66 Environmental Justice

On May 2, 2009, GreenLaw and Georgia Appleseed, with the help of Liberty County resident Meredith Devendorf, organized a legal seminar to address the complex issues facing African-American heirs to property in coastal Georgia. Dubbed a “People’s Law School,” this seminar familiarized landowners with basic property law and addressed pressing concerns such as estate planning, title, heirs property, community preservation, zoning, and legal protection from nuisances including facility-siting and neighboring polluters.

1964–2014 Environmental Justice Timeline and Milestones

of persistent chemicals to northern Indigenous peoples and a call for the phase of these chemicals as a necessary measure to protect health and cultural survival: Persistent Organic Pollutants in the Arctic: A Report for the Delegates of the 4th Conference of the Parties Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (www.akaction.org).

In May, the National Academy of Public Administrators published an independent evaluation of the Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) demonstration program. The CARE model provides a solid and tested framework for engaging communities and other stakeholders. The CARE model involves decades of thought and effort by EPA’s career staff, especially those working in environmentally overburdened and economically disadvantaged communities.

In May 2009, several environmental justice organizations in Detroit filed a lawsuit challenging the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) record of decision (ROD) concerning the proposed construction of a new international bridge known as the Detroit River International Crossing, connecting Detroit, Michigan with Windsor, Ontario. The lawsuit alleged that the ROD violated NEPA by not properly accounting for environmental justice because the community where the bridge was to be located was an economically depressed and minority community. Latin Americans for Social and Economic Development v. Federal Highway Administration, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48452 (E.D. Mich. April 5, 2012).

In May, President Barack Obama proposed allotting $1.25 billion in the fical year 2010 budget to settle discrimination lawsuits by thousands of black farmers against the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Nearly $1 billion in damages were paid out on almost 16,000 claims, but nearly 75,000 additional black farmers filed their claims after the deadline.

On May 2, 2009, GreenLaw and Georgia Appleseed, with the help of Liberty County resident Meredith Devendorf, organized a legal seminar to address the complex issues facing African-American heirs to property in coastal Georgia. Dubbed a “People’s Law School,” this seminar familiarized landowners with basic property law and addressed pressing concerns such as estate planning, title, heirs property, community preservation, zoning, and legal protection from nuisances including facility-siting and neighboring polluters. Knowing their rights and responsibilities will enable the descendants of slaves who were granted land by General Sherman’s 1865 Field Order, to defend their property in the face of the

76 Environmental Justice

April 18, 2012, EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice launched its Environmental Justice in Action blog. The blog is a resource for educating, communicating and engaging with government employees, external stakeholders and the broader public about the actions and ideas that stakeholders are using to advance the mission of environmental justice.

1964–2014 Environmental Justice Timeline and Milestones

justice, air pollution and asthma, and skills related to fundraising and communications.

Governor Lincoln Chafee signs into law legislation banning the siting of schools in Rhode Island on contaminated sites where there is an ongoing potential for toxic vapors to enter into school buildings, and establishing a public review process for using other contaminated sites formerly used for industrial or landfill purposes. The law was developed by a court-ordered stakeholder group arising out of the Hartford Park Tenant Association v. Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management lawsuit decided in the plaintiffs’ favor in 2005.

On February 27, 2012, the Obama Administration announces that federal agencies are finalizing strategies for incorporating environmental justice into their operations (i.e., Federal Transit Administration, Labor Department, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).

USDA releases its environmental justice strategic plan and provides an overall direction for continued integration of environmental justice at the department in February 2012. The goals were developed with the input of the USDA Environmental Justice Working Group, comprised of key staff and leadership from each of the department’s mission areas.

Two nonprofit environmental groups filed a complaint in intervention in United States v. City of Baton Rouge, 01-CV-978 (M.D. Tenn.), alleging that EPA has failed to prosecute the lawsuit diligently and otherwise failed to enforce a consent decree entered into by the parties in 2002 concerning Clean Water Act violations at a wastewater treatment plant in Baton Rouge.

On March 20, 2012, GreenLaw informs the Georgia Public Service Commission that Georgia Power is not going far enough by retiring two aging coal-fired units at Plant Branch near Milledgeville. Based on Georgia Power’s own analysis, additional pollution controls that are required to meet public health standards would render the operation of these units uneconomical.

April 2012, Maryland Legislature passes HB 644, authorizing Maryland Department of the Environment to administer the EPA Renovate, Repair and Paint rule and require lead dust testing after renovations on pre-1978 homes.

On April 4, 2012, the Southern California Association of Governments

9/29/14, 6:39 PMThe Law of Environmental Justice (Detail Updates)

Page 2 of 103http://www.americanbar.org/groups/environment_energy_resources/publications/books_related_products/ejupdates/ejweb.html

motion for interlocutory appeal. Padres Hacia Una Vida Mejor v. Jackson, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49047(E.D. Cal. April 6, 2012).

District Court Held that Government Agency Must Take Steps toEnsure Complete Administrative Record in Case Concerning BridgeLocated in EJ CommunitySeveral environmental justice organizations in Detroit filed a lawsuit in May 2009 challenging the FederalHighway Administration’s (FHWA) record of decision (ROD) concerning the proposed construction of a newinternational bridge known as the Detroit River International Crossing, connecting Detroit, Michigan withWindsor, Ontario. The lawsuit alleged that the ROD violated NEPA by not properly accounting forenvironmental justice because the community where the bridge was to be located was an economicallydepressed and minority community. After filing the action, the plaintiffs filed a motion seeking discovery todetermine whether the administrative record was complete. In an April 5, 2012 decision, the district courtheld that it was unable to evaluate the adequacy of the FHWA administrative record, and ordered FHWA totake additional steps in order to enable the court to assess the completeness of the record. Latin Americansfor Social and Economic Development v. Federal Highway Administration, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48452(E.D. Mich. April 5, 2012).

Environmental Groups Seek to Intervene in Lawsuit, Alleging thatEPA Failed to Enforce Consent Order at Wastewater TreatmentPlantOn March 4, 2012, two nonprofit environmental groups filed a complaint in intervention in United States v.City of Baton Rouge, 01-CV-978 (M.D. Tenn.), alleging that EPA has failed to prosecute the lawsuit diligentlyand otherwise failed to enforce a consent decree entered into by the parties in 2002 concerning Clean WaterAct violations at a wastewater treatment plant in Baton Rouge. According to the complaint, the plantscontinued violations under the CWA impose offensive odors, sewer flies, and unsanitary conditions on nearbyminority residents, violating those residents’ human rights and creating an environmental injustice. Thegroups are being represented by the Tulane Environmental Law Clinic. The complaint in intervention isavailable at http://www.tulane.edu/~telc/assets/pdfs/3-4-12_BR_POTW_.5th_Cir.pdf.

Obama Administration Announced that Federal Agencies areFinalizing Strategies for Incorporating Environmental Justice intotheir OperationsOn February 27, 2012, the Obama Administration announced that federal agencies are finalizing strategiesfor incorporating environmental justice into their operations. For example, the announcement mentionedthat the Federal Transit Administration will help grant recipients determine if minority or low-income areaswill be affected by transit projects, and the Labor Department is translating educational materials intoSpanish, Chinese, and Vietnamese, so workers can avoid environmental hazards. The Veterans Affairs

Milestones and Accomplishments 75

HB 2018, “Reduced Truck Idling Rule”, is passed to limit the amount of time that a truck

or commercial vehicle can idle. This helps reduce the amount of emissions produced by

commercial vehicles. The limitation on idle time is five minutes in a 60-minute period.

EPA releases School Siting Guidelines which recommend best practices for sponsors of school projects to use when siting schools relative to a range of man-made environmental hazards. Significantly, the Guidelines recommend that school sponsors conduct rigorous environmental reviews of candidate sites, and that siting decisions and environmental reviews be developed with the participation of local school siting advisory committees.

The Cochabamba World People’s Conference On Global Warming and Rights Of Mother Earth was held in 2011.

Farmworkers and environmental health organizations file methyl iodide lawsuit.

HUD awards first grant to the Little Sisters of the Assumption Family Health Service, Inc. to improve health hazards for asthmatic children living in public or assisted multifamily housing.

Senator Warren of Ann Arbor introduces the Safe Children’s Product Act to provide families with information about toxic chemicals in children’s products sold in Michigan.

Women’s Voices for Earth releases, Dirty Secrets: What’s Hiding in Your Cleaning Products, revealing the hidden toxic chemicals in top brand name cleaners.

Warning letters and hazard alerts are issued on the use of formaldehyde-containing Brazilian Blowout hair straightening treatments.

On November 7, 2011, the Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) released a report finding that EPA has not defined key environmental justice terms, such as “minority” and “low-income communities,” which could hamper the agency’s ability to identify communities with environmental justice concerns.

On December 16, 2011, the Department of Transportation (DOT) released a guidance document advising Federal Highway Administration (HFWA) offices on the process to address environmental justice issues during the NEPA process.

HB 2018, “Reduced Truck Idling Rule”, is passed to limit the amount of time that a truck or commercial vehicle can idle. This helps reduce the amount of emissions produced by commercial vehicles. The limitation on idle time is five minutes in a 60-minute period.

Rita Harris is awarded the Sierra Club’s Virginia Ferguson Award for her work to diversify the organization.

2012 On January 3, 2012, 50 Alabama residents living near a landfill that took coal-combustion ash from a Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) plant and filed an administrative complaint with EPA, alleging that the Alabama Department of Environmental Management should not have renewed the permit for the landfill and did so in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. In re Alabama Department of Environmental Management Permitting of Arrowhead Landfill in Perry County, Alabama (EPA, filed Jan. 3, 2012).

On January 6, 2012, Marshall Shepherd, professor of geography in the University of Georgia Franklin College of Arts and Sciences, was voted president-elect of the American Meteorological Society. He is only the second African American to hold this office.

On January 18, 2012, EPA released a draft guidance document entitled “Recommendations for Developing a Model Civil Rights Program at the Environmental Protection Agency”.

Approximately 175 people attend the New England Environmental Justice Forum’s first Region-wide Environmental Justice Summit at Clark University in Worcester. This was the first time that environmental justice activists and advocates, as well as academics and government officials met face to face to discuss environmental justice issues on a regional basis. All six New England states were represented. Issues discussed at the summit included connecting urban and rural environmental justice issues, food justice, transportation

9/29/14, 6:39 PMThe Law of Environmental Justice (Detail Updates)

Page 4 of 103http://www.americanbar.org/groups/environment_energy_resources/publications/books_related_products/ejupdates/ejweb.html

Alleging Violations of the Civil Rights Act Concerning Landfill thatAccepted Coal-Combustion AshOn January 3, 2012, 50 Alabama residents living near a landfill that took coal-combustion ash from aTennessee Valley Authority (TVA) plant filed an administrative complaint with EPA, alleging that theAlabama Department of Environmental Management should not have renewed the permit for the landfill anddid so in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. According to the complaint, TVA, working withfederal and state regulators, sent 414 train shipments of coal ash to the landfill from a 2008 coal-sludge spillin Roane County, Tennessee. The complaint alleges that foul odor from the landfill is affecting the health ofthe landfill’s neighbors, most of whom are African American, and dust from the dump is polluting theirproperty. In re Alabama Department of Environmental Management Permitting of Arrowhead Landfill inPerry County, Alabama (EPA, filed Jan. 3, 2012).

Department of Transportation Released Guidance Document onProcess to Address EJ Issues During NEPA ProcessOn December 16, 2011, the Department of Transportation (DOT) released a guidance document advisingFederal Highway Administration (HFWA) offices on the process to address EJ issues during the NEPAprocess. Among other things, the guidance document states that EJ evaluations should describe the followinginformation: identify existing minority and low income populations; explain coordination, access toinformation and participation; identify disproportionately high and adverse effects; and evaluate proceedingwhen there are disproportionately high and adverse effects on EJ populations. This guidance document isavailable at http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/guidance_ej_nepa.asp.

GAO Released Report Criticizing Several Aspects of EPA’sEnvironmental Justice PoliciesOn November 7, 2011, the Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) released a report finding that EPA hasnot defined key environmental justice terms, such as “minority” and “low-income communities,” whichcould hamper the agency’s ability to identify communities with environmental justice concerns. According tothe report, without definitions, the agency could have a difficult time identifying communities that haveenvironmental justice concerns and showing that its efforts are helping communities with disproportionateenvironmental impacts. In addition, the report found that the agency has not identified the resources,including the staffing, that it needs to implement environmental justice plans, and that it has not articulatedthe roles of states in the initiative or developed performance measures. The report found that states will havea significant role in implementing environmental justice plans through permitting, monitoring, andenforcement, GAO said, but their specific roles so far are unclear. The GAO analysis was conducted fromMay 2010 to September 2011. The report also found positive aspects of EPA’s implementation ofenvironmental justice plans, namely that it has made progress on defining its mission and goals related toenvironmental justice, ensuring leadership involvement and accountability, and coordinating with otheragencies. The report is available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1277.pdf.

Environmental Justice Interagency Working Group Released

Milestones and Accomplishments 77

On May 9, 2012, protesters of the 99 Percent Power Coalition rallied outside of

Bank of America in Charlotte, NC against the financing of coal mining in the United States.

passed a landmark Sustainable Communities Strategy plan, potentially reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the region by 8% by 2020.

In April 2012, EPA released a draft Plan EJ 2014 Supplement. According to the agency, the supplement sets forth goals, strategies, and activities that will assist the agency in building a robust Title VI civil rights program. In particular, the strategies outlined in the supplement include establishing a robust Title VI pre-award and post-award compliance program; strengthening Title VI in EPA’s National Program Management guidance, performance partnership agreements and performance partnership grants; partner with other federal agencies to improve and strengthen compliance with Title VI.

On April 6, 2012, a California federal district court rejects EPA’s bid to dismiss a lawsuit involving a 15-year-old administrative complaint filed over the permitting of hazardous waste dumps in low-income, rural, and Latino communities.

April 18, 2012, EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice launched its Environmental Justice in Action blog. The blog is a resource for educating, communicating and engaging with government employees, external stakeholders and the broader public about the actions and ideas that stakeholders are using to advance the mission of environmental justice.

In May 2012, GreenLaw is working with Atlanta’s Tire Commission, Mayor Kasim Reed, and The City of Atlanta to combat pollution from tire dumps. Dumped tires in the Atlanta metropolitan area contribute to blight and can form large tire piles that breed diseases such as West Nile virus.

On May 1, 2012, a three-judge panel on the North Carolina Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a trial court decision in Waste Industries v. NC upholding the constitutionality of a state law that limits the size and location of new large landfills built in the state. The Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association and the NC

NAACP had intervened in the litigation to defend the law, passed in 2007, because large landfills are often sited in low-income, minority communities. The NAACP had pushed the General Assembly to consider environmental justice when dealing with new landfills. The decision from the Court of Appeals expressly recognized the environmental justice protections provided by the challenged statutes.

May 2, 2012, The Fulton County Board of Commissioners passed a resolution urging the Georgia Environmental Protection Division to take swift action to develop, implement, and enforce regulations and policies to promote environmental justice for the citizens of Fulton County and the entire State of Georgia. The resolution, sponsored by Commissioner Emma J. Darnell, was drafted after the release of The Patterns of Pollution report by GreenLaw.

On May 9, 2012, protesters of the 99 Percent Power Coalition rallied outside of Bank of America in Charlotte, NC against the financing of coal mining in the United States.

June 2012, the Coalition to End Childhood Lead Poisoning committed to scaling its Green & Healthy Homes Initiative (GHHI) to 25 new cities in the next three years through Clinton Global Initiative. This commitment will create 25,000 Green & Healthy Homes and 1,550 green construction jobs.

On July 2012, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) proposed regulations that would require electricity generating facilities in New York to evaluate potential environmental justice impacts in siting decisions.

In July 19, 2012, the Department of Justice (DOJ), EPA and a New Jersey municipal sewer utility entered into a Clean Water Act consent decree between the parties whereby the utility agreed to improve sewer collection infrastructure for low-income housing. The decree requires the Jersey City Municipal Utilities Authority to invest $550,000

9/29/14, 6:39 PMThe Law of Environmental Justice (Detail Updates)

Page 1 of 103http://www.americanbar.org/groups/environment_energy_resources/publications/books_related_products/ejupdates/ejweb.html

The Law of Environmental Justice: Update ServiceUpdated on: June 20, 2012

2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 or Earlier

2012:

EPA Released Draft Plan EJ 2014 SupplementIn April 2012, EPA released a draft Plan EJ 2014 Supplement. According to the agency, the supplement setsforth goals, strategies, and activities that will assist the agency in building a robust Title VI civil rightsprogram. In particular, the strategies outlined in the supplement include establishing a robust Title VI pre-award and post-award compliance program; strengthening Title VI in EPA’s National Program Managementguidance, performance partnership agreements and performance partnership grants; partner with other federalagencies to improve and strengthen compliance with Title VI; and advance EJ goals through Limited EnglishProficiency initiatives. Comments on the draft supplement are being accepted until June 19, 2012. The draftsupplement is available at http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/plan-ej/civil-rights.html.

EPA Launched Environmental Justice in Action BlogOn April 18, 2012, EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice launched its Environmental Justice in Action blog. According to the agency, the blog is a resource for educating, communicating and engaging with governmentemployees, external stakeholders and the broader public about the actions and ideas that stakeholders areusing to advance the mission of environmental justice. The blog is available at http://blog.epa.gov/ej.

Federal Court Refused to Dismiss Lawsuit Concerning Permitting ofHazardous Waste Dumps in Low-Income and Latino CommunitiesOn April 6, 2012, a California federal district court rejected EPA’s bid to dismiss a lawsuit involving a 15-year-old administrative complaint filed over the permitting of hazardous waste dumps in low-income, rural,and Latino communities. In particular, the court dismissed EPA’s motions contending the plaintiffs hadwaited too long to bring the claim under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). At issue was whether the lawsuit is barred by the six-year statute of limitations that applies to APA claims, or if each day of EPA’s failure to address the civil rights claim over the last 15 years represents a separate violation of its duty underthe statute. The court held that the lawsuit was timely because it seeks relief for the agency failure to meetits on-going duty. Plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in June 2011 and alleged that EPA had failed to issuepreliminary findings in an administrative complaint accusing the California Department of Toxic SubstancesControl of violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by permitting hazardous waste dumps in poorLatino communities. Although the court rejected EPA’s arguments, it did acknowledge that agency attorneysraised significant and substantial issues of controlling law. As a result, the court held that it would consider a

Milestones and Accomplishments 81

The 2013 Environmental Justice Implementation Progress Report is released

by HHS in February 2013 and describes the vision for environmental justice as “a nation that equitably promotes healthy community

environments and protects the health of all people.”

2013In January, Greenaction succeeds obtaining a voluntary agreement to reduce diesel truck idling in Kettleman City and Avenal.

EPA releases for public comment two draft policy papers intended to improve the agency’s enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. One draft policy paper proposes to change the way EPA assesses “adversity” by having the agency refrain from applying a “rebuttable presumption” in certain Title VI investigations. The rebuttable presumption, announced in the Select Steel case establishes a presumption that compliance with environmental standards means there is no “adversity” for purposes of establishing a violation of the agency’s Title VI “disparate impact” regulations. The second draft paper discusses EPA’s thinking about how to expand the roles of complainants and recipients in the Title VI complaints process. Both papers were developed in response to a series of meetings with EPA Administrator Jackson and environmental justice activists and attorneys in 2012.

The National Park Service publishes the final report on the proposed national recreation area in the San Gabriel watershed and mountains, which is a best practice example for park agencies to improve environmental justice, environmental quality, and public health, in response to public comments from diverse allies.

On February 7, 2013, the Los Angeles Times reports that California leads the nation in advanced bio fuel companies being named the “clean tech hub of the country”.

President Obama adds a climate adaption to sustainability planning in order to integrate sustainable strategies, to protect infrastructure from climate change and to improve water-use efficiency.

On February 12, 2013, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE), the Atlanta Black Nurses Association (ABNA) and the West Atlanta Watershed Alliance (WAWA) kicked off Black History Month with a symposium focused on disproportionately environmental impacts and how the production and consumption of energy affects communities of color.

This was the first time the three organizations convened a group of this kind to discuss energy and environmental health disparities in minority communities.

Robert D. Bullard, Dean Barbara Jordan-Mickey Leland School of Public Affairs at Texas Southern University presents “Environmental Justice: Building Healthy and Sustainable Communities in the Gulf Coast.” EPA’s Gulf of Mexico Program to Hold Environmental Justice Conference in Biloxi, MS. February 22, 2013.

The 2013 Environmental Justice Implementation Progress Report is released by HHS in February 2013 and describes the vision for environmental justice as “a nation that equitably promotes healthy community environments and protects the health of all people.”

Early in 2013, Southern Coalition for Social Justice (SCSJ) filed on behalf of the Southernside Neighborhoods in Action and two individuals a complaint under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against the South Carolina Department of Transportation. In the complaint, they alleged that residents of the Southernside neighborhood, an economically disadvantaged community of color, were excluded from the decision-making process behind demolition of a pedestrian bridge that connected the community to the adjacent town.

Civil rights and environmental justice activist Dolores Huerta was inducted into the California Hall of Fame, receiving the Spirit of California medal on March 20, 2013.

The historic genocide and human rights trial in Guatemala of the former president Efrain Rios Montt begins March 19, 2013. This is the first time anywhere in the world that a former head of state is being tried for genocide by a national tribunal. The United States overthrew the democratically elected government of Guatemala in 1954 and installed a military dictatorship. This led over the next 42 years to the murder, torture, and disappearance of 200,000 Guatemalan people. The government’s “scorched earth” policy led to the destruction of entire Mayan villages and the massacre of women, children,

10/12/14, 12:56 PMTitle VI Policy | Civil Rights | US EPA

Page 1 of 2http://www.epa.gov/civilrights/title6policy.htm

You are here: EPA Home Civil Rights Basic Information

Title VI PolicyBackgroundScheduled Teleconference CallsListserv

Background

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made improving itscivil rights program a priority and recognizes that its enforcement of TitleVI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) is an important tool in itsefforts to protect against discrimination and ensure that recipients of EPAfinancial assistance do not discriminate in implementing programs andactivities. On January 29, 2013, EPA released two draft policy papers viaits website for public comment. The first paper, Adversity andCompliance With Environmental Health-Based Thresholds (PDF) (5pp,216K, About PDF), proposes to change the way EPA assesses“adversity” by having the Agency refrain from applying a “rebuttablepresumption” in certain Title VI investigations. The second paper, Rolesof Complainants and Recipients in the Title VI Complaints and ResolutionProcess (PDF)(4pp, 52K, About PDF), discusses EPA’s clarification of theroles of complainants and recipients in the Title VI complaint process. Consistent with its goal to promote transparency, EPA initially postedthese documents on its website and sent notification of the posting tostakeholders who previously had expressed an interest in agencyactivities. On April 26, 2013, EPA will publish these documents in theFederal Register with a 30-day comment period in an effort to furtherexpand the potential audience who may see these documents. Also, EPAwill host two outreach sessions via teleconference with interestedstakeholders concerning these two draft policies.

Civil Rights

http://www.epa.gov/civilrights/title6policy.htmLast updated on December 13, 2013

10/12/14, 1:11 PMNational Park Service Recommends Designation of San Gabriel and…nal Recreation Area | Green Justice | Departures Columns | KCET

Page 2 of 9http://www.kcet.org/socal/departures/columns/green-justice/nps-stud…ation-of-san-gabriel-and-santa-monica-national-recreation-area.html

Area (http://www.kcet.org/socal/departures/columns/green-justice/nps-study-recommends-designation-of-san-gabriel-and-santa-monica-national-recreation-area.html)

By Robert Garcia |April 10, 2013

RELATED TOPICSActivismSocial Justice

The National Park Service (NPS) has released the Final Study Recommendations for the SanGabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study. NPS seeks to "work in acoordinated fashion, on a regional basis, to address equitable access to open space, protectionof significant resources, and interpretation and education about significant resources. ExistingNPS assistance programs are currently insufficient to address these needs in the study area,"according to the study. "I am pleased to recommend to Congress the designation of a SanGabriel unit of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area," said Secretary of theInterior Kenneth Salazar.

