Relations (Involvement) Coordinators
Geographic Information System Coordinator
Tribal Coordinator
Brownfields Coordinator
Headquarters Environmental Justice Contacts
I. Region 4 Potential EJ Areas Maps ............................. 48
1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, environmental justice (EJ) has emerged as a national and regional policy
issue due to the EJ grassroots movement and struggles and several initiatives spearheaded by
federal agencies and community organizations. In 1994, the Presidential Executive Order on
Environmental Justice #12898 set the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as
other federal agencies on a new road to prioritize the issues of environmental justice. It stated
"each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by
identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income populations in the United States and its territories and
possessions." Section 1-1, Executive Order No. 12898, Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Since the issuance of the Executive Order, EPA Headquarters and Regional Offices have
dedicated attention and resources toward EJ issues. Offices of Environmental Justice were
created across the country by various federal agencies. In 1994, the EPA Administrator chartered
the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), a federal advisory council
focused on EJ issues. NEJAC meets biannually and supplies policy advice to assist the EPA in
serving the public. Since its inception, the NEJAC has become an integral part of the EPA's EJ
program.
On February 5, 1998, the EPA Office of Civil Rights issued an interim guidance on
processing Title VI civil rights complaints regarding environmental permitting. Issuance of this
guidance has increased national visibility and awareness of the responsibility local, state, and
federal governments are held by to comply with civil rights obligations in environmental decision-
making.1
A. Understanding the Definition of Environmental Justice
The EPA Headquarters Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) has adopted the definition
of EJ established by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER). It is defined
as:
"The fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, incomes, and educational levels with
respect to the development and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.
Fair treatment implies that no population should be forced to shoulder a disproportionate share of
1 Executive Order #12898 attempts to deal with disproportionate risk to minority and/or low-
income communities, whereas Title VI prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin,
and the measure of discrimination is whether or not an adverse disparate impact exists.
I
exposure to the negative effects of pollution due to lack of political or economic strength. "2
In the Director of OEJ' s memo dated December 16, 1998, he says, "This definition is
compatible with the mission of the Agency which is to protect human health and to safeguard the
natural environment -air, land, and water -upon which life depends." In addition, "The
OSWER's 1995 publication was widely distributed to business and industry; federal, state and
local government environmental regulatory offices; environmental organizations and other non-
governmental organizations and associations; national, state, and local bar associations; law firms
and corporate environmental counsel offices; community and grassroots group; and the general
public. Therefore, many individuals, groups, and organizations are well acquainted with this
definition. Moreover, the OEJ has used and will continue to use this definition ofEJ. It is
therefore, strongly recommended that, until such time that the Agency changes the above
definition, this should serve as the Agency's standard definition ofEJ because it is not only quite
comprehensive but also is the generally accepted definition since 1995."3
2 Source: "Guide to Environmental Issues -Earth Day 25 Edition, April 11, 1995," EPA/OSWER,
No. 520/B-94-001 (April 1995) at 53.
3 Source: "Distinction Between Environmental Justice and Title VI, And the Future Direction of
the Office of Environmental Justice" Memo from Barry Hill, Director of OEJ, December 16, 1998
2
2. PURPOSE AND USE OF THIS POLICY
The purpose of this Interim EJ Policy is to provide clarification on the concepts of EJ to
Region 4 staff The policy outlines a process to help determine whether a case4 should be
considered a potential EJ case, and if so, what course of action should be taken. It accomplishes
this by explaining the necessary tools to properly define a potential EJ area of concern, setting
forth a process to gather baseline information to conduct an EJ analysis, and considering
alternative actions which may lessen the impact on the affected community. 5 It will serve as a
useful guide for all employees to make some significant steps toward implementing EJ into
functional activities, and as a result, help make a difference in the lives of many depending on
EPA to protect human health and the environment. It is intended that awareness and integration
ofEJ across all functional levels of Region 4 will be increased.
Overall, the policy was created to fulfill an immediate need to provide Region 4 staff with
guidance to:
■ clarify the concept ofEJ through uses of terminology, definitions, and
methodologies through the use of state-by-state thresholds;
■ identify potential EJ areas of concern consistently;
■ ensure greater public participation;
■ answer EJ-related questions that are frequently asked; and
■ provide a road map for all staff to integrate EJ into daily functions.
This policy provides a method for defining minority and low-income populations which is
the first step to identifying potential EJ areas of concern.. Once the basic definitions and
analytical concepts are introduced, the policy delves into how the user can implement EJ in
enforcement, permitting, remediation, and other activities of Region 4. These sections of the
policy address EPA Region 4 practices whereby the fair implementation of environmental laws
and meaningful involvement of all stakeholders can be carried out. It also prompts the user to
explore other opportunities to help achieve "win-win" results for all parties involved.
It also includes a comprehensive discussion on stakeholder involvement which is
considered crucial in ensuring that decisions affecting human health and the environment embrace
EJ. If EPA Region 4 involve affected communities in our decision-making process early on, a
greater possibility exists to enhance trust and partnership between EPA and these affected
communities on environmental issues. Most important, more effective solutions are borne from
this collaborative environmental decision-making.
As attachments, we included several items to supplement an understanding for all
4 "Case" broadly means any site, project, community, area, enforcement action, inspection,
regulated facility permitting action, administrative case, or judicial case.
5 Affected community is defined as an area within a community that has the potential for bearing
environmental and public health burdens.
3
employees embarking on a potential EJ case. Persons needing a quick reference may find the
Frequently Asked Questions section most useful. Other items consist of the EJ Geographic
Information System (GIS) Demographic Request Form and an EJ contact list. Many resources
will be available on the Internet or they can be obtained from the Divisional EJ Coordinator( s) or
the Environmental Justice/Community Liaison Program (EJ/CLP).
It is important to recognize that there are inherent limitations of the current policy.
Although it is possible to determine an actual EJ area of concern, this policy goes as far as
national guidance exist. Since policy issues are still emerging, we will only refer to ''potential El
areas of concern" for this policy. Noteworthy is that this policy does not currently provide
guidance on how to identify actual (versus potential) areas of concern in Region 4, though these
concepts may be incorporated at a later date as the understanding of appropriate analytical
approaches develop further on a national and regional basis. Section 4 presents a valuable state-
by-state reference which lists the current "relative thresholds" to help determine if a respective
EPA case is within a community that is a potential EJ area of concern. Due to this natural
progression on EJ methodologies and technical developments, this policy does not include any
details on defining disproportionate effects; which is a key factor to determining actual EJ areas.
The policy does mention the consideration of cumulative impacts as it relates to siting of
hazardous waste facilities. However, it does not provide the methodology for determining what
are the cumulative impacts from one additional siting.
4
3. KEY CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGY
EPA employees need to know when their regulated facilities, enforcement cases,
permitting actions, or place-based projects fall within potential EJ areas of concern. This section
of the document presents a consistent set of important terms for use in making that determination
and to clarify understanding of EJ concepts within this document. A consistent use of these terms
can help EPA Region 4 more effectively address EJ in the normal course of work and EJ
assessments. The definitions are not intended to carry legal significance, but simply to provide a
useful way to consistently describe the issues and ideas pertinent to EJ analyses and their resulting
uses in program activities.
Environmental Justice
The fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, incomes, and educational levels with
respect to the development and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.
Fair treatment implies that no population should be forced to shoulder a disproportionate share of
exposure to the negative effects of pollution due to lack of political or economic strength.
Target Area
A target area (study area) is a geographical area that is potentially affected by an action
falling under Presidential Executive Order No. 12898. A target area is usually proximate to and
may surround a source( s) of potential adverse environmental and/ or human health effects, often
including, but not restricted to, one or more polluting facilities, or other sources of possible
effects. Typically, this is a radius from a point source; however, in some instances the target area
may be defined differently ( e.g., poulation along a stream or river).
Target Population
A target population includes the potentially affected residents of the target area.
Depending upon the objective and context of the analysis, the target population may also include
transient residents such as migrant workers, commuters, and seasonal visitors. A target
population may constitute an entire population or a subset within the population ( e.g., children or
low-income fishermen). Exposure of the target population to an environmental hazard, may be
the result of a source(s) within the target area or a source external to the target area (e.g.,
consumers of contaminated drinking water or persons doing subsistence fishing on a polluted
body of water).
Reference Area/Reference Population
A reference area is the area that is used as a benchmark of comparison when determining
whether a target area suffers from disproportionate effects to its minority and/or low-income
populations. A reference population includes the residents of the reference area. Therefore, both
the reference area and population provide a context for the interpretation of data from the target
area and population.
5
Disproportionate Effect
A disproportionate effect is an incidence ( or prevalence) of an effect, a risk of an effect, or
likely exposure to environmental hazards potentially causing such adverse health effects on a
minority and/or low-income population, or sub-population such as children, that significantly
exceeds that experienced by a comparable reference population. Both the Executive Order No.
12898 and the latest EPA interim Title VI [Civil Rights Act] guidance, speak to the need to
prevent and remediate disproportionate effects. Although a critical element in addressing EJ, the
technical approaches for determining disproportionate effects are still under development, and as
such are not refined and presented herein. When EPA Headquarters policy is generated on the
subject of these effects, they will be incorporated into this EJ Policy. In estimating effects, the
possible cumulative nature of these effects should be considered. The concept of
disproportionate effect on sub-populations (such as high numbers of minority children) is also
important and should be considered.
Potential EJ Area of Concern
A potential El area of concern is a target area that contains relatively high minority
and/or low-income population where the existence of disproportionate effects has not been
evaluated. Analysis to determine if a site( s) is a potential EJ area of concern may or may not
involve the use of a reference area. This is the most commonly used term in Region 4.
Actual EJ Area of Concern
An actual El area of concern is a target area that has been demonstrated to experience
disproportionate effects and has a significant minority and/or low income population relative to an
appropriate reference area. Analysis to determine is a site ( or sites) is an actual EJ area of
concern is more rigorous and requires the use of a reference area.
Potential EJ Case
This refers to a "case" (broadly meaning any site, project, community, area, enforcement
action, regulated facility permitting action, administrative case, or judicial case) that falls within a
potential El area of concern. This is the common expression for cases that may have EJ
considerations.
Actual EJ Case
This refers to a "case" (broadly means any site, project, community, area, enforcement
action, regulated facility permitting action, administrative case, or judicial case) that falls within a
target area that has been demonstrated to be within an actual El area of concern (i.e.
experiencing disproprtionate effects) through the use of a reference area
6
4. GUIDELINES FOR IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL EJ AREAS
The purpose of this section is to provide a recommendation for defining minority and
low-income populations, as well as recommended thresholds for determining potential EJ areas of
concern. Figure 1, "Potential El Flow Chart" and Table 1, "Relative Thresholds for Region 4"
may be used along with concepts presented herein to assess whether a community meets Region
4's state-by-state standards for EJ demographics and income levels.
It is important to note that self-identified EJ communities should be considered potential
EJ areas of concern along with those identified through analysis of demographic data. This is
because Census data that is generally used in these analyses are from 1990 and so may not be
reflective of current demographic conditions.
Figure 1 outlines a multi-step process for identifying potential areas of concern.
Appendix B outlines the process for obtaining demographic information for a particular case. The
procedure generally involved in identifying whether or not the area of interest is a potential EJ
area by using either the state maps6 included in Appendix I as a screening tool and/or submitting a
GIS request form found in Appendix B.
As a supplement to the policy , the Region 4 EJ Pocket Guide is available to assist you in
identifying potential EJ areas. It offers a concise five-step process to aid in characterizing the area
in which you are working. It outlines the GIS request process, evaluating demographic data, and
defining the EJ status of the community. The Pocket Guide was developed as a supplement to the
EJ Policy to help staff in identifying a potential EJ case for outreach activities, citizen complaints,
inspections, and permit reviews. It will not replace the Policy, but will provide a concise, step-by-
step approach to identifying potential low-income and minority communities.
6 Note: If you experience difficulty in duplicating these maps on a copier, please refer to the
colored maps available from your EJ Division Coordinator, EJ/CLP, or submit an EJ GIS Request form to
the GIS and Information Section. The maps should be used as a screening tool to determine if your area of
interest is a potential EJ area.
7
STEPS TO IDENTIFYING
A POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE CASE
Refer to state maps SubmitGIS Evaluate Is low-income or Case should be Refer to the Model
in Appendix I or Request demographic data minority identified as a Plan for Public
obtain a GIS Form to Rebecca obtained from population percentage potential EJ Participation
Request Kemp, GIS and ors and of the target area in case (fowid on the Region
~ ~ ~ which the case is ~ ~ 4 EJ website) as a tool
Form. Informations Information to aid in the public
When: Outreach Resources Resources located greater ~ei participation process or
activities, Citizens Section, Room Section. than or equal to the contact your Division
complaints, 9Tl I, (Appendix B) State low-income EJ Coordinator of your
Inspections, or or minority threshold? ~ ~ EJ/CLP Division Liaison
Permit for additional guidance.
