Integrating environmental justice into EPA permitting authority

Ecology Law Quarterly

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 617-678

  Lazarus, Richard J ^a   Tai, Stephanie ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033269582     PISSN: 00461121     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (342)

1. See, e.g., Edward Patrick Boyle, Note, It's Not Easy Being Green: The Psychology of Racism, Environmental Discrimination, and the Argument for Modernizing Equal Protection Analysis, 46 VAND. L. REV. 937 (1993); James H. Colopy, Note, The Road Less Traveled: Pursuing Environmental Justice Through Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 13 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 125 (1994); Rachel D. Godsil, Note, Remedying Environmental Racism, 90 MICH. L. REV. 394 (1991).
2. See, e.g., Edward Patrick Boyle, Note, It's Not Easy Being Green: The Psychology of Racism, Environmental Discrimination, and the Argument for Modernizing Equal Protection Analysis, 46 VAND. L. REV. 937 (1993); James H. Colopy, Note, The Road Less Traveled: Pursuing Environmental Justice Through Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 13 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 125 (1994); Rachel D. Godsil, Note, Remedying Environmental Racism, 90 MICH. L. REV. 394 (1991).
3. See, e.g., Edward Patrick Boyle, Note, It's Not Easy Being Green: The Psychology of Racism, Environmental Discrimination, and the Argument for Modernizing Equal Protection Analysis, 46 VAND. L. REV. 937 (1993); James H. Colopy, Note, The Road Less Traveled: Pursuing Environmental Justice Through Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 13 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 125 (1994); Rachel D. Godsil, Note, Remedying Environmental Racism, 90 MICH. L. REV. 394 (1991).
4. See Michael B. Gerrard, The Role of Existing Environmental Laws in the Environmental Justice Movement, 9 ST. JOHN'S J. LEGAL COMMENT. 555 (1994); see also Alice Kaswan, Environmental Justice: Bridging the Gap Between Environmental Laws and "Justice", 47 AM. U. L. REV. 221 (1997).
5. See Michael B. Gerrard, The Role of Existing Environmental Laws in the Environmental Justice Movement, 9 ST. JOHN'S J. LEGAL COMMENT. 555 (1994); see also Alice Kaswan, Environmental Justice: Bridging the Gap Between Environmental Laws and "Justice", 47 AM. U. L. REV. 221 (1997).
6. See, e.g., In re Louisiana Energy Services, L.P., 47 N.R.C. 77 (1998) (finding that the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4370e (1994), required the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to consider environmental justice impacts in the Commission's licensing process and remanding a nuclear material license for agency review to determine whether such concerns were adequately considered).
7. U.S. ENVTL. PROTECTION AGENCY, INTERIM GUIDANCE FOR INVESTIGATING TITLE VI ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINTS CHALLENGING PERMITS (1998) (on file with author) [hereinafter INTERIM GUIDANCE].
8. See Gerald Torres, Changing the Way Government Views Environmental Justice, 9 ST. JOHN'S J. LEGAL COMMENT. 543, 547-51 (1994).
9. See Conference, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environmental Justice in the Matter of the Fifth Meeting of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, 9 ADMIN. L.J. AM. U. 623, 768 (1995) (describing Region V's efforts to proactively identify "environmental justice areas of concern" and to incorporate environmental justice considerations into "work practice").
10. See Michael Fisher, Environmental Claims Brought Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 25 ENVTL. L. 285, 319-21 (1995) (concluding that environmental justice activists need to demonstrate that a project results in disparate impact in order to successfully pursue an environmental justice claim under Title VI case law).
11. See Eileen Gauna, Major Sources of Criteria Pollutants in Nonattainment Areas: Balancing the Considerations of Clean Air, Environmental Justice, and Industrial Development, 3 HASTINGS W.-N.W. J. ENVTL. L. & POL'Y 379, 394 (1996) (finding it "unclear to what extent the permitting authority can and will consider the environmental justice implications of a PSD permit").
12. See OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR, U.S. ENVTL. PROTECTION AGENCY, THE NEW GENERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: A SUMMARY OF EPA'S FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN 6-7 (1994) (emphasizing importance of compliance monitoring, inspections, and enforcement actions, as well as involvement of all stakeholders).