Diverse allies submitted public comments to diversify access to and support for a newrecreation area in the San Gabriel watershed and mountains and the expansion of the SantaMonica Mountains National Recreation Area. The final study is a best practice example forpark agencies to improve environmental justice, environmental quality, and public health. Theproposed expansion would go a long way to ensure access to green space and better health forpark poor, income poor communities.

Story Continues BelowSupport KCET

As NPS emphasizes, "Many communities in the region ... lack appropriate access to park andrecreational resources ... NPS and partner agencies would seek to improve recreational accessand opportunities in urban areas that are deficient in recreation and park lands by offering

10/12/14, 1:23 PMSouthern Coalition for Social Justice | Southernside Environmental Justice Case Progress

Page 2 of 10http://www.southerncoalition.org/southernside-environmental-justice-case-progress/

Earlier this year, SCSJ filed on behalf of theSouthernside Neighborhoods in Actionand two individuals a complaint underTitle VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964against the South Carolina Department ofTransportation. In the complaint, wealleged that residents of the Southernsideneighborhood, an economicallydisadvantaged community of color, wereexcluded from the decision-makingprocess behind demolition of a pedestrianbridge that connected the community tothe adjacent town. The Hampton AvenueBridge allowed easier access to a grocerystore and pharmacy, among many other

The demolished pedestrian bridge

[http://www.southerncoalition.org/wp-

content/uploads/2013/09/chain-link-fence-view-of-

former-bridge.jpg]

10/12/14, 1:34 PMThe City Project Blog » Blog Archive » Guatemala Genocide Huma…eginning March 19, 2013, Live Web Cast, Commentaries, Updates

Page 2 of 6http://www.cityprojectca.org/blog/archives/19030

The historic genocide trial in Guatemala of the former president Efrain Rios Montt is

scheduled to begin March 19, 2013, at 8:30 am. This is the first time anywhere in

the world that a former head of state is being tried for genocide by a national

tribunal.

The trial will be webcast live. The sound is better at El Periodico at

http://www.elperiodico.com.gt/es/20130319/pais/226109/, and the visuals are close

up and better at Coordinacion Genocidio Nunca Mas,

www.paraqueseconozca.blogspot.com.

The trial is also being covered with summaries and commentary at www.riosmontt-

trial.org, a project of the Open Society Justice Initiative. Para noticias del juicio en

español, haz click aquí.*

10/12/14, 1:34 PMThe City Project Blog » Blog Archive » Guatemala Genocide Huma…eginning March 19, 2013, Live Web Cast, Commentaries, Updates

Page 3 of 6http://www.cityprojectca.org/blog/archives/19030

Coverage on Democracy Now is avialable here

http://www.democracynow.org/topics/guatemala.

The United States and CIA overthrew the democratically elected government of

Jacobo Arbenz in 1954 and installed a military dictatorship. The overthrew led over

the next 48 years to the murder, torture, and disappearance of 200,000 Guatemalan

people. The government’s “scorched earth” policy led to the destruction of entire

Mayan villages and the massacre of all their inhabitants, including women, children,

babies and elderly people. Estimates of displaced persons vary from 500,000 to 1.5

million people in the most intense period from 1981 to 1983, according to the United

Nations Commission for Historical Clarification.

The genocide and human rights violations were documented after the signing of the

Peace Accord in 1996 by the Catholic Church and the United Nations Truth

Commission. Guatemalan Bishop Juan Gerardi was bludgeoned to death for

publishing the report of the Catholic Church called Guatemala: Never Again!

(Guatemala: Nunca Mas!) in 1998. The work of Bishop Gerardi and the Catholic

Church is recognized as a best practice of liberation theology at work. If you want

peace, work for justice. The United Nations Commission for Historical Clarification

Commission (Comisión para el Esclarecimiento Histórico, or Truth Commission)

published the report Guatemala: Memory of Silence (Guatemala: Memoria del

Silencio) in 1999. Both reports include the stories of the victims in the victim’s own

words.

According to the UN report, the state of Guatemala is morally, ethically, and legally

responsible for genocide and human rights violations. The president of the republic,

as commander in chief of the army and minister of defense, should be subject to the

same criteria of responsibility, given that national objectives were prepared at the

Milestones and Accomplishments 83

On April 12, 2013, Texas Southern University enters into a significant agreement

with the EPA Region 6 focused on the training of qualified professionals in environmental

policy, economics, and several areas of science, business and technology.

Labor Occupational Health Program submits findings on efforts to improve refinery safety following the explosion at the Richmond Chevron refinery to the California Governor’s Interagency Task Force on Refinery Safety.

Federal judge rules in favor of parents suing New York City to expedite removal of toxic polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from public schools.

The Safe Chemicals Act of 2013 was introduced by Montana’s Senators Baucus and Tester to provide fixes to the nation’s chemical policies and limit the use of unsafe chemicals.

The White House has selected 12 Champions of Change, including the Asian Pacific Environmental Network’s Lip Chanthanasak, who display leadership in working to prepare their communities for the consequences of climate change.

Sustainable South Bronx is featured in an upcoming documentary, Water Blues-Green Solution.

Staying Green and Growing Jobs: Infrastructure Operations and Maintenance as Career Pathway Stepping Stones, a green infrastructure report, is released by Green for All and American Rivers.

Freedom Farms sponsored its Environmental Food Justice Conference during the last week of February 2013. The event was held at the Guild Theater and included participation from a number of stakeholders including local farmers and representatives from government agencies.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Gulf of Mexico Program hosted an Environmental Justice Conference, “Environmental Justice: Systems, Symptoms, and Solutions” on March 1-2, 2013 in Biloxi, Mississippi.

Deep South Center for Environmental Justice at Dillard University hosts the 1st Annual HBCU Student Climate Change Conference, “Bridging The Gap Between Climate Change Theory and Experience.” April 4-6, 2013.

The Board of Directors of the National Environmental Justice Conference, Inc. held the 2013 National Environmental Justice Conference and Training Program in Washington, DC, April 3-5, 2013.

The NAACP and Green for All join forces to demand protection against coal plant pollution.

President and CEO of Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies met with other prominent African American leaders at the White House to meet with President Obama about strengthening the middle class and providing opportunities for poverty stricken African American and other minority communities.

A federal judge ruled that the Obama Administration violated the law when it issued oil leases in Monterey County, CA without considering the environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking. The ruling came in response to a suit brought by the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club.

The EPA wins an important legal victory in a long-brewing battle over a West Virginia coal mining project that includes a controversial practice of blasting the tops off mountains and dumping the waste into streams.

Asa Needle, 17 of Worcester, MA won the Brower Youth Award, which goes to a young adult who is making outstanding contributions to the cause of environmental justice.

On April 12, 2013, Texas Southern University enters into a significant agreement with the EPA- Region 6, focused on the training of qualified professionals in environmental policy, economics, and several areas of science, business and technology. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will focus on bringing innovative strategies to the forefront to assure an adequate supply of highly trained and skilled personnel for the accomplishment of environmental research, policy and program development.

Robert D. Bullard spoke at the Second International Congress on Civil and State Liability, Benjamin Herrera

http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/04/court-victory-opponents-fracking-california

10/10/14, 12:04 PMJudge rules administration overlooked fracking risks in California mineral leases | Reuters

Page 1 of 5http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/09/us-usa-fracking-california-idUSBRE93803720130409

BY RORY CARROLLSAN FRANCISCO Tue Apr 9, 2013 3:34am EDT

11 COMMENTS TweetTweet 243 Share this 24 Email Print

RELATED NEWS

GE to buy oil pump makerLufkin for nearly $3 billion

Shale-rich Spanish regionvote to ban fracking

U.S. proposal to movefracking wastewater bybarge stirs debate

Insight: Russia's Bazhenov -a long, slow shale oilrevolution

Exxon cleans up Arkansas

Judge rules administration overlookedfracking risks in California mineralleases

(Reuters) - A federal judge has ruled the Obama administrationbroke the law when it issued oil leases in central Californiawithout fully weighing the environmental impact of "fracking," asetback for companies seeking to exploit the region's enormousenergy resources.

The decision, made public on Monday, effectively bars for thetime being any drilling on two tracts of land comprising 2,500acres leased for oil and gas development in 2011 by the InteriorDepartment's Bureau of Land Management in Monterey County.

ShareShare 8

Thousands 'will most likely be massacred' ifKobani falls to jihadists, U.N. warns |

1

New York man shot 15 minutes after releasefrom prison

2

Pakistani teen, Indian activist win NobelPeace Prize |

3

U.S. Air Force probed for scrapping costlyplanes bought for Afghans

4

Growth worries slam stocks, oil, emergingmarkets

5

Gasoline drips off a nozzle during refueling at a gas station in Altadena, California March 24, 2012. Picture taken March24, 2012.CREDIT: REUTERS/MARIO ANZUONI

HOME BUSINESS MARKETS WORLD POLITICS TECH OPINION BREAKINGVIEWS MONEY LIFE PICTURES VIDEO

EDITION: U.S. Search News & QuotesSIGN IN REGISTER

10/6/14, 5:41 PMEPA Wins Important Legal Victory in Spruce 1 Coal Mine Fight - WSJ.com

Page 1 of 1http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20130423-710759.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#printMode

Subscribe Log InU.S. EDITION Tuesday, April 23, 2013 As of 11:58 AM EDT

April 23, 2013, 11:58 a.m. ET

EPA Wins Important Legal Victory in Spruce 1 Coal Mine Fight By Tennille Tracy WASHINGTON--The Environmental Protection Agency won an important legal victory Tuesday in a long-brewing battle with Arch Coal Inc. (ACI) over a coalmining project in West Virginia known as Spruce No. 1.

The case tests whether the EPA can revoke a permit for the controversial practice known as mountaintop mining after another federal agency, the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers, has already approved it.

For the coal industry, which faces an uncertain future in the U.S., the fight over Spruce No. 1 has come to symbolize what it believes is an unjust power grab bythe EPA. The industry is already locked in debates with the environmental agency over air pollution rules that seek to limit emissions from power plants thatburn coal to generate electricity.

Environmental groups, which have petitioned Congress to ban mountaintop mining altogether, say the EPA made the right move in stopping a dangerouspractice that poses risks to both human health and the environment.

The fight over Spruce No. 1 goes back to 2007, when the George W. Bush administration granted Arch Coal a permit to dump mining material into threestreams.

In mountaintop removal mining, coal companies use dynamite to blow off the tops of mountains and reveal coal seams lying below the surface. As part of theprocess, the mining companies obtain permits under the Clean Water Act to dispose of mountain waste --excess rock and dirt--into nearby streams.

Arch Coal is one of the largest coal mining companies operating in the U.S.

In 2011, four years later after the Corps granted the permit, the Obama administration overturned that permit, citing concerns about water quality.

Arch Coal challenged the EPA's decision and won in a district court, which said EPA has overstepped its bounds. On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for theD.C. Circuit overturned the lower court's ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Neither Arch Coal nor the EPA were available for immediate comment.

Write to Tennille Tracy at tennille.tracy@dowjones.com

10/10/14, 12:02 PMEnvironmental Food Justice Conference Hosted in Oak Park

Page 1 of 3http://sacobserver.com/2013/03/environmental-food-justice-conference-hosted-in-oak-park/

Follow TweetTweet 2 0

Environmental Food Justice ConferenceHosted in Oak Park

March 5, 2013 by Genoa Barrow

OAK PARK – They’ve planted the seeds,but aren’t satisfied with simply sitting backand watching them grow. The localorganization, Freedom Farms is seeking tocultivate a movement, one that will lead toa healthier community.

Freedom Farms sponsored itsEnvironmental Food Justice Conferencelast week. The event was held at the GuildTheater and included participation from a

number of stakeholders including local farmers and representatives from government agencies.

“The vision for the first annual Environment and Food Justice Conference was to provide a safeenvironment for people of color to represent their perspectives and issues relating toenvironmental/food justice,” said Freedom Farms Program Manager Kory Clift, also known asRunning Bear Stean-Mann.

The goal, he continued, was also to have academics, professionals and community activists thatpresent solutions to make ‘system’ change.

Freedom Farms seeks to create a local, healthy, and sustainable food supply and a strong localfarm economy. Members want children who know where their food comes from and how to growand cook healthy food. In an effort to promote self-sufficiency, Freedom Farms has operatedsuccessful community gardens in Oak Park and South Sacramento and trains at-risk youth for“green” related jobs.

“The African American/ Black community is in tune with issues around ‘Food Justice’ but we don’tview it in such terminology,” Clift said.

“In the past four years the income gap between White and Black people has tripled. Food accesswill be a very important cultural tool for survival. We have men and women who have agriculturalknowledge, we have professionals in position that could gather the many food-based communityorganizations to form a collective of urban farmers and we have youth with very few options andplenty of energy. It can be done, but the right people have to be in charge of the resources,planning and organizing using a intergenerational approach. Freedom Farms is creating such a

Search this website… Search

Connect With Us!

This Week’s Sacramento Observer

HOME OBSERVER HISTORY SUBSCRIBE TO PRINT ADVERTISE WITH US PLACES TO PURCHASE CONTACT US

Local National Business Politics Sports & Entertainment Health Opinion

ShareShare11LikeLike

Milestones and Accomplishments 85

May 4, 2013, Jekyll Island-65/35 Defining Marsh Law is needed because if marsh were

defined as “land” in Jekyll’s case, the Coastal Marshlands Protection Act (CMPA)’s right to delineate Georgia’s tidal marshes could be promised. The state’s marshes can’t be fully protected unless there’s a clear definition of

marsh and where it meets land.

Sierra Club of Puerto Rico is honored by the EPA with the 2013 U.S. EPA Environmental Quality Award for efforts to create an innovative recycling program.

On April 24, 2013, citizens in Appalachia celebrated a huge victory in their fight to protect their families and communities from harmful mountaintop removal mining. In a sharp 15-page ruling, a panel of three Republican-appointed judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously upheld the Environment Protection Agency’s veto of the permit for the Spruce No. 1 mine, the largest proposed mountaintop removal mine in West Virginia. Earthjustice, along with Appalachian Mountain Advocates, represented a handful of community and citizen groups in this case. This court decision comes after 15 years of court challenges by community groups whose members were in the fallout zone of the proposed mine. It’s a precedent-setting decision and historic The Spruce Mine permit is the first mountaintop removal mining permit ever challenged in courts.

On April 25, 2013, the Healthier Hospitals Initiative launched initiatives to reduce carbon footprint, improve the health of patients in hospitals and possibly lower health costs. In this process, the participating hospitals were able to collect and report quantified data showing the success of the initiative. It has since then been reported that more than 50 million tons of waste has been recycled with more than 61.5 million pounds of construction and demolition waste kept out of landfills through reuse and recycling.

Robert D. Bullard is a featured speaker at the Tufts University Spring 2013 Colloquium at 40th Anniversary of UEP Celebration, Medford, MA, Saturday (evening), April 27, 2013.

May 4, 2013, Jekyll Island-65/35 Defining Marsh Law is needed because if marsh were defined as “land” in Jekyll’s case, the Coastal Marshlands Protection Act (CMPA)’s right to delineate Georgia’s tidal marshes could be promised. The state’s marshes can’t be fully

protected unless there’s a clear definition of marsh and where it meets land.

In a formal petition for rulemaking, 19 Appalachian local, regional, and national groups are petitioning the EPA to set a numeric water quality standard under the Clean Water Act to protect streams in Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, Tennessee, Ohio, and Pennsylvania from pollution caused by mountaintop removal mining. This petition is backed by robust scientific studies that demonstrate that the dumping of mountaintop removal mining waste leads to harmful levels of conductivity – the ability of a waterway to conduct an electric current. Elevated conductivity is toxic to aquatic life, and studies show it is having an extreme ecological effect on Appalachian waters and streams.

May 13, 2013, East Oakland Gains an Environmental Justice Victory. City Council unanimously passed a 180-day extension for the emergency ordinance that requires any new crematoriums in Oakland to first, obtain a Major Conditional Use Permit. Without this emergency ordinance, the city would allow human cremation to be classified as a “General Manufacturing” activity, and therefore not require a permit with public participation and environmental review. Cremation is not a manufacturing activity and the community has a right to know!

On May 28, 2013, The Washington, D.C. Circuit Court dismissed an appeal by Sunflower Electric of a ruling requiring environmental review of Sunflower’s proposed new coal plant in Holcomb, Kansas. The decision lets stand a district court ruling that the United States government violated the law by allowing Sunflower to proceed with the polluting and financially risky plant without first examining its environmental effects and alternative actions.

Riverkeeper, Inc., Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc., Citizens Campaign for the Environment, Inc., Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter, Buffalo Niagara Riverkeeper, Inc. Lower Susquehanna Riverkeeper, Inc., and Theodore Gordon

10/12/14, 2:15 PMVictory: Court Upholds EPA Authority to Protect Appalachia | Earthjustice

Page 2 of 16http://earthjustice.org/blog/2013-april/victory-court-upholds-epa-authority-to-protect-appalachia

By Liz Judge | Wednesday, April24, 2013

Spruce No. 1 mine. The community

of Pigeon Roost Hollow is on the

right.

PHOTO BY VIVIAN STOCKMAN;FLYOVER COURTESY OF SOUTHWINGS

Yesterday, citizens in

Appalachia celebrated a huge

victory in their fight to protect

their families and

communities from harmful

Friday

Finds:

Seafood

S.O.S.

Next Blog

Post !

public

awareness

and sharing

Earthjustice

victories with

journalists.

Learn more

about Liz.

" Previous

Blog Post

Arctic

Athabaskans

Urge Black

Carbon

10/12/14, 2:15 PMVictory: Court Upholds EPA Authority to Protect Appalachia | Earthjustice

Page 3 of 16http://earthjustice.org/blog/2013-april/victory-court-upholds-epa-authority-to-protect-appalachia

mountaintop removal mining.

In a sharp 15-page ruling, a

panel of three Republican-

appointed judges in the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the D.C.

Circuit unanimously upheld

the Environment Protection

Agency’s veto of the permit for

the Spruce No. 1 mine, the

largest proposed mountaintop

removal mine in West Virginia.

Earthjustice, along with

Appalachian Mountain

Advocates, represented a

handful of community and

citizen groups in this case.

This court decision comes

after 15 years of court

challenges by community

groups whose members were

in fallout zone of the proposed

Reductions

to Protect

Homelands

RELATEDPOSTS

LegalCase

STOPPINGAMASSIVEMOUNTAINTOPREMOVALCOALMINE

For Release: April 25, 2013, 9:00 a.m. EDT Contact: Sheri Singer, sheri.singer@verizon.net, 703-346-7111, @sherisinger Robin Buckley, robin@buckleykaldenbach.com, 703-201-3524

FIRST-EVER Healthier Hospitals Initiative's 2012 Milestone Report Data from U.S. Hospitals Shows Decreased Environmental Impacts and Costs

In the first-ever Healthier Hospitals Initiative 2012 Milestone Report released today, 370 HHI-member hospitals indicate that they have reduced their environmental footprint, lowered costs and improved patient health by incorporating sustainability initiatives into their business models. This is the first time hospitals have quantified sustainability efforts by collecting and reporting data to show movement. Launched in April 2012, HHI is a national campaign to improve health of patients, staff, and the community; reduce environmental impact by the sector; and experience considerable fiscal savings that reduce the overall national health care costs through better public health. The data in the report was collected from HHI-member hospitals in six key “Challenge" areas: Engaged Leadership, Healthier Food, Leaner Energy, Less Waste, Safer Chemicals, and Smarter Purchasing. "HHI is a multi-year campaign and our first Milestone Report shows movement toward delivering a more sustainable hospital environment," said Gary Cohen, president, Health Care Without Harm (HCWH) and founder of Healthier Hospitals Initiative. "This report is a baseline from which we can move forward and continue to measure our future successes by encouraging hospitals to purchase more environmentally-preferable supplies, serve healthier foods, use less energy, reduce waste and more." Led by 13 sponsoring health systems that represent more than 500 hospitals with more than $20 billion in purchasing power, and in conjunction with three nonprofit organizations—HCWH, The Center for Health Design and Practice Greenhealth—HHI aims to advocate for environmentally responsible health practices by spurring sustainable change across the health care industry. Each HHI member has committed to improve the health and safety of patients, staff and communities by implementing at least one of the Challenges; The 2012 HHI Milestone Report summarizes the Initiative’s first year of progress, with 370 HHI enrollees of all sizes and types contributing their experiences to the data. Some of the report’s key findings include:

• More than 50 million pounds of materials recycled, plus an additional 61.5 million pounds of construction and demolition waste kept out of landfills through reuse and recycling.

• About $32 million in savings resulting from single-use medical device reprocessing.

10/12/14, 2:46 PMGroups Petition U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for Water Qu…unities from Mountaintop Removal Mining Pollution | Earthjustice

Page 2 of 10http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2013/groups-petition-u-s-environ…agency-for-water-quality-standard-in-appalachia-to-protect-communit

coalition of Appalachian and national groups

pressed the Environmental Protection

Agency for stronger protection for their

waters from the most extreme form of coal

mining, mountaintop removal.

In a formal petition for rulemaking, 19

Appalachian local, regional, and national

groups are petitioning the EPA to set a

numeric water quality standard under the

Clean Water Act to protect streams in

Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, Tennessee,

Ohio, and Pennsylvania from pollution

caused by mountaintop removal mining. This

petition is backed by robust scientific studies

that demonstrate that the dumping of

mountaintop removal mining waste leads to

harmful levels of conductivity – the ability of

a waterway to conduct an electric current.

Elevated conductivity is toxic to aquatic life,

and studies show it is having an extreme

ecological effect on Appalachian waters and

streams.

This petition comes during the eighth annual

End Mountaintop Removal Week in

Washington, as citizens from all over

Appalachia gather in the nation’s capital to

demand protections for their communities

and an end to mountaintop removal.

Earthjustice,

(202) 797-5237

Legal Case

MOUNTAINTOPREMOVAL INWESTVIRGINIA

1904 Franklin, Suite 600 · Oakland, CA 94612 · Ph: (510) 302-0430 // Legal fax (510) 302-0437

In Southern California: 6326 Pacific Blvd, Suite 300 · Huntington Park, CA 90255 · Ph: (323) 826-9771

1904 Franklin St, Suite 600 | Oakland, CA 94612Phone: 510‐302‐0430 | Fax: 510‐302‐0437 | www.cbecal.org 

Dear East Oakland COMMUNITY & MEMBERS May 13, 2013 On Tuesday night, Oakland City Council unanimously passed a 180-day extension for the Emergency Ordinance that requires any new crematoriums in Oakland to first, obtain a Major Conditional Use Permit. This is what Oakland residents wanted! East Oakland residents, Allen Temple Baptist Church, Communities for a Better Environment, Alameda County Public Health Department, and local businesses believe that everyone deserves the freedom to breathe! Without this emergency ordinance, the City would allow human cremation to be classified as a “General Manufacturing” activity, and therefore not require a permit with public participation and environmental review. Cremation is not a manufacturing activity and the community has a right to know! We want to thank the hundreds of Oakland residents that signed our petition, Reverend Buford and Allen Temple Baptist Church, Allen Temple Arms, Alameda Public Health Department, Hope Collaborative, and CBE members for your support. Over 57 residents signed up to speak on this issue. We had fiery public testimony of over twenty-five Oakland residents who are still outraged by a proposed “Walmart-scale” crematorium with the capacity to burn over 3000 bodies per year in East Oakland. More mercury would come out of this proposed facility in East Oakland than the Richmond Chevron refinery reports it is putting out in the air. East Oakland is already overburdened by pollution. Because of that, we have high asthma rates and lower life expectancy than people in other parts of the Bay area. We also have worse impacts of economic depression, blight, and violence. We need to build a healthier Oakland, and not allow more pollution in our air. We need policies that will improve the quality of life of ALL Oakland residents. Because of your support, we won this round but our work is not complete. City staff will have 180 days to make this ordinance permanent so that any new crematorium wanting to come to Oakland knows it will need to get a Conditional Use Permit. Making the law clear is important. Thank you for all your support! We give a special thanks to the leadership of Vice Mayor, Councilmember Reid and his Chief of Staff Iris Merriouns! In Solidarity and Justice, Communities for a Better Environment (CBE) Oakland Team

10/12/14, 3:09 PMPlans for Proposed Kansas Coal-Fired Power Plant Halted Pending Further Environmental Review | Earthjustice

Page 2 of 10http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2013/plans-for-proposed-kansas-coal-fired-power-plant-halted-pending-further-environmental-review

May 28, 2013

Washington, D.C. — The D.C.