Reviews Refer to Appendices A-D
in the EJ Policy for Where: guidelines to address EJ.
Appendix D No Yes of Region 4 EJ
Policy or Region 4 ~, EJ Website'
Are you responding
toa
community that
identified itself as a
potential EJ case?
No
~ ,
Not a potential EJ
Figure 1 case. Requires no
further evaluation
at this time.
"Region 4 EJ Website Address: http://www.epa.gov/region4/ejpgs/ejmain.htm
8
A. Recommendations for Defining Minority and Low-Income Populations
This section presents recommendations for defining minority and low-income populations
using demographic and low-income data. The following section presents recommendations for
determining if these populations are significant and may be considered potential EJ areas of concern.
1. Defining "Minority Populations"
This policy uses U.S. Census categories to define "minority" populations. These categories
include American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanics and other
non-White populations.
2. Defining "Low-Income Populations"
There are two options for defining low-income populations in Region 4 analyses and
program applications. These definitions should be used at the analyst's discretion, given the
particulars of the EJ assessment being conducted and the attributes of the data being used in the
analysis. Some of the advantages and drawbacks to using the different benchmarks are identified
below:
• Below $15,000 -This threshold is more commonly used than the poverty status threshold
described below. The main advantage to using the set income ranges in Summary Tape File 3A
(STF3A) as benchmarks for low-income status is that the associated data are updated for
population counts more frequently than poverty data and thus are more current. In addition, the
data are available for most of the same geographic summary levels and cross tabulations of
poverty thresholds. A drawback to using income ranges is that associated data are not adjusted
for family size or cost of living by geographic area. The common units for this statistic, are
percent of households in the target area with below $15,000 income.
• Below Poverty Status -An advantage of using the poverty status as a benchmark for low-income
status is that the associated data adhere to a Federal statistical standard. The data are available in
a variety of geographic levels; block group, tract, county, place, state, Census region, U.S., zip
code, and tribal land. In addition, the data are available in a wide range of cross tabulations, such
as race and age, and will facilitate some types of assessments, (e.g., young children below poverty
as an indicator of potentially high lead paint exposure). Poverty data are also adjusted for family
size and number of dependents. A drawback to using poverty status is that the associated data
are adjusted for cost of living on a national basis but not for regional, state or local variations.
The common unit for this statistic are percent of households in the target area that is in below
poverty status.
B. Determining Potential EJ Areas of Concern
There does not exist one single method for determining potential EJ areas of concern.
However, for purposes of this policy, we are advocating the use of the method using relative
9
minority and low-income thresholds.
1. Relative Minority and Low-Income Thresholds
For both the minority and low-income data, use of a relative threshold in EJ analyses is
generally recommended for determining significant minority and low-income populations, ( i.e.,
potential EJ areas of concern.)
• Minority Thresholds -The recommended relative threshold for use in Region 4 EJ analyses is
1.2 times the state average. This approach assumes that the distribution of minorities is the same
in all reference areas (e.g., Region 4 states). See Table 1 for the recommended thresholds to use
by state.
• Low-Income Thresholds -As discussed above, an analyst may use either income ranges or
poverty status to determine significant low-income populations. The use of a relative threshold is
recommended for EJ assessments in Region 4. The relative threshold is defined as 1.2 times the
percent of households with incomes below $15,000 (or the percent of persons in a target area for
whom poverty status is determined) in a state. In other words, if the percent of households in a
target area with incomes below $15,000 (or the percent of persons in a target area for whom
poverty status is determined) are equal to or greater than 1.2 times the percent of households in a
state with incomes below $15,000 in the state, the target area is considered a potential El area of
concern. For example, if the percent of households in a target area with incomes below $15,000
( or the percent of persons in a target area for whom poverty status is determined) in Alabama are
equal to or greater than 39.76% (22.01 % if the poverty threshold is used), that area is considered
a potential EJ area of concern.
Table 1. Relative Thresholds for Region 4
State Minority Threshold Low-Income Low-Income
Threshold (15K) Threshold (Poverty)
Alabama 32.10% 39.76% 22.01%
Florida 31.99% 30.01% 15.23%
Georgia 35 .72% 30.54% 17.58%
Kentucky 9.95% 41.53% 22.84%
Mississippi 44.30% 47.09% 30.25%
North Carolina 29.89% 32.40% 15.56%
South Carolina 37.68% 33 .91% 18.44%
Tennessee 20.89% 36.59% 18 .84%
10
For additional explanations, please refer to Section 3 (Key Concepts and Terminology). The relative
threshold values were derived from the 1990 Census of Population and Housing, Summary Tape File
3 (STF3) data.
Note: The table was developed for EPA by contractor Indus under EPA Contract Number
68-W7-0034. The relative threshold values above were derived using the 1990 Census of
Population and Housing, Summary Tape File 3 (STF3) data. The minority threshold value is 1.2
times the average minority statistic within each state and the other columns represent the average
low-income statistics within those states. The "15K" low-income threshold is 1. 2 times the percent
of households in the state with below $15,000 income. The "Poverty " low-income threshold is 1.2
times the percent of households in the state meeting a Federal statistical poverty standard.
11
5. GUIDELINES FOR ADDRESSING POTENTIAL EJ AREAS
The previous section outlines the process to identify potential EJ areas by utilizing the GIS
analysis to determine the low-income and minority percentages and then comparing the percentages
to the state averages. The activities addressed in this section and described in the appendices are
essential to the mission of the EPA. Prior to implementing enforcement, permitting, or remediation
activities, GIS demographics and low-income data must be obtained to make an EJ determination.
It is important to note that identification of a minority population or low-income population
does not preclude a proposed agency action from going forward, nor does it necessarily compel a
conclusion that a proposed action is environmentally unsatisfactory. Rather, the identification of
such an effect should heighten agency attention to alternatives (including alternative sites), mitigation
strategies, monitoring needs, and preferences expressed by the affected community.
A. Enforcement Activities (Refer to Appendix D for further details)
EPA Region 4 enforcement personnel should ensure that potential EJ cases are prosecuted
vigorously and expeditiously. On the basis of available scientific literature and experiences, there are
identifiable potential EJ areas of concern that experience a certain type of double jeopardy in the
sense they 1) experience higher levels of exposure to environmental stressors in terms of both
frequency and magnitude; and 2) are less able to deal with these hazards as a result oflimited
knowledge of exposures and disenfranchisement from the political process. It is important to return
violating facilities to compliance as quickly as possible.
In addition, as the case is prosecuted, the enforcement team should be certain to keep the
community informed of developments and as practicable, should seek community input into the
resolution of cases in an appropriate matter. Since every enforcement case is different, and the level
of community interest will vary depending upon the case, there is no single technique for ensuring
that community members are kept adequately informed and their views solicited.
Appendix D sets forth protocol for the enforcement team to consider in the initiation,
prosecution and resolution of an enforcement matter in order to accomplish this enhanced
community involvement. It provides a menu of ideas which can be employed to ensure that the
Region meets its obligations under the Executive Order No. 12898 to carry out its activities so as to
achieve the goal ofEJ.
B. Permitting Activities (Refer to Appendix E for further details)
This section provides permitting staff with guidance on how to consider EJ in the context of
EPA-lead permitting decisions. Permitting decisions include new permits, permit modifications
(except administrative modifications), and permit renewals. Following the steps outlined in
Appendix E will help to ensure that the EPA' s permitting decisions are consistent with Executive
12
Order No.12898, and that these decisions meet the minimum requirements identified by the
Environmental Appeals Board (EAB). 7
For State or Tribal-lead permitting matters, EPA permitting staff should encourage the States to
consider EJ during their permitting process. 8 EPA and the State agency should seek heightened
coordination with one another when a permitting action for a particular facility is perceived as posing
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on a potential EJ
community.
The permit writers or reviewers should first request a GIS analysis to determine if the permit in
question occurs in a potential EJ area of concern using the recommendations described in Sections 4
of this report.
C. Remediation Activities (Refer to Appendix F for further details)
This section provides regional staff engaged in remedial, removal, site investigation and other
non-permitting/non-enforcement activities [ e.g., the annual state-based Performance Partnership
Agreement (PPA) process, environmental impact statements under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA)] with general policy guidance on how to integrate EJ into these activities.
This section was not developed to address each and every EJ opportunity or situation that EPA
staff may encounter; rather, its purpose is to establish an EJ framework for decision-making. In
certain instances of cleanup or site remediation activities, those involving an immediate threat or
actual endangerment to human health or the environment may require some deviation from this
guidance. Some emergency situations, in which time is of the essence, may not present opportunities
for high level of community involvement in environmental decision-making. In those instances, the
high priority may be a timely community notification which triggers an evacuation. In the activities
of NEPA, the scoping, and subsequent processes naturally lend themselves to having citizens in
potential EJ areas of concerns fully participate in environmental decision-making on matters
concerning impacts from construction and other projects. As for PPAs, this agreement lends itself to
meaningful community involvement, as the EPNstate process is one of planning, dialogue and
making annual environmental commitments.
7 One good bibliographic reference is the "Draft Memorandum on Integrating EJ into EPA
Permitting Authority (7/18/96)," prepared by the Enforcement Subcommittee of the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), which reports to the EPA Administrator (located at the
NEJAC web site, http://www.prcemi.com/nejac/publicat.html).
8 Title VI Guidance outlines the details for handling Title VI complaints against a federally funded
agency, such as a State or Tribal government. Compliance with Title VI is mandatory. The outcome of a
Title VI complaint filed by a citizen may include dismissal, mitigation {permit modification) or even the
withholding of federal funding.
13
By following the steps outlined in Appendix F and being familiar with Appendix G (EJ and
Community Involvement), staff can do their part to ensure that these kinds of activities are consistent
with the Presidential Executive Order on EJ, No. 12898, as well as national EPA and regional EJ
strategies and policies.
D. Community Involvement Activities (Refer to Appendix F for further details)
The purpose of this section is to provide EPA Region 4 guidance when assisting communities
affected by environmental injustice. Whether it's a permitting, enforcement, remediation or other
EPA activity, this protocol should be implemented in potential EJ areas of concern. For assistance,
please be sure to contact the appropriate Divisional EJ Coordinator(s), Division EJ Liaisons, Tribal
Coordinators (if appropriate). (Refer to Appendix H for a list of helpful contacts.)
This section will assist the "case team" in selecting the kinds of community involvement and
outreach for the potential EJ area of concern. Becoming familiar with the outlined checklist in
Appendix G is a very good start. The "Model Plan for Public Participation" publication by NEJAC
supplements this checklist and can be obtained from the Region 4 EJ/CLP. (This also can be located
at the NEJAC web site, under publications at http://www.prcemi.com/nejac/publicat.html.)
14
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix Page#
A. Presidential Executive Order #12898 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
B. EJ Geographic Information System (GIS) Demographics Request Form . 7
C. Frequently Asked Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
D. Implementing EJ in Enforcement Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
E. Implementing EJ in Permitting Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
F. Implementing EJ in Remediation Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
G. EJ and Community Involvement .............................. 36
H. EPA Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Region 4 Environmental Justice Coordinators
Community Relations (Involvement) Coordinators
Geographic Information System Coordinator
Tribal Coordinator
Brownfields Coordinator
Headquarters Environmental Justice Contacts
I. Region 4 Potential EJ Area Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
APPENDIX A
PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 12898
FEDERAL ACTIONS TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN
MINORITY POPULATIONS AND LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United
States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1-1 . Implementation
1-101 . Agency Responsibilities. To the greatest extend practicable and permitted by law, and
consistent with the principles set forth in the report on the National Performance Review,
each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by
identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health
or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and
low-income populations in the United States and its territories and possessions, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the Mariana
Islands.
1-102. Creation of an Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice. (a) Within 3
months of the date of this order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
("Administrator") or the Administrator's designee shall convene an interagency Federal
Working Group on Environmental Justice ("Working Group"). The Working Group shall
comprise the heads of the following executive agencies and offices or their designees: (a)
Department of Defense; (b) Department of Health and Human Services; ( c) Department of
Housing and Urban Development; (d) Department of Labor; (e) Department of Agriculture;
(t) Department of Transportation; (g) Department of Justice; (h) Department of the Interior;
(i) Department of Commerce; G) Department of Energy; (k) Environmental Protection
Agency; (1) Office of Management and Budget; (m) Office of Science and Technology Policy;
(n) Office of the Deputy Assistant to the President for Environmental Policy; (o) Office of the
Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy; (p) National Economic Council; (q) Council of
Economic Advisers; and (r) such other Government officials as the President may designate.