13. See 116 CONG. REC. 32,927 (1970) (statement of Sen. Muskie during debate on Clean Air Act citizen suit provisions) ("I think it is too much to presume that, however well staffed or well intentioned these enforcement agencies, they will be able to monitor the potential violations."); see also Jeannette L. Austin, Comment, The Rise of Citizen-Suit Enforcement in Environmental Law: Reconciling Private and Public Attorneys General, 81 NW. U. L. REV. 220 (1987) (discussing the role of citizen suits in federal environmental enforcement).
14. See Eileen Gauna, Federal Environmental Citizen Provisions: Obstacles and Incentives on the Road to Environmental Justice, 22 ECOLOGY L.Q. 1, 31-32 (1995); see also Robert W. Collin, Environmental Equity: A Law and Planning Approach to Environmental Racism, 11 VA. ENVTL. L.J. 495, 511-13 (1992); Colin Crawford, Strategies for Environmental Justice: Rethinking CERCLA Medical Monitoring Lawsuits, 74 B.U. L. REV. 267, 268-70 (1994).
15. See Eileen Gauna, Federal Environmental Citizen Provisions: Obstacles and Incentives on the Road to Environmental Justice, 22 ECOLOGY L.Q. 1, 31-32 (1995); see also Robert W. Collin, Environmental Equity: A Law and Planning Approach to Environmental Racism, 11 VA. ENVTL. L.J. 495, 511-13 (1992); Colin Crawford, Strategies for Environmental Justice: Rethinking CERCLA Medical Monitoring Lawsuits, 74 B.U. L. REV. 267, 268-70 (1994).
16. See Eileen Gauna, Federal Environmental Citizen Provisions: Obstacles and Incentives on the Road to Environmental Justice, 22 ECOLOGY L.Q. 1, 31-32 (1995); see also Robert W. Collin, Environmental Equity: A Law and Planning Approach to Environmental Racism, 11 VA. ENVTL. L.J. 495, 511-13 (1992); Colin Crawford, Strategies for Environmental Justice: Rethinking CERCLA Medical Monitoring Lawsuits, 74 B.U. L. REV. 267, 268-70 (1994).
17. See Richard J. Lazarus, The Meaning and Promotion of Environmental Justice, 5 MD. J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 1, 4-6 (1994) (describing how lack of resources in the face of environmental law's sheer complexity makes it difficult to take advantage of citizen suit provisions).
18. See COMMISSION FOR RACIAL JUSTICE, UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST, TOXIC WASTES AND RACE IN THE UNITED STATES, A NATIONAL REPORT ON RACIAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF COMMUNITIES WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES 24 (1987) (recommending that EPA monitor siting of facilities to ensure environmental justice characteristics are considered).
19. Various environmental justice advocacy centers may serve as models for such efforts. These centers provide services such as leadership training, technical assistance, and education to impacted communities. See generally Carita Shanklin, Pathfinder: Environmental Justice, 24 ECOLOGY L.Q. 333, 352-56 (1997).
20. The Executive Order on Federal Action to Address Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations Section 3-301(b) states that "Environmental human health analyses, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall identify multiple and cumulative exposures." Exec. Order No. 12,898, 3 C.F.R. 859 (1995), reprinted in 42 U.S.C. § 4321 (1994) [hereinafter Executive Order]; see also Robert R. Kuehn, The Environmental Justice Implications of Quantitative Risk Assessment, 1996 U. ILL. L. REV. 103, 151-52 (1996).
21. See Gauna, supra note 8, at 404 (arguing that permitting authorities should "use existing data bases to determine the likelihood of the host community's disparate exposure to environmental risks").
22. See Kuehn, supra note 15, at 152 (discussing the need to evaluate particular risks in light of existing risks within the context of EPA's risk assessment guidelines).
23. See Sheila Foster, Justice from the Ground Up: Distributive Inequities, Grassroots Resistance, and the Transformative Politics of the Environmental Justice Movement, 86 CAL. L. REV. 775, 782 (1998) (examining EPA's use of its own studies which found that residents of Chester, Pennsylvania, had unacceptably high blood lead levels).