Circuit Court today dismissed

an appeal by Sunflower

Electric of a ruling requiring

environmental review of

Sunflower’s proposed new

coal plant in Holcomb, Kansas.

The decision lets stand a

district court ruling that the

U.S. government violated the

law by allowing Sunflower to

proceed with the polluting and

financially risky plant without

first examining its

CONTACTS

Kansas power company appeal, leavingenvironmental review requirements inplace

Amanda

Goodin,

Earthjustice,

(206)

343-

7340,

ext.1020

Emily

Rosenwasser,

Sierra

Club,

(312)

251-

1680,

ext. 119

92 Environmental Justice

REPORTSGovernment Reports

1999National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, Environmental Justice in the Permitting Process: A Report From the Public Meeting on Environmental Permitting Convened by the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, Arlington, Virginia —November 30–December 2, 1999 (Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999).

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) 1997 Strategic Plan commits the Agency to ensure that all Americans are protected from significant risk to human health and the environment where they live, learn, and work. Requirements for the siting of solid waste incinerators must minimize, on a site-specific basis, to the maximum extent practicable, potential risks to public health or the environment.

2000National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, Guide on Consultation and Collaboration With Indian Tribal Governments and the Public Participation of Indigenous Groups and Tribal Members in Environmental Decision Making (Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000).

The Guide responds to testimony before the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) that, in some instances, existing public participation processes have provided inadequate opportunities for tribal communities and tribal members to have meaningful involvement in environmental and public health decision-making processes. As citizens of the United States, tribal members (as individuals or representatives of indigenous organizations) have a right to environmental and public health protection under federal law comparable to that afforded to other citizens.

2001Governor Paris N. Glendening and Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. The Maryland Commission on Environmental Justice and Sustainable Communities Report (Baltimore: State of Maryland, Department of Environment, December 2001).

CHAPTER 5

Selected Bibliography

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

ADVISORY COUNCIL

August 3, 2000

Administrator Carol M. BrownerU. S. Environmental Protection Agency1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Browner:

Please find attached a copy of the report entitled “Environmental Justice in the Permitting Process: A Report on the Public Meeting Convened by the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, November 30-December 2, 1999.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through its Office of Environmental Justice, asked the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) to provide advice and recommendations on the following question:

“In order to secure protection from environmental degradation for all citizens, what factors should be considered by a federal permitting authority, as well as state or local agencies with delegated permitting responsibilities, in the decision-making process prior to allowing a new pollution-generating facility to operate in a minority and/or low income community that may already have a number of such facilities?”

Clearly, this is a question that the Agency has wrestled with for some time. To address this question, NEJAC scheduled a three day public meeting of industry, government (federal, tribal, state, and local), academic, and community stakeholders to explore whether and how the issue of environmental justice could be integrated into the permitting process.

This report sets forth approximately eighty (80) policy proposals that were presented by representatives from various stakeholder groups. The breath of the discussions were exemplified by individuals and/or organizations that either provided comments, suggestions or recommendations on what EPA could and/or should consider in the permit review application process. The NEJAC has considered these policy proposals and has formulated the following recommendations. Consequently, NEJAC recommends that the Administrator undertake the following actions:

$ Request the Office of General Counsel to clarify legal authority and provide guidance on, the extent to which, permit writers (including delegated state, tribal, and local governments) have a mandatory and/or discretionary authority to deny an environmental permit, condition a permit, or require additional permit procedures on environmental justice grounds.

$ As delineated in EPA’s 1997 Strategic Plan to ensure that all people, regardless of race, income or national origin, “are protected from significant risk to human health and the environment where they live, learn, and work," the NEJAC urges the Administrator to assert leadership in the quest to better understand the following: (1) cumulative impacts; (2) degree of risk; (3) community demographics; and (4) disproportionality of risk, and how these can be integrated into the permit review process, as appropriate.

• Section 112(r)(7) also authorizes the EPA Administrator to consider location and response capabilities in establishing requirements to prevent accidental releases of hazardous air pollutants. 42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(7).

• Requirements for the siting of solid waste incinerators must "minimize, on a site specific basis, to the maximum extent practicable, potential risks to public health or the environment." Section 129(a)(3), 42 U.S.C. 7429(a)(3)(emphasis added).

• Penalties for noncompliance with applicable Clean Air Act provisions must reflect "such other factors as justice may require," including, presumably, the potentially greater need for deterrence in communities which have historically lacked the resources to oversee facility compliance. See section 113(e)(1), 42 U.S.C. 7413(e)(1)(emphasis added).

• EPA has broad discretion to impose whatever permit conditions "are necessary to assure compliance." Section 504, 42 U.S.C. 7661c. Conceivably, permit conditions could include provisions to enhance a community's ability to oversee facility compliance.

• Finally, state boards with responsibility for permitting and enforcement of the Act must have "at least a majority of members who represent the public interest." Section 128, 42 U.S.C. 7428(emphasis added). The "public interest" standard may allow EPA to require that such boards include representatives of environmental justice communities.

5. Does section 112(k) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7412(k), require or authorize EPA (and delegated permit authorities) to address environmental justice concerns about cumulative burdens and their associated health risks in urban areas?

Section 112(k) addresses hazardous air pollutants from “area sources” (i.e., stationary sources that are not major) that individually or collectively present significant risks to public health in urban areas. The section directs EPA to monitor for a broad range of hazardous air pollutants, analyze contributing sources, and assess the public health risks they pose. EPA also must develop a comprehensive national emission control strategy, encourage and support State and local emission control strategies, and report to Congress on specific metropolitan areas that continue to experience high risks to public health from area source emissions. See also section 112(c)(3), 42 U.S.C. 7412(c)(3) and Tr. I-294-295.

6. Does the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA") require or authorize EPA (and delegated permit authorities) to address such environmental justice concerns as cumulative risk, unique exposure pathways, and sensitive populations? Tr. I-238. Relevant provisions cited in a law review article presented to NEJAC include:

• Standards applicable to generators and transporters of hazardous waste as well as hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities must incorporate such protective requirements "as may be necessary to protect human health and the environment," language broad enough to encompass consideration of cumulative impacts. See sections 3002(a), 3003(a), and 3004(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a), 6923(a), and 6924(a)(emphasis added).

13

Milestones and Accomplishments 93

The Commission made several recommendations that could result in the development of more sustainable communities. The Commission recommended that state agencies develop plans using Maryland Department of Environment’s Strategic Environmental Justice Plan as a guideline for developing a comparable approach in achieving their own agency missions.

2002Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice. Status Report: Environmental Justice Collaborative Model: A Framework to Ensure Local Problem-Solving (Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002).

This collaborative model is an effective method for comprehensively and proactively addressing the interrelated environmental, public health, economic, and social concerns collectively known as environmental justice issues. This report summarizes the lessons learned from the ongoing projects, identifies the elements of success, examines the emerging outline of a coherent collaborative problem-solving model, and describes efforts to evaluate the model and specific demonstration projects.

2003U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Not in My Backyard: Executive Order 12898 and Title VI as Tools for Achieving Environmental Justice (Washington, DC: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 2003).

This report, based on Commission hearings, interviews, research, and a review of relevant literature, reveals that while there has been some limited success in implementing Executive Order 12898 and the principles of environmental justice, significant problems and shortcomings remain. The report recommends that federal agencies coordinate and promulgate clear regulations, guidelines, and procedures for investigating, reviewing, and deciding without unnecessary delay of Title VI claims, and that federal agencies implement

formal Title VI compliance review programs to ensure nondiscrimination in programs and activities receiving federal funding.

2004U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Evaluation Report: EPA Needs to Consistently Implement the Intent of the Executive Order on Environmental Justice, Report No. 2004-P-00007 (Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004).

The report recommends that the EPA establish specific time frames for the development of definitions, goals, and measurements. It also recommends that the EPA develop and articulate a clear vision on the Agency’s approach to environmental justice. This report contains findings that describe problems and corrective actions the Office of Inspector General (OIG) recommends. This report represents the opinion of the OIG, and the findings in this report do not necessarily represent the final EPA position.

2005U.S. Government Accountability Office (GOA). Environmental Justice: EPA Should Devote More Attention to Environmental Justice When Developing Clean Air Rules. Report to the Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, GAO-05-289 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2005).

The GAO was asked to examine how the EPA considers environmental justice during two phases of developing clean air rules: (1) drafting the rule, including activities of the work group that considered regulatory options, the economic review of the rule’s costs, and making the proposed rule available for public comment; and (2) finalizing the rule, including addressing public comments, and revising the economic review.

THE MARYLAND COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

ANNUAL REPORT

December 2001

Governor Parris N. Glendening

Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Purpose

The Maryland Commission on Environmental Justice and Sustainable Communities has completed its first annual report. At Maryland’s annual Environmental Legislative Summit on January 21, 2002, Mr. Scot T. Spencer, the Commission’s Chairman, presented an official report to Maryland’s Governor, Parris Glendening for his review and consideration. The report contains the Commission’s findings and recommendations in accordance with an Executive Order issued by the Governor on January 1, 2001. Background

The Commission held its inaugural meeting on May 11, 2001. The Maryland Department of the Environment’s Secretary, Jane Nishida, Assistant Secretary Denise Ferguson-Southard and the Commission’s Chair, Scot T. Spencer, presented the charge and goals to the Commission. The Commission has had seven (7) meetings since its first meeting in addition to the first community forum, which was held on December 21, 2001. The Commission’s meetings have identified several problematic areas of concern across the state of Maryland. There is significant concern about the full integration of stakeholder-based/community involvement and planning within the framework of the regulatory mandates, processes, and procedures. General concerns articulated by Marylanders during the 2001 meetings include inequities in research practices associated with lead paint studies, power plant siting, landfill siting, the provision of wastewater and sewer infrastructure, permitting, hearing processes, public outreach, and involvement, and protection of public health.

The Commission has made several recommendations that could result in the development of more sustainable communities. One concept that is intriguing to the Commission is the development of a comprehensive framework to respond to environmental inequities in targeted communities. This concept builds on the foundations of Maryland’s Smart Growth paradigm and those created by the visions adopted as State policy in the 1992 Growth Act.

This concept embodies the development of policies with the use of State resources that

support communities and influence the location of specific development. It will attempt to use the authority of state government in communities designated by counties and local government as environmentally challenged or higher risk communities. These designated communities would receive priority attention that could manifest in several forms: additional compliance and enforcement activities, additional state funding and tax benefits, and special analyses of potential developmental benefits and impacts, with the idea of steering away environmentally detrimental activities while encouraging environmentally and economically beneficial ones.

The Commission is looking at mechanisms to identify high-risk communities so that state

agencies can focus their limited resources on the highest priority areas. To facilitate this identification, the Commission has started to develop criteria to better define high risk or environmentally challenged communities.

3

Recommendations

This initial Commission report recognizes the unique challenges faced by many Maryland communities and is recommending the integration of an environmental justice and sustainable communities ethic within all state agencies. In this context, the Commission is recommending that state agencies develop plans using MDE’s Strategic Environmental Justice Plan as a guideline for developing a comparable approach in achieving their own agency missions.

The Commission recommends the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a

response mechanism to community-based environmental disputes. We are striving to develop innovative practices and approaches that can better lead to resolving environmental disputes before executive branch agencies in Maryland.

The Commission also recommends continued education of state agencies on

environmental justice and sustainable communities, with special attention given to marginalized and disenfranchised communities; the creation of state-wide community forums to discuss these issues; the development of environmental justice related guidance for state agencies; focused effort to improve public participation before agencies; and, the building and strengthening government “infrastructure” at local levels to support marginalized communities.

Finally, the Commission applauds Governor Glendening for his vision and foresight to innovate in this area. The members have recognized the enormity of the Commission’s tasks. They do not see these tasks as challenges, but as opportunities to build upon and strengthen all of Maryland communities, consistent with the state’s legacy of inclusion and sustainable communities.

4

United States Environmental Protection Agency

STATUS REPORT

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COLLABORATIVE MODEL: A Framework to Ensure Local Problem-Solving

Developed by Federal Interagency Working Group On Environmental Justice

Preface

In May, 2000, the 11 federal agencies comprising the Federal Interagency Working Group on

Environmental Justice (IWG) developed and issued an Interagency Environmental Justice Action

Agenda (Action Agenda). The goals of the Action Agenda are as follows:

(1) to promote greater coordination and cooperation among federal agencies;

(2) to make government more accessible and responsive to communities;

(3) to initiate environmental justice demonstration projects to develop integrated place-based

models for addressing community quality-of-life issues; and

(4) to ensure integration of environmental justice in policies, programs and activities of

federal agencies.

The underlying premise of the Action Agenda is that a collaborative model is an effective method for

comprehensively and proactively addressing the interrelated environmental, public health, economic,

and social concerns collectively known as environmental justice issues. The IWG, in partnership with

various stakeholders (i.e., state, tribal, and local government agencies; community organizations;

industry representatives; and others) established 15 demonstration projects to test this underlying

premise.

This interim status report presents a “work-in-progress” as it:

(1) summarizes the “lessons learned” from the ongoing projects;

(2) identifies the elements of success;

(3) examines the emerging outline of a coherent collaborative problem-solving model; and

(4) describes efforts to evaluate the model and specific demonstration projects.

These activities are intended to lay the groundwork for a second round of IWG demonstration

projects being identified for 2002.

IWG Status Report - February 2002 Environmental Justice Collaborative Model iii

iii

Letter of Transmittal The President The President of the Senate The Speaker of the House of Representatives Sirs: The United States Commission on Civil Rights transmits this report, Not in My Backyard: Executive Order 12,898 and Title VI as Tools for Achieving Environmental Justice, pursuant to Public Law 103-419. This report examines how well four federal agencies—the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of the Interior, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of Transportation—have implemented Executive Order 12,898 and Title VI. Execu-tive Order 12,898 requires federal agencies to collect data on the health and environmental impact of their activities on communities of color and low-income populations, and develop policies incorpo-rating the principles of environmental justice into their programs and activities. In this report the Commission assesses the efforts of these agencies to adopt, promote, and execute policies ensuring that environmental justice is incorporated into their core missions, whether affected communities are provided meaningful participation in environmental decision-making processes, and to what extent these communities have access to scientific data and effective Title VI enforcement procedures.

This report, based on Commission hearings, interviews, research, and a review of relevant literature, reveals that while there has been some limited success in implementing Executive Order 12,898 and the principles of environmental justice, significant problems and shortcomings remain. Federal agencies still have neither fully incorporated environmental justice into their core missions nor established ac-countability and performance outcomes for programs and activities. Moreover, a commitment to envi-ronmental justice is often lacking in agency leadership, communities are not yet full participants in environmental decision-making, and there is still inadequate scientific and technical literature on the relationship between environmental pollutants and human health status. Although poor communities and communities of color are becoming more skilled at using Title VI administrative processes to seek recourse and remedies, agencies seldom, if ever, revoke a permit or withhold money from the recipients of federal funding for violating Title VI. Strong administrative enforcement of Title VI is required in light of court decisions limiting access to judicial recourse and remedies under Title VI. Uncertainty about the use and effectiveness of Title VI in protecting the poor and communities of color is created by the absence of final investigative and recipient guidance by EPA. The agency was moving toward finalizing its Title VI guidance at the time the Commission report was drafted, and we look forward to its release. The other agencies, unlike EPA, lacked any comprehensive Title VI investigation and recipient guidance.

As a result, the Commission report makes many recommendations; some of the recommendations are directed toward federal agencies while others require congressional action. The report recommends, for example, that federal agencies coordinate and promulgate clear regulations, guidelines, and pro-cedures for investigating, reviewing, and deciding without unnecessary delay Title VI claims, and that federal agencies implement formal Title VI compliance review programs to ensure nondiscrimi-nation in programs and activities receiving federal funding. In addition, Congress should pass a Civil Rights Restoration Act to provide for a private right of action for disparate impact claims under Title VI, as well as § 1983.

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

March 1, 2004

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Evaluation Report: EPA Needs to Consistently Implement the Intent of theExecutive Order on Environmental JusticeReport No. 2004-P-00007

FROM: Kwai Chan /s/Assistant Inspector General for Program Evaluation

TO: Stephen L. JohnsonActing Deputy Administrator

Attached is our final report regarding the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s)implementation of Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice, its integration into themission of EPA, and associated actions to protect minority and low-income populations. Thisreport contains findings that describe problems and corrective actions the Office of InspectorGeneral (OIG) recommends. This report represents the opinion of the OIG, and the findings inthis report do not necessarily represent the final EPA position. Final determinations on mattersin the report will be made by EPA managers in accordance with established procedures.

Action Required

In accordance with EPA Manual 2750, as the action official, you are required to provide awritten response to the findings and recommendations presented in this final report within 90days of the final report date. The response should address all recommendations. For correctiveactions planned but not completed by the response date, please describe the actions that areongoing and provide a timetable for completion. Where you disagree with a recommendation,please provide alternative actions for addressing the findings reported.

If you or your staff have any questions regarding this report, please contact meat (202) 566-0827 or Jeffrey Harris, Director for Program Evaluation, Cross-Media Issues, at(202) 566-0831.

ii

justice protocols used by three different regions would apply to the same cityshowed a wide disparity in protected populations.

We believe the Agency is bound by the requirements of Executive Order 12898and does not have the authority to reinterpret the order. The Acting DeputyAdministrator needs to reaffirm that the Executive Order 12898 appliesspecifically to minority and low-income populations that are disproportionatelyimpacted. After 10 years, there is an urgent need for the Agency to standardizeenvironmental justice definitions, goals, and measurements for the consistentimplementation and integration of environmental justice at EPA.

Recommendations

We recommended that the Acting Deputy Administrator issue a memorandumreaffirming that Executive Order 12898 is an Agency priority and that minorityand low-income populations disproportionately impacted will be the beneficiariesof this Executive Order. Additionally, EPA should establish specific time framesfor the development of definitions, goals, and measurements. Furthermore, werecommended that EPA develop and articulate a clear vision on the Agency’sapproach to environmental justice. We also recommended that EPA develop acomprehensive strategic plan, ensure appropriate training is provided, clearlydefine the mission of the Office of Environmental Justice, determine if adequateresources are being applied to environmental justice, and develop a systematicapproach to gathering information related to environmental justice.

Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation

In the response to our draft report, the Agency disagreed with the central premisethat Executive Order 12898 requires the Agency to identify and address theenvironmental effects of its programs on minority and low-income populations. The Agency believes the Executive Order “instructs the Agency to identify andaddress the disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmentaleffects of it (sic) programs, policies, and activities.” The Agency does not takeinto account the inclusion of the minority and low-income populations, andindicated it is attempting to provide environmental justice for everyone. Whileproviding adequate environmental justice to the entire population iscommendable, doing so had already been EPA’s mission prior to implementationof the Executive Order; we do not believe the intent of the Executive Order wassimply to reiterate that mission. We believe the Executive Order was specificallyissued to provide environmental justice to minority and/or low-incomepopulations due to concerns that those populations had been disproportionatelyimpacted by environmental risk.

A summary of the Agency’s response and our evaluation is included at the end ofeach chapter. The Agency’s complete response and our evaluation of thatresponse are included in Appendices D and E, respectively.

What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

HighlightsAccountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-289. To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on the link above. For more information, contact John B. Stephenson at (202) 512-3841.

Highlights of GAO-05-289, a report to the Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives

July 2005

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

EPA Should Devote More Attention to Environmental Justice When Developing Clean Air Rules

When drafting the three clean air rules, EPA generally devoted little attention to environmental justice. While EPA guidance on rulemaking states that workgroups should consider environmental justice early in this process, GAO found that a lack of guidance and training for workgroup members on identifying environmental justice issues may have limited their ability to identify such issues. In addition, while EPA officials stated that economic reviews of proposed rules consider potential environmental justice impacts, the gasoline and diesel rules did not provide decision makers with environmental justice analyses, and EPA has not identified all the types of data necessary to analyze such impacts. Finally, in all three rules, EPA mentioned environmental justice when they were published in proposed form, but the discussion in the ozone implementation rule was contradictory. In finalizing the three clean air rules, EPA considered environmental justice to varying degrees. Public commenters stated that all three rules, as proposed, raised environmental justice issues. In responding to such comments on the gasoline rule, EPA published its belief that the rule would not create such issues, but did not publish the data and assumptions supporting its belief. Specifically, EPA did not publish (1) its estimate that potentially harmful air emissions would increase in 26 of the 86 counties with refineries affected by the rule or (2) its assumption that this estimate overstated the eventual increases in refinery emissions. For the diesel rule, in response to refiners’ concerns that their permits could be delayed if environmental justice issues were raised by citizens, EPA stated that the permits would not be delayed by such issues. Moreover, after reviewing the comments, EPA did not change its final economic reviews to discuss the gasoline and diesel rules’ potential environmental justice impacts. Finally, the portions of the ozone implementation rule that prompted the comments about environmental justice were not included in the final rule. Overall, EPA officials said that these rules, as published in final form, did not create an environmental justice issue. Three Clean Air Rules

Executive Order 12898 made achieving “environmental justice” part of the mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal agencies. According to EPA, environmental justice involves fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes. EPA developed guidance for considering environmental justice during the development of rules under the Clean Air Act and other activities. GAO was asked to examine how EPA considered environmental justice during two phases of developing clean air rules: (1) drafting the rule, including activities of the workgroup that considered regulatory options, the economic review of the rule’s costs, and making the proposed rule available for public comment, and (2) finalizing the rule, including addressing public comments and revising the economic review. GAO reviewed the three clean air rules described in the next column.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends, among other things, that EPA improve workgroups’ ability to identify environmental justice issues and enhance the ability of its economic reviews to analyze potential environmental justice impacts. EPA disagreed with the recommendations because it believes it pays appropriate attention to environmental justice. GAO believes the recommendations are still valid.

94 Environmental Justice

2006National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes and Vulnerable Populations—Recommendations for Future Disaster Preparedness/Response (Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006).

NEJAC recommends that the EPA should work with appropriate agencies to address issues such as mold, debris, and sediments, and assess whether a health survey of Gulf Coast residents impacted by the hurricanes is appropriate. It is everyone’s collective hope that, in the aftermath of disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, we as a nation not only will be able to rebuild healthier, more sustainable communities, but also will be better prepared both to respond to future such events and to prevent their negative consequences.

2007Jennifer Pike. Spending Federal Disaster Aid: Comparing the Process and Priorities in Louisiana and Mississippi in the Wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita (New York: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, 2007).

The report highlights some of the roadblocks Louisiana and Mississippi have been grappling with as they steer these somewhat flexible funding sources to the areas in need. The author emphasizes that what is at stake is the hospital dispute on whether Louisiana should rebuild the centerpiece of what many critics contend is a failed health care system, and many proponents argue is the only way the poor can have access to adequate health care.

2008Staff Report Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight by Committee on Science and Technology for U.S. House of Representatives. Toxic Trailers–Toxic Lethargy: How the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Has Failed to Protect the Public Health (Washington, DC: Committee on Science and Technology, 2008).

The report provides a detailed examination of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s (ATSDR) response to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) trailer/formaldehyde issue and the Agency’s production, approval, and release of that health consultation. ATSDR failed to translate its scientific findings and facts into appropriate public health actions to properly inform and warn FEMA and the tens

Selected Bibliography

Milestones and Accomplishments 95

of thousands of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita survivors living in FEMA-provided trailers and mobile homes of the potential health risks they faced from exposure to formaldehyde.

2009U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Pacific Southwest Region 9. Environmental Justice Resource Guide: A Handbook for Communities and Decision-Makers (Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009).

This guide for community organizers and decision-makers includes information on agency funding sources, training opportunities, and technical and program assistance for minority and low-income communities disproportionately affected by environmental and public health impacts.

2010National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. Strategies to Enhance School Air Toxics Monitoring in Environmental Justice Communities (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, 2010).