The Working Group shall report to the president through the Deputy Assistant to the
President for Environmental Policy and the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy.
(b) The Working Group shall: (1) provide guidance to Federal agencies on criteria for
identifying disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on
minority populations and low-income populations;
(2) coordinate with, provide guidance to, and serve as a clearinghouse for, each Federal
agency as it develops an environmental justice strategy as required by section 1-103 of this
order, in order to ensure that the administration, interpretation and enforcement of programs,
activities and policies are undertaken in a consistent manner;
(3) assist in coordinating research by, and stimulating cooperation among, the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, and other agencies conducting research or other activities
in accordance with section 3-3 of this order;
2
(4) assist in coordinating data collection, required by this order;
(5) examine existing data and studies on environmental justice;
(6) hold public meetings as required in section 5-502(d) of this order; and
(7) develop interagency model projects on environmental justice that evidence cooperation
among Federal agencies.
1-103. Development of Agency Strategies. (a) Except as provided in section 6-605 of this
order, each Federal agency shall develop an agency-wide environmental justice strategy, as
set forth in subsections (b)-(e) of this section that identifies and addresses disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities
on minority populations and low-income populations. The environmental justice strategy shall
list programs, policies, planning and public participation processes, enforcement and/or rule
makings related to human health or the environment that should be revised to, at a minimum:
( 1) promote enforcement of all health and environmental statutes in areas with minority
populations and low-income populations; (2) ensure greater public participation; (3) improve
research and data collection relating to the health of and environment of minority populations
and low-income populations; and ( 4) identify differential patterns of consumption of natural
resources among minority populations and low-income populations. In addition, the
environmental justice strategy shall include, where appropriate, a timetable for undertaking
identified revisions and consideration of economic and social implications of the revisions.
(b) Within 4 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall identify an internal
administrative process for developing its environmental justice strategy, and shall inform the
Working Group of the process.
(c) Within 6 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall provide the Working
Group with an outline of its proposed environmental justice strategy.
(d) Within 10 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall provide the
Working Group with its proposed environmental justice strategy.
(e) Within 12 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall finalize its
environmental justice strategy and provide a copy and written description of its strategy to the
Working Group. During the 12 month period from the date of this order, each Federal
agency, as part of its environmental justice strategy, shall identify several specific projects that
can be promptly undertaken to address particular concerns identified during the development
of the proposed environmental justice strategy and a schedule for implementing those
projects.
(t) Within 24 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall report to the
Working Group on its progress in implementing its agency-wide environmental justice
strategy.
(g) Federal agencies shall provide additional periodic reports to the Working Group as
requested by the Working Group.
1-104. Reports to the President. Within 14 months of the date of this order, the Working
Group shall submit to the President, through the Office of the Deputy Assistant to the
3
President for Environmental Policy and the Office of the Assistant to the President for
Domestic Policy, a report that describes the implementation of this order, and includes the
final environmental justice strategies described in section 1-103 ( e) of this order.
Section 2-2. Federal Agency Responsibilities for Federal Programs
Each Federal agency shall conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially
affect human health or the environment, in a manner that ensures that such programs, policies,
and activities do not have the effect of excluding persons (including populations) from
participation in, denying persons (including populations) the benefits of, or subjecting persons
(including populations) to discrimination under, such programs, policies, and activities,
because of their race, color, or national origin.
Section 3-3. Research, Data Collection, and Analysis
3-301. Human Health and Environmental Research and Analysis. (a) Environmental human
health research, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall include diverse segments of the
population in epidemiological and clinical studies, including segments at high risk from
environmental hazards, such as minority populations, low-income populations and workers
who may be exposed to substantial environmental hazards.
(b) Environmental human health analyses, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall identify
multiple and cumulative exposures.
(c) Federal agencies shall provide minority populations and low-income populations the
opportunity to comment on the development and design of research strategies undertaken
pursuant to this order.
3-302. Human Health and Environmental Data Collection and Analysis. To the extent
permitted by existing law, including the Privacy Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. section 552a): (a)
each Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall collect, maintain, and
analyze information assessing and comparing environmental and human health risks borne by
populations identified by race, national origin, or income. To the extent practical and
appropriate, Federal agencies shall use this information to determine whether their programs,
policies, and activities have disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority populations and low-income populations;
(b) In connection with the development and implementation of agency strategies in section
1-103 of this order, each Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall
collect, maintain and analyze information on the race, national origin, income level, and other
readily accessible and appropriate information for areas surrounding facilities or sites
expected to have a substantial environmental, human health, or economic effect on the
surrounding populations, when such facilities or sites become the subject of a substantial
Federal environmental administrative or judicial action. Such information shall be made
available to the public, unless prohibited by law; and
(c) Each Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall collect, maintain, and
analyze information on the race, national origin, income level, and other readily accessible and
appropriate information for areas surrounding Federal facilities that are: (1) subject to the
reporting requirements under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act,
42 U.S.C. section 11001-11050 as mandated in Executive Order No. 12856; and (2)
4
expected to have a substantial environmental, human health, or economic effect on
surrounding populations. Such information shall be made available to the public, unless
prohibited by law.
(d) In carrying out the responsibilities in this section, each Federal agency, whenever
practicable and appropriate, shall share information and eliminate unnecessary duplication of
efforts through the use of existing data systems and cooperative agreements among Federal
agencies and with State, local, and tribal governments.
Section 4-4. Subsistence Consumption of Fish and Wildlife
4-401. Consumption Patterns. In order to assist in identifying the need for ensuring protection
of populations with differential patterns of subsistence consumption of fish and wildlife,
Federal agencies, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall collect, maintain, and analyze
information on the consumption patterns of populations who principally rely on fish and/or
wildlife for subsistence. Federal agencies shall communicate to the public the risks of those
consumption patterns.
4-402. Guidance. Federal agencies, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall work in a
coordinated manner to publish guidance reflecting the latest scientific information available
concerning methods for evaluating the human health risks associated with the consumption of
pollutant-bearing fish or wildlife. Agencies shall consider such guidance in developing their
policies and rules.
Section 5-5. Public Participation and Access to Information
(a) The public may submit recommendations to Federal agencies relating to the incorporation
of environmental justice principles into Federal agency programs or policies. Each Federal
agency shall convey such recommendations to the Working Group.
(b) Each Federal agency may, whenever practicable and appropriate, translate crucial public
documents, notices, and hearings relating to human health or the environment for limited
English speaking populations.
(c) Each Federal agency shall work to ensure that public documents, notices, and hearings
relating to human health or the environment are concise, understandable, and readily
accessible to the public.
( d) The Working Group shall hold public meetings, as appropriate, for the purpose of
fact-finding, receiving public comments, and conducting inquiries concerning environmental
justice. The Working Group shall prepare for public review a summary of the comments and
recommendations discussed at the public meetings.
Section 6-6. General Provisions
6-601. Responsibility for Agency Implementation. The head of each Federal agency shall be
responsible for ensuring compliance with this order. Each Federal agency shall conduct
internal reviews and take such other steps as may be necessary to monitor compliance with
this order.
6-602. Executive Order No. 12250. This Executive order is intended to supplement but not
5
supersede Executive Order No. 12250, which requires consistent and effective
implementation of various laws prohibiting discriminatory practices in programs receiving
Federal financial assistance. Nothing herein shall limit the effect or mandate of Executive
Order No. 12250.
6-603. Executive Order No. 12875. This Executive order is not intended to limit the effect or
mandate of Executive Order No. 12875.
6-604. Scope. For purposes of this order, Federal agency means any agency on the Working
group, and such other agencies as may be designated by the President, that conducts any
Federal program or activity that substantially affects human health or the environment.
Independent agencies are requested to comply with the provisions of this order.
6-605 . Petitions for Exemptions. The head of a Federal agency may petition the President for
an exemption from the requirements of this order on the grounds that all or some of the
petitioning agency's programs or activities should not be subject to the requirements of this
order.
6-606. Native American Programs. Each Federal agency responsibility set forth under this
order shall apply equally to Native American programs. In addition, the Department of the
Interior, in coordination with the Working Group, and, after consultation with tribal leaders,
shall coordinate steps to be taken pursuant to this order that address Federally-recognized
Indian Tribes.
6-607. Costs. Unless otherwise provided by law, Federal agencies shall assume the financial
costs of complying with this order.
6-608. General. Federal agencies shall implement this order consistent with, and to the extent
permitted by, existing law.
6-609. Judicial Review. This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the
executive branch and is not intended to, nor does it create any right, benefit, or trust
responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party against the
United States, its agencies, its officers, or any person. This order shall not be construed to
create any right to judicial review involving the compliance or non-compliance of the United
States, its agencies, its officers, or any other person with this order.
William J. Clinton
The White House
11 February 1994
6
APPENDIX B
Geographic Information System (GIS)
Request Form
Instructions
Why do you need GIS data?
Part 4
GIS is used to provide map products and tables summarizing EJ demographic parameters in the
vicinity of sources. (Refer to Question 18 in Appendix C)
Provide information about the requestor (i.e. name, division, office, telephone number). This should
be the person to contact for questions pertaining to the area in which you are requesting
information. Provide the date of the request and the date the product is needed. The tracking
number will be assigned by the Environmental Justice/Community Liaison Program (EJ/CLP).
Provide a geographic description of the area that will be plotted. If available, provide the site
latitude and longitude. Specify the mile radius around the site to be mapped. Select either 0-1
mile, 1-3 miles, or 3-5 miles. In some instances one may use another target area (e.g. long stretch
of stream). You may also wish to select all 3. If there are other areas (towns, roads, landfills, etc.)
that should be plotted in the map, list those areas. Specify the name of the title that you want on
the map.
Indicate if you prefer a mapped product and/or if you would like only demographic data. A
summary sheet will provide you with the demographic data.
Provide a brief description of the area that will be mapped. If needed, include additional
descriptions or instructions on the other area to be plotted.
If available, provide any demographic data that you may have. This will serve as a reference to the
product that will be returned to you by the GIS section.
Submit completed EJ GIS request form to Rebecca Kemp in the GIS and Information Resources
Section, Room 9Tl I. If you have questions about filling out the form, call Elvie Barlow at 404-
562-9650.
Return a copy of the completed GIS request form and a copy of the site's summary sheet to:
Elvie Barlow
Environmental Justice/Community Liaison Program
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
8
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS)REQUEST FORM
[Please Print or Type)
(Part 1)
DATE OF REQUEST: Requestor's Name
DATE PRODUCT NEEDED BY: Office/Division Tele. Ext.
EJ TRACKING#: (to be assigned Purpose of Request
byEJ/CLP)
(Part 2)
(SITE/FACILITY NAME or SPECIFY GEOGRAPHICAL AREA) (STREET ADDRESS or RURAL ROUTE)
I I
(CITY/TOWN) (COUNTY) (STATE) (ZIP CODE)
SITE LATITUDE SITE LONGITUDE
MILES RADIUS AROUND SPECIFIED POINT --□ 0-1 Mile □ 1-3 Miles D 3-5 Miles
OTHER AREAS TO BE PLOTTED:
MAP TITLE(S):
(PartJ) (Part 4)
MAP(S) REQUESTED: □ YES □ NO ADDITIONAL SITE DESCRIPTIONS or INSTRUCTIONS:
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ONLY: □ YES □ NO
HOW MANY COPIES? □ COLOR □ B&W
SIZE: □ 8.S"xll" □ 11 X 17 □ OTHER
DEMOGRAPHICS INFORMATION: (Please provide data, if available) (PartS)
Approximate Size of Population:
□ City □ County □ Community/Impacted Area
□ Percent of Minority □ Percent of Low-Income □ Percent of at or below Poverty
Source of Information: 0 Census Statistics (Year) □ Other [Explain Below]
(Part 6)
Return a copy of this form and a copy of the site's summary sheet to Elvie Barlow in the Office of EJ.
(For tracking purposes only)
EJGISRF(Rev2)2-l-99 9
APPENDIXC
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
RELATED TO THE EPA REGION 4 EJ POLICY
Ql. What is Environmental Justice (EJ)?
Al. There is no single definition for EJ. However, EPA HQ OEJ has adopted the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response definition ofEJ. It is as follows: "The fair
treatment of people of all races, cultures, incomes, and educational levels with respect to
the development and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair
treatment implies that no population should be forced to shoulder a disproportionate share
of exposure to the negative effects of pollution due to lack of political or economic
strength.
Q2. What are U.S. EPA's general responsibilities under Executive Order 12898 "Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations"?
A2. On February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued this Executive Order and an
accompanying Presidential memorandum to focus Federal attention on the environmental
and human health conditions in minority communities and low-income communities. To
the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, EPA must make achieving EJ part of
its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and
adverse human health and environmental effects on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States and its territories.