24. See id. (discussing how environmental justice is about procedural equity as well as distributional equity); see also ROBERT V. PERCIVAL ET AL., ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION: LAW, SCIENCE, AND POLICY 188 (2nd ed. 1996) ("[I]t is necessary to consider not only how efficient [environmental] policies are, but also how equitable."); Cheryl A. Calloway & Karen L. Ferguson, The "Human Environment" Requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act: Implications for Environmental Justice, 1997 DET. C.L. REV. 1147, 1151 (1997).
25. See id. (discussing how environmental justice is about procedural equity as well as distributional equity); see also ROBERT V. PERCIVAL ET AL., ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION: LAW, SCIENCE, AND POLICY 188 (2nd ed. 1996) ("[I]t is necessary to consider not only how efficient [environmental] policies are, but also how equitable."); Cheryl A. Calloway & Karen L. Ferguson, The "Human Environment" Requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act: Implications for Environmental Justice, 1997 DET. C.L. REV. 1147, 1151 (1997).
26. See Gauna, supra note 8, at 394 (advocating that the showing of disproportionate exposure and availability of an alternative site should be valid grounds for permit denial).
27. 33 U.S.C. § 407 (1994); see United States v. Standard Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224 (1966) (holding that the Refuse Act, which addressed navigable waters, covered discharges of industrial wastes regardless of whether the wastes threatened navigation).
28. 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (1994); see Calvert Cliffs Coordinating Comm. v. United States Atomic Energy Comm'n, 449 F.2d 1109 (D.C. Cir. 1971) (finding that because the National Environmental Policy Act mandates informed decisionmaking, an agency's environmental impact statement was invalid when the agency was found not to have given that statement consideration).
29. 42 U.S.C. §§ 7470-7515 (1994); see Sierra Club v. Ruckelshaus, 344 F. Supp. 253 (D.D.C. 1972) (holding that EPA could not approve state implementation plans if those plans did not include provisions to prevent significant deterioration, even if those implementation plans met the national ambient air quality standards), affd by an equally divided court sub nom. Fri v. Sierra Club, 412 U.S. 541 (1973).
30. 33 U.S.C. § 1341(a)(1) (1994); see Public Util. Dist. No. 1 v. Washington Dep't of Ecology, 511 U.S. 700 (1994) (holding that a state may impose a minimum stream flow rate condition on a dam certification permit).
31. 42 U.S.C. § 6925(c)(3) (1994) ("Each permit issued under this section shall contain such terms and conditions as the Administrator (or the State) determines necessary to protect human health and the environment.").
32. 1995 WL 395962 (E.P.A. June 29, 1995).
33. 1996 WL 66307, at *13 (E.P.A. Feb. 15, 1996); 40 C.F.R. § 144.52(a)(9) (1998) ("The Director shall impose on a case by case basis such additional conditions as are necessary to prevent the migration of fluids into underground sources of drinking water.").
34. Very recent events also suggest that at least EPA may now be ready to undertake more ambitious steps to exercise its statutory authority in the permitting area to address environmental justice concerns. Just as this Article was going to press, EPA announced that it would be conducting a three-day meeting of EPA's National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, from November 30 to December 2, 1999, to discuss the issues raised and discussed in this Article. In addition to an overview of some of the statutory authorities described herein, other topics for panel discussions by representatives from EPA, state environmental agencies, tribal representatives, local government, industry, and environmental community organizations include: (1) Addressing the Real Life Dilemmas of Environmental Justice in Permitting: How Do We Respond to the Legacy of Land Use Impacts?; (2) The Current State of Environmental Justice and Permitting: What Are Its Limitations?; and (3) Opportunities for Improvement: What Factors Should EPA Consider to Help Ensure Environmental Justice in Permitting? The source of this information is a conversation one of the authors had with Mr. Charles Lee, Director of Policy, U.S. EPA Office of Environmental Justice, on October 7, 1999.
35. See Executive Order, supra note 15.
36. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-7 (1994).
37. Executive Order, supra note 15.
38. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-7 (1994).
39. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 7.10-7.135 (1998).
40. Id. § 7.25.
41. See INTERIM GUIDANCE, supra note 4; see also Bradford C. Mank, Environmental Justice and Title VI: Making Recipient Agencies Justify the Siting Decisions, 73 TULANE L. REV. 787 (1999).