This report contains advice and recommendations about how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can most effectively promote strategies that would improve EPA’s long-term school and community outreach approach in the future. The report includes nineteen recommendations and the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) indicate that EPA should seek the advice of the NEJAC (or its work group as delegated) about designing and implementing the next phase of the school air toxics monitoring project

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. Nationally Consistent Environmental Justice Screening Approaches (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, 2010).

This report discusses screening approaches through the lens of the Agency’s Environmental Justice Strategic

Enforcement Tool (EJSEAT), in particular, and how such approaches might better identify areas of concern. This report also discusses the principles that should guide the use of such screening approaches, those instances where a nationally consistent screening approach might be appropriate, and those instances where such an approach might be inappropriate or misused.

United States Commission on Civil Rights. Civil Rights Challenges of the 21st Century: A View from the States. A Staff Report of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Washington, D.C.: United States Commission on Civil Rights).

This report will enable the Commission to obtain an on-the-ground perspective in regions and states in identifying top civil rights priorities. This perspective in turn will help the Commission meet its strategic goal of shaping a national conversation on current and future civil rights issues that identifies civil rights priorities for policy makers.

2011National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. Recommendations for Ensuring Long-Term Engagement of Communities in Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, 2011).

This report contains advice and recommendations about how the Agency can best engage minority, low-income, and tribal/indigenous communities for input on decisions about Gulf Coast restoration plans, particularly with respect to the impacts of such plans on permitting (such as wetlands restoration, equitable development, revitalization, cleanups, and sustainable energy).

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. Enhancing Environmental Justice in EPA Permitting Programs (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, 2011).

THE 2005 GULF COAST HURRICANES AND VULNERABLE POPULATIONS –

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE DISASTER PREPAREDNESS/RESPONSE

August 2006

A Report prepared by the

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

a Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

• Establish a credible forum for dialogue with affected stakeholders about different ways to improve risk communications, including the use of forums and expert panels;

• Use neutral facilitators, when appropriate; • Provide technical assistance to communities to access and interpret data, and • Build partnerships to ensure community outreach and meaningful involvement for

populations which historically have had less access to environmental and public health information and/or the decision-making process.

In addition, EPA should work with appropriate agencies to address issues such as mold, debris and sediments, and assess whether a health survey of Gulf Coast residents impacted by the hurricanes is appropriate. With respect to environmentally sound redevelopment, we recommend that EPA work with appropriate agencies to foster environmentally sustainable redevelopment and the restoration of wetlands and barrier islands. In addition, EPA should work with appropriate agencies to address issues such as Brownfields assessment and cleanup, worker protection, and job training and creation. In closing, we want to acknowledge the members of the Gulf Coast Hurricanes Work Group for their contributions to this report. In particular, we wish to recognize the leadership, hard work and dedication provided by Ms. Wilma Subra, Work Group Chair. We also want to acknowledge the many EPA offices that worked with the NEJAC to develop meaningful recommendations. These EPA offices include: Region 4; Region 6; Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (Office of Emergency Management, Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment); Office of Water; Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation; Office of Radiation and Indoor Air; Office of Research and Development; and the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (Office of Environmental Justice). We look forward to your response to our advice and recommendations.

Sincerely,

Richard Moore /s/ Richard Moore Chair

cc: NEJAC Members

Granta Nakayama, Assistant Administrator, OECA Thomas Dunne, Associate Administrator, Homeland Security Susan Bodine, Assistant Administrator, OSWER Catherine McCabe, Deputy Assistant Administrator, OECA Stanly Meiburg, Deputy Regional Administrator, EPA Region 4 Lawrence Starfield, Deputy Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6 Barry E. Hill, Director, OEJ Deborah Dietrich, Director, OEM Charles Lee, Associate Director, OEJ and NEJAC Designated Federal Officer Victoria Robinson, NEJAC Program Manager, OEJ

THE 2005 GULF COAST HURRICANES AND VULNERABLE POPULATIONS – RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

FUTURE DISASTER PREPAREDNESS/RESPONSE

INTRODUCTION The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is a formal federal advisory committee chartered pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”) to provide advice and recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on matters related to environmental justice. This report responds to EPA’s request for advice and recommendations on the following question:

“How can EPA effectively address the vulnerabilities of all communities to public health and environmental risks and harms, including minority and low-income communities, in EPA’s response and rebuilding, and preparedness and prevention efforts, in the aftermath of natural disasters similar to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, pursuant to the National Response Plan and applicable statutory authorities and their implementing regulations, as well as Executive Order 12898?”

It is everyone’s collective hope that, in the aftermath of disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, we as a Nation not only will be able to rebuild healthier, more sustainable communities, but also will be better prepared both to respond to future such events and to prevent their negative consequences. Therefore, the NEJAC has worked earnestly to provide advice and recommendations on the important question above. The EPA convened a multi-stakeholder group of individuals from the Gulf Coast region, in the form of the NEJAC Gulf Coast Hurricanes Work Group (Work Group), to formulate a set of initial draft recommendations for the NEJAC to deliberate and act upon. The Work Group met in person twice, in New Orleans, Louisiana (February 1-2, 2006) and Biloxi, Mississippi (April 11-12, 2006). The Work Group also conducted several conference calls. In addition, the NEJAC Executive Council deliberated on the Work Group’s draft recommendations, and received public comments regarding them, at a NEJAC Public Meeting in Washington, DC (June 20-22, 2006). NEJAC Work Group members, who themselves have been struggling to rebuild and renew their lives and devastated communities, requested that the NEJAC express their appreciation to the EPA Administrator for the selfless, and often heroic, efforts of EPA staff in responding to the recent hurricanes. They recognized the monumental scope of the hurricanes’ impacts, and commended EPA’s rapid and extensive response efforts. In particular, they noted EPA’s sensitivity to the needs of disadvantaged communities. They urged the NEJAC to strongly convey their communities’ sense of tremendous anguish and urgency regarding their current and future challenges, as well as EPA’s important role in addressing them. As Mayor Johnny Dupree of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, a member of that Work Group, poignantly stated on April 12, 2006: “Because of EPA’s past good work in environmental justice, communities in the Gulf Coast have high expectations for EPA to provide leadership in addressing their concerns.”

GulfGov Reports

Spending Federal Disaster AidComparing the Process and Priorities in Louisiana and Mississippi

in the Wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita

Principal Author:Jennifer Pike

Research Director,Public Affairs Research

Council of Louisiana

© 2007 by The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government and

the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana

All rights reserved.

The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government

411 State Street

Albany, New York 12203-1003

www.rockinst.org

Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana

4664 Jamestown Avenue, Suite 300

Baton Rouge, LA 70808-4776

www.la-par.org

The Nelson A. Rockefeller

Institute of Government

Public Affairs Research

Council of Louisiana

Financial support for the startup of this research program has been provided by the Ford Foundation.

We gratefully appreciate their support and assistance.

GulfGov Reports

Spending Federal Disaster Aid iv

Executive Summary

Among the many types of federal disaster aid that have been sent to the Gulf Coast region in the wake of

hurricanes Katrina and Rita, two major grant programs stand out both for the amount of money being

funneled through them and for the flexibility they offer state and local governments trying to rebuild their

communities. Specifically, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Public Assistance (PA)

and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs are being used to help the affected cities,

counties, parishes, and states. In some instances that means replacing severely damaged or destroyed

buildings and infrastructure. In others, it means providing financial assistance for repairs to structures that

can be salvaged. For officials in the devastated communities, the money is essential to their rebuilding

processes. Yet the slow pace at which the FEMA PA grants and CDBG awards are being disbursed has

proved frustrating to local governments at best and debilitating to their recovery efforts at worst.

This report highlights some of the roadblocks Louisiana and Mississippi have been grappling with as

they steer these somewhat flexible funding sources to the areas in need. Although Texas and Alabama

also have received FEMA PA money and CDBG funding to help repair hurricane damage, neither state

suffered the level of damage that Louisiana and Mississippi did. Consequently, they received

considerably less federal money than the billions of dollars that have been set aside to help Louisiana

and Mississippi. For that reason, the decision was made to exclude them from this study.

Both the FEMA PA and CDBG programs give state and local officials discretion in spending

decisions while at the same time requiring compliance with federal guidelines. This report shows that

variations in the process each state has used to set spending priorities have had an impact on the

timeliness with which the money is being disbursed. The goal for state and local officials has been to

strike a balance between expediency — the need to distribute the money as quickly as possible — and

accountability — the need to make sure the money is used as it was intended. But this has proved to be a

challenging and, at times, elusive goal.

Among the findings of the report:

1. The amount of federal aid provided to Mississippi and Louisiana is not proportional to the amount

of damage each state suffered.

2. The sluggishness of aid distribution continues to be the primary concern of state and local officials

in both states.

allocated for economic development in Louisiana. The bulk of the Mississippi funding, $340 million, is for

grants and loans for job creation. The bulk of Louisiana’s funding, $235 million, is set aside for bridge and

long-term recovery loan and grant programs for private businesses. Other programs provide funding for

tourism marketing and research support at higher education institutions.

Issues Between States and HUD

A primary goal of the CDBG program at the federal level is to provide assistance for citizens at the low-

to moderate-income levels. In normal operating environments, grant recipients are challenged to document

carefully the income levels of the clients served by their programs. The low- to moderate-income

requirement was expected to hinder development of the disaster programs. Upon initial appropriation of the

funding, Congress authorized a general waiver allowing the requirement to be lowered from 70 percent of

funding to 50 percent of funding for the amount that must be spent on low- to moderate-income recipients.

This adjustment was sufficient for Louisiana, where the affected population was of significantly lower

income levels than in Mississippi. Mississippi, on the other hand, has had to seek waivers for many of its

programs that will not serve a sufficient number of low- to moderate-income recipients. Mississippi officials

said HUD has been cooperative in granting the additional waivers.

Officials in both states said cooperation between community development officials and HUD has been

reasonably good — until the criticism of Louisiana’s housing program began in the spring of 2007. To that

point, HUD had not requested any major alterations to the spending plans developed by the states.

A separate controversy was settled when Louisiana withdrew its request for $300 million in CDBG

money to rebuild the charity hospital in New Orleans. Legislative involvement in the development of the

spending plan for the project led to an increase in the allocation from $74 million to $300 million, prompting

calls from private stakeholders and some state officials for HUD — as final gatekeeper for the funds — to

reject the plan at least until a business plan for operation of the facility was developed. Unhappy at the

negative reaction the request drew from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Louisiana

ultimately decided to use its own money to begin the hospital project.

The charity hospital decision may have set an important precedent as the intergovernmental roles in

setting rebuilding priorities and policies are established for future disasters. The question is whether

rebuilding funds can or should be used to promote policy reforms and whether federal officials should

intervene in the development of those reforms. At stake in the hospital dispute is whether Louisiana should

rebuild the centerpiece of what many critics contend is a failed health care system and many proponents

argue is the only way the poor can have access to adequate health care.

Issues Between States and Recipient Entities(Governments, Businesses, Individuals)

The sluggishness of aid distribution is the primary concern of the states and the intended funding

recipients. Small business owners in the devastated areas of Louisiana have been calling for quick infusions

of cash to keep their operations afloat until their populations return — but the programs were slow to get off

GulfGov Reports

Spending Federal Disaster Aid 15

BART GORDON, TENNESSEE CHAIRMAN RALPH M. HALL, TEXAS

RANKING MEMBER

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SUITE 2320 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6301

(202) 225-6375

TTY: (202) 226-4410 http://science.house.gov

MEMORANDUM

September 22, 2008

TO: Rep. Brad Miller, Chairman Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight

FROM: Majority Staff

RE: Attached is a staff report titled: "Toxic Trailers - Toxic Lethargy: How the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Has Failed to Protect the Public Health." On April 1, 2008, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's (ATSDR) production of its February 2007 health consultation for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on formaldehyde levels in travel trailers provided to survivors of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The attached report provides a detailed examinatiOIl. ofATSDR's production, approval and release of that health consultation and the agency's response to the FEMA/formaldehyde issue. It includes information provided to the Subcommittee after the April 1st hearing.

Cc: F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. Ranking Member Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight

Bart Gordon Chairman

------ ---------- --- -------Committeeon-Science-andTechnology --------- -

Nick Lampson Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Environment

Executive Summary

Created in 1980 by Congress, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), based in Atlanta, Georgia, is a federal public health agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. As part of its mandate to protect the public from harmful environmental chemicals the agency performs "public health assessments of waste sites, health consultations concerning specific hazardous substances, health surveillance and registries, response to emergency releases of hazardous substances, applied research in support of public health assessments, information development and dissemination, and education and training concerning hazardous substances."l

The mission of ATSDR, a sister agency of the Centers for Disease Control and. Prevention (CDC), "is to serve the public by using the best science, taking responsive public health actions, and providing trusted health information to prevent harmful exposures and disease related to toxic substances.,,2 Unfortunately, the agency failed to meet any of those objectives when it produced a "health consultation" on formaldehyde levels in travel trailers provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to survivors of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in February 2007.3 In almost every respect ATSDR failed to fulfill its mission to protect the public from exposure to formaldehyde at levels known to cause negative health effects. The agency's incomplete and inadequate handling of their public health assessment, the failure to quickly and effectively correct their scientific mistakes and their reluctance to take appropriate corrective actions was all marked by notable inattention and inaction on the part of ATSDR's senior leadership. As a result, tens of thousands of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita families living in trailers with elevated levels of formaldehyde were kept in harm's way for at least one year longer than necessary. ,

ATSDR failed to translate its scientific findings and facts into appropriate public health actions to properly inform and warn FEMA and the tens of thousands of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita survivors living in FEMA-provided trailers and mobile homes of the potential health risks they faced from exposure to formaldehyde. Instead, ATSDR's reaction was marred by scientific flaws, ineffective leadership, a sluggish response to inform trailer residents of the potential risks they faced, and a lack of urgency to actually remove them from harm's way. Most disturbingly, there was a concerted and continuing effort by the agency's leadership to both mask their own involvement in the formaldehyde

-study,-and to pushthe-blame1ortheir-flmibl1ngofthis-c:ritlcafpublichealthls-sue-cioWii-the line to others.

The health consultation itself, conducted at the request ofFEMA's Office of General Counsel because of expected litigation concerns, was scientifically flawed and

1 "About ATSDR," from agency's web-site, available here: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/about.html 2 Statement of Mission, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), available here: www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mission.html

3 "Health Consultation: Formaldehyde Sampling at FEMA Temporary Housing Units, Baton Rouge, Louisiana," Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, February 1,2007. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/PHA/fema housing formaldehyde/formaldehyde report 0507.pdf

- 1

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

March 31, 2010

Members: Richard Moore, Chair Don Aragon Sue Briggum Chuck Barlow M. Kathryn Brown Peter Captain, Sr. Jolene Catron Wynecta Fisher William Harper Jodena Henneke Christian Holmes Hilton Kelley Langdon Marsh Greg Melanson Paul Mohai Shankar Prasad John Ridgway John Rosenthal Patricia Salkin Omega Wilson ElizabethYeampierre

Lisa P. Jackson Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (MC1101A) Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Administrator Jackson: The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is pleased to submit the report, Strategies to Enhance School Air Toxics Monitoring in Environmental Justice Communities (April 2010), for the Agency’s review. This report contains advice and recommendations about how EPA can most effectively promote strategies that would improve EPA’s long-term school and community outreach approach in the future. With the 19 recommendations outlined in this report, the Council seeks to • Identify ways in which EPA can work with its partners and stakeholders at

the national, state, tribal, and local levels to enhance the Agency’s engagement with all school communities, but especially with low-income and people of color communities.

• Convey a sense of urgency toward taking action for reducing children’s exposure to toxic air contaminants

• Provide a clear focus about the need to aggressively protect children where they live, learn, and play

Key recommendations include: • Fully employ the strength of EPA’s regulatory clout as needed to mitigate

pollution sources around schools • Develop community involvement and outreach plans, supported by

adequate funding • Promote and ensure Federal interagency coordination and effective

national strategies to address school environmental health • Coordinate with EPA’s Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee,

particularly as monitoring results relate to the siting of schools. • Expand the research agenda to support the establishment of child safe

exposure standards

A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Strategies to Enhance School Air Toxics Monitoring in EJ Communities A NEJAC Report of Recommendations Page 11

to mitigate identified air quality problems. A full range of options, including permit modification or revocation, should be on the table.

4.0 CONCLUSION As part of the “next steps” for EPA’s School Air Toxics Monitoring Program, the following recommendation is offered: 19. EPA should seek the advice of the NEJAC (or its work group as delegated) about designing

and implementing the next phase of the school air toxics monitoring project. The Agency should engage the NEJAC in more than just community outreach and communications issues related to this program. For all the aforementioned reasons, we believe that EPA’s “Charge” to the NEJAC needs to be revised and expanded to incorporate areas other than effective communications strategies for engaging with the public about EPA’s School Air Toxics Monitoring project.

Additionally, a revised charge from the NEJAC to the Work Group, should delineate the role of that body in interpreting and analyzing air monitoring data that is distinct from that of a formally established Peer Review Committee, yet allows the Work Group to substantively address these areas in a way that is not considered to be going beyond its “chartered” responsibilities and those of the NEJAC itself. The development of protocols that address all aspects of the monitoring project would allow the Work Group to provide expert advice relevant to two key phases of the project, i.e., data collection design and interpretation of findings, both critical to the usefulness and credibility of the program.

REPORT OF THE

NATIONALLY CONSISTENT ENVIRONMENT JUSTICE SCREENING

APPROACHES WORK GROUP

TO THE

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

January 11, 2010

DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

I. INTRODUCTION The Environmental Justice Strategic Enforcement Screening Tool (EJSEAT) was created by EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) to serve as “a consistent methodology that would enable OECA to identify communities or areas experiencing disproportionate environmental and public health burdens for the purposes of enhancing and focusing OECA’s enforcement and compliance activities in those areas.”1 OECA’s desire to improve consistency in EPA’s environmental justice program is commendable. For some regulatory functions, there should be consistent logic in approaching environmental justice (EJ) concerns. For example, it is important to have a way of tracking progress in allocating resources to environmental justice areas in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of a national EJ program. In addition it is helpful to clearly articulate the critical factors to be included when screening for areas of concern so that communities know the standards under which they can seek agency support and assistance. However, it is equally important to recognize that for some purposes, a consistent national methodology strictly applied is not appropriate and screening factors must be supplemented by local information. This report to the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) from the Work Group discusses screening approaches through the lens of EJSEAT, in particular, and how such approaches might better identify areas of concern. This report also discusses the principles that should guide the use of a screening approach, those instances where a nationally consistent screening approach might be appropriate, and those instances where such an approach might be inappropriate or misused. II. CHARGE TO THE WORK GROUP The Work Group initially was charged to gain a basic understanding of EJSEAT and to identify policy-level issues, concerns, potential benefits and uses of EJSEAT. This identification process would take place in the context of briefings on EPA’s developing programmatic approaches to environmental justice. On December 14, 2007, the NEJAC forwarded to the Assistant Administrator of OECA a letter describing its approach to evaluating EJSEAT, and providing quick feedback on issues and concerns flagged at the outset. The letter was forwarded as well to EPA’s staff who were at the time working on EJSEAT for their consideration as they continued to refine the approach. Then Assistant Administrator of OECA. Granta Nakayama requested advice and recommendations from the NEJAC to improve EJSEAT’s comprehensiveness, efficacy and accuracy. 2 On the basis of these initially identified issues and the request of the Assistant Administrator, the NEJAC established a Work Group to assess the nature of EJSEAT and its potential uses, and to develop a list of initial principles that should shape development of such a tool. The Work Group sought to gain a deeper understanding of how EJSEAT worked and how it appeared to be operating in early field testing by EPA Regions. We received briefings from EPA staff. The OECA in particular answered follow-up questions from Work Group members and provided EJSEAT data elements, definitions and sources. The Work Group also requested reports from several Regions performing this testing. We received an informal briefing from one

1 EPA, Work Plan for the NEJAC Work Group on Nationally Consistent EJ Screening Approaches 2 Letter from Granta Y. Nakayama to Richard Moore, Chair of the NEJAC, dated February 4, 2008.

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

Members: ElizabethYeampierre, Chair John Ridgway, Vice Chair Teri Blanton Sue Briggum Peter Captain, Sr. Jolene Catron Wynecta Fisher Stephanie Hall Jodena Henneke Savanala 'Savi' Horne Langdon Marsh Margaret May Vernice Miller-Travis Paul Mohai Vien T. Nguyen Edith Pestana Nia Robinson Patricia Salkin Nicholas Targ Kimberly Wasserman

July 23, 2011

Lisa P. Jackson Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20460

Dear Administrator Jackson:

The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is pleased to submit the report, Recommendations for Ensuring Long-Term Community Engagement in Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration, for the Agency’s review. This report contains advice and recommendations about how the Agency can best engage minority, low-income, and tribal/indigenous communities for input on decisions about Gulf Coast restoration plans, particularly with respect to the impacts of such plans on permitting (such as wetlands restoration, equitable development, revitalization, cleanups, and sustainable energy).

As noted by President Obama, the plan for ecosystem restoration had to come from the people of the Gulf Coast. Specifically, input from communities affected by the disaster and ensuing restoration requires consultation with community-based organizations and community members. Given EPA’s lead role on the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, the Council was instructed to “take a broad view, and not to limit its recommendations to areas only under EPA’s statutory authority, but rather, to explore community engagement at multiple levels (federal, state, tribal, and local) relevant to the restoration of the Gulf Coast ecosystem. The Council’s charge is appended to the end of this report as Appendix A.

The following is a list of key recommendations proposed by the NEJAC:

Coordinate multi-stakeholder efforts to avoid confusion and make it easier for people to participate. Specifically, designate an entity to be responsible for overseeing and coordinating centralized, interagency community engagement efforts within federal initiatives.

Create a broad based citizen advisory group to advise governments, including any new Council or regional bodies, about policies, funding allocations, megaprojects, and other broad decisions.

Work with both Federally Recognized and Non-Recognized Tribes Define the scope and focus of ecosystem restoration efforts, recognizing that

people and communities are part of the ecosystem, and ensuring the diversity of input and opinions.

A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

96 Environmental Justice

Selected Bibliography

This report contains advice and recommendations about how the Agency can most effectively enhance environmental justice throughout its permitting programs. The advice is to be considered both in terms of the environmental permits that EPA issues and those permits issued by the states and tribes under delegation of authority or federal oversight of state and tribal programs. Although EPA’s charge to the Council focused on types of permits, the Council’s response respectfully shifts the focus to a broader context: cumulative impacts from multiple permits and environmental conditions. Prioritizing environmental justice opportunities by traditional permit type is too narrow to properly address the charge. Thus, this report addresses a broader approach.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. Environmental Justice: EPA Needs to Take Additional Actions to Help Ensure Effective Implementation (Washington, D.C. Government Accountability Office, 2011).

This report responds to the request that we review EPA’s environmental justice efforts. Their objectives were to examine (1) how EPA is implementing its environmental justice efforts and (2) the extent to which EPA is following leading strategic planning practices in establishing a framework for integrating environmental justice in its programs, policies, and activities.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Justice Federal Interagency Directory. Working Together Towards Collaborative and Innovative Solutions (Washington, D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency).

The Environmental Justice Directory will serve as a resource for the public with a goal of increasing communication and collaboration among stakeholders, federal, state, and local agencies, and tribal governments to address environmental justice issues. Most importantly, this Directory will assist community stakeholders with obtaining better access to federal agencies in order to more effectively address environmental justice issues within their local communities.

Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice. Community-Based Federal Environmental Justice Resource Guide (Washington, D.C.: Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice, 2011).

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

Members: Don Aragon Chuck Barlow Teri Blanton April 30, 2011 Sue Briggum M. Kathryn Brown Peter Captain, Sr. Jolene Catron Lisa P. Jackson Wynecta Fisher AdministratorStephanie Hall Jodena Henneke U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Savanala 'Savi' 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Horne Hilton Kelley Washington, D.C. 20460 Langdon Marsh Margaret May Vernice Miller-Travis Paul Mohai Dear Administrator Jackson: Vien T. Nguyen Edith Pestana Shankar Prasad The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is pleased to submit the John Ridgway report, Enhancing Environmental Justice in EPA Permitting Programs, for the Agency’s Nia Robinson review. This report contains advice and recommendations about how the Agency can most Patricia Salkin Nicholas Targ effectively enhance environmental justice throughout its permitting programs. The advice is Kimberly to be considered both in terms of the environmental permits that EPA issues and those Wasserman Eli b hY i permits issued by the states and tribes under delegation of authority or federal oversight of

state and tribal programs. Although EPA’s charge to the Council focused on “types” of permits, the Council’s response respectfully shifts the focus to a broader context: cumulative impacts from multiple permits and environmental conditions. Prioritizing environmental justice opportunities by traditional permit type is too narrow to properly address the charge. Thus, this report addresses a broader approach.