The identification of a disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effect on a minority population or low-income population does not preclude a proposed
agency action from going forward, nor does it necessarily compel a conclusion that a
proposed action is environmentally unsatisfactory. Rather, the identification of such an
effect should heighten agency attention to alternatives (including alternative sites),
mitigation strategies, monitoring needs, and preferences expressed by the affected
community.
Q3. What are the guidelines for "Identifying and Addressing a potential Environmental
Justice Case" and when do I use them?
A3 . Please refer to Sections 1-5 of this Policy Document. Sections 4 and 5 focus on GIS
analyses and addressing potential EJ cases, as well as Appendix B. They outline a process
for identifying and addressing potential EJ cases. They include criteria for identifying
potential EJ cases with respect to low-income populations and minority populations and
provide recommendations for taking EJ into account in enforcement, permitting, and
community involvement matters.
These guidelines should be used by U.S. EPA Region 4 staff whenever they are trying to
determine whether their case is a potential EJ case and what actions to take ( on EPA-lead
activities) if this designation is made. Each Region 4 program will determine those cases
11
for which a GIS analysis should be conducted ( e.g., new cases, existing cases, per
community self-identification, etc.).
Q4. Have national EJ guidelines been developed? Have other Regions developed
guidelines?
A4. National EJ guidelines are being developed. Other Regions have developed or are in the
process of developing guidelines, including Regions 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.
Q5. Why does this EJ Policy Document have limitations?
AS . This Interim EJ Policy was created to fill an immediate need to provide Region 4 staff with
a methodology for identifying and addressing potential EJ cases. There are inherent
limitations in these guidelines in that they are based primarily on an analysis of
demographics and income levels and do not involve a complex analysis of risk or
disproportionate effects (a key factor in EJ assessment). This approach has benefits
because it allows for expediency in identifying potential EJ cases. The guidelines will be
further developed to reflect experience and methodological improvements.
Q6. Can I share these EJ Policy guidelines with the States and other external partners?
A6. Yes. Although this EJ Policy is primarily to assist EPA management and staff in assessing
and addressing EJ cases, they may be shared with other partners. Keep in mind, however,
that these guidelines apply only to those activities where U.S. EPA Region 4 has direct
authority. States and other external partners are not required to follow them but are
encouraged to take them into consideration.
Q7. What is meant by "disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects" (disproportionate effects)?
A7. In Appendix A of the guidance pertaining to EJ and the National Environmental Policy
Act1, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has established the following
definitions:
-When determining whether human health effects are disproportionately high and
adverse, agencies are to consider the following: (a) whether the health effects, which may
be measured in risks and rates, are significant (as employed by the National Environmental
Policy Act -NEPA), or above generally accepted norms. Adverse health effects may
include bodily impairment, infirmity, illness, or death; and (b) whether the risk or rate of
hazard exposure by a minority population, low-income population or Indian tribe to an
environmental hazard is significant and appreciably exceeds or is likely to appreciably
exceed the risk or rate to the general population or other appropriate comparison group;
and ( c) whether health effects occur in a minority population, low income population, or
"Environmental Justice -Guidance Under the National Environmental Policy Act", developed
by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), 1997. The CEQ, which is part of the Executive Office of
the President, oversees the Federal government's compliance with Executive Order 12898. The Internet
address is http://www.whitehouse.gov/CEQ/.
12
An Indian tribe affected by cumulative or multiple adverse exposures from environmental
hazards.
-When determining whether environmental effects are disproportionately high and
adverse, agencies are to consider the following: (a) whether there is or will be an impact
on the natural or physical environment that significantly ( as employed by NEPA) and
adversely affects a minority population, low-income population, or Indian tribe. Such
effects may include ecological, cultural, human health, economic, or social impacts on
minority communities, low-income communities, or Indian tribes when those impacts are
interrelated to impacts on the natural or physical environment; and (b) whether
environmental effects are significant (as employed by NEPA) and are or may be having an
adverse impact on minority populations, low-income populations, or Indian tribes that
appreciably exceeds or is likely to appreciably exceed those on the general population or
other appropriate comparison group; and ( c) whether the environmental effects occur or
would occur in a minority population, low-income population, or Indian tribe affected by
cumulative or multiple adverse exposures from environmental hazards.
QS. Why isn't an assessment of "disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects" (disproportionate effects) included in the guidelines as a
criterion for identifying potential EJ cases?
A8. A methodology for assessing disproportionate effects is still evolving. To date, there is no
agreed upon methodology for conducting this type of assessment and what can be done
may be labor intensive and costly. Consequently, this policy offer a user-friendly
methodology for management and staff seeking a quick assessment of whether a case is
potentially EJ based primarily on demographic information.
Q9. What are "cumulative effects" or "cumulative exposures"?
A9. Total effects from exposures to one or more chemical, biological, physical or radiological
agents across environmental media ( e.g., air, water, soil) from single or multiple sources.
QlO. What is considered "Minority" or "People of Color"?
Al 0. Minority individuals, as classified by the U.S. Census Bureau, are members of the
following populations' groups: American Indian or Alaskan Native; Asian or Pacific
Islander; Black, not of Hispanic origin; or Hispanic.
For the purposes of this EJ Policy, an area is considered to be minority if its minority
population percentage is 1.2 times the state average. See Table I for the recommended
thresholds to use by state. The minority population thresholds for the Region 4 States
(according to the 1990 Bureau of the Census' Current Population Reports, Series P-60 on
Income and Poverty) are: Alabama -32.10%, Florida-31.99%, Georgia -35 .72%,
Kentucky-9.95%, Mississippi -44.30%, North Carolina -29.89%, South Carolina -
37.68%, Tennessee -20.89%.
This EJ Policy uses the term "minority" rather than "people of color" in order to remain
13
consistent with the language in Executive Order No. 12898, but EPA Region 4 is mindful
and supportive of many communities' preference for the term "people of color".
Qll. Why is a different minority population threshold being used for each State, instead
of a single Region wide figure?
Al 1. These guidelines use a different minority population threshold for each Region 4 State
because each State has unique characteristics, in terms of the composition of its
population. Use of a state versus regional threshold reduces some of the uncertainty
associated with the screening analysis. Table 1, page 10 in the policy shows a table for the
relative thresholds (minority) for each state.
Q12. What is the "poverty threshold/level?"
A12. The Bureau of Census' poverty statistics is based on a definition originated by the Social
Security Administration in 1964, subsequently modified by the Federal interagency
committees in 1969 and 1980 and prescribed by the Office of Management and Budget in
Directive 14 as the standard to be used by Federal agencies for statistical purposes.
The national poverty thresholds are revised annually to allow for changes in the cost of
living as reflected in the Consumer Price Index. These guidelines use the 1989 poverty
threshold for a family of four persons ($12,674). This is the threshold upon which the
1990 census poverty data is based.
Q13. What is "Low-income?"
A13 . For the purpose of these guidelines, low-income is defined as 1.2 times the percent of
households with incomes below $15,000 (or the percent of persons in a target area for
whom poverty status is determined) in a state.. An area/community will be considered
"low-income" when its low-income population percentage exceeds the State low-income
population percentage for the State in question.
According to the 1990 Bureau of the Census' Current Population Reports, Series P-60 on
Income and Poverty, the low-income population percentages for the Region 4 States are:
Alabama -39.76%, Florida -30.01%, Georgia -30.54%, Kentucky-41.53%, Mississippi
-44.30%, North Carolina -32.40%, South Carolina -33 .91%, Tennessee -36.59%.
Q14. Why is a "greater than the State (low-income or minority) percentage used as an
indicator of a potential EJ case? What is the significance of "1.2 times the State
percentage" in potential EJ case evaluation?
Al 4. The use of a relative threshold of 1.2 times the state average for both minority and
low-income data is recommended for EJ assessments in Region 4. A relative threshold is
the percent population derived from the reference area (e.g., the state average) used as a
benchmark in determining whether or not a target area has a significant minority or
low-income population. It is considered relative because the threshold is derived from the
14
same geographic area. This is important because the characteristics of some states vary
greatly with respect to their minority and low-income populations. The 1.2 figure is
recommended for use because it allows the determination of areas that contain a
"meaningfully" greater percent minority or low-income population than the reference area
which is consistent with recommendations from the Interagency Working Group Guidance
and the Council on Environmental Quality NEPA Guidance Document, and very similar to
Region 2's recommendation of using 1.25 times the state average.
Q15. What is a "Tribe?"
A 15. All federally recognized tribal entities, such as American Indian tribes (including Alaskan
Native Villages), pueblos, and rancheros.
Q16. What is an actual EJ Community?
A16. A minority community OR low-income community that has been shown to bear
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects.
Ql 7. What is demographic information and how do I obtain it?
Al 7. Demographic information is the statistical data describing characteristics of a population
(e.g., race, gender, ethnicity, income). This information can be obtained via Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) by submitting a request to your Division/Office GIS expert or
the Office oflnformation Services. See the GIS Request Form in Appendix B for more
information on how to obtain demographic information.
Q18. What is Geographic Information Systems (GIS)?
Al 8. The Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis ofEJ uses the National Spatial Data
Library System (NSDLS). GIS is used to provide map products and tables summarizing
EJ demographic parameters in the vicinity of sources. The NSDLS layer commonly used
in EJ analysis includes the 1990 Bureau of Census block group polygons with the 1990
Bureau of Census demographic files, the Topographically Integrated Geographic
Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) 92 data on roads, railroads and hydrography, and the
Envirofacts Points. Envirofacts contain attribute data for EPA regulated facilities for the
major media programs.
Q19. Why are 1990 census data being used? Are more current data available?
Al 9. Our files currently contain complete sets of 1990 census data. We also have population
projection data based on a linear growth model for 1997 and 2002, but the uncertainty
associated with that data is not know. However, the updates may not include information
for all the areas we need to assess. For this reason, we will use the 1990 census
information until data from the upcoming 2000 census is available.
Q20. What is meant by "Cases?"
A20. For the purpose of these guidelines, the term "case" is meant in its broadest, most general
sense and refers to any site, project, community, area, enforcement action, inspection,
15
regulated permitting action, administrative case or judicial case.
Q21. What happens to a case once it is identified as a "potential EJ case?"
A2 l. What happens to a case once it is identified as a potential EJ case is program dependent.
Please consult your Divisional EJ Coordinator or the EJ/CLP for specific direction.
Q22. What is a census block group and why obtain demographic information for the
census block group?
A22. A census block group is a defined expanse or area ofland that contains between 800 to
1000 people utilized by the U.S. Census Bureau in demographic studies. Census block
groups vary greatly in size and are smaller and more densely populated in urban areas than
in rural areas.
The use of the census block groups in demographic analysis is common because it is the
smallest data unit for which all parameters needed to conduct an EJ assessment are
available. In addition, information can be obtained on cases even in the absence of certain
information (e.g., latitude and longitude information).
The disadvantages of using census block groups are apparent when a pollution source is
located near the boundary of the census block group and may, in fact, affect the
population of the adjacent block group; and in less densely populated areas (e.g., rural
areas) where the block group is so large that it may not provide meaningful information.
In both of these cases, the reviewer/assessor should use his/her best judgement (e.g.,
obtain demographic information for every potentially affected block group or for an area
smaller than a block group).
Q23. What is the relationship between EJ and Title VI [Civil Rights Act]?
A23 . In a recent memo dated December 16, 1998 from the Director of EPA HQ OEJ, it
addresses the distinction between EJ and Title VI. The following are excerpts from the
memo titled "Distinction Between Environmental Justice and Title VI, and the Future
Direction of the Office of Environmental Justice."
"Simply stated, EJ is the goal to be achieved. According to the Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response, EJ means:
The fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, incomes, and educational levels with
respect to the development and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. Fair treatment implies that no population should be forced to shoulder a
disproportionate share of exposure to the negative effects of pollution due to lack of
political or economic strength.
Whatever the situation described above, however, the basic premise of the EJ Movement
is that people of color communities and/or low-income communities are
16
disproportionately exposed to environmental harms and risks because several studies,
methodological differences aside, have concluded that they are far more likely to live in
communities near industrial sites, and who, consequently, are exposed disproportionately
to a wide variety of pollutants. If this fundamental premise remains at the forefront of
your analysis of the allegations of environmental injustice, it should assist you in your
evaluation of the situation."
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is one of a number of tools that a community
and/or grassroots group may use to address an instance of environmental injustice.
As you know, Title VI is a federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race,
color, or national origin, in any program or activity which receives federal funding. Title
VI allows persons to file administrative complaints with a federal department and
agencies, including EPA, alleging discrimination. From the Agency's perspective, Title VI
is the process for a community to file an administrative complaint with the Office of Civil
Rights (OCR) alleging, for example, discrimination in a state environmental permitting
programs. Consequently, OCR will process and investigate the administrative complaint
involving the alleged discriminatory permitting actions of the state in accordance with the
Agency's regulations and guidance."