42. INTERIM GUIDANCE, supra note 4, at 9 n. 12.
43. Id. at 6.
44. Id. at 12.
45. Id.
46. 40. See id. at 5 (specifying that such notice will be sent within 180 calendar days from the start of the complaint investigation). This notice may include the OCR's recommendations for the means to achieve voluntary compliance. See id.
47. INTERIM GUIDANCE, supra note 4, at 10.
48. Id. at 11. There is embedded within the concept of "cognizable impact" a critical threshold issue affecting the ultimate scope of Title VI's nondiscrimination mandate. Environmental justice advocates generally assert that the scope of relevant impacts for Title VI purposes extends to any impact of the facility being permitted. Hence, any discriminatory impacts that would be caused by the operating facility, ranging not only from human health and environmental effects, but extending to economic, social, and cultural effects, could be the potential basis of a Title VI discrimination claim. Not surprisingly, those in the regulated community (and most state regulators) favor a more restrictive view of what constitutes a "cognizable impact" under Title VI. Under the more restrictive approach, an impact would be cognizable if it were an actual impact on human health (or perhaps a substantial, credible risk thereof). EPA has not yet reached a final decision on this critical threshold issue. Because, however, it seems likely that the Agency will ultimately decide that the scope of cognizable impacts under Title VI is confined to those considerations that are relevant under the permitting agency's statutory grant of authority in deciding to grant (or not to grant or condition) the permit at issue, whether a permitting agency possesses the statutory authority to address environmental justice concerns takes on even more significance. If the relevant permitting provision allows the agency to consider risks of human health effects, not just actual human health effects, and socioeconomic factors, then those same risks and factors can theoretically form the basis of a discrimination claim even under a narrower Agency reading of what constitutes a "cognizable impact" under Title VI. See generally U.S. ENVTL. PROTECTION AGENCY, REPORT OF THE TITLE VI IMPLEMENTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE: NEXT STEPS FOR EPA, STATE, AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PROGRAMS 57-65 (1999).
49. INTERIM GUIDANCE, supra note 4, at 11.
50. Id. at 12 (emphasis added). The possibility of mitigation through supplemental mitigation projects raises a host of issues. At the outset, there is the threshold issue of whether any mitigation, short of either elimination of the disparate impact or a "justification" for the impact, can ever legitimately offset what would otherwise constitute an unlawful discriminatory impact. Assuming, however, that mitigation can play a valid, independent role, its applicability will turn greatly on the extent to which the proposed mitigation must address the effects giving rise to the disparate impact. There are two dimensions to this "nexus" inquiry. One relates to the extent to which the mitigation must address the same effects or at least, the same kind of effects. The other concerns the degree to which the mitigation must provide offsetting benefits. With respect to the latter, there is a further temporal inquiry related to the possibility that impacts could be tolerated today in exchange for the promise of benefits in the future (or vice versa). See generally REPORT OF THE TITLE VI IMPLEMENTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE, supra note 42, at 82-90.
51. See, e.g., INTERIM GUIDANCE, supra note 4, at 5 (recommending means for voluntary compliance); id. at 11-12 (encouraging adoption of mitigation to respond to concerns "outside those considerations ordinarily entertained by the permitting authority"); id. at 12 (rejecting "justification" if a less discriminating alternative is shown).
52. Id. at 12.
53. See id. at 6 (encouraging participation in informal resolution with complainant).
54. See Lazarus, supra note 12, at 4-6; see also Gauna, supra note 11, at 9. Such support may help complainants with little legal background understand how potential claims might fit into the existing network of environmental law.
55. INTERIM GUIDANCE, supra note 4, at 8.
56. 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q (1994).
57. Id. § 7409(b)(1).
58. See, e.g., American Lung Ass'n v. EPA, 134 F.3d 388, 389 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (quoting S. REP. NO. 91-1196, at 10 (1970)) ("Congress defined public health broadly. NAAQS must protect not only average healthy individuals, but also "sensitive citizens' - children, for example, or people with asthma, emphysema, or other conditions rendering them particularly vulnerable to air pollution."); Lead Indus. Ass'n v. EPA, 647 F.2d 1130, 1152 (D.C. Cir. 1980) ("[T]he [Senate] report is particularly careful to note that especially sensitive persons such as asthmatics and emphysematics are included within the group that must be protected.").