The following is the list of key recommendations proposed by the NEJAC:

Cumulative environmental impacts, permitted or not, must be addressed and mitigated within existing and new permits, regardless of permit type.

Permitting covers a broad range of regulatory work, including renewals, modifications, enforcement actions, and settlements. All of these permit-related processes have important elements for environmental justice engagement. This is not just about new facilities and their permit applications.

Formal agreements between EPA regions and their respective delegated or authorized states, tribes, and/or other jurisdictions need to have environmental justice addressed more – both in general and with specific actions and noted responsibilities. Multiple ideas and examples are provided.

More recent permit issues related to hydraulic fracturing and mountain top mining need immediate review from an environmental justice perspective. Acknowledging several prior Council reports to EPA related to permitting over the past 15 years (cited in footnotes), this report draws attention to newer permit related challenges in need of environmental justice attention and action by EPA and others.

A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Page 1 GAO-12-77

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

October 6, 2011

The Honorable Donna F. Edwards Ranking Member Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight Committee on Science, Space, and Technology House of Representatives

Dear Ms. Edwards:

The concept of environmental justice is based on the belief that communities with large numbers of minority or low-income residents frequently shoulder a disproportionate share of environmental and health risks. Many of these communities are located in areas within close proximity to sources of pollutants that can adversely affect both the environment and human health. For more than 15 years, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been responsible for leading the federal government’s approach to environmental justice—that is, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Specifically, an executive order signed in 1994,1 calls for all federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice into their programs, policies, and activities to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. It also calls on EPA to take the lead in chairing an interagency workgroup created to help federal agencies make environmental justice part of their missions. However, over the years, EPA’s efforts in integrating environmental justice have come under criticism, both from within and outside the agency. For example, in 2004 and 2006,2 EPA’s Inspector General (IG) made a number of recommendations to improve EPA’s environmental justice efforts. In

1Exec. Order No. 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” 59 Fed. Reg. 7629 (Feb. 11, 1994).

2EPA Office of Inspector General, Evaluation Report: EPA Needs to Consistently Implement The Intent of The Executive Order on Environmental Justice, Report No. 2004-P-00007, March 1, 2004. And, EPA Office of Inspector General, Evaluation Report: EPA Needs to Conduct Environmental Justice Reviews of Its Programs, Policies, and Activities, Report No. 2006-P-00034, September 18, 2006.

Environmental Justice

addition, in 2005,3 we recommended that EPA take steps to incorporate environmental justice into its rulemaking processes for clean air regulations and, in 2007,4 testified that EPA’s efforts in doing so were incomplete. EPA subsequently took actions to address many of these recommendations, but some actions are still needed.

In a January 2010 memo to EPA staff, the EPA Administrator cited environmental justice as one of the agency’s top priorities. To communicate this priority within the agency and externally, EPA identified environmental justice as a cross-cutting strategy in its fiscal year 2011-2015 agencywide strategic plan. Additionally, in July 2010, EPA issued its draft Plan EJ 2014—the agency’s road map for integrating environmental justice into its programs. This plan was released in final form in September 2011.5 Plan EJ 2014 identifies three key goals: (1) to protect the environment and health in communities overburdened by pollution; (2) to empower communities to take action to improve their health and environment; and (3) to establish partnerships with local, state, tribal, and federal governments and organizations to achieve healthy and sustainable communities. In addition, in December 2010, the Administration hosted the first White House Forum on Environmental Justice. This event brought together environmental justice community leaders; state, local, and tribal government officials; cabinet members; and other senior federal officials for a discussion on creating a healthy and sustainable environment for all. In light of this renewed interest in environmental justice, you asked us to examine EPA’s environmental justice efforts.

This report responds to your request that we review EPA’s environmental justice efforts. Our objectives were to examine (1) how EPA is implementing

3GAO, Environmental Justice: EPA Should Devote More Attention to Environmental Justice When Developing Clean Air Rules, GAO-05-289 (Washington, D.C.: July 22, 2005).

4GAO, Environmental Justice: Measurable Benchmarks Needed to Gauge EPA Progress in Correcting Past Problems, GAO-07-1140T (Washington, D.C.: July 25, 2007).

5Because EPA’s Plan EJ 2014 and associated implementation plans were not finalized until September 2011 as we were preparing to issue our report, our analysis is based on our review of draft versions of these documents. However, after EPA’s plans were publicly released, we reviewed these final documents and determined that they did not substantively differ from the draft versions on which our conclusions and recommendations are based. Therefore, throughout this report, except where necessary to ensure clarity, we do not distinguish between draft and final versions of EPA’s Plan EJ 2014 and its implementation plans.

Page 2 GAO-12-77 Environmental Justice

its environmental justice efforts and (2) the extent to which EPA is following leading strategic planning practices in establishing a framework for integrating environmental justice in its programs, policies, and activities.

To conduct this work, we reviewed the executive order, relevant EPA guidance, and interviewed senior officials within individual program offices in the agency’s headquarters as well as senior officials in EPA regions. We also interviewed other stakeholders, including selected members of EPA’s National Environmental Justice Advisory Council and a number of national associations that represent state environmental agencies, including the Environmental Council of States and the Association of State and Tribal Solid Waste Management Officials. To determine how EPA is implementing its environmental justice efforts, we identified key offices with environmental justice responsibilities by reviewing and analyzing EPA documents as well as interviewing officials from EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice and Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, among others. To determine the extent to which EPA is following leading practices in developing a framework for integrating environmental justice in its programs, policies, and activities, we compared EPA’s strategic planning efforts for environmental justice to leading practices in federal strategic planning. These include (1) practices required at the federal department/agency level under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA),6 which we have previously reported also can serve as leading practices for planning at lower levels within federal agencies such as individual programs or initiatives;7 (2) practices identified in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance to federal agencies for implementing GPRA’s requirements;8 and (3) related leading practices that GAO’s past work has identified.9

6Pub. L., No. 103-62 (Aug. 3, 1993).

7For example, see GAO, Foreign Aid Reform: Comprehensive Strategy, Interagency Coordination, and Operational Improvements Would Bolster Current Efforts, GAO-09-192 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 17, 2009), p. 31.

8OMB, Circular A-11, Section 210: Preparing and Submitting an Agency Strategic Plan, 2010.

9For example, see GAO, Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act, GAO/GGD-96-118 (Washington, D.C.: June 1, 1996); Tax Administration: IRS Needs to Further Refine Its Tax Filing Season Performance Measures, GAO-03-143 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 22, 2002); and Managing for Results: Strengthening Regulatory Agencies’ Performance Management Practices, GAO-GGD-00-10 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 28, 1999).

Page 3 GAO-12-77 Environmental Justice

Environmental Justice Federal Interagency

Directory August 2011

Working

together towards

collaborative

and innovative

solutions

Environmental Justice Federal Interagency Directory August 2011

The Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (IWG) was established

in 1994 under Executive Order (EO) 12898. The IWG is comprised of federal agencies and

several White House offices. Chaired by the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), the IWG’s focus is to integrate environmental justice into federal

agency programs, policies and activities. In August 2011 the federal family reaffirmed its

commitment to work for environmental justice and continue the collaborative work of the

IWG. The IWG works to share lessons-learned and ensure opportunities for collaboration

in ensure opportunities for collaboration in addressing environmental justice concerns.

The Environmental Justice Directory will serve as a resource for the public with a goal

of increasing communication and collaboration among stakeholders, federal, state, and

local agencies, and tribal governments to address environmental justice issues. Most

importantly, this Directory will assist community stakeholders with obtaining better

access to federal agencies in order to more effectively address environmental justice

issues within their local communities.

Working

together towards

collaborative

and innovative

solutions

Federal Interagency Working Group: Environmental Justice Directory 1

Milestones and Accomplishments 97

The IWG is pleased to provide this guide as a source of information for individuals and organizations working in communities overburdened by the adverse health impacts of exposure to toxics where they live, work and play. The programs included in this guide are focused on resources that would assist communities with technical or financial assistance to reduce exposure. Through this and other efforts, federal agencies are recommitting to improving the health and sustainability of communities across America.

2012U.S. Department of the Interior. Environmental Justice Implementation Progress Report (Washington, D.C.: Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance, 2012).

This document serves as the Department of the Interior (DOI)’s Implementation Progress Report under Executive Order 12898 and the Department’s Environmental Justice Strategic Plan 2011-2017 (EJSP) for the year 2012. This report provides baseline data for the EJSP established performance measures, as well as highlights several of the programs, policies, activities, and collaborative efforts that DOI has actively engaged in during 2012. These programs, policies, and activities are not all inclusive of the DOI’s efforts to implement environmental justice (EJ), but show their ongoing commitment and progress toward the integration of EJ into all applicable programs, policies, and activities.

U.S. Department of the Interior. Environmental Justice Implementation Progress Report 2009-2011 (Washington, D.C.: Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance, 2012).

This document serves as the Department of the Interior’s (Department) First Implementation Progress Report in carrying out its Environmental Justice (EJ) Strategy and Executive Order 12898 (E.O. 12898). Although the Department’s initial EJ Strategy was developed in 1995, this Report highlights several of the activities and programs the Department has actively been engaged in during the period from approximately January 2009

through February 2012. These activities and programs are not all inclusive of the Department’s efforts to implement EJ, but show their ongoing progress towards integration.

U.S. Department of the Interior. Environmental Justice Strategic Plan 2012-2017 (Washington, D.C.: Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance, 2012).

The Department of Interior’s 2012-2017 Environmental Justice Strategic Plan (EJSP) sets forth five major goals to guide the Department in its pursuit of environmental justice. This EJSP should not be viewed as a mechanism to provide direct solutions to EJ issues in a particular community. Instead, the Environmental Justice Strategic Plan is intended for the Department to assess different environmental scenarios, identify challenges and opportunities, explore practical application of strategies, and develop recommendations to address environmental justice issues.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. Environmental Protection: EPA Should Develop a Strategic Plan for Its New Compliance Initiative (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2012).

GAO has previously reported that strategic planning for activities below the agency-wide level is a leading practice for successful agencies. EPA acknowledges the need for an overall plan for Next Generation Compliance. Developing a plan that incorporates selected leading practices for federal strategic planning could help EPA more effectively integrate Next Generation Compliance into its enforcement and compliance program and promote greater public transparency. Without a strategic plan incorporating these leading practices, EPA may face challenges in helping to ensure that its initiative will achieve its long-term goals of improving compliance and obtaining greater health and environmental benefits from the agency’s regulations.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS REPORT

2012

Assistant Secretary- Policy Management and Budget

Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance Washington, DC 20240

http://www.doi.gov

http://www.doi.gov/pmb/oepc/environmental-justice.cfm

5

Introduction

Executive Order 12898 of 1994 – Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. The Executive Order issued on February 11, 1994, states in part that “Federal agencies 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…” Mission

Protecting America’s Great Outdoors and Powering Our Future. The U.S. Department of the Interior protects America’s natural resources and heritage, honors our cultures and tribal communities, and supplies the energy to power our future. Environmental Justice Vision Statement

To provide outstanding management of the natural and cultural resources entrusted to us in a manner that is sustainable, equitable, accessible, and inclusive of all populations. This document serves as the Department of the Interior’s (Department) Implementation Progress Report under Executive Order 12898 and the Department’s Environmental Justice Strategic Plan 2011-2017 (EJSP) for the year 2012. This report provides baseline data for the EJSP established performance measures, as well as highlights several of the programs, policies, activities, and collaborative efforts the Department has actively engaged in during 2012. These programs, policies, and activities are not all inclusive of the Department’s efforts to implement environmental justice (EJ), but show our ongoing commitment and progress toward the integration of EJ into all applicable programs, policies, and activities. The past year has continued the momentum gained during the current administration in the reinvigoration of EJ within this Department as well as other federal agencies. The Department has been an active member in the Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (IWG) and has participated in its collaborative efforts. As set forth in the EJSP, these principles should contribute not only to natural and cultural resource management decisions, but also to mitigation of existing hazards, outreach, partnerships, training, and other measures to support healthy and economically viable minority, low-income, and tribal communities. The Department is reporting on the specific goals, strategies, and performance measures established in its EJSP. Although the Department’s strategy outlines five goals, associated strategies, and performance measures, our integration and implementation efforts are not limited

23

This complaint involves the Texas County Commission court's approval of a mining permit in Austin, Texas which will interrupt the water table in a predominately Latino, African American, and Spanish speaking only community. Also, that the Department of Transportation will be hauling the gravel and sandstone for roads and building sites. The FWS and NPS will process this complaint. The FWS will be the primary bureau in this case. This complaint was accepted for review under the authority of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color and national origin in programs, activities, and services receiving federal financial assistance. This case remains open. Goal #5 – Performance Measure #2 – “Percentage of civil rights compliance reviews where EJ is a review factor.” The Department did not conduct a Civil Rights compliance review where EJ was a review factor. Goal # 5 – Performance Measure #3 – “Recipients of federal financial assistance receiving technical guidance on EJ as linked to Title VI.” The Department is currently reviewing this performance measure and will determine its feasibility and report accordingly.

Environmental Justice Directory and Compendium of Resources

The Department has made several updates to its Directory of EJ Contacts. The EJ Directory serves as a resource for the public with a goal of increasing communication and collaboration among stakeholders including federal, state, local agencies, and tribal governments to address EJ issues. The Directory is intended to assist stakeholders with obtaining better access to the Department’s staff in order to more effectively address EJ issues and concerns at the local level. The compendium of resources remains available on the Department’s EJ web site. The compendium is a source of information for individuals and organizations working in communities that may be overburdened by the adverse health impacts of exposure to toxins where they live, work and play. The programs included in this guide are focused on resources that may assist communities with technical or financial assistance to reduce exposure. Through these and other efforts, the Department is recommitted to improving the health and sustainability of communities across America.

Environmental Justice Conferences and Listening Sessions

Conferences The Department participated in the 2012 National Environmental Justice Conference and Training Program held in Washington, DC. The conference was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy. Leaders from around the country gathered for three days to discuss barriers and challenges to EJ, and ways to build capacity in communities. The program format

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS REPORT

2009-2011

Assistant Secretary- Policy Management and Budget

Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance Washington, DC 20240

http://www.doi.gov/oepc/justice.html

5

Introduction

Executive Order 12898 of 1994 – Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. The Executive Order issued on February 11, 1994, states in part that “Federal agencies 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…” This document serves as the Department of the Interior’s (Department) First Implementation Progress Report in carrying out its Environmental Justice (EJ) Strategy and Executive Order 12898 (EO 12898). Although the Department’s initial EJ Strategy was developed in 1995, this Report highlights several of the activities and programs the Department has actively been engaged in during the period from approximately January 2009 through February 2012. These activities and programs are not all inclusive of the Department’s efforts to implement EJ, but show our ongoing progress towards integration. The past few years have seen a reinvigoration of EJ within this Department as well as other Federal agencies. The Department has been an active member in the Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (EJ IWG) and has participated in its collaborative reinvigoration efforts. The Department strives to incorporate EJ principles into its programs, policies, and activities. As set forth by the 2012-2017 Environmental Justice Strategic Plan (EJ SP), these principles should contribute not only to resource management decisions, but also to mitigation of existing hazards, outreach, partnerships, training, and other measures to support healthy and economically viable minority, low-income, and tribal communities. The Department anticipates reporting on the specific goals, strategies, and measures established in its EJ SP in its upcoming 2013 Annual Implementation Progress Report (Report). Although the Department’s strategy currently outlines five goals, associated strategies, and measures, our integration and implementation efforts are not limited to them, and we will report accordingly. The Department will continue to increase its internal awareness and implementation efforts and engage its stakeholders in the continuous effort to ensure that EJ is a part of our mission. The EJ SP is a living document, and as we look at our annual accomplishments, we will adjust our strategy as necessary to ensure that we have effectively integrated EJ into our programs, activities, and mission. This progress report highlights many of the Department’s qualitative and quantitative accomplishments and progress towards carrying out the provisions of EO 12898 beginning with the appointment of senior level officials to its reinvigoration efforts, and several programs and activities the Department and its bureaus have engaged in over the past few years.

UU..SS.. DDEEPPAARRTTMMEENNTT OOFF TTHHEE IINNTTEERRIIOORR

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE STRATEGIC PLAN

2012 – 2017

ASSISTANT SECRETARY, POLICY MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND COMPLIANCE https://www.doi.gov/oepc/justice.html

14

The 1995 EJ Strategic Plan did not establish quantitative measures or reporting requirements. Nevertheless, we recognize the value that such tools provide in achieving our goals. Therefore, in order to build upon our past efforts we have included quantitative measures and reporting requirements in this revised EJ SP. The Department’s 2012-2017 EJ SP sets forth five major goals to guide the Department in its pursuit of EJ. In the coming years, we will employ an integrated strategy to:

• Ensure responsible officials2

are aware of the provisions of EO 12898 and are able to identify and amend programs, policies, and activities under their purview that may have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income, or tribal populations;

• Ensure minority, low-income, and tribal populations are provided with the opportunity to engage in meaningful involvement in the Department’s decision making processes;

• The Department will, on its own or in collaboration with partners, identify and address

environmental impacts that may result in disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income, or tribal populations;

• Use existing grant programs, training, and educational opportunities as available to aid

and empower minority, low-income, and tribal populations in their efforts to build and sustain environmentally and economically sound communities; and

• Integrate the Department’s EJ Strategies with its Title VI of the Civil Rights Act

enforcement responsibilities to improve efficiencies while preserving the integrity of Title VI and EJ activities.

II. How this Environmental Justice Strategic Plan was Developed This strategy was developed under the direction of the AS-PMB using a template developed by the EJ IWG. This EJ SP is based on input and review by our bureaus and several selected offices. The draft of this EJ SP was made available on the OEPC web site (http://www.doi.gov/oepc/justice.html) and was provided to the EPA for publication on the EJ IWG web site (http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice/interagency/iwg-compendium.html) and for distribution to members on their EJ list serve. All public comments were reviewed and considered to the extent practicable in the finalization of the Department’s 2012-2017 EJ SP. The Department has made several revisions based upon public comments, such as adding language to the Secretary’s message regarding exclusion and discrimination, expanding upon our strategies under goals 2, 4, and 5, and adding an explanation for EJ Coordinator in our footnotes. The recommendations specifically related to civil rights have been provided to the Department’s Office of Civil Rights for further review. The recommendations 2 Responsible Official is the bureau employee who is delegated the authority to make and implement a decision on a proposed action and is responsible for ensuring compliance with NEPA.

25

Bureaus/Office Reporting Performance Measures 2017 Target

All Percentage of Title VI EJ complaints resolved or adjudicated.

The Department will determine the baseline in 2012 and subsequently establish targets.

All Percentage of civil rights compliance reviews where EJ is a review factor.

The Department will determine the baseline in 2012 and subsequently establish targets.

All Recipients of Federal financial assistance receiving technical guidance on EJ as linked to Title VI.

The Department will determine the baseline in 2012 and subsequently establish targets.

Examples of Department or bureau specific goals, programs, activities, or policies that currently or potentially could be used to support this strategic goal: The FWS’s Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program provides Federal financial assistance to state and wildlife agencies. The FWS plans to conduct annually at least nine civil rights compliance reviews of these state fish and wildlife agencies. Compliance with EJ will be a major component of those reviews. In particular, the FWS will monitor state’s activities in working with minority and low-income communities on environmental assessments conducted. The FWS will monitor the emission of toxins into the air, ground or water by these state agencies. EJ Requirements will be considered on a project by project basis where Federal funds are being spent. Action 9 of the NPS’s A Call to Action is “Keep the Dream Alive.” The NPS will foster civic dialogue about the stories of the civil rights movement found within the parks. The NPS will conduct a coordinated series of special events to commemorate significant 50th anniversaries of the civil rights movement (Civil Rights Act passage, “I Have a Dream” speech, etc.).” About this Environmental Justice Strategic Plan:

This EJ SP should not be viewed as a mechanism to provide direct solutions to EJ issues in a particular community. Instead, the EJ SP is intended for the Department to assess different environmental scenarios, identify challenges and opportunities, explore practical application of strategies, and develop recommendations to address EJ issues. This EJ SP does not confer any legal right and is not a rule requiring notice and comment under the Administrative Procedure Act (Public Law 89-554). This EJ SP is intended only to improve the internal management of the U.S. Department

United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-115 a report to the Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate

December 2012

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EPA Should Develop a Strategic Plan for Its New Compliance Initiative

Why GAO Did This Study

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) oversees many environmental programs that seek to protect public health and the environment. Substantial noncompliance with these regulations and increasing budget pressures, among other things, led EPA to propose a new enforcement and compliance initiative in fiscal year 2012. This new initiative—Next Generation Compliance—attempts to capitalize on advances in emissions and pollutants monitoring and information technology. Among other things, EPA expects Next Generation Compliance to provide new and more complete enforcement and compliance information and promote greater public transparency and accountability.

GAO was asked to review (1) actions EPA has undertaken in Next Generation Compliance to increase enforcement and compliance transparency and accountability and (2) the extent to which EPA is developing a strategic plan to integrate Next Generation Compliance into its enforcement and compliance program. To conduct this work, GAO reviewed Next Generation Compliance documents and interviewed selected EPA officials.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that EPA (1) develop a schedule for completing a strategic plan for its Next Generation Compliance initiative in a timely manner and (2) incorporate selected leading practices in federal strategic planning in the plan. EPA agreed with GAO’s recommendations.

What GAO Found

Since introducing its Next Generation Compliance initiative in fiscal year 2012, EPA has taken four primary steps to increase transparency and accountability in enforcement and compliance. According to EPA documents and officials, these actions will provide greater access to data under EPA-regulated programs and make regulated entities more accountable to the public. In this regard, EPA

• formed an electronic reporting task force in December 2011 to provide recommendations for converting from existing paper-based reporting requirements to electronic reporting;

• established a work group in April 2012 to identify advanced emissions and pollutants monitoring technology and evaluate how the agency can better use such technology;

• formed a work group in September 2012 to advance the use of new compliance tools in its enforcement activities, such as in settlement agreements with entities that are found in noncompliance with regulations; and

• increased the public availability of the enforcement and compliance information it currently has available by, among other actions, placing a tool on its enforcement website that allows the public to obtain information about pollutants that are released into local waterways.

EPA has not developed a strategic plan to integrate Next Generation Compliance into its enforcement and compliance program. EPA has prepared some documents on the initiative and its components, but these documents are general in nature and provide little specificity regarding EPA’s plans related to Next Generation Compliance. GAO has previously reported that strategic planning for activities below the agencywide level is a leading practice for successful agencies. EPA acknowledges the need for an overall plan for Next Generation Compliance. Developing a plan that incorporates selected leading practices for federal strategic planning could help EPA more effectively integrate Next Generation Compliance into its enforcement and compliance program and promote greater public transparency. Without a strategic plan incorporating these leading practices, EPA may face challenges in helping to ensure that its initiative will achieve its long-term goals of improving compliance and obtaining greater health and environmental benefits from the agency’s regulations. Additionally, without a strategic plan to direct its Next Generation Compliance initiative, EPA could waste valuable resources, time, and effort. For example, without proper planning, EPA may pursue emissions monitoring technologies that not all regulated entities—especially the growing numbers of smaller facilities—can fully utilize, thereby requiring EPA to rely on costly individual facility inspections with its limited resources.

View GAO-13-115. For more information, contact David C. Trimble at (202) 512-3841or trimbled@gao.gov.

98 Environmental Justice

Selected Bibliography

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Plan EJ 2014: Progress Report. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA, 2012).

This report details the accomplishments in implementing Plan EJ 2014 in areas critical to advancing environmental justice, including rulemaking, permitting, compliance and enforcement, community-based programs and their work with other federal agencies. In addition, the enhancement of the critical legal, scientific and information tools that aid the EPA in meeting the needs of communities in decision making are discussed.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. President’s Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children: Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2012).