Q24. What is an affected or impacted community?
A24. Affected or impacted communities are defined as an area within a community that has the
potential for bearing environmental and public health burdens.
17
APPENDIXD
IMPLEMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN
ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
1. Identifying Potential Environmental Justice Cases
The enforcement team1 should determine whether a particular matter is a potential EJ
case. Demographic research assistance should be requested from the Information and Resources
Section. This should be done by GIS experts using the criteria set forth in Section 4 (Guidelines
for Identifying Potential EJ Areas) and Appendix B. The lead program assignee on the case
should ensure that this determination of an EJ case is conducted.
The results of this analysis of demographic material and any other information available to
the enforcement team concerning community interest in the enforcement action should be
summarized in the referral package (in the case of judicial matters) or in a separate memorandum
accompanying the sign-off of administrative cases.
Specifically, the referral or sign-off memorandum should include answers to the following:
• What are the demographic characteristics of the population adjacent to the facility of
concern? Is the case or matter located within a potential EJ area of concern based upon
the definitions and criteria in this EJ Policy in Section 4?
• Is the facility on or near an Indian reservation? Is the facility owned or operated by an
Indian Tribe? Is the facility located in Tribal ceded territory? (Ceded territory is any area
where a Tribe retains a treaty right to hunt, fish or gather resources. Maps of ceded
territory can be obtained from the EPA Region 4 Tribal Coordinator, as listed in Appendix
H.)
• Is the enforcement program staff person(s) aware of local citizens or community groups
who have expressed interest in the facility or area in question 2 and what is the nature of
that interest?
• What steps are contemplated at the present time for responding to potential EJ areas of
concern?
1 Enforcement team generally includes a lead program person assigned to the case ( e.g. RPM,
OSC, etc.), EPA attorney, and other pertinent staff members. Where matters have been referred to the
Department of Justice (DOJ) the team would include a DOJ representative.
2 It may be useful to dialogue with the Divisional EJ Coordinator(s), Community Involvement
Coordinator(s), or EJ/CLP who may know of local groups or citizens who have previously contacted EPA
or have raised complaints, concerns, and interests before. Additionally, local and State agencies may
provide helpful information on pollution related complaints from citizens.
19
2. Implementing Environmental Justice in the Enforcement Process
Once a case has been determined to be a potential EJ matter, the enforcement team should
recognize the need to give priority attention to the possible prosecution and resolution of the case.
Also, EPA Region 4 should act promptly to return violating facilities to compliance as quickly as
possible in order to minimize the potential continuing impacts of pollution or risk of pollution to
such communities.
In addition to giving priority to EJ matters, the enforcement team should consider
enhanced public outreach at the three stages in the enforcement process discussed below. It is
recognized that not all cases will be the same; in other words, minor administrative matters may
not call for the same degree of activity as larger cases involving considerable community interest.
However, the enforcement team should exercise its judgement about the kinds of activities which
are appropriate to the case, recognizing its responsibility under the Presidential Executive Order
No.12898 on EJ, as well as Agency policy to promote EJ in all aspects of the performance of our
duties.
There are two tracks through which an enforcement action may be undertaken to secure
compliance by offending parties. The enforcement team can pursue enforcement through civil
judicial3 or administrative4 actions. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has primary responsibility
for managing cases that are the subject of civil judicial enforcement. Therefore, the enforcement
team must coordinate its planned community outreach activities with the DOJ representative.
Where the enforcement team determines that the matter should be pursued administratively,
consultation with DOJ is not generally required. 5 The enforcement team should consider the
steps outlined below in administrative actions. Similarly, the enforcement team should consult
with the assigned DOJ representative regarding the application of these steps in civil judicial
actions.
A. Initiation of Enforcement Actions
It is strongly encouraged that EPA Region 4 employees help target enforcement in
potential EJ areas of concern with the annual Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) process with
EPA Headquarters Office of Compliance and Enforcement (OECA). This MOA process allows
an opportunity for EPA Region 4 to help provide input on targeting manufacturing sectors that
3 For example: filing complaints in federal courts to recover response costs incurred by EPA at
Superfund sites, and seeking court orders to enforce administrative orders issued by EPA.
4 For example: issuance of Unilateral Administrative Orders under Section 106 of CERCLA,
issuance of Administrative Order under Section 309 of the Clean Water Act, or issuance a Compliance
Order under Section 113 of the Clean Air Act.
5 For example: consultation with DOJ is required where a proposed administrative settlement
includes a covenant not to sue. In that instance, issuance of a covenant not to sue would represent a waiver
of a government claim, which may only be done with the approval of the DOJ.
20
have a high percentage of communities that fit EJ demographics, or list more specifically facilities
that reside in potential EJ areas of concern. 6
Once EPA has begun a significant administrative enforcement action against a facility,
EPA may issue a press release announcing the commencement of significant administrative
enforcement actions. 7 Ordinarily, the enforcement team should consider going beyond this
practice when there is actual or potential interest in the matter, particularly for a potential EJ area
of concern. This could include:
• Making contact with the Divisional EJ Coordinators (refer to Appendix H) and other
appropriate persons who will assist in public outreach during the course of the litigation. 8
• Ensuring that persons or groups ( e.g. local citizen or EJ groups) are aware of and are
informed of the commencement of the action. The EPA's original Notice of Violations
(NOV) against the facility should be timely announced and forwarded upon request to any
interested community-based groups. Contact information of known EJ and environmental
groups/networks throughout the Southeast are obtainable from the EJ/CLP and Divisional
EJ Coordinators.
• Conferring with local citizen or EJ groups which are a good source of contacts for
current or former employees of regulated facilities that may have first-hand knowledge of
alleged civil or criminal violations of environmental laws. These contacts may be useful
as witnesses in the investigative phase or during the enforcement process for on-site or
off-site pollution releases. Although the six major federal environmental laws have
employee protection ('whistleblower') clauses for employees coming forth to EPA with
information, staff should undertake efforts to uphold strict confidentiality because of the
potential of retaliation.
• Consulting with the Office of External Affairs (OEA), Press & Media Relations staff for
press releases, such as the initialization and finalization of enforcement actions. This OEA
group can assist in customizing notice to particular groups and individuals who may be
6 For instance, a study generated from EPA's Common Sense Initiative (CSI) for the Automobile
Sector (1998) found that a high majority of the neighboring communities could be classified having EJ
demographics (using 3-Mile Radius Demographic Profiles). The report can be accessed at
http ://www.epa.gov/oar/opar/auto/
7 The Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs has primary responsibility for press
releases announcing the commencement of civil judicial actions. The enforcement team should consult
with the DOJ attorney assigned to cases where the enforcement team determines that a press release
announcing a significant accomplishment in the case would be appropriate.
8 The Divisional EJ Coordinators should collaborate with the Office of External Affairs,
Community Involvement Coordinators (otherwise known as Community Relations Coordinators), etc.
21
interested in the action. 9
B. Prosecution of Enforcement Actions
During the course of civil judicial, or administrative actions, every effort should be made
to keep concerned citizens informed of significant milestones in the litigation. At a minimum,
since EPA has a responsibility to respond to inquiries from the public, the enforcement team
should provide public information about the litigation or administrative action to members of the
community. For matters with known community interest, the enforcement team should work with
Division EJ Coordinators and OEA to provide regular updates on the litigation to interested
persons and groups.
Settlement discussions are a particularly sensitive aspect of litigation with respect to
community outreach. It is always appropriate to reveal that settlement discussions are occurring.
However, the specific terms of settlement discussions are generally confidential and ordinarily
should not be discussed with the general public. However, as discussed below, there are
techniques for obtaining public input into settlement terms when appropriate.
C. Resolution of Enforcement Actions
EJ should be considered in each aspect of the resolution of an enforcement action:
penalties; injunctive relief; and Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEP).
1. Penalties In calculating a penalty, the enforcement team should employ Agency
penalty policies. These policies allow for enhanced penalties for factors such as "sensitivity of
surrounding area" or other discretionary factors. In addition, the enforcement team should use
relevant statutory and penalty policy criteria to determine appropriate penalty amounts given
existing burdens in the community. In appropriate cases, the "seriousness of a violation" will
reflect public health and environmental threats aggravated by a facilities violations. Where
practicable, the enforcement team should consider these factors in calculating original penalty
amounts.
2. Injunctive Relief Where a facility cannot immediately come into compliance, the
schedule for compliance may be a matter of intense public concern. Community concerns about
compliance issues may be magnified if public health threats are perceived to be high (e.g. after a
serious chemical accident, etc.). The enforcement team should consult with DOJ on the
appropriateness of seeking injunctive relief where a judicial enforcement action will be necessary
to bring the offending facility into compliance. Similarly, the enforcement team must coordinate
with DOJ on proposed plans to solicit input from key interested individuals and community
groups. Where the desired relief is being pursued through non-judicial means, such as an
administrative action, consultation with DOJ is generally not required, and the enforcement team
may consider the techniques listed below.
9 It should be remembered that Agency personnel may neither confirm or deny the existence of any
criminal investigation.
22
The enforcement team should also consider creative provisions which can involve the
community in injunctive relief at the facility. It is recognized that the degree to which EPA can
obtain agreement on these points is subject to negotiation. Some examples could include:
• Requirements that the company provide information or other outreach to the community.
• Requirements which provide a role of the community in monitoring compliance at the
facility.
• Provisions for technical assistance to the community.
• Provisions for notifying the community of the public comment periods.
• Provisions to facilitate citizen information committees for ongoing community
involvement in longer-term remedies.
3. Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEP)
The enforcement team should endeavor to involve the community in SEP discussions with
the defendant, EPA Region 4, and the state or tribes (if applicable). 1° Community input is one of
the six factors EPA can consider in the mitigation percentage for the SEP. The policy states that
"SEPs which perform well on this factor will have been developed taking into consideration input
received from the affected community." The higher this mitigation percentage against the SEP
cost, the greater it can help offset the gravity portion of the penalty against a defendant.
Any SEPs should be developed in accordance with the Agency "Supplemental
Environmental Projects" Guidance. The degree of involvement will depend on the range of
potential SEPs feasible for the enforcement action. Some methods for obtaining community input
include:
• The Interim revised EPA "Supplemental Environmental Projects" Guidance should be
consulted both for the types of projects appropriate for SEPs and suggestions for
community involvement. This is located at http://es.epa.gov/oeca/sep/.
• Consider SEPs which have been used in other cases.
• Consult the EPA HQ's Office of Regulatory Enforcement's SEP Internet site which serves
as an aid to enforcement staff and to regulated entities. The Internet address is
http://es.epa.gov/oeca/sep/ The site provides access to SEP Guidance Documents and
the SEP National Database. The guidance documents include the Interim Revised SEP
Policy, a "model" settlement decree and information on administrative procedures
10 SEPs are beneficial projects to be performed by the regulated facility, in order to substitute for some of
the monetary penalties that would have otherwise gone to the U.S. Treasury. SEPs are excellent opportunities for
securing tangible results to benefit the public health and environment for an EJ area of concern.
23
involving SEPs. The national database contains information about SEPs that have
previously been included in environmental enforcement settlements (currently, over 300
SEPs). You can search the database on such parameters as the environmental statute, the
specific type of violation, the technical description of the SEP, and the estimated cost of
the project and the database will list SEPs that match these criteria.
• If the enforcement matter is within a locality that contains a EPA Region 4 initiative ( e.g.
Community-Based Environmental Protection (CBEP) Project area or others)11 consult
with that project's Team Manager to obtain other ideas for community projects which
have been developed through Team efforts.
• Consult directly with community groups who meaningfully represent the impacted or
affected community. Also consult with leaders who are a resource for understanding the
interests of a particular community. It's important to involve interested members of the
community in the process of developing SEPs because members of the community may
recognize pollution sources and points of concern that will have a real impact on the
future well being of the community, which EPA could not otherwise assess. Educational
outreach concerning SEPs is important in all instances to ensure that communities
understand the parameters of the policy.
The SEP policy actively encourages the use of creative settlement approaches in
enforcement actions, particularly where violations have been identified in communities
disproportionately impacted by environmental problems. As noted above, the enforcement team
must obtain DOJ' s concurrence and approval before initiative settlement discussions where the
case is the subject of judicial enforcement; where the penalty amounts sought exceeds the limits
that can be collected administratively;12 and where a covenant not to sue is a component of a
proposed settlement. Conversely, DOJ's concurrence and approval of a proposed SEP are not
required where it is proposed as part of an administrative action that does not include matters
listed above.