59. For example, EPA promulgated a lower NAAQS for lead because of the special sensitivities faced by some individuals, such as preschool-age children and pregnant women. See Lead Indus., 647 F.2d at 1141 (noting risks to preschool-age children and pregnant women).
60. 42 U.S.C. § 7408(a)(2)(A) (1994).
61. See John S. Applegate, Risk Assessment, Redevelopment, and Environmental Justice: Evaluating the Brownfield Bargain, 13 J. NAT. RESOURCES & ENVTL. L. 243, 280 (1997-1998) (discussing low-income and minority neighbors of brownfields as "extra-sensitive risk receptors" because of risk aggregation).
62. 42 U.S.C. § 7408 (1994).
63. Id. § 7409(d)(1).
64. See American Lung Ass'n v. EPA, 134 F.3d 388 (D.C. Cir. 1998).
65. 42 U.S.C. § 7410 (1994).
66. Id. § 7410(a)(2)(E).
67. EPA is apparently considering the possibility of this very linkage between the CAA and Title VI. See Letter from Mr. David P. Howekamp, Director, Air Division, USEPA Region IX, to Mr. Michael Kenny, Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board (Dec. 23, 1997) (copy on file with author) ("A complaint under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act has been filed with EPA regarding [Southern California Air Quality Management Division] Rule 1610. This complaint leads to uncertainty about whether or not the requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(E) are being met. Until this uncertainty has been resolved, EPA Region 9 will not take action on SCAQMD Rule 1610.").
68. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 7501-7515 (1994).
69. Id. § 7470(5) (emphasis added).
70. Id. § 7407(d)(3) & (4).
71. Id. § 7474(b)(1)(A) (emphasis added).
72. Id. § 7509(d).
73. Id. § 7411(f).
74. Id. § 7411j(1)(A)(iii) (emphasis added).
75. See id. §§ 7501-7515.
76. See id. § 7503.
77. Id. § 7503(a)(5) (emphasis added).
78. Id. § 7412(r)(7).
79. Id. § 7412(c)(3), (k).
80. Id. § 7412(c)(3) (emphasis added).
81. Id. 76. Id. § 7412(k)(3)(A).
82. See id. § 7412(k)(3)(B)(i).
83. Id. § 7412(k)(3)(c).
84. Id. § 7429(a)(3).
85. See id. § 7413.
86. Id. § 7413(b).
87. See Richard J. Lazarus, Pursuing "Environmental Justice": The Distributional Effects of Environmental Protection, 87 NW. U. L. REV. 787 (1993); see also ROBERT D. BOLLARD, DUMPING IN DIXIE: RACE, CLASS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (1990); Foster, supra note 18.
88. See Richard J. Lazarus, Pursuing "Environmental Justice": The Distributional Effects of Environmental Protection, 87 NW. U. L. REV. 787 (1993); see also ROBERT D. BOLLARD, DUMPING IN DIXIE: RACE, CLASS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (1990); Foster, supra note 18.
89. 42 U.S.C. § 7413(e)(1) (1994).
90. See id.
91. Id.
92. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Clean Air Act Stationary Source Civil Penalty Policy (last visited Nov. 15, 1998) 〈http://www.epa.gov/region4/ air/enforce/penpol.pdf〉.
93. Id. 88. 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(d) (1994).
94. Id. § 7661c.
95. Id. § 7661c(a).
96. Id. § 7604.
97. See supra notes 9-14 and accompanying text.
98. 42 U.S.C. § 7661c(b) (1994).
99. Id. § 7661c(c).
100. Id. § 7428.
101. Id. § 7428(a)(1).
102. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387 (1994) (Clean Water Act).
103. 33 U.S.C. § 1312(a) (1994).
104. Id. 100. Id. § 1314(l)(1)(D).
105. Id. § 1313; see PERCIVAL, supra note 19, at 936-45.
106. See PERCIVAL, supra note 19, at 937, 938-40.
107. Id. at 939.
108. See 40 C.F.R. § 131.12(a)(2) (1998); PERCIVAL, supra note 19, at 938.
109. The TMDL is the maximum amount of a pollutant that all sources can contribute to a water segment without causing a violation of the water quality standard. See 33 U.S.C. § 1313(d)(1)(C) (1994); PERCIVAL, supra note 19, at 943-45.