The report builds on the strengths and lessons learned from past and existing federal asthma programs, combines efforts among federal programs at the community level, and develops collaborative strategies to fill knowledge gaps within existing resources. The Action Plan presents a framework to maximize the use of our existing federal resources for addressing this major public health challenge during the next three to five years. The goal of the Action Plan is to reduce the burden caused by asthma, especially among children — in particular, minority children and children with family incomes below the poverty level. The plan will also promote synergy and alignment across numerous federal programs. It emphasizes priority actions that demonstrate a high positive impact on addressing preventable factors that lead to asthma disparities.

U.S. Department of Transportation – Federal Highway Administration. Environmental Justice-2012 Implementation Report (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation-Federal Highway Administration, 2012).

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) updated the DOT Environmental Justice Strategy in February 2012. In implementing this strategy, DOT has focused on the goals of increasing transparency, public engagement, and intermodal harmonization within the department. In addition to ongoing work considering environmental justice as part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses for infrastructure improvements, the department has also hosted or supported extensive training opportunities on environmental justice, and has published new and revised guidance and regulations to improve consistency across the department. The department cooperates with other federal

Final Draft 01/14/13

i | P a g e

Message from the Administrator

Agency Priorities Taking action on climate change

Improving air quality

Assuring the safety of chemicals

Cleaning up our communities

Protecting America’s waters

Expanding the conversation on environmentalism and working for environmental justice

Building strong state and tribal partnerships

Dear Colleagues: Expanding the conversation on environmentalism and working for environmental justice have been among my top priorities since I began serving as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency four years ago.

All too often, low-income, minority and tribal communities endure disproportionate health impacts living in areas overburdened by pollution and face greater obstacles to economic growth because they cannot attract businesses and new jobs.

President Bill Clinton in 1994 issued an executive order directing all federal agencies to engage in a government-wide effort and issue strategies to address environmental justice issues. The EPA in 2011 updated its environmental justice strategy and issued Plan EJ 2014, a roadmap to fully integrate the principles of environmental justice throughout the agency.

The Plan outlines how each national program and regional office can play a role as we strengthen our mission to protect the health of all Americans. Through Plan EJ 2014, the EPA is also providing national leadership on environmental justice issues through its actions and partnerships with other agencies, state and local governments, and local communities.

This report details our accomplishments in implementing Plan EJ 2014. We have made significant progress in areas critical to advancing environmental justice, including rulemaking, permitting, compliance and enforcement, community-based programs and our work with other federal agencies. In addition, we have enhanced the critical legal, scientific and information tools that help us meet the needs of communities in our decision making.

I want to thank the many people, both inside and outside of the EPA, who worked tirelessly to bring about these accomplishments. The success we have seen is a testament to the vision, creativity and tenacity of many dedicated individuals. Our efforts will go a long way toward building a foundation for integrating environmental justice in all EPA programs, policies and daily work.

Every American deserves clean air, water and land in the places where they live, work, play and learn. Through our implementation of Plan EJ 2014, the EPA is leading by example to expand the conversation on environmentalism and work for environmental justice – now and into the future. I have considered it a great privilege to contribute to this effort. Sincerely, Lisa P. Jackson Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

19 | P a g e

(2) Issuing EJ strategies and implementation progress reports;

(3) Establishing structures and procedures to ensure that the IWG operates effectively and efficiently; and

(4) Identifying four areas of focus to be included in the agencies’ EJ efforts, (i.e., NEPA, goods movement, climate change and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964).

PARTNERSHIP FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

The Partnership for Sustainable Communities (Partnership), consisting of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Department of Transportation (DOT) and the EPA, helps communities nationwide to improve access to affordable housing, provide more transportation options and lower transportation costs, while protecting the environment in communities. EJ principles are being integrated into the work of the Partnership in collaboration with the IWG. The Partnership has achieved important outcomes such as: (1) Engaging and training management and staff

within HUD, DOT and the EPA on sustainability practices;

(2) Expanding community access to funding opportunities (i.e., For HUD’s 2011 Regional Planning and Community Challenge grant, recipients were required to incorporate meaningful involvement in the decision-making process for underrepresented populations; devote a portion of their budgets to meaningful involvement; and consider EJ principles in the planning process for infrastructure, transportation and housing); and

(3) Increasing transparency and meaningful participation for overburdened communities in the Partnership’s activities.

ASTHMA ACTION PLAN

Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities

In May, 2012, the interagency Asthma Disparities Working Group (co-chaired by the EPA, HHS, and HUD) under the President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children released the Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities. The goal of the Action Plan is to reduce the burden caused by asthma among children, in particular, minority children and children with family incomes below the poverty level. The plan promotes synergy and alignment across numerous federal programs and emphasizes priority actions that demonstrate a high positive impact on addressing preventable factors that lead to asthma disparities. With the EPA’s leadership toward the development and establishment of the Action Plan, the Agency is working even more closely with other federal agency partners in building the nation's capacity to control asthma and manage exposure to indoor and outdoor pollutants to improve the quality of life for millions of Americans in communities across the country.

RADON PARTNERSHIP

Healthy Homes Strategy and Federal Radon Action Plan

In June 2011, senior leaders from the EPA and HUD released the Federal Radon Action Plan. The Action Plan is a call for federal action on radon as the leading cause of lung cancer for nonsmokers in the U.S. The interagency initiative is designed to increase federal efforts to reduce radon exposure in the homes and schools the federal government owns, operates or finances. An Action Plan Scorecard keeps the public informed about the progress of activities from federal partners working to implement the plan. The Federal Radon Action Plan is an activity under the interagency Healthy Homes Strategy.

Since the release of the Federal Radon Action Plan, almost half of federal agency commitments have been completed. A major commitment among the EPA and federal agencies is the development of the Advancing Healthy Housing: A Strategy for Action. A Strategy for Action is an interagency plan which outlines goals and priorities in federal healthy housing programs for the next three to five years. New radon requirements in the federal multi-family housing program represent a concrete action in the

PPLLAA

NN EE

JJ 22

0011

44 PP

RROO

GGRR

EESS

SS RR

EEPP

OORR

TT:: FF

OOSS

TTEERR

II NNGG

AADD

MMII NN

II SSTTRR

AATTII OO

NN--WW

II DDEE AA

CCTTII OO

NN OO

NN EE

NNVV

II RROO

NNMM

EENN

TTAA

LL JJ

UUSS

TTII CC

EE

1

Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities

Approximately 7 million children aged 0 to 17 in the United States have asthma, with poor and minority children suffering a greater burden of the disease.1 Asthma persists into adulthood and the costs to society are high: medical expenses associated with asthma are estimated to be $50 billion annually.2 It is critical that we promote synergy across the numerous federal programs that affect asthma management in order to reduce this burden and these disparities. The magnitude of the problem of asthma disparities and the breadth of stakeholder involvement required to address it will necessitate enhancing the interagency coordination of partnerships that many of our federal programs already have with state and local health departments, nonprofit organizations, community asthma coalitions and asthma foundations. Preventable factors related to effective asthma management are well established. Coordinating our federal efforts will help us take appropriate actions to better address these known preventable factors in underserved populations.

In this plan, we propose to build on the strengths and lessons learned from past and existing federal asthma programs, combine efforts among federal programs at the community level, and develop collaborative strategies to fill knowledge gaps within existing resources. With clear evidence of broad commitment to reducing health disparities from federal, state, and local partners, the timing is right for this Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities (Action Plan) to accelerate actions that will reduce asthma disparities. The Action Plan presents a framework to maximize the use of our existing federal resources for addressing this major public health challenge during the next three to five years.

The Action Plan is founded on the following principles, which we believe offer the best foundation for effective and feasible federal efforts to address asthma disparities:

yy Collaboration across federal agencies, other levels of government, and community partners.

yy Utilizing existing federal resources and optimizing their impact through synergies.

yy Emphasizing activities that address the preventable factors that impact asthma disparities.

The Action Plan reflects a broad-based consensus of federal agencies. It is an outcome of the collaborative interagency Asthma Disparities Working Group (see Appendix A), co-chaired by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The working group functions under the auspices of the President’s Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children, which has the objectives to identify priority issues of environmental health and safety risks to children that could best be addressed through interagency efforts, recommend and implement interagency actions, and communicate to federal, state and local decision makers information to protect children from risks. Representatives of the Asthma Disparities Working Group collected and synthesized recommendations of previous task forces and expert panels, along with input from members of the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program’s (NAEPP) Federal Liaison Group on Asthma, extramural scientists, and leaders from national, regional and local community asthma programs. These recommendations were distilled into four overarching strategies, each of which is associated with several priority actions. The strategies and priority actions are described in detail below, starting on page 4.

The Action Plan aligns with federal initiatives, including Healthy People 2020 (see Appendix B), the HHS Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Disparities,

1 Akinbami, L.J., Mooreman, J.E., Bailey, C., Zahran, H., King, M., Johnson, C., & Liu, X. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. (2012). Trends in asthma prevalence, health care use, and mortality in the United States, 2001-2010. Retrieved from http://www.cdc. gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db94.pdf

2 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011, May). Asthma in the U.S. Vital Signs. Retrieved February 13, 2012, from http://cdc.gov/vitalsigns

11/8/14, 3:12 PM2012 Implementation Report - EJ at DOT - Environmental Justice - Environment - FHWA

Page 1 of 10http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/environmental_justice/ej_at_dot/2012_implementation_report/

Environmental Justice - 2012 Implementation Report

The US Department of Transportation (DOT) updated the DOT Environmental Justice Strategy inFebruary 2012; in implementing this Strategy, DOT has focused on the goals of increasing transparency,public engagement, and intermodal harmonization within the Department. In addition to ongoing workconsidering EJ as part of the NEPA analyses for infrastructure improvements, the Department has alsohosted or supported extensive training opportunities on EJ, and has published new and revised guidanceand regulations to improve consistency across the Department. The Department cooperates with otherFederal Agencies through the Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice in order to integrateEnvironmental Justice principles into Federal programs, policies, and activities. Further, DOT participatesin a subgroup on EJ through the Partnership for Sustainable Communities with the EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Department of Housing and Urban Development and other agencies, which promotesFederal action to encourage sustainable communities with a variety of housing and transportationchoices. This report details some of the specific activities undertaken to support Environmental Justice atDOT during 2012.

Department-wide InitiativesUpdates to the EJ Order, May 2012

The DOT EJ Strategy called for the Department to revisit the Departmental Order 5610.2 (Actions toAddress Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations) and to make anynecessary revisions and updates since its original publication in April 1997. On May 2, 2012, DOTpublished a revised Order 5610.2(a), which continues to be a key component of the Department'sstrategy to promote the principles of environmental justice in all Departmental programs, policies, andactivities.

DOT Order 5610.2(a) sets forth the DOT policy to consider environmental justice principles in all DOTprograms, policies, and activities. It describes how the objectives of environmental justice will beintegrated into planning and programming, rulemaking, and policy formulation. The Order sets forthsteps to prevent disproportionately high and adverse effects to minority or low-income populationsthrough Title VI analyses and environmental justice analyses conducted as part of Federal transportationplanning and NEPA provisions. It also describes the specific measures to be taken to address instancesof disproportionately high and adverse effects and sets forth relevant definitions.

In updating the Order, DOT reaffirms its commitment to environmental justice and clarifies certainaspects of the original Order, including the definitions of "minority" populations in compliance with theOffice of Management and Budget's (OMB) Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of FederalData on Race and Ethnicity of October 30, 1997. The revisions clarify the distinction between a Title VIanalysis and an environmental justice analysis conducted as part of a NEPA review, and affirm theimportance of considering environmental justice principles as part of early planning activities in order toavoid disproportionately high and adverse effects. The updated Order maintains the original Order'sgeneral framework and procedures and DOT's commitment to promoting the principles of environmentaljustice in all DOT programs, policies, and activities.

Environmental Justice Forum, July 2012

On July 17, 2012, DOT hosted a forum on Environmental Justice for transportation practitioners. This

About Programs Resources Briefing Room Contact Search FHWA

Milestones and Accomplishments 99

agencies through the Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice in order to integrate environmental justice principles into federal programs, policies, and activities.

2013National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. Recommendations for Fostering Environmental Justice for Tribes and Indigenous Peoples (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, 2013).

This report contains advice and recommendations about how EPA can improve the incorporation of environmental justice into tribal environmental capacity-building and federal implementation programs; collaborate with federally-recognized tribal governments in addressing environmental justice concerns; collaborate with tribal community-based organizations and other indigenous peoples; and coordinate with other federal agencies on tribal and indigenous environmental justice issues.

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. Model Guidelines for Public Participation (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, 2013).

NEJAC is pleased to transmit the following recommendations that update the NEJAC Model Plan for Public Participation, first issued in 1996. The Model Plan outlined critical elements for conducting public participation and identified core values and guiding principles for the practice of public participation.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Provides Tools for Sustainable Communities/Smart Growth Policies Can Help Achieve Environmental Justice Goals (Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA, 2013).

The report describes how low-income, minority, and tribal communities can employ smart growth strategies to clean up and reinvest in existing neighborhoods; provide affordable housing and transportation; and improve access to jobs, parks and stores. The report also provides smart growth practitioners with concrete ideas on how

they can better meet the needs of low-income residents as they promote development or redevelopment in underserved communities.

Megan McConville. Creating Equitable, Healthy, and Sustainable Communities: Strategies for Advancing Smart Growth, Environmental Justice, and Equitable Development (Washington, D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2013).

This report aims to build on past successes and offer other low-income, minority, tribal and overburdened communities’ approaches to shape development that responds to their needs and reflects their values. It identifies strategies that bring together smart growth, environmental justice, and equitable development principles and that community-based organizations, local and regional decision-makers, developers, and others can use to build healthy, sustainable, and inclusive communities.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2013 Environmental Justice Implementation Progress Report (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013).

This Implementation Progress Report highlights the department’s advancement of the actions outlined in the 2012 HHS EJ Strategy. This progress report also addresses HHS’s efforts to uphold the strategy’s three guiding principles.

Non-Government Organization Reports

1999Robert D. Bullard, Sprawl Atlanta: Social Equity Dimensions of Uneven Growth and Development (Atlanta, GA: Environmental Justice Resource Center, 1999).

The report includes an analysis of factors that contribute to urban sprawl and their consequences. It also outlines policy recommendations and an action agenda. An extensive use of geographic information system analysis

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

Members: ElizabethYeampierre,

Chair Margaret May.

Vice-Chair Teri Blanton Peter Captain, Sr. Andrea Guajardo Stephanie Hall Savanala 'Savi' Horne Monica Hedstrom Effenus Henderson Langdon Marsh Vernice Miller-Travis Paul Mohai Edith Pestana John Ridgway Nia Robinson Patricia Salkin Deidre Sanders Fatemeh Shafiei Nicky Sheats Paul Shoemaker Kenneth Smith Horace Strand Nicholas Targ Javier Francisco Torres Kimberly Wasserman

January 15, 2013

Lisa P. Jackson Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Jackson:

The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is pleased to transmit the following recommendations to you in response to your charge of October 5, 2011. In that charge, you asked the NEJAC to provide advice and recommendations about how the Agency can most effectively address the environmental justice issues in Indian country, including in Alaska and Hawaii and those facing indigenous peoples both on and off reservations. This report contains advice and recommendations about how EPA can improve the incorporation of environmental justice into: tribal environmental capacity-building and federal implementation programs; collaboration with federally-recognized tribal governments in addressing environmental justice concerns; collaboration with tribal community-based organizations and other indigenous peoples; and coordination with other federal agencies on tribal and indigenous environmental justice issues.

Key recommendations include:

EPA should seek input and the meaningful involvement and engagement of tribal and indigenous communities, state-recognized tribes, and other indigenous stakeholders in the Agency’s decision-making processes, pertaining to policies, projects and activities that may affect them and/or their traditionally used lands, waters, air and territories.

EPA should comply with its long-standing Indian Policy principles, which has established sufficient guidance (EPA’s 1984 Indian Policy, and Executive Order 12898) for the Agency to work effectively with tribal governments regarding on-reservation environmental justice issues.

EPA should continue to recognize and support tribal authority to set environmental standards, make environmental policy decisions, and to manage environmental programs, demonstrating respect for internal tribal governmental affairs.

EPA should elevate the role of Regional Environmental Justice and Tribal Coordinators/ Liaisons.

EPA should create a standing Indigenous Peoples Environmental Justice Committee (or standing Subcommittee of the NEJAC) to help advise EPA to address Environmental Justice concerns.

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVISORY COUNCIL

Members: ElizabethYeampierre,

Chair Margaret May.

Vice-Chair Teri Blanton Peter Captain, Sr. Andrea Guajardo Stephanie Hall Savanala 'Savi' Horne Monica Hedstrom Effenus Henderson Langdon Marsh Vernice Miller-Travis Paul Mohai Edith Pestana John Ridgway Nia Robinson Patricia Salkin Deidre Sanders Fatemeh Shafiei Nicky Sheats Paul Shoemaker Kenneth Smith Horace Strand Nicholas Targ Javier Francisco Torres Kimberly Wasserman

January 25, 2013

Lisa P. Jackson Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Jackson:

The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is pleased to transmit the following recommendations that update the NEJAC Model Plan for Public Participation, first issued in 1996. The Model Plan outlined critical elements for conducting public participation and identified core values and guiding principles for the practice of public participation.

In 2012, in light of how public participation has evolved over the years, the NEJAC identified the need to update the 1996 Model Plan. Such revisions were considered necessary to reflect current needs, concerns, and best practices, and in consideration of your designation of expanding the conversation on environmentalism and working for environmental justice as a priority. This update to the 1996 Model Plan, herein called the Model Guidelines for Public Participation, should complement the implementation of EPA’s Plan EJ 2014, the roadmap intended to help EPA integrate environmental justice into the Agency’s programs, policies, and activities.

Once again, thank you for this opportunity to provide recommendations for enhancing environmental justice in EPA’s programs, particularly the tribal program and Agency’s work with indigenous stakeholders.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth C. Yeampierre Chair

cc: NEJAC Members Robert Perciasepe, EPA Deputy Administrator Cynthia Giles, EPA Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Lisa Garcia, EPA Associate Assistant Administrator for Environmental Justice Heather Case, Acting Director, EPA Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) Victoria Robinson, NEJAC DFO, EPA OEJ

A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

11/8/14, 4:08 PM02/06/2013: EPA Provides Tools for Sustainable Communities / Smart growth policies can help achieve environmental justice goals

Page 1 of 2http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/99A5003DC8454FB585257B0A005BCABC

Last updated on November 8, 2014

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/99A5003DC8454FB585257B0A005BCABC

Newsroom

EPA Provides Tools for Sustainable Communities / Smart growthpolicies can help achieve environmental justice goals

Release Date: 02/06/2013Contact Information: Latisha Petteway (News Media Only), petteway.latisha@epa.gov, 202-564-3191, 202-564-4355;ESPAÑOL: Lina Younes, younes.lina@epa.gov, 202-564-9924, 202-564-4355

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today released a first-of-its kind report showing howlow-income, minority and tribal communities can apply smart growth land use and development strategies to createhealthy communities, spur economic growth and protect the environment.

The Creating Equitable, Healthy, and Sustainable Communities report describes how low-income, minority, and tribalcommunities can employ smart growth strategies to clean up and reinvest in existing neighborhoods; provide affordablehousing and transportation; and improve access to jobs, parks and stores. The report also provides smart growthpractitioners with concrete ideas on how they can better meet the needs of low-income residents as they promotedevelopment or redevelopment in underserved communities.

“The way communities are designed and built has an important influence on public health, the quality of our air and water,and economic vitality,” said Michael Goo, associate administrator for EPA’s Office of Policy. “EPA hopes this report will helpsmart growth and environmental justice advocates work together more effectively to achieve the best results possible forcommunities."

“Historically, environmental justice and smart growth have been viewed as separate interests, yet communities across theU.S. are showing that they are actually complementary,” said Lisa Garcia, associate assistant administrator for EPA’sOffice of Environmental Justice. “Combining these principles and focusing on equitable development can help community-based organizations, local planners, and other stakeholders achieve healthy and sustainable communities for allAmericans, regardless of race, ethnicity, or economic status.”

The report also features case studies on seven communities across the country that have used the strategies describedin the report. These strategies include:

· designing safe streets for all users · cleaning and reusing contaminated properties · reducing exposure to facilities with potential environmental concerns · fixing existing infrastructure before investing in new projects· preserving affordable housing

The Creating Equitable, Healthy, and Sustainable Communities report was developed by EPA’s Office of EnvironmentalJustice and Office of Sustainable Communities.

More information about the report: http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/equitable_development_report.htm

More information about the Office of Environmental Justice: http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljusticeMore information about the Office of Sustainable Communities: http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth

Receive our News Releases Automatically by Email

Search this collection of releases | orsearch all news releases

Get news releases by email

View selected historical press releasesfrom 1970 to 1998 in the EPA Historywebsite.

Recent additions

11/07/2014 EPA Region 7 to Participateat National Association ofFarm Broadcasting TradeTalk Event Nov. 13 inKansas City, Mo.

11/07/2014 EPA Grants Support TribalEnvironmental Programs inthe Pacific Northwest andAlaska

11/06/2014 Subsidiaries of the World’sLargest Fertilizer Producerto Reduce Harmful AirEmissions at Four FloridaPlants

11/06/2014 Bradford, R.I. Rock QuarryAgrees to Clean Air ActSettlement

11/06/2014 Subsidiaries of the World’sLargest Fertilizer Producerto Reduce Harmful AirEmissions at Three NorthCarolina Plants

News Releases By Date

vE X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

C R E A T I N G E Q U I T A B L E , H E A L T H Y , A N D S U S T A I N A B L E C O M M U N I T I E S

Executive Summary

Communities across the country are integrating smart growth, environmental justice, and equitable development approaches to design and build healthy, sustainable, and inclusive neighborhoods. Overburdened communities are using smart growth strategies to address longstanding environmental and health challenges and create new opportunities where they live. Regional and local planners are engaging low-income, minority, and tribal residents in decision-making and producing more enduring development that is better for people and the environment. Community groups, government agencies, and private and nonprofit partners are cleaning up and investing in existing neighborhoods, providing affordable housing and transportation options, and improving access to critical services and amenities.

This informational publication aims to build on past successes and offer other low-income, minority, tribal, and overburdened communities approaches to shape development that responds to their needs and reflects their values. It identifies strategies that bring together smart growth, environmental justice, and equitable development principles and that community-based organizations, local and regional decision-makers, developers, and others can use to build healthy, sustainable, and inclusive communities. These are places that provide clean air, water, and land; affordable and healthy homes; safe, reliable, and economical transportation options; and convenient access to jobs, schools, parks, shopping, and other daily necessities.

The strategies are grouped under seven common elements, or shared goals and principles that connect environmental justice, smart growth, and equitable development. The fundamental overlap between these concepts is around how to plan and build neighborhoods to address environmental, health, and economic disparities and provide opportunities for low-income,

“A clean, green, healthy community is a better place to buy a home and raise a family; it’s more competitive in the race to attract new businesses; and it has the foundations it needs for prosperity.”

—Lisa P. Jackson EPA Administrator

minority, tribal, and overburdened residents; therefore, all the approaches described relate to land use and community design. This document provides a brief introduction to each strategy, with a description of what it is, how it supports equitable and environmentally sustainable development, and examples of how it has been used. Local governments and community-based organizations can choose the approaches that best suit their needs and goals. Each of the seven common elements is illustrated by an in-depth case study highlighting a community’s experiences with these strategies.

The seven common elements, along with the strategies that fit under each one, are summarized on the following pages.