D. Actions Involving Indian Tribes
Whenever a potential enforcement action involves an Indian tribe in any way, special
procedures must be followed to ensure that EPA fulfills its trust responsibility and "govemment-
to-govemment" relationship with Tribes. This policy applies when: 1) a facility is located within
or near an Indian reservation (even if owned and operated by non-Indians); 2) a facility is owned
or operated by an Indian Tribe; 3) a facility is located within Indian ceded territory. Situations
involving any of these factors should be brought to the immediate attention of the EPA Region 4
Tribal Coordinator and the program division's Tribal Coordinator.
11 Other place-based initiatives include the Children's Health Initiative, Urban Initiatives,
Brown.fields, Project XL, and others which may have an emphasis on EJ.
12 See for example, Section 309 (g) of CW A, 33 U.S .C. § 1319; Section 122(g)(4) of CERCLA
42 U.S .C. § 9622; and Section 113 of CAA, 42 § 7413.
24
E. Citizen Suit Provisions
Congress deliberately included citizen suit enforcement provisions in federal environmental
protection laws because of its awareness that government resources may be insufficient to
establish the enforcement presence or threat needed to promote compliance. EPA staff should
refer all inquiries regarding citizen suits to the Office of Legal Support. Upon receipt, it is
important for programs to pay partic~lar attention to notices of citizens suits from potential EJ
areas. The respective EPA programs should follow-up with an evaluation of the citizen suit and
then determine if EPA region 4 has an interest in a formal intervention or initiating an enforcement
action related to the citizen suit.
F. Other Enforcement-Related Activities
Debarment and Suspension -The enforcement team should recognize the need to consider
a referral to the Office of Debarment when appropriate in potential EJ areas of concern. The
Office of Suspension & Debarment includes an effective administrative tool for environmental
noncompliance or other misconduct. Suspension and Debarment actions prevent negligent
companies and individuals from participating in government contracts, subcontracts, loans, grants
and other assistance programs. The effect of suspension and debarment by a Federal agency is
government wide . 13
13 See 48 C.F.R. Subpart 9.4 and 40 C.F.R. Part 32. Suspension and debarment actions protect
the government from doing business with individuals/companies/recipients who pose a business risk to the
government.
25
APPENDIXE
IMPLEMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN PERMITTING
ACTIVITIES
1. EPA Identification of Potential Environmental Justice Permitting Cases
The threshold question is whether the impacted population is within the scope of
Executive Order No.12898. A GIS analysis should be completed prior to the initial public notice
regarding the permit application, and should be made publicly available no later than the time of
the initial public notice. If the demographics indicate a potential EJ community, the environmental
and human health burden experienced by that community should receive heightened scrutiny
during the decision-making process.
A. Screening and analysis
Use the EJ Policy Section 4 and Appendix B to determine if the permitting decision
presents potential EJ concerns. In some cases (i.e. cases involving air facilities), the impacted
community may be different from or extend beyond the community where the facility is located.
The permit writer(s) or reviewer(s) should determine the area of the demographic analysis based
upon his/her knowledge of the type and effect of the facility or source.
1. Include the results of the demographic analysis in the Administrative Record and
other publicly available records.
2. Indicate the level of community interest.
3. Indicate if the facility/source is on or near tribal lands, or may impact an American
Indian population, and notify your Division Tribal Coordinator and the Regional
Tribal Coordinator (refer to Appendix H).
B. Public Involvement
Where the demographic analysis indicates a potential EJ community, refer to Appendix G
of this Policy document on EJ and Community Involvement.
2. Consideration of Surrounding Facilities With Respect To Permit Decision-Making:
The permitting writer( s) or reviewer( s) should consider other known surrounding sources
of potential pollution exposure together with knowledge gained from community input and site
visits. Based upon this information, the permitting staff can better evaluate if additional analysis is
needed to determine if the area is a potential EJ area of concern. This analysis requires additional
time and resources, which may or may not be available (see Section 4). The screening analysis, in
fact, may be sufficient to meet the needs of the project which is to work actively with the public
so that an effective permitting plan may be developed and implemented.
27
3. Community Self-Identification Of Permitting Case As EJ
EPA should seek enhanced public participation where a community raises EJ concerns. If
a citizen or community group identifies EJ concerns in an area potentially impacted by EPA' s
permit decision, the permitting writer(s) or reviewer(s) should respond to this self-identification.
Community self-identification should prompt the permitting staff to reconsider its
demographic analysis in light of specific information about the community. However, keep in
mind that if a self-identified community does not meet the demographic requirements for a
potential EJ area of concern, then it is not an EJ community. Also, self-identification as EJ by a
non-EJ community should not be allowed to unduly delay EPA' s permitting decision. See the EJ
and Community Involvement -Appendix G, for guidance on implementing public participation.
4. Responding to Community Concerns
This Section identifies specific responses which may be appropriate, based upon the
permitting staffs evaluation and public input. Every permitting situation is unique, and the
permitting writer(s) or reviewer(s) must exercise its best judgement.
Decisions by the Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) indicate the core ingredients of an
effective response to EJ issues in the permitting process. The EAB has identified two broad areas
in which EPA should exercise its discretion to achieve EJ with regard to a permit. 1 These areas
are: (1) public participation, and (2) the omnibus authority -EPA' s authority under various
statutory and regulatory provisions to set conditions as it determines necessary to protect human
health and the environment.
A. Enhance public participation
The EAB has held that "when the Region has a basis to believe that operation of the
facility may have a disproportionate effect on a minority or low-income segment of the affected
community, the Region should, as a matter of policy, exercise its discretion to assure early and
ongoing opportunities for public involvement in the permitting process." 2 Early and ongoing
public participation helps achieve EJ by ensuring that citizen concerns and information about the
community have a meaningful influence on EPA' s decision-making process.
Public participation is a two-way process. EPA receives information, comments and
advice, and disseminates information, analyses, and decisions. Established public participation
procedures are not always adequate in minority or low-income communities, where there may be
additional barriers to communication. These may include: language barriers; difficulty in traveling
1 See In re : Chemical Waste Management of Indiana. Inc., RCRA Appeal Nos . 95-2 & 95-3
(June 29, 1995)
2 Id., at 17-18.
28
to meeting locations or in meeting at particular times; failure to reach community members
through normal EPA communications; failure to identify the level of education in a specific
community; and a lack of trust which results in apathy or loss of communication. Most of these
barriers are easily overcome once they are identified.
In general, the permitting staff should provide public participation opportunities beyond
the required minimum. The permitting staff should also seek the advice oflocal groups and
individuals on how to gain meaningful participation within a specific community. (Refer to the EJ
and Community Involvement, Appendix G, for specific guidance on enhancing public
participation.)
B. Consider exercising authority to set permit conditions
The omnibus authority provided in various statutes and regulations gives EPA the
discretion to write permits that take disproportionate effects into account.3 Permitting personnel
should consider the following issues when developing permit conditions:
1. Monitoring It may be appropriate to include permit conditions that set additional
monitoring requirements, or require the permitted facility to make monitoring data more readily
accessible to the impacted community.
2. Risk Reduction Any additional steps which will reduce risk from a permitted activity
are appropriate, where the impacted population already faces a heightened risk of harm to human
health and the environment. The team may include improved or more stringent standard
operating procedures (SOPs) to reduce releases, and therefore exposures. For example, SOPs
may include surface facility construction and material handling procedures to reduce air emissions.
3. Release Preparedness Additional requirement for emergency preparedness may be
appropriate to address the risk from an accidental or unpermitted release.
EPA can also play an important role in encouraging the parties to reach separate
agreements outside the scope of the agency's permitting authority. For example, the permit
applicant and community members may be able to negotiate truck routes or operating hours to
eliminate the impact of a facility on that community.
C. Active Dialogue Between States, Tribes and EPA
As most permitting programs are delegated, assumed, or authorized, it is recommended
that the EPA and the federally funded agency have open discussions for permits in potential EJ
3 Consult with the EPA Region 4's Office of Legal Support to determine sources of omnibus
authority in particular permitting situations, if necessary. Authorities identified by the EAB include RCRA
Section 3005 (c)(3) (for TSD facility permits) and the SOWA, 40 C.F.R. § 144.52(a)(9) (for UIC
permits). Other relevant provisions include 40 C.F.R. § 761.60(e) (for alternate PCB disposal under
TSCA); CAA Section l 73(a)(5), 42 U.S.C. § 7503(a)(5) (for permits in nonattainment areas); and CWA
Section 402(a)(l), 42 U.S.C. § 1342(a)(l) (for NPDES permits).
29
areas of concern. Collaborative dialogue on a draft or renewed permit, may be suggested if it
appears that it would be beneficial to modify permit conditions to increase the protection of public
health and the environment in these potential EJ areas of concern. In the course of the permitting
process, thoughtful EJ consideration and discretion may help avoid disproportionate high and
adverse human health and environmental effects of pollution. (Refer to questions 2 and 7 in
Appendix C)
30
APPENDIXF
IMPLEMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN
REMEDIATION AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
For EPA-lead remediation activities at Superfund sites, regional staff should take
advantage of the in-house infrastructure of Community Involvement (or Relations) Coordinators
and Divisional EJ Coordinators. Remedial and Removal personnel should also ensure that the
environmental laws are being applied uniformly manner and that meaningful involvement is carried
out for all people, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income.
For state-lead remediation activities, regional staff should encourage the state agency to
consider EJ in its decision-making processes. EPA Region 4 and the state agency should seek to
heighten the level of coordination with one another when remediation actions may be perceived to
have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on an EJ area of
concern. (Refer to questions 2 and 7 in Appendix C)
1. Remediation Activities
A. Identification of Potential EJ Remediation Cases
The threshold question is whether the impacted population is within the scope of
Executive Order No. 12898. Demographic analyses and sampling are the best tools to make this
determination using the recommendations presented in Section 4 and Appendix B. The results of
this analysis should be made publicly available during the initial stages of remediation or during
the initial public meeting. If the demographics indicate a potential EJ community, the
environmental and human health burden experienced by that community should receive
heightened scrutiny during the decision-making process. In some cases the impacted community
may be different from or extend beyond the community boundaries where the remediation activity
is occurring. In such cases, the remedial project manager (RPM) should determine the area of the
demographic analysis based upon his/her knowledge of the site and sampling results. If the site is
on or near tribal lands, or may impact an Indigenous population, the regional project managers
should notify the Regional Tribal Coordinator. In any case, make the results of the demographic
analysis and sampling publicly available as soon as these have been obtained.
Along with demographic analysis screening to identify potential EJ concerns, the RPM
should evaluate the level of community interest in the project. This analysis requires additional
time and resources, which may or may not be available (see Section 4). The screening analysis, in
fact, may be sufficient to meet the needs of the project which is to work actively with the public
so that a successful management plan may be developed and implemented.
B. Community Self-Identification Of Remediation Site As EJ
The Region should seek to enhance public participation and outreach where a community
raises EJ concerns. If a citizen or community group identifies EJ concerns in an area potentially
impacted by the clean-up activity, the RPM should respond to this self-identification. Adequate
community participation is an issue whether or not the project manager identifies that the
32
community falls within the recommended threshold demographic values.
C. Involving Communities in the Preliminary Assessment and Site Investigation
Local citizen or EJ groups have been found to be a good source of contacts for current or
former employees of regulated facilities that may have first-hand knowledge of historical waste
management practices. These contacts have been proven to be very useful in the information
gathering phase to assess on-site or off-site pollution releases. For instance, with the facilitation
of an EJ group in Spartanburg, SC, a dozen employees came forth to EPA in order to report how
waste from an 80-year old abandoned fertilizer plant was handled. The information improved the
quality of sampling targeting for contaminants on the large + 30 acre Superfund site.
RP Ms should also take advantage of the community knowledge of the local environment,
such as any terrain changes, which could have effected the migration of remediation pollutants
off-site or on-site.
D. Responding to Community Concerns
Public participation is a two-way process. EPA Region 4 staff have the capability to
foster this by having intimate knowledge of the progress on a remedial activity. Staff should share
this information with community constituents in a timely and proactive manner, and in a manner
that can be understood. Draft work plans or progress reports about the cleanup should be shared
with leaders oflocal community groups that have shown a real interest in being informed of
incremental steps of progress. The use of"carbon copies" can be used as a practice to regularly
inform citizens when the Superfund process or other EPA processes are making headway.
Providing thorough answers in layperson terms and follow-up to community inquiries, questions,
concerns are essential to maintain EPA Region 4's credibility. (See Appendix G, EJ and
Community Involvement, for more detailed information.)
Besides this information distribution, EPA Region 4 staff should look for opportunities for
meaningful community involvement in decision-making. Community involvement revolves around
the principles that "People should have a say in decisions about actions which affect their lives"
and that "Public participation includes the promise that the public's contribution will influence the
decision."1 Project managers should be alert to issues that potential EJ communities of concern
raise, particularly off-site pollution migration ( e.g. air pollution fall-out or surface water run off,
etc.) beyond the traditional fence-lines of Superfund or other EPA sites. In the long run, a
community-based consensus decision is often one that will stand the test of time. Early "buy-in,"
consideration and incorporation of citizen concerns aid in the creation of better environmental
solutions.
Ensuring adequate public participation may be a challenge in minority or low-income
1 These values are adapted from the "The Model Plan for Public Participation" publication by
EPA's National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) (found at this Internet web site,
http://www.prcemi.com/nejac/publicat.html.)
33
communities where there may be additional barriers to communication. These may include
difficulty in traveling to meeting locations, lack of sufficient notice of meetings, language barriers,
etc. These barriers in and of themselves may result in a lack of trust which could lead to a loss of
communication. Therefore, EPA staff should make decisions that will limit these barriers, if
possible.
E. Keeping Citizens Informed of Remediation Progress
EPA staff should take advantage of local citizen or EJ groups as a vehicle to distribute
information on remediation progress. For instance, new releases of remediation-related
documents may be considered to these key local groups from the EPA, EPA' s remediation
contractor, or the potential responsible party's (PRPs) contractor. Appropriate draft or final
documents may be distributed to these centralized local groups, for the benefit of timely access
and understanding of how the remediation is progressing. 2
F. Responding to Grants/Economic Development-Related Concerns in the Remediation
Process
This section identifies specific responses which may address grants/economic related
questions, based on the project manager's evaluation and the public request for grant/economic
development information. Every remediation situation is unique, and regional project managers
must exercise his/her best judgement when providing grant/economic development related
information.
Economic development and the availability of grants often is an underlying concern faced
by EJ communities involved in an environmental remediation. The general information provided
below should aid RPMs in responding to questions on this subject matter.
1. Grants
RP Ms should make EJ community groups or individuals aware of the availability of such
funding small grant funding tools such as: EJ Small Grants, EJ/P2 Grants, and the Environmental
Education Grant. Many of these have grant application windows in the Spring of each year. Other
worthwhile grants include Lead Abatement and Technical Assistance Grants (TAG). Each
division may also award grants on a discretionary basis for specific EJ projects mandated by that
Division's senior leadership. To obtain information on specific EJ projects, the RPM should
contact the appropriate division's EJ coordinator. The Technical Outreach Services for
Communities (TOSC) is a non-advocate technical assistance program provided at no cost to
communities which have hazardous substance concerns. For Region 4, the EPA-funded TOSC
program directly helps communities with a hot-line number (l-888-683-5963.)
2 The report, "Community involvement in the Enforcement Process Pilot Project Report: Piloting
innovative ways to enhance community involvement in the enforcement process" shows examples of new
techniques within Superfund for public participation. Office of Site Remediation Enforcement, January,
1999
34
2. Economic Development
The Worker Training, CBEP and Brownfields programs are tools for achieving economic
development in EJ communities. The RPM should refer concerned groups or individuals to the
appropriate regional contacts responsible for managing these programs. (Refer to Appendix H.)
If an economic development project is underway in the community, the RPM should take steps to
include appropriate staff in public meetings, etc.
2. Environmental Assessment or Impact Activities
This guidance should be considered when conducting the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) compliance analyses. EPA can apply EJ considerations during the review or
composing environmental assessments (EA's) or environmental impact statements (EIS). These
activities are covered under NEPA for: research and development activities; facilities
construction; wastewater treatment construction grants under Title II of the Clean Water Act and
under certain Appropriations Acts; and EPA-issued National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits for new sources subject to new source performance standards. A
guidance document entitled "Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice Concerns in
EPA 's NEPA Compliance Analyses" is available to assist EPA staff responsible for developing
EPA NEPA compliance documentation, including EISs and EAs.
This BJ-related guidance is intended to 1) heighten awareness of EPA staff in addressing
EJ issues within NEPA analyses; 2) present basic procedures for identifying and describing
junctures in the NEPA process where environmental justice issues may be encountered; and; 3)
present methods for communicating with the affected population throughout the NEPA process.
3. Performance Partnership Agreements (PPAs) Activities
Region 4 participates in the National Environmental Performance Partnership System
through the development of Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs) and Performance Partnership
Agreements, (PP As), with states/tribes. The PP A is a strategic document with negotiated
environmental priorities and goals agreed to by the Regional Administrator and the State/Tribe
which may also be used as a workplan for a grant (i .e., PPG). The PPA will identify EPA roles
and responsibilities, state-EPA initiatives, and special focus areas as well. Because this document
outlines the environmental commitments/initiatives of a State/Tribe, it is imperative that all
interested EJ stakeholders participate in the development of this strategy.
Region 4 staff should encourage states/tribes using the PP A/PPG process or the traditional
categorical workplan process to include EJ components in their environmental protection
activities. In the creation of these annual agreements, EJ organizations/groups should be invited
to participate in the public dialogues before these agreements become final. A listing ofEJ
organizations/groups located in Region 4 can be obtained from the Divisional EJ Coordinator or
the EJ/CLP.
35
APPENDIXG
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
The core values for the practice of community involvement1 include:
• People should have a say in decisions about actions which affect their lives;
• Public participation should include the opportunity to provide meaningful input
into Agency's decisions;
• The community involvement process should communicate the interest of all
participants;
• The public participation process should seek out and facilitate the involvement of
those potentially affected;
• The process involves participants in defining how they participate;
• The community involvement process communicates to participants how their input
was, or was not, utilized; and
• The public participation process provides participants with the information they
need to participate in a meaningful way.
COMMUNITY CHECKLIST
1. Identify Stakeholders
Developing a relationship with community organizations and residents is essential for
successful public participation. Consider placing a higher priority on involving groups and
individuals who actually reside within the EJ area of concern and who may be at higher risk to
exposure to environmental hazards, versus those stakeholders which live further away.
Conducting community interviews helps EPA identify interested stakeholders. In addition,
contacting EJ networks ( e.g. the non-profits such as the Southern Organizing Committee in
Atlanta, GA) can place you in touch with small community grass-roots groups in different
Southeast localities. The interviews also provide the EJ stakeholders and community leaders an
opportunity to offer input into decisions that may affect their health, property values and lifestyles.
The stakeholders include:
✓ Grassroots/community-based organizations
✓ Environmental organizations
✓ Homeowner and resident organizations
✓ Civic/public interest groups
✓ Medical community
✓ Indigenous people
1 These values are adapted from the "The Model Plan for Public Participation" publication by
EPA's National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) (found at this Internet web site,
http://www.prcemi.com/nejac/publicat.html.)
37
✓ Not-for-profit and non-governmental organizations
✓ Religious and spiritual community
✓ Business and trade organizations
✓ Industry
✓ Government Agencies (federal, state, county, local and tribal)
✓ Local institutions and foundations
✓ Educational institutions and academia (Minority Academic Institutions)
✓ Media/Press
Community interviews are conducted to assess the potential EJ area of concerns through
one-on-one conversations, small group meetings and/or telephone. The interview process allows
the case team to relay what the Agency may like to do, inform the community on how they can
become involved, and request when and how the community would prefer to receive information.
Examples of questions which should be asked during the interviews are:
1. When did you first become aware of environmental problems in your community?
2. Do community residents believe their health, or their children's health, may be affected by
local pollution?
3. What are your current concerns, and how have you acted on these concerns?
4. How sensitive is the public in the area to environmental issues?
5. How does the community typically perceive the presence of federal/state officials in the
community?
6. What kinds of issues have attracted the most public attention?
7. Are you interested in receiving more information about environmental issues in your
community? If yes, what's the best way to provide that information to you?
8. What kinds of information do you need?
9. Has an active vocal group leader ( or leaders) emerged in the community?
10. Can you suggest other individuals or groups that should be contacted for additional
information?
2. Prepare a Community Involvement Plan or Communications Strategy
After conducting the community interviews, the case team should consider developing a
Community Involvement Plan (CIP) or Communications Strategy to identify the community's
concerns and outline the planned community involvement activities. If devised and implemented,
these plans or strategies can successfully build community-based environmental solutions and help
minimize disputes or conflicts later on. An effective and thorough CIP should include the
following items:
✓ describe the environmental process and programs involved
✓ address EJ and community-based environmental protection issues
✓ site or area description and history
✓ depict community profile and demographics;
38
✓ highlight key community concerns
✓ chronology of expected community involvement activities detailing the areas
where the community can participate
✓ define timelines and techniques (fact sheets, update letters, flyers, meetings)
✓ lists of contacts and interested parties
✓ locations for information repositories and administrative record
✓ potential locations for public meetings
✓ newspaper articles
Identify ways to communicate pertinent information to the community. Ensure language
and cultural barriers are overcome by translating documents into various languages to best meet
the community's needs; provide technical assistance as necessary; address literacy, access to
information and privacy issues; and reconfirm the community's preferred types of
communications. Consider creating a mailing list encompassing the surrounding community
(within one or two mile radius of the potential EJ area of concern).
3. Perform Outreach on State and Federal Hot-lines and Contacts to Report Violations
and Emergencies
EPA programs should recognize the importance of citizens reporting complaints to
regulated authorities and engaging in proper follow-up to their concerns. When appropriate, EPA
staff should encourage state environmental delegated programs to enhance citizen complaint
hotlines and their response actions by making them accessible and affordable, as some: may not
have 1-800 phone numbers, and require an expensive long distance call; may not be well
advertised within the communities; may not have an answering service; and may not necessarily
operate 24 hours a day and 7 days a week.
Similarly, EPA should endeavor to expand community education and outreach regarding
its Emergency Response and Removal 1-800 hot-line and other programmatic hotlines. Giving
citizens timely and affordable access to report suspected environmental violations, concerns or
emergencies to EPA or the states meets the EJ definition requirement of allowing citizens
'meaningful involvement.' Proper follow-up or investigation of these complaints is also
important.
In addition, EPA Region 4 staff should take advantage of opportunities to share names of
primary contacts on program issues of community interest, our organizational charts, e-mail
addresses to improve easier customer service access with our offices. Regarding phone numbers,
staff are encourage to share with our external customers (i .e., grassroots groups and citizens) who
cannot afford long distance calls to use our Region 4 toll-free number (1-800-435-9233 and 9234,
OEA).
39
4. Establish Local Forums for Community Input or Resolutions
A. Community Advisory Groups (CAG)
These CAGs are a way to seek out representatives of diverse community interests, and
facilitate their involvement. Some programs ( e.g. Superfund and Community-Based
Environmental Projects) have proven CAGs are worthwhile where there is sufficient and sustained
interest. CAGs provide a setting in which representatives of the local community can receive up-
to-date information about the status of activities ( e.g. cleanups, etc.) by state and federal agencies.
In addition, CAGs have proven themselves as effective vehicles to identify other local
environmental problems ( outside EPA' s jurisdiction), so that problem identification and solving
on a local level can occur.
The CAG should definitely have a makeup of impacted community residents, as well as
local public interest groups which have as a high priority the public health and environment of the
community. The CAG nomination and selection process should ensure balanced representation of
these interests with other representatives whose priority is economic. In addition, resources may
be leveraged by ensuring representation of local expertise for technical and science reviews. The
CAG can be an effective public forum in which all affected and interested parties can have a voice
and actively participate in the case resolution.
B. Community Advisory Boards at Federal Facilities
The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) are
also obligated to work with the public to find solutions to environmental restoration and waste
management challenges. At DOD, implementation policies are in effect for establishing and
maintaining Restoration Advisory Boards (RABs) at all closing installations and at non-closing
installations where the local community expresses interest. The principle is to offer an
opportunity for communities to provide input to the cleanup process. Similarly, the DOE has
established Site-Specific Advisory Board (SSABs) to involve stakeholders in the decision-making
process at federal facilities . Like a CAG, if impacted EJ community members are adequately
represented, RABs and the SSABs can be an effective public forum in which all affected and
interested parties can have a voice and actively participate in the resolution of environmental
issues.
C. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
In potential EJ areas of concern where a certain case or situation raises serious conflicts
between citizens and states or citizens and industry, EPA staff may elect to apply environmental
dispute resolution practices. EPA Region 4 staff should be aware that the annual EPA Region 4
budget contains appropriated funds for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) training, facilitation
and intervention. In controversial, high profile or complex cases, staff should consider the
benefits of applying ADR skills or mediation afforded by these contracts. Conflicts may be
resolved by finding constructive solutions with community involvement.