Strategies Linking Smart Growth, Environmental Justice, and Equitable Development

Common Element #1: Facilitate Meaningful Community Engagement in Planning and Land Use Decisions

Meaningful community participation in land use planning and decision-making can produce development that meets the needs of a diverse group of residents, build broad support for projects, and lead to more effective public processes. Planners and community-based organizations can use interactive, customizable

i

2013 Environmental Justice Implementation Progress Report

4

Development of the 2013 Environmental Justice Implementation Progress Report

This Implementation Progress Report highlights the Department’s advancement of the actions outlined in the 2012 HHS EJ Strategy. Throughout 2012, the HHS Environmental Justice Working Group (HHS EJ Working Group), comprised of representatives from agencies and offices across HHS, provided primary oversight of the implementation of the HHS EJ Strategy. It is led by staff from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH). The HHS EJ Working Group utilized multiple subgroups to lead implementation efforts. Four subgroups organized by the strategic elements were responsible for actions specific to their respective individual strategic elements. Additional groups were established to address HHS actions that cut across the four strategic elements. These crosscutting groups were established to address the following areas: (1) environmental justice award criteria; (2) vulnerability assessment and climate change; (3) health in all policies; (4) HHS environmental justice website;

2013 Environmental Justice Implementation Progress Report

5

(5) community-based participatory research; (6) HHS employee environmental justice education and training; and (7) stakeholder engagement. The 2013 Implementation Progress Report also addresses HHS’s efforts to uphold the Strategy’s three guiding principles. Create and Implement Meaningful Public Partnerships To gain additional insights and to begin to build partnerships to help implement the Strategy, the HHS EJ Working Group held the HHS Environmental Justice Stakeholders Implementation meeting in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina on July 16-17, 2012. Environmental justice stakeholders from non-profit advocacy groups, universities, and government agencies from across the country engaged the HHS Working Group in a two-day dialogue. The HHS EJ Working Group drew upon the comments made by participants to guide further implementation efforts. As a result of stakeholder comments, HHS has worked to foster greater partnerships with its stakeholders, including the occupational health community and Native American Tribes. Ensure Interagency and Intra-agency Coordination The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH) is responsible for coordinating and implementing a wide array of interdisciplinary programs within HHS and ensures that HHS works in concert with its Federal partners, including the Federal EJ IWG. OASH staff lead the HHS EJ Working Group, and coordinate its subcommittees and groups. Bi-weekly meetings of the Working Group provide time for sharing information and new approaches, identifying opportunities for collaboration, and updating progress toward advancing the actions of the Strategy. HHS EJ Working Group members are responsible for coordinating and reporting on activities related to environmental justice within their agencies. The HHS EJ Leadership Advisory Group, which includes senior leadership from throughout HHS, provides guidance to the overall HHS environmental justice effort. OASH staff also represent HHS on the Federal EJ IWG and coordinate appropriate representation on EJ IWG activities, including monthly EJ IWG meetings, regional or local stakeholder meetings and EJ IWG workgroups on goods movement, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other environmental justice topic areas. An accounting of the Federal EJ IWG activities is discussed in a later section of this report. Establish and Implement Accountability Measures The 2013 Implementation Progress Report documents HHS’s progress in implementing the EJ Strategy’s actions in two ways. First, the body of the report highlights specific completed actions that are related to the 2012 HHS Environmental Justice Strategy.

102 Environmental Justice

Selected Bibliography

our communities, and tools to understand how citizen participation can work to clean up Georgia’s neighborhoods.

UNICEF. Climate Change and Children (New York, NY: United Nations Children Fund, 2007).

This report gives children a voice on climate change. In 2006, child delegates to the 4th World Water Forum in Mexico City challenged leaders and policymakers, saying, “We, the children of the world, are ready to work with you. Are you ready to work with us?” The answer must be a resounding “yes” because what are good for children such as reducing pollution, safeguarding education and health, preserving environmental diversity, protecting water supplies, increasing access to proper sanitation are also good for the planet.

2008David A. Bositis. Joint Center National Survey Results: African Americans Respond to Global Warming (Washington, DC: Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, 2008).

The report concludes that while most African Americans do not believe global warming is one of the most pressing national problems the United States confronts, there is widespread recognition of the problem of global warming among them, and a strong belief that the federal government should take steps to deal with it.

Houston Department of Health and Human Services. The City of Houston Health Disparities Data Report (Houston, Texas: Houston Department of Health and Human Services, 2008).

This health disparities data report is not intended to be a definitive explanation of how social inequities such as poverty or racism lead to differences in health outcomes. However, it is meant to highlight some factors related to the health of racial/ethnic groups and identify potential underlying causes. This report is the first in a series designed to foster concrete and actionable change.

J. Andrew Hoerner and Nia Robinson. A Climate of Change: African Americans, Global Warming, and A Just Climate Policy for the U.S. (Oakland, CA: Environmental Justice and Climate Change Initiative, 2008).

This report shows that there is a disproportionate burden on African Americans from heat deaths; floods, fires, and other climate-related

22

Young people today are aware of the need to protect the environment. When they are asked to list the issues that most concern them, one issue that features highly on their agenda is climate change.

They are right to be concerned. While we still have a lot to learn about the consequences of climate change, economic and social development cannot be sustainable unless we deal decisively with this issue. It has the potential to add to the insecurity faced by some of the most vulnerable people in some of the most vulnerable countries.

New fi gures released earlier this year show solid progress on child survival, including a decline in the annual number of under-fi ve deaths. Global child deaths have reached a record low, falling below 10 million per year to 9.7 million, down from almost 13 million in 1990.

Millions of young lives have been saved by the expansion of such basic services as primary health care, nutrition programmes, and adequate water supply and sanitation, showing that progress for children is possible.

But the loss of 9.7 million young lives each year is unacceptable, and we need to continue and accelerate this progress. This task must not be threatened or undermined by short-sighted decisions that cause permanent damage to the environment.

This publication gives children a voice on climate change. In 2006, child delegates to the 4th World Water Forum in Mexico City challenged leaders and policymakers, saying, “We, the children of the world, are ready to work with you. Are you ready to work with us?” The answer must be a resounding “yes” because what is good for children – reducing pollution, safeguarding education and health, preserving environmental diversity, protecting water supplies, increasing access to proper sanitation – is also good for the planet.

Foreword

“We call on all members of society to join us in a global movement that will help build a world fi t for children through upholding our commitments to the following principles and objectives…

“Protect the Earth for children. We must safeguard our natural environment, with its diversity of life, its beauty and its resources, all of which enhance the quality of life, for present and future generations. We will give every assistance to protect children and minimize the impact of natural disasters and environmental degradation on them.”— A World Fit for Children, 2002, para. 7, section 10, UN General Assembly Special Session on Children, 2002

Ann M. VenemanExecutive Director, UNICEF

ClimateChange_FINAL_g.indd Sec1:2 11/6/07 2:44:19 PMProcess CyanProcess MagentaProcess YellowProcess Black

CITY OF HOUSTON HEALTH DISPARITIES DATA REPORT PAGE 1

Overview

Purpose of this Report

Health disparities are differences in health conditions that exist between specific population groups, resulting in one group having a disproportionate burden of disease, disability, or premature death. These population groups can be defined through different demographic measures, such as geography, gender, age, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, or race/ethnicity. Since evidence shows that health disparities among race/ethnic groups correlate with differences in other socio-economic factors, in this report, we will focus on health disparities based on race/ethnicity.

Since race is a social construct rather than a biological one, health disparities are not the result of differences in genetic factors either. Instead, racial disparities in health are the result of social factors that create inequalities among different racial/ethnic groups. These factors include poverty, unemployment, education, safe and affordable housing, health care access, transportation, discrimination, and racism.

Health disparities affect everyone, not just populations which are economically and socially disadvantaged. Not only are health disparities unjust, they affect economic productivity and drive up the cost of health care for everyone. Therefore, eliminating health disparities will help to create healthy, productive, and economically viable communities. Moreover, demographic trends show that racial/ethnic groups which experience poorer health will continue to grow and make up a larger proportion of the total Houston and U.S. population in the future. Thus, addressing health disparities has become both a local and national priority, as the inter-connection affects us all.

“The future health of the nation will be determined to a large extent by how effectively we work with communities to reduce and eliminate health disparities between non-minority and minority populations experiencing disproportionate burdens of disease, disability, and premature death.” — Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Office of Minority Health & Health Disparities

Addressing health disparities requires a shift in think-ing: rather than focusing on changing individual be-haviors, the focus will shift to altering conditions at the community level that influence health. The elimi-nation of health disparities requires multidisciplinary action and partnerships to address social and envi-ronmental factors in order to create safe and healthy neighborhoods in Houston.

The Houston Department of Health and Human Ser-vices (HDHHS) hopes this report can be used to highlight and identify disparities which exist and also serve as a useful planning tool. The idea is to help guide the creation of public policies and efficient use of resources to transform living conditions in order to build healthier communities benefiting everyone.

This health disparities data report is not intended to be a definitive explanation of how social inequities such as poverty or racism lead to differences in health outcomes. However, it is meant to highlight some factors related to the health of racial/ethnic groups and identify potential underlying causes.

To understand the health disparities which exist among different racial/ethnic groups in Houston, this report begins with a look at Houston’s demo-graphic makeup. Next, it examines differences in some social factors that influence health outcomes, otherwise known as health determinants, among different racial/ethnic groups in Houston. Finally, a “health profile” is given for each racial/ethnic group, providing a closer look at some health burdens which disproportionately affect these populations.

Introduction and Highlights

A Climate of ChangeEnvironmental Justice and Climate Change Initiative 5

Global warming has emerged, not only as one of the most serious environmental threats facing the world today, but also as a major threat to

people of color in America and around the world. It is now essentially certain that warming is occurring, as evidenced by the melting of glaciers and ice caps, the rising temperature of the seas, and the predicted increase in droughts and storms around the world.1 In 2008, except for a few industry hired guns, there is unanimous consensus among the world’s scientists that global warming is real and that the worst is yet to come. African Americans and people of color worldwide bear the brunt of this climatic shift.

But global warming is not simply an environmental issue. It is an issue of justice and human rights at the intersection of race and class. Global warming will a" ect transportation policy, energy policy, health policy, labor policy, and even military policy: no area of public life is una" ected. Because of the United States’ historic legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, and institutional racism, African American families and communities are highly vulnerable to the whole range of problems caused by global warming including the potential for climate change policy that continues and extends this legacy. Problems of scarce household resources and lack of access to community services will be exacerbated as these communities are increasingly a" ected.

! is report shows that there is a disproportionate burden on African Americans from heat deaths; fl oods, fi res, and other climate-related disasters; tropical storms like Katrina and Rita; and economic disruption of various sorts.

African Americans are less responsible for global warming, with average household emissions of greenhouse gases that are nearly twenty percent lower than that of non-Hispanic whites. At the same time, African American communities are also more vulnerable to the consequences of short-sighted energy policies that are responsible for maintaining the high dependence on fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas), particularly given racially motivated placement of fossil fuel and petrochemical facilities. ! ese policies cause the U.S. to be one of the world’s worst global warming polluters, and lead to health, economic, and environmental impacts both from warming itself and from associated air pollution. ! ey also include a range of non-environmental costs ranging from higher energy bills to unemployment from recessions caused by global energy price shocks to wars designed to protect oil company interests abroad. ! is paper will demonstrate that, on average, African American households are signifi cantly more vulnerable to all of these harms than non-Hispanic white households.

! e fi nal sections of this report describe the essential elements of a just domestic climate policy. It fi nds, fi rst, that specifi c policies to promote racial and economic justice are essential to achieving cuts in global warming pollution that are rapid, e# cient, fair, and equitable.

CONTENTS6. African Americans Are Less Responsible for Global Warming7. Disparities at the Global Level8. Vulnerability to Energy Price Increases9. Notes

Synthetic gases

Nitrous oxide

Methane

Other CO2

Burning fossil fuels

FIGURE 1: U.S. Global Warming Pollution

78%

2%7%

8%

5%

Source: EPA, Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2006 (2008)

IntroductionClimate Change at the

Intersection of Race and Class

Milestones and Accomplishments 103

disasters; tropical storms like Katrina and Rita; and economic disruption of various sorts. The report also describes the essential elements of a just domestic climate policy. It finds, first, that specific policies to promote racial and economic justice are essential to achieving cuts in global warming pollution that are rapid, efficient, fair, and equitable.

Serena W. Lin. Understanding Climate Change: An Equitable Framework (Oakland, CA: PolicyLink, 2008).

Climate change ultimately affects all of us, and the most vulnerable populations—nationally and globally, will bear the brunt of this crisis if action is not taken. This paper does not purport to explain climatology or provide an in-depth description of climate chemistry. This report contributes to a deeper understanding of the issues and to encourage everyone to participate in the discussion and to weigh in on proposed solutions.

Newtown Florist Club, GreenLaw, and University of Georgia Land Use Clinic. Health, Environmental & Quality of Life Impacts. Newtown Community, Gainesville, GA. (Atlanta, GA: GreenLaw, 2008).

This report was prepared to communicate the significant health, environmental and quality of life impacts imposed upon the Newtown residential population in Gainesville, GA. The intent of the document is to provide scientific data and analysis of these impacts which will, in turn, support proposed changes to the City of Gainesville’s land use and zoning ordinances. It was prepared for the benefit of the citizens of Newtown and the Newtown Florist Club.

Virginia Department of Health. Unequal Health Access Across the Commonwealth: A Snapshot. (Richmond, Virginia: Virginia Department of Health Division of Health Statistics, 2008).

The report represents a one-year snapshot of vital events data taken from the birth and death certificates of Virginia’s population and stratified by socioeconomic

status, race/ethnicity, and geography (rural and non-rural). The report serves as a reminder and a challenge that much more needs to be done in order to address public health issues in Virginia. Their ultimate success is to reduce health inequities and achieve more equitable access and outcomes that depend on strong, action-oriented partnerships with individuals, families, neighborhoods, organizations, cities, countries, and other important stakeholders, throughout the Commonwealth.

2009Steven Bonorris, ed., University of California Hastings College of Law Public Law Research Institute. Environmental Justice for All: A Fifty State Survey of Legislation, Policies and Cases, 4th ed. (Chicago: American Bar Association, 2009).

This report represents the collaboration between the University of California Hastings College of the Law and the American Bar Association to maintain a comprehensive and up-to-date survey of state environmental justice laws, policies, and cases. Their goal is to present community members, environmental law practitioners, industry leaders, regulators, academics, and others with the breadth of regulatory and policy techniques that the 50 states and the District of Columbia have developed to pursue environmental justice.

Michael Ash, James K. Boyce, Grace Chang, Manuel Pastor, Justin Scoggins, and Jennifer Tran. Justice in the Air: Tracking Toxic Pollution from America’s Industries and Companies to Our States, Cities and Neighborhoods (Los Angeles, CA: Program for Environmental and Regional Equity, 2009).

One unique aspect of this work is that we track the pollution not just to the smokestacks but to the companies that own them. Many firms are aware of their impacts on communities and the environment, and many have adopted strategies for becoming better corporate citizens. This report aims to contribute to these efforts by presenting a new measure of performance and whether

3

Background The Virginia Health Equity Report represents a one-year snapshot of vital events data taken from the birth and death certificates of Virginia’s population and stratified by socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and geography (rural and non-rural). Previously, this report focused specifically on the health of racial and ethnic minority populations. This year is the first step towards a report that presents data on the current status of health inequities in the Commonwealth and monitors progress towards their elimination. The primary addition to the report is Geographical Information System (GIS) and spatial analysis data that demonstrate the distribution of health inequities and the related social and economic factors that underlie their existence. The report also presents the spatial distribution of mortality and morbidity. The vital events data within this report include births, natural fetal deaths, induced terminations, teen pregnancies, infant deaths, leading causes of death, and selected cancer deaths. While not intended to be a comprehensive analysis, this report provides a valuable summary of the health status of Virginia’s diverse populations. Introduction The Virginia Department of Health (VDH) continues to improve the health information available to Virginia’s policymakers, health care providers, consumers, and researchers in the Commonwealth. These actions are consistent with the primary public health goals related to assessment, data analysis, and evaluation. They also respond to the demand for accurate and reliable health information, and help to determine a true picture of the health and wellness of Virginia’s 7.6 million residents. This data is vital in community efforts to eliminate health inequities that exist among low socioeconomic (SES), rural, and racial and ethnic minority populations in the Commonwealth. In the early 1990s, the State Health Commissioner’s Minority Health Advisory Committee recommended that Virginia health statistics be collected and reported by racial and ethnic groupings, with particular focus on minority populations. These minority populations include the races Black/African-American (used interchangeably throughout the report), Native American/American Indian, and Asian/Pacific Islander, and the ethnicity Hispanic/Latino (used interchangeably throughout the report). The enhanced data sets would improve the documentation of health statistics for all Virginians, and provide the critical measurements for evaluating health outcomes for the state’s diverse populations. In 1995, the department responded with the first Virginia Minority Health Data Report that provided vital statistics (birth, fetal death, death) data for the four minority groups. Information on Whites was provided for comparative purposes. This tenth edition of the report covers the 2006 calendar year. It provides vital statistics data by minority group for each health district (and city/county) within Virginia. Beginning this year, the report will also focus on the health of other socially disadvantaged populations in Virginia, most notably those of low socioeconomic status (SES), rural populations, and potentially other disadvantaged groups in the future. In addition to making comparisons to the White population, comparisons are also made by SES (primarily using data on educational attainment, income, and area-based analyses of census tract poverty) and geographic residence (urban, rural, and

PUBLIC LAW RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Environmental Justice for All:

A Fifty State Survey of Legislation, Policies and Cases

Fourth Edition February 15, 2010

Written in association with the American Bar Association’s Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities

and the Section of Environment, Energy and Resources

This report does not represent the views or policies of Hastings College of the Law, its Board of Directors or its faculty, or the American Bar Association, any of its sections, or its Board of Governors.

This report does not represent the views or policies of Hastings College of the Law, its Board of Directors or its faculty, or the American Bar Association, any of its sections, or its Board of Governors.

Preface

This study represents an ongoing collaboration between UC Hastings College of the Law and the American Bar Association, to maintain a comprehensive and up to date survey of state environmental justice laws, policies and cases. Our goal is to present community members, environmental law practitioners, industry leaders, regulators, academics and others with the breadth of regulatory and policy techniques that the fifty states and the District of Columbia have developed to pursue environmental justice. We do not hold out any initiative as a best practice, nor do we assess the success of any state's program. We believe, however, that this compilation of state responses can serve as a reference point as to which techniques have become customary, which innovations have newly entered the regulatory arena, and which practices are no longer in use. Trends You will note that this study is lengthier than previous editions — states continue to innovate in tackling environmental justice issues and the range of approaches is growing, showing that this area of law and policy continues to mature. Community participation and education mechanisms, as in years past, represent the most prevalent techniques of addressing environmental justice concerns. Substantively, permitting and facility siting decisions remain a major focus for state rules and programs. However, in a departure from initiatives identified in our prior studies, a growing number of states, Maryland for example, are using land use planning techniques such as buffer zones, to improve environmental conditions, reduce potential health risks, and prevent environmental degradation in at-risk communities. In addition, several states have begun addressing global climate change, and a few of those states — California, for example — specifically reference environmental justice concerns in their climate change initiatives. California’s 2006 climate change bill (AB 32) established an environmental justice-climate change advisory committee, which has participated in the debate about how different implementation approaches will affect Environmental Justice (EJ) communities.1 We have noted an increase in the number of states pursuing positive collaborative, problem-solving approaches or economic incentives to address environmental justice. For example, several states account for environmental justice in brownfields grant programs and public private partnerships. A final noteworthy thread is that many states have environmental enforcement policies that seek to address environmental justice issues. For example, we found at least seven states that incorporate environmental justice into Supplemental Environmental Projects

1 In this study, reflecting discrepant state nomenclature, we use a variety of terms to refer to the communities that may be disproportionately affected by environmental hazards. These terms include: environmental justice communities, EJ populations, environmentally burdened communities, marginalized communities, poor people, the urban poor, and poor communities of color.

iv

In recent years, Americans have become increasingly concerned about our environment. With climate change threatening the planet, dirty air triggering asthma, and industrial pollutants causing cancer, the nation is more motivated than ever before to take a hard look at the problems we face and seek new approaches that can better secure the future of the planet and the health of our communities.

One of the first steps in that process is gathering the information that can help frame the challenge and steer us to positive solutions. This report, one of the first efforts based on a new database on industrially-generated toxic air, attempts to do just that. Along the way, we examine not only the level of pollution but also who is being polluted. As with so many other environmental hazards, it turns out that the problems are disproportionately borne by low-income communities of color.

One unique aspect of this work is that we track the pollution not just to the smokestacks but to the companies that own them. Many firms are aware of their impacts on communities and the environment, and many have adopted strategies for becoming better corporate citizens. This report aims to contribute to these efforts by presenting a new measure of performance: whether companies are having a particularly high and disparate impact on disadvantaged communities.

This work has been the product of many hands – not that it made the work that much lighter – and even more eyes. For having the faith to fund the larger project from which this stems, we thank Michelle De Pass and the Ford Foundation. For helping us think through data issues inherent in our calculations, we gratefully acknowledge our colleagues Nick Bouwes, Paul Mohai, Rachel Morello-Frosch, Rich Puchalsky, and Jim Sadd. For working with us to make our message more, well, understandable, we thank Michelle Mulkey and Fenton Communications. And for reviewing our early research and making suggestions for change, we thank our colleagues in the environmental justice movement who work hard every day to secure healthy neighborhoods for all Americans.

Michael Ash, James K. Boyce, Grace Chang Amherst, Massachusetts

Manuel Pastor, Justin Scoggins, Jennifer Tran Los Angeles, California

FOREWORD

104 Environmental Justice

Selected Bibliography

companies are having a particularly high and disparate impact on disadvantaged communities.

Geraldine Terry. Climate Change and Gender Justice (Oxford: Oxam 2009).

This report is an exploration of the complex relationship between gender and climate change that applies a gender lens to issues of vulnerability to climate impacts, adaptation, mitigation, and advocacy.

Global Humanitarian Forum Geneva. Key Points on Climate Justice (Global Humanitarian Forum Geneva 2009).

This report provides key points on climate justice that are intended to serve as principles to guide policy and action on climate change. Increasingly unpredictable weather is having a severe impact on people and communities worldwide. We now know that climate change constitutes a serious humanitarian concern and a growing threat to socio-economic development, in particular for the world’s poorest communities.

National Wildlife Federation. More Extreme Weather: Implications for Public Health and Social Justice. (National Wildlife Federation, 2009)

This report discusses that global warming will bring more extreme heat waves. By the 2080s and 2090s, many parts of the country will have more than two months each year with100-degree weather if global warming emissions are not curbed. Urban air pollution will be exacerbated by more extreme heat, compounding the health effects on hot days and forcing some cities to take even more aggressive steps to meet federal ozone standards.

2010Robert D. Bullard, Glenn S. Johnson, and Angel O. Torres. The State of Black Atlanta: Exploding the Myth of Black Mecca (Atlanta: Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University Report Series, 2010).

In 2010 Summit organizers from Clark Atlanta University-Environmental Justice Resource Center commissioned working papers from top Atlanta leaders in academic, public health, business, media, and local community based organizations with the goal of impacting public sector policies

Milestones and Accomplishments 105

around health, environmental justice, civil rights and human rights, transportation and land use, housing and home ownership, wealth creation and business development, equitable development, education, food security, and parks and green access in Atlanta’s underserved communities. This report represents a synthesis of challenges, barriers, and opportunities facing Black Atlanta.

Manuel Pastor, Rachel Morello-Frosch, James Sadd, and Justin Scoggins. Minding the Climate Gap: What’s at Stake if California’s Climate Law Isn’t Done Right and Right Away (College of Natural Resources-University of California, Berkeley and Program for Environmental and Regional Equity (PERE), University of Southern California, 2010).

The California Global Warming Act (AB 32) – a cutting edge policy that no one expected to pass so quickly and with so much bipartisan support – proposes to cut green house gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The successful implementation of such a standard would mean reducing carbon emissions from major polluters around the state – cement refineries, power plants, and oil refineries top among them. This report seeks to analyze co-pollutants and co-benefits, with an eye toward thinking through policy designs that could help maximize public health and close the climate gap. However, California is at the forefront of dealing with climate change, by setting new standards, driving toward energy efficiency, encouraging renewables, and even working to rebalance the mix of land uses and transportation that have produced our well-documented sprawl.

Dawn Phillips, Robbie Clark, Tammy Lee, and Alexandra Desautels. Rebuilding Neighborhoods, Restoring Health: A Report on the Impact of Foreclosure on Public Health (Oakland, CA: Alameda County Public Health Department, 2010).