40
5. Establish Regional Forums for Community Input or Resolutions
Public meetings on programmatic issues may be conducted to foster partnerships and
information exchange between impacted EJ communities and EPA programs. Using a 'summit'
or 'focus group' format, the EPA has an opportunity to: improve regulatory decision-making with
respect to communities near regulated sites or facilities; allow citizens direct access to EPA
officials and staff in charge of providing solutions to environmental problems; create plans of
action that involve input from grassroots groups; and provide a sounding board for community
concerns. For instance, the Waste Management Division successfully used the EJ Summit format
on two (2) occasions and other programs have used the focus group format.
6. Host Public Meetings and Availability Sessions
Public participation is encouraged through public meetings and availability sessions.
These meetings help educate the community and provide a means for the community to influence
EPA' s decisions and actions. A public meeting is a more formal meeting in a large group setting
with an outlined agenda and presentations, whereas an availability session is an informal meeting
which allows the community to ask questions of federal representatives on a one-to-one basis.
An important point is to advertise public meetings in the affected community's local paper.
Distribute notifications (i.e. flyers) announcing public meetings and availability sessions to the
mailing list to encourage active public participation. Every notification will have a phone number
and address for communities to contact regarding meetings, pending issues, entering concerns,
seek participation and/or add items to the meeting agenda. Issue press releases to the local media
announcing the meeting. The Office of External Affairs (OEA) Press and Media Relations staff
will be accessible to the writing/editing press releases, and supporting press conferences and
media events. The Press and Media Relations staff will also assist with writing/editing press
releases, and supporting press conferences and media events. Contact local television and radio
stations when meetings are scheduled. Develop public service announcements to announce
activities occurring in the community.
When scheduling public meetings, ensure time frames do not conflict with work schedules,
rush hours, and other community commitments that may decrease attendance. Where
appropriate, translators should be provided for limited-English speaking communities.2 Where the
majority of potentially affected audiences speak a language other than English, EPA will find a
translator. However, in fragmented communities with multiple ethnic backgrounds, English will
be the language of choice. Below are some items to remember when planning a public meeting:
2 For translating some EPA written publications ( e.g. meeting notices, press releases, etc.) from
English to the foreign language (e.g. Hispanic, Asian languages, etc.) within Superfund potential EJ areas
of concern, call the Superfund Technical Support Center at [phone], Romega Dugger. OSWER
currently has a contract with the U.S. State Department for these kinds of services.
41
• Meeting should be accessible ( close to public transportation and adequate
parking).
• Meeting should be held in a neutral location (public library, local church,
community center, local school, etc.).
• Visual aids should be used to illustrate the work and allow for more effective
communication (flip charts, maps, poster boards, overheads, slides, handouts, etc.)
Graphics, posters exhibits and software materials may also be used to increase
participation ofEJ stakeholders.
• Create an accepting environment (i.e., avoid use of panels and head tables as room
layouts.).
• Meeting times should include consideration of factors such as time of day and year,
( evenings and weekends accommodate working people) and careful scheduling
avoids conflicts with other community or cultural events.
7. Follow-Up After Public Meeting
Follow-up is considered essential for maintaining EPA credibility in potential EJ areas of
concern. After holding a public meeting/availability session, establish and maintain a procedure to
follow up with concrete actions to address the communities' concerns, particularly if questions .
arise which are not answered at the meeting. Examples include, but are not limited to: letters, fact
sheets, phone calls, and site visits. Workshops, seminars and grants are an effective mechanism to
develop partnerships between agencies, workers and community groups. Formation of
cooperative agreements can be beneficial to all parties involved.
The Divisional EJ Coordinators, Community Relations and other communications staff
will assist in preparing and exploring other options including:
• Repository of EPA documents at local library
• Surveys and or Internet feedback
• Telephone Hotline
• Notification ofEPA Small Grants and Technical Assistance Grant (TAG)
programs
• Training and Education Programs, Workshops and Materials
• Public database and Bulletin Boards
• Participation in Civic and Community Activities
• Formation of Community Advisory Groups (CAG)
For creating sustaining technical support links to the community, it may be effective for
EPA to contact local institutions and foundations. Contact, as appropriate, Historically Black
Colleges and Universities (HBCU) and Minority Institutes (MI), Hispanic Serving Colleges and
Universities (HSCU), Indian Centers and other groups. Some HBCU's have been very effective
in lending technical support to deserving community groups.
Grants can be an effective tool for empowering and expanding the capacity of the
community to organize, monitor and play a continuing role in environmental decision-making.
42
Contact the Office ofEJ and the Divisional EJ Coordinators to understand the current selection,
availability and deadlines of grants (most of which proposals are due in Spring of 1998). These
small grants of $20,000 ( or less) can go a long way to help build community education on
environmental and public health issues (e.g. EJ, Environmental Education, etc.). Technical
Assistance Grants (available from the Superfund program) are $50,000 grant which help
communities with technical assistance on long-term cleanups. Grants are an effective tool to help
foster collective participation in decisions that affect a communities' well being.
43
APPENDIXH
EPA Region 4 Environmental Justice Contacts
EJ Cross-Divisional Team
Environmental Justice/Community Liaison Program Connie Raines, Manager
Phone: ( 404) 562-9671
Elvie Barlow, Air and Water Division Liaison
Phone: ( 404) 562-9650
Deborah Carter, Management/Grants Assistant
Phone: [phone]
Sheryl Good, Waste Liaison
Phone: [phone]
Gloria Love, Grants Coordinator
Phone: ( 404) 562-9672
Office Fax: [phone]
Air, Pesticides and Toxic Management Division Robert Bookman
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Kellyann Belizaire
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Environmental Science Division Louis Salguero
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Environmental Accountability Division Ntale Kajumba
Phone: ( 404) 562-9620
Fax: [phone]
Catherine Fox
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Office of Policy and Management Matthew Robbins
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Wesley Lambert
Phone: ( 404) 562-8316
Fax: [phone]
Waste Management Division Brian Holtzclaw
Phone: ( 404) 562-8868
Fax: [phone]
Eddie Wright
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Water Management Division Natalie Ellington
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: last name.first [e-mail]
45
EPA Region 4
Community Relations (Involvement) Coordinators
North Site Management Branch
South Site Management Branch
Emergency Response and Removal
Federal Facilities
Diane Barrett
Phone: [phone]
Fax: ( 404) 562-8788
E-mail: barrett. diane@epamail. epa. gov
Cindy Gibson
Phone: [phone]
Fax: ( 404) 562-8788
E-mail: [e-mail]
David Derokey
Phone [phone]
Fax: (404) 562-
E-mail: [e-mail]
Rose Jackson
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Angela Leach
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: leach.angela@epamail. epa. gov
Carlean Wakefield
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: wakefield. carlean@epamail. epa. gov
Sherryl Carbonaro
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: carbonaro. sherryl@epamail. epa. gov
Michael Henderson
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: henderson. rnichael@epamail. epa. gov
Tiki Whitfield
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
F.m,,;1, -·. -Iii tiki""
EPA Regional Geographic Information System (GIS) Contact
46
EPARegion4 I Rebecca Kemp Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: kemp.rebecca@,epamailepo.gov
EPA Region 4 Regional Tribal Coordinator
EPA Region 4 I Marl< Robertson Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: robertson.mmkw!epamaileoa.,m1
EPA Region 4 Regional Brownfields Coordinator
EPA Region 4 I Mickey Hartnett
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: bartnett. mickev@A"'"'1aileoa.gov
Environmental Justice Contacts -Headquarters
Office of Environmental Justice Barry Hill, Director
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: hill. barry@epamail. epa. gov
Office of Air and Radiation Wilbert Wilson
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: wilson. wil@epamail. epa. gov
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Sherry Milan
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Office of Prevention, Pesticides & Toxic Substances Caren Rothstein
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: rothstein. caren@epamail. epa. gov
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Kent Benjamin
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
47
Office of Environmental Justice Barry Hill, Director
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Office of Water Alice Walker
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: walker.alice@.epamail.epa.gov
48
APPENDIX I
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS
IN REGION 4
D State Boundaries
Potenba I EJ Are as in Reg ion 4 AN
!111§1111111 Low lnrnrre
• Minority t:::::;i;:l Minorfy/Low Income
"' 00 180 Mi!u
Source: 1000 C1nsus of PopulnlOn and Housing Summary Tape flt J (STFJ) Oi1ill
CA,ogregned to Block Group Loel .. 800 • 2000 Peopl1)
For more information, contilc1 C11herin1 fo. at ◄04•:102-9034
EPA REGION 4
ENVIRONMENT AL ACCOUITTABILrrv DIVISION
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS IN ALABAMA
D Counties
Potential EJ Areas
111111111! Low Income
-Minority A
iEra Minority/Low Income
"° "° BO Miles
Source: 1GQO Census o1Populltton and Housing SummaryTIpI FUe 3 (STF3)D.ta.
('-'lgregatedto Block Group LAvel-800-2000 People)
Formor• inform1tion,contact Catherin1. Fu 404-682~&34.
EPA REGION 4
ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTABIL ITV OMSION
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS IN FLORIDA
□counties
Potential EJ Areas
lll'IIJ'lllill Low Income
-Minor~y
W:.£ Minority/Low Income
40 40
N
A
80 Mil,u
Source: 10110 C•nsu, of Population 11nd Housing SummuyTap• Fi .. 3 (STF3)
(Aggr•g>1ed to Bk)ck Gro1.1p LAv•I .. 800 · 2000 Pupl11)
For mor• int>rm1tion, Mntad Catharl'I• Fox 404582.01'134
EPA REGION•
ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTABILITY DIVISION .,
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS IN GEORGIA
D Counties
Potential EJ Areas lllillll Low Income
-Minorny ~:&:$ Minority/low Income
30 30 ISO Miles
Scurct: 1000 Ctntus of Popu1:nion :and HourW'lg Summuy hp• fie 3 (STF3)
(Aogrtg:attd 10 Block Grovp Llvtl .. 800. 2000 Ptoplt)
formort informiltion, cont.ict Catherin• Fol 404-~e2-G03'4.
EPA REGION ,4
ENVIRONMENTAL AC CO UNTA8 ILJT Y DIVISION
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS IN KENTUCKY
D Counties
Potential EJ Areas
-Low Income
-Minority t::i@ Minority/Low Income
30 30 00 Miln
Sou roe: 1000 Census of Population ind Housing Summaryhpe File. 3 (STF3)
(Aggregated to Blc,ok Group i..--,11 -800 -2000 People).
For more inform1tion, contle1 C11ht:rin1 Fox 4045G2-IH134.
EPA REGION 4
ENVIRONMENTAL AC. COUNT AB ILITV DIVISION
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS IN MISSISSIPPI
□Counties
Potential EJ Areas AN llllllll Low Income Only
-Minority
W#;.; Minority/Low Income
30 30 00 Mllu
Source: 1QQO Census 01 Populnlon Jnd Housing Summar\/ Tape Fie 3 (STF3),
(AQ;regatedto Block Group Lavliw 8DD • 2000 Peoplt).
formor• intirm11tion,contaC1 Catherfflt Fox 4D~5152,Q634.
EPA REGION 4
ENVIRONMENT AL AC COUNT AS !LIT Y DIVISION
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS IN NORTH CAROLINA
O Counlies
Polenlial EJ Areas N
lllllilll Low Income A
-Minorily f'. W.l Minority/Low Income
<ID <ID 80 tJilu
Source: 1990 Census ot Population and Housing Summuyl,pe file J (STF3).
(AQgregattd to Block Group L.evt:I ~ 800 • 2000 P•oplt)
For more int>rmation, cont■!.t Catherine ro,. 404-502•Q834.
EPA REGION 4
ENVIRONMENTAL AC COUNT AB IUTV DIVISION
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS IN SOUTH CAROLINA
D Counties
Potential EJ Areas
llllllll!IIII Low Income
-Minority ::=::@ Minori1y/l...ow Income
30 00 Mi\u
a,o,.,c•:ll:IPl)C.fllO, ($ •op~ii,o,,N •OUll'tl•,.,.,r, '"'Pf,. )(ITf)) D,tu. ~ .. ,.,., ... ,,-0000.p ..... .i-too-.uoo•""'->·
EPA REGION 4
ENVIRONMENTAL AC COUNT AB ILrT'I' DIVISION
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AREAS IN TENNESSEE
D Counties
Potential EJ Areas illllllll1I Low Income
-Minority :;::'Ji,';} Minority/Low Income
40 40
N
A
9'J Miles
Sourc•: 1QII0 Census of Population and Housrlg Summ1ryT1p• n, 3 (STF3)01t1.
(Aggrtgat1d to Block Oroup t..vtl,. BOO · 2000 P1:ople).
For more Jlforrnation, contact C1tti.rin1 Fo1 404-~!12-1103◄
EPA REGION 4
ENVIRONMENTAL AC COUNT AB ILITY DIVISION