The report uses empirical data gathered from hundreds of Oakland residents living in foreclosure hotspots to illuminate in compelling detail about the profound acute

and sustained consequences of the foreclosure crisis, and the larger issue of housing instability on human health. The report convincingly elucidates the fact that these health consequences are interactive and synergistic and occur at both the individual level and the larger community level; thus wreaking havoc not only on isolated families, but also on whole neighborhoods in Oakland and Alameda County.

Alameda County Health Department. His Health: Alameda County Male Health Status Report (Oakland, CA: Alameda County Public Health Department, 2010).

This report provides a unique gendered perspective on select health and social indicators (chronic/communicable disease, crime/violence, mental health, employment/income, education, homelessness) affecting Alameda County men. The report includes profiles of men who live and work in our communities and policy recommendations.

Suzanne Reuben. The President’s Cancer Panel. Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk: What We Can Do Now (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, and National Cancer Institute, 2010).

This report summarizes the panel’s findings and conclusions based on the testimony received and additional information gathering. The panel’s recommendations delineate concrete actions that governments, industry, research, healthcare, advocacy communities, and individuals can take to reduce cancer.

Robin Saha, Kathryn Makarowski, Russ J. Van Paepeghem, Bethany Taylor, Michelle Lanzoni, Michael Lattanzio. Missoula Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Analysis, 2003-2008: Toward A Blueprint for Municipal Sustainability (Missoula, MT: University of Montana, 2010)

Missoula is not alone in recognizing that taking action as a community can improve fiscal well-being as well as benefitting the local economy and enhancing quality of

106 Environmental Justice

Selected Bibliography

life. However, to be effective, efforts require careful analysis and planning. This report seeks to assist in that regard by methodically carrying out the first of five steps for local governments to achieve emission reductions under the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement: conducting a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory of municipal operations.

Center for Energy and Environmental Policy, University of Delaware. Policies for Achieving Energy Justice in Society: Best Practices for Applying Solar Energy Technologies to Low-Income Housing (Newark, DE: Center for Energy and Environmental Policy, University of Delaware, 2010).

This report examines the ways in which existing barriers may be overcome, through a review of state and federal policies that presently work to reduce the energy burden for low-income households. Examined in this regard are the history and current state of policies aimed at addressing energy poverty in the U.S., to identify the strengths, weaknesses, and relationships among existing policies, and the role of increased renewable energy consumption in achieving this goal.

Anthony Leiserowitz and Karen Akerlof. Race, Ethnicity and Public Responses to Climate Change (Yale Project on Climate Change and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication, 2010).

This report is a survey of public support for climate and energy policies among different racial and ethnic groups. As the United States becomes increasingly diverse over the first half of the twenty-first century, understanding the viewpoints of people of different racial and ethnic groups on climate change is becoming ever more important.

Linda Mazur, Carmen Milanes, Karen Randles, David Siegel. Indicators of Climate Change in California: Environmental Justice Impacts (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), 2010).

This report presents four indicators that help track trends relating to the disproportionate impacts of climate change on California communities. The indicators chosen were selected based on evidence that: (1) the impacts of climate change are already occurring (rather than projected to occur based on future climate scenarios); and (2) disparities exist among socioeconomic or racial groups in either the degree of exposure to a hazard, or the capacity to take action to reduce exposures or minimize adverse outcomes.

Key Points on Climate Change2 Key Points on Climate Change 3

fact that many decades of carbon emissions in richer parts of the world have led

to global warming and caused severe climate impacts in the poorest countries.

We must hold governments accountable for putting into practice well-established

principles such as the requirement that polluters pay for the environmental damages

they cause.

The concept of Climate Justice also recognizes that the world’s poorest

countries have contributed least to the problem of climate change and

acknowledges that although we all have responsibilities to act, because the world’s

richest economies have contributed and continue to contribute most to the problem,

they have a greater obligation to take action and to do so more quickly. That must

include providing support to developing countries on a scale that not only ensures

they avoid environmentally damaging economic development patterns of the past

but also enables them to meet their current and projected energy needs.

Government leaders have acknowledged their responsibility to work together

towards social justice and protection of the environment. They have signed treaties

and declarations in which they agree to cooperate to protect the climate system and

to ensure respect for fundamental human rights. Yet the challenge of climate change

makes clear that we must define more precisely what international obligations entail,

when they are triggered, and what factors condition our responses.

As a contribution to ongoing effort to shape a shared agenda for

Climate Justice, the Global Humanitarian Forum has worked with a range

of organizations and individuals to develop these “Key Points on Climate

Justice.” They reaffirm that the benefits and burdens associated with

climate change and its resolution must be allocated in an equitable way.

I commend this document as a valuable guide for all who are working to

make Climate Justice a reality.

Mary Robinson, President and Founder, Realizing Rights: The Ethical Globalization Initiative

IntroductionIncreasingly unpredictable weather is having a severe impact on people and

communities worldwide. We now know that climate change constitutes a serious

humanitarian concern and a growing threat to socio-economic development, in

particular for the world’s poorest communities. These people, already the most

vulnerable, contribute least to global emissions of gases that are the principal

cause of climate change. They have the fewest mechanisms of protection available

and the least means to cope.

However, the poor are not alone in facing the threat of climate change. If

emissions of greenhouse gases worldwide continue to intensify, today’s dangerous

situation will become catastrophic for the entire planet and for all societies. Billions

of people are now vulnerable to the indiscriminate impacts of climate change,

and significant, immediate and sustained emissions reductions are an urgent

priority. Those who already suffer or will suffer from the impacts of climate change,

especially the poor, require support in order to adapt to environmental changes.

As the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirmed more than 60 years

ago, every human being is born free and equal in dignity and rights. Yet within the

shared biosphere of our planet, the limited resources available to human society

have been unequally consumed. The mass consumption of fossil fuels by some

has led to a changing climate for the entire planet.

As a global community, we can act together. Efforts to ensure respect for

human rights in the 21st century should include protecting the habitat in which

human beings coexist. Ultimately, shared concern and commitment to the planet

we inhabit and to our neighbours both near and far should be a unifying force.

The following “Key Points on Climate Justice” are intended to serve as

principles to guide policy and action on climate change.

More ExtremeWeather: Implicationsfor Public Health and Social Justice

N A T I O N A L W I L D L I F E F E D E R A T I O N 2 0 0 9

ReportC O N F R O N T I N G G L O B A L W A R M I N G

Global warming is making hot days hotter, rainfall and flooding heavier,

storms stronger, and droughts more severe. These will be the most visible

impacts of global warming in our everyday lives and will have grave

implications for public health and social justice. Indeed, our urban

infrastructure, flood protection measures, emergency management

strategies, and agricultural systems were all developed based on past

experience with extreme weather. But, with global warming pushing these

extremes beyond their historical limits, we can no longer plan for the

future based on past climate conditions.

We are already seeing these impacts across the nation. The long-term

warming trend is undeniable: according to NASA, the ten warmest years

on record globally all occurred within the 12-year period 1997-2008.1

Weather and climate disasters are becoming more common and more

expensive in the United States. In the 1980s a billion-dollar weather

disaster was relatively rare. The last decade has seen multiple billion-

dollar disasters each year.2

Some people are more vulnerable than others to intensifying weather and

climate extremes. Underserved communities and people who are old,

young, or already sick are at greatest risk. Hurricane Katrina is a prime

example: the poor and elderly lost the most because of where they lived

and their limited ability to get out of harm’s way. About 310,000 African

Americans living in New Orleans were displaced by flooding or damage, a

significantly larger proportion than any other group.3

More and more Americans will be living in vulnerable locations as

population continues to grow rapidly in cities, along the coasts, and in the

South. People of color will be disproportionately impacted because their

populations are concentrated in these areas. For example, 56 percent of

African Americans live in the southern United States or in urban areas.4

We must take action to reduce global warming pollution now, while there

is still time to avert the worst impacts. Investing in a clean energy future

is the essential path forward that will help communities nationwide,

especially the most vulnerable. It can also create new economic

opportunities for underserved communities. One analysis estimates that

transitioning to clean energy could create more than 430,000 jobs for

African Americans by 2030.5

FEMA/illinoisphoto.com

Heat WavesGlobal warming will bring more extreme

heat waves. By the 2080s and 2090s,

many parts of the country will have

more than two months each year with

100-degree weather if global warming

emissions are not curbed. Urban air

pollution will be exacerbated by more

extreme heat, compounding the health

effects on hot days and forcing some

cities to take even more aggressive

steps to meet federal ozone standards.

Heat waves disproportionately impact

the very old and very young, as well as

people who are poor, have asthma or

heart disease, or live in big cities. With

often diminished health and a greater

likelihood of living alone, the elderly are

especially vulnerable. As the U.S.

demographics shift toward an older and

Number of Billion-DollarWeather andClimate Disasters(1980-2008)

21-30

13-20

7-12

1-6

Number of peopleindicating one or moreraces including Black orAfrican American(2008)

1,000,000 to3,363,000

100,000 to 999,999

15,000 to 99,999

5,378 to 14,999

SOURCE: National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau

The intensity of the hurricanessince Katrina in 2005 andunusually high temperatures havebecome the norm – impacting thelives of all Gulf Coast residents,including me. I’ve dealt withfrequent evacuations and thepersonal loss of a friendas a result of heat stroke.

Flickr:tlh3rd

”

“

Jerome RingoPresident of the Apollo AllianceFormer Chair of the National WildlifeFederation’s Board of DirectorsResident of Lake Charles, Louisiana

The time for enactingcomprehensive climatechange policies is now. TheAmerican public needs tounderstand that globalwarming is a health issue andthe most vulnerable people toits dangerous impacts areinner city African-Americans.”

“

Hilary O. SheltonSenior Vice President forAdvocacy and Director of theNAACP DC Bureau

more urban population, efforts to

protect these at-risk communities from

extreme heat will become increasingly

important. Furthermore, African

Americans are at higher risk because

they are both more likely to live in the

places where heat waves are most

severe and less likely to be able to

afford air conditioning, insulation, and

other home improvements that reduce

exposure to extreme heat.6

For more information, see National

Wildlife Federation’s 2009 reportMore

Extreme Heat Waves: Global Warming’s

Wake Up Call.

States in the Southeast have experienced more billion-dollarweather and climate disasters — from hurricanes and floods todroughts and heat waves — than other parts of the country.These disasters disproportionately impact the large populationof African Americans who call the Southeast home.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis report was jointly produced by CausaJusta :: Just Cause (CJJC) and the Alameda CountyPublic Health Department (ACPHD). Many individuals and organizations contributed thought-fully, tirelessly, and wholeheartedly to its development. We especially acknowledge and thankall the East and West Oakland residents who shared their personal insights and experiencesthrough the door-to-door survey and one-on-one interviews. The foreclosure crisis has deeplyimpacted many of these residents, and it is their voices and stories that we seek to underscoreand augment in this report.

AuthorsDawn Phillips, Program Director, CJJCRobbie Clark, Housing Rights Lead Organizer, CJJCTammy Lee, Community Epidemiologist, ACPHDAlexandra Desautels, Local Policy Coordinator, ACPHD

Contributors388 residents of East and West Oakland neighborhoodsKimberly Isaac, CJJC member since 2000 and West Oakland residentKaren Mims, CJJC member since 2009 and East Oakland residentMaria Ramirez, CJJC member since 2009 and East Oakland residentJoan Phillips, CJJC member since 2010 and East Oakland resident

Survey Outreach, Data Support, and Report ReviewersMembers of the National Civilian Community CorpsVanessa Moses, Oakland Basebuilding Lead Organizer, CJJCPaper Buck, CJJC volunteerJustin Stein, CJJC volunteerSandra Witt, Deputy Director of Planning, Policy, and Health Equity, ACPHDJane Martin, SuperviSing Epidemiologist, ACPHDMatt Beyers, Epidemiologist, ACPHDLiz Maker, Evaluation Specialist, ACPHDSarah Martin-Anderson, Policy Consultant, ACPHDJennifer Aquino, ACPHD internLauren Pettis, ACPHD intern

Report Design and LayoutDesign Action Collective

Photo CreditsDavid Velasquez, CJJC InternTatiana Randal, CJJC InternAmber McZeal, Oakland Housing Organizer, CJJC

Report FunderThe California Endowment

TheCalifornia

Endowment

The disaster also acutely crystallizes the questionof how we strike the right balance between privatesector risk-taking and effective regulation that pro-tects the interests of vulnerable populations andother precious resources. While the BP oil spillis the most recent and dramatic example of ourrelatively hands-off approach to aggressive privatesector risk-taking, the banking and foreclosurecrisis and resultant world economic crisis are a re-flection of the very same phenomenon.

Ultimately, decisions about the design of poli-cies that balance these competing interests comedown to a question of values. Unfortunately, itappears that we are still struggling in this countryto reach a stable consensus on the core valuesthat should serve as the underpinning of oursocial policy and more clearly define the role ofgovernment. Consequently, we are witnessing astark polarization between notions of individualresponsibility, market justice, laissez-faire capi-talism, and small government versus notions ofsocial responsibility, environmental stewardship,sustainability, equity, and fairness. Policies thatare firmly grounded in the latter values will helpsteer us away from inevitable and extreme envi-ronmental and economic crises that are propelledby the reckless and profit-blinded actions of ahandful of private sector actors that feel no mean-ingful regulatory constraints or consequences.

Until those who are strongly committed to asense of social and environmental stewardshipengage more effectively in the values battle-ground, we will continue in the "damage control"mode that has us cleaning up toxic spills, bury-ing masses of people abandoned by Katrina-likeevents, and trying to mitigate the health and so-cial consequences of economic disasters such asthe foreclosure crisis. This vivid report reminds usof the undeniable human health costs of inaction.

The foreclosure crisis, in conjunction with the as-sociated surge in unemployment and larger eco-nomic recession, has focused renewed attentionon the human health consequences of large-scalesocial crises. While the association between hous-ing stability and homeownership and health hasbeen documented in the public health literature,the direct effects of foreclosure on health haveonly recently begun to be explored. Thus this

ground-breaking and highly anticipated report byCausta Justa :: Just Cause (CJJC) and the AlamedaCounty Public Health Department (ACPHD) willgreatly advance our understanding of this issueand provide a tool for communities, advocates,and policymakers to employ in the design ofthoughtful preventive and intervention strategies.

The report uses empirical data gathered fromhundreds of Oakland residents living in foreclo-sure hotspots to illuminate in compelling detailthe profound acute and sustained consequencesof the foreclosure crisis, and the larger issue ofhousing instability, on human health. The reportconvincingly elucidates the fact that these healthconsequences are interactive and synergisticand occur at both the individual-level and thelarger community-level; thus wreaking havocnot only on isolated families, but also on wholeneighborhoods in Oakland and Alameda County.The report brilliantly delineates key pathwaysthrough which these health consequences occurand thereby offers policymakers a much deeperinsight into the inter-relatedness of housingpolicy and health policy. Furthermore, the reportprescribes cogent city, county, state, and federalpolicy approaches to mitigating the immediateconsequences of the foreclosure crisis in Oaklandand Alameda County and preventing future crises.

Prior research by ACPHD has demonstrated thatpeople who live in certain low-income neighbor-hoods in Alameda County can expect to die, onaverage, a decade or more before residents ofthe rest of the County. These low-income neigh-borhoods represent a constellation of sociallyhazardous conditions that are not natural, butinstead the legacy of man-made policy. Throughportraying the tight relationship between theforeclosure crisis and the physical and emotionalhealth of Oakland and Alameda County residents,this report invites us to dedicate ourselves to thecreation of new social policy and systems changethat better reflect the values of equity, social jus-tice, environmental stewardship, and communityresponsibility. This work aligns squarely with themission, vision, and practice of The CaliforniaEndowment, which salutes CJJC and ACPHD fordemonstrating the data-driven, inter-sectoral, val-ues-centered leadership that sustainable progressin health equity demands.

Rebuilding Neighborhoods, Restoring Health I 5

2008–2009 Annual Report  i President’s Cancer Panel

REDUCINGENVIRONMENTAL

CANCER RISKWhat We Can Do Now

Suzanne H. Reuben for 

The President’s Cancer Panel

April 2010

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESNational Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute

2008–2009 ANNUAL REPORT | PRESIDENT’S CANCER PANEL ii

Executive SummaryDespite overall decreases in incidence and mortality, cancer continues to shatter and steal the lives of Americans. Approximately 41 percent of Americans will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives, and about 21 percent will die from cancer. The incidence of some cancers, including some most common among children, is increasing for unexplained reasons.

Public and governmental awareness of environmental influences on cancer risk and other health issues has increased substantially in recent years as scientific and health care communities, policymakers, and individuals strive to understand and ameliorate the causes and toll of human disease. A growing body of research documents myriad established and suspected environmental factors linked to genetic, immune, and endocrine dysfunction that can lead to cancer and other diseases.

Between September 2008 and January 2009, the President’s Cancer Panel (the Panel) convened four meetings to assess the state of environmental cancer research, policy, and programs addressing known and potential effects of environmental exposures on cancer. The Panel received testimony from 45 invited experts from academia, government, industry, the environmental and cancer advocacy communities, and the public.

This report summarizes the Panel’s findings and conclusions based on the testimony received and additional information gathering. The Panel’s recommendations delineate concrete actions that governments; industry; the research, health care, and advocacy communities; and individuals can take to reduce cancer risk related to environmental contaminants, excess radiation, and other harmful exposures.

Key Issues for Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk

Issues impeding control of environmental cancer risks include those related to limited research on environmental influences on cancer; conflicting or inadequate exposure measurement, assessment, and classification; and ineffective regulation of environmental chemical and other hazardous exposures.

Missoula Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Analysis 2003-2008

2

Goals and oBjeCtives

As frequent stories in the news attest, climate change is harming the natural assets that Montanans value. Scientists predict that threats to our forests, streams, wildlife, working farms, and our state’s economy will grow in the future as things continue to heat up and dry out. Indeed, climate change threatens the local economy in Missoula, the fiscal well-being of City government, and our local quality of life.

As major contributors of greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change, cities around the world, including several cities in Montana, are facing up to their responsibility to be part of climate change solutions. In an era of ever-increasing energy costs, cities are finding many good reasons to lead by example.

Because addressing climate change involves using less energy and using it more wisely, it can allow services that the public demands to be maintained in tough economic times and prevent undesirable and forced choices to be made.

Missoula is not alone in recognizing that taking action as a community can improve fiscal well-being as well as benefitting the local economy and enhancing quality of life. However, to be effective, efforts require careful analysis and planning. This report seeks to assist in that regard by methodically carrying out the first of five steps for local governments to achieve emission reductions under the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement: conducting a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory of municipal operations.

Specific goals of this report are:

To present a baseline greenhouse gas emissions inventory for the City of Missoula that 1. quantifies total energy use and associated emissions for municipal operations.To identify major sources of municipal GHG emissions and relative contributions within 2. and among the various sectors examined.

eXeCutive suMMary

1

RRAACCEE,, EETTHHNNIICCIITTYY aanndd PPuubblliicc RReessppoonnsseess ttoo CClliimmaattee CChhaannggee

2

Cover image courtesy of NASA. This study was conducted by the Yale Project on Climate Change and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication. It was funded by the Surdna Foundation, the 11th Hour Project, the Pacific Foundation, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The race and ethnicity analysis was supported by the Natural Resources Defense Council. Principal investigators: Anthony Leiserowitz, PhD Yale Project on Climate Change School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University (203) 432-4865 anthony.leiserowitz@yale.edu Karen Akerlof Center for Climate Change Communication Department of Communication, George Mason University (703) 282-1289 kakerlof@gmu.edu Cite as: Leiserowitz, A. & Akerlof, K. (2010) Race, Ethnicity and Public Responses to Climate Change. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change. http://environment.yale.edu/uploads/RaceEthnicity2010.pdf

3

�“The climate change movement still remains highly homogenous by race and class and significantly by gender in its leadership. Even in 2009, climate briefings held across the country consistently feature mostly male and all-white casts. Like other pockets of environmental and conservation movements, climate change still suffers from the perception, and arguably the reality, that it is a movement led by and designed for the interests of the white, upper-middle class. Many people erroneously believe that interest in environmental issues is dependent on race, education, and class. To the contrary, growing numbers of people of color working in the environmental field and public polling demonstrate that reality often differs from conventional assumptions.�” �– Angela Park1

In this report we examine American public support for climate change and energy policies among different racial and ethnic groups. We find that in many cases, minorities are equally as supportive, and often more supportive of national climate and energy policies, than white Americans.

4

Introduction As the United States becomes increasingly diverse over the first half of the twenty-first century2, understanding the viewpoints of people of different racial and ethnic groups on climate change is becoming ever more important. This report provides an analysis of the global warming and energy policy preferences of both the overall American public and of particular racial and ethnic groups, based upon an October and November 2008 nationally representative survey of American 2,164 adults. A follow-up survey of 1,001 respondents in December 2009 and January 2010 (see Survey Methodology, p. 18) is also discussed. The impacts of climate change are likely to be felt disproportionately by those who face socioeconomic inequalities.3 In the United States this includes many Hispanics, African Americans and other racial and ethnic groups who are likely to be more vulnerable to heat waves, extreme weather events, environmental degradation, and subsequent labor market dislocations.4 Climate and energy policies that limit greenhouse gas emissions can often help reduce these impacts and improve the health of all Americans by decreasing other concomitant air pollutants and increasing opportunities for active and less carbon intensive lifestyles. These reductions are of great benefit to low-income and minority communities since many suffer greater impacts from air pollution and as a result will have the most to gain from policies that will improve air quality. Economic opportunities for low-income and minority communities are also forecast to improve access to green jobs and grow the green economy.5

Overall Policy Support

The fall of 2008 survey asked Americans how much they supported or opposed a wide variety of climate change policies, including possible regulations, subsidies, tax incentives, research and development funding, and international treaties. Overall, there was broad-based, bipartisan support for most policy options, with the notable exception of a higher gas tax (Fig. 1).

INDICATORS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN CALIFORNIA:

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

IMPACTS

December 2010

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Authors Linda Mazur

Carmen Milanes Karen Randles

David Siegel, Ph.D. Integrated Risk Assessment Branch,

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA)

Reviewers

George Alexeeff, Ph.D., DABT, Deputy Director for Scientific Affairs, OEHHA

Allan Hirsch, Chief Deputy Director, OEHHA

Joan Denton, Ph.D., Director, OEHHA

Andrew Altevogt, Cal/EPA Office of the Secretary

Marian Ashe, Cal/EPA Office of the Secretary

-i-

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2009, the California Environmental Protection Agency’s (Cal/EPA) Office of the Secretary requested the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to develop indicators describing the disproportionate impacts of climate change on environmental justice communities. These indicators will help Cal/EPA examine potential environmental justice concerns associated with climate change. Evidence is emerging that some of the projected impacts of climate change on human health and well-being are already occurring. Some of these impacts may disproportionately affect those who are socially or economically disadvantaged, and hence represent environmental justice concerns. This report presents four indicators that help track trends relating to the disproportionate impacts of climate change on these communities. The indicators chosen were selected based on evidence that: (1) the impacts of climate change are already occurring (rather than projected to occur based on future climate scenarios); and (2) disparities exist among socioeconomic or racial groups in either the degree of exposure to a hazard, or the capacity to take action to reduce exposures or minimize adverse outcomes. The indicators are summarized in the text box below.

THE INDICATORS Air conditioner ownership and cost Low-income individuals and families are less likely to live in homes with air conditioning. Moreover, electricity costs for cooling are a greater proportion of their household income compared to more affluent households. Farm worker exposure to extreme heat Farm workers are a low-income, predominantly Hispanic population. They experience disproportionately greater exposures to extreme heat. Summertime extreme heat in certain agricultural stations declined from 1950 to the mid-1980s, but appears to be trending upward.

Exposure to urban heat Low-income residents and people of color are more likely to live in urban neighborhoods with large impervious areas and with minimal tree canopy—conditions that intensify summertime heat. Indicators to track these conditions need to be developed. Vulnerability to wildfires The rural poor living at the wildland-urban interface may have less capacity and resources to take measures to prevent and fight wildfires and to recover following a fire. Indicators that integrate information about fire threat and about community capacity will help track vulnerability to wildfires.