110. See generally Oliver A. Houck, TMDLs, Are We There Yet?: The Long Road Toward Water Quality-Based Regulation Under the Clean Water Act, 27 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. L. Inst.) 10,391 (1997).
111. 33 U.S.C. § 1318(a)(A) (1994).
112. Id. § 1318 (a)(B).
113. Id. § 1319(d), (g).
114. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. § 2604(f)(1) (1994) (requiring EPA to take measures that protect against "unreasonable risk of injury to health or environment" caused by manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of a chemical substance under the Toxic Substances Control Act); 42 U.S.C. § 6924(q)(2)(B) (1994) (allowing certain record keeping and labeling exceptions under RCRA for facilities where waste is burned with such efficiency that "protection of human health and environment is assured").
115. 33 U.S.C. § 1342 (1994).
116. Id. § 1342(a)(1) (emphasis added); see Bradley C. Bobertz, The Tools of Prevention: Opportunities for Promoting Pollution Prevention Under Federal Environmental Legislation, 12 VA. ENVTL. L.J. 1, 6-7 (1992) (discussing "such conditions as the Administrator determines are necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter" as a "generous grant of authority").
117. 42 U.S.C. §§ 6922(a), 6923(a), 6924(a) (1994).
118. Id. § 6924.
119. Id. § 6924(a).
120. Id. § 6924(a)(4).
121. See, e.g., id. § 6924(a)(6) (discussing considerations for owning and operating a facility).
122. See generally Conference, supra note 6, at 700 (addressing "concerns that people have about facility siting" and providing for "training of community representatives on how they can better participate in the process of clean-up around facilities that are in proximity to their communities").
123. 42 U.S.C. § 6924(o)(7) (1994).
124. Id. § 1325.
125. Id. § 1324(o)(7) (emphasis added).
126. See Executive Order, supra note 15.
127. See 42 U.S.C. § 6928 (1994) for federal enforcement regulations under RCRA.
128. See, e.g., id. § 7413(e)(1) (CAA civil penalty assessment); 33 U.S.C. § 1319(d) (1994) (CWA civil penalty determination).
129. 42 U.S.C. § 6928(a)(3) (1994) (describing civil penalty provisions for noncompliance under RCRA).
130. Id. § 6927(a).
131. Id. § 6927(b).
132. Many EPA documents are available only to those who travel to EPA regional offices where there are rooms where public records are made available. Even then, not all documents are readily comprehensible to a layperson, especially if English is not the reader's first language. Cf. El Pueblo Para el Aire y Agua Limpio v. County of Kings, [1999] 22 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. L. Inst.) 20,357, 20,358 (Cal. Super. Ct. Dec. 30, 1991) (reversing siting decision of toxic waste incinerator on grounds that public zoning process was publicized only in English to primarily Spanish speaking community concerns).
133. 42 U.S.C. § 6927(e)(1) (1994).
134. See, e.g., id. § 6925(g)(1), (j)(7)(A).
135. The Environmental Appeals Board is the administrative appeals tribunal of EPA. See Changes to Regulations to Reflect the Role of the New Environmental Appeals Board in Agency Adjudications, 57 Fed. Reg. 5320 (1992); see also William A. Tilleman, Environmental Appeal Boards: A Comparative Look at the United States, Canada, and England, 21 COLUM. J. ENVTL. L. 1, 13 (1996). EPA's Environmental Appeals Board and its environmental justice precedent are more fully discussed later in this Article. See infra Part IV.
136. The Environmental Appeals Board is the administrative appeals tribunal of EPA. See Changes to Regulations to Reflect the Role of the New Environmental Appeals Board in Agency Adjudications, 57 Fed. Reg. 5320 (1992); see also William A. Tilleman, Environmental Appeal Boards: A Comparative Look at the United States, Canada, and England, 21 COLUM. J. ENVTL. L. 1, 13 (1996). EPA's Environmental Appeals Board and its environmental justice precedent are more fully discussed later in this Article. See infra Part IV.
137. In re Chemical Waste Management, Inc., 1995 WL 395962 (E.P.A. June 29, 1995). This opinion is more fully discussed infra at text accompanying notes 216-237.
138. Id. at *5 (discussing RCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 6925(c)(3) (1994)).
139. Id. at *6.
140. Id.
141. See supra Part I.B.
142. See supra Parts I.A, I.B.
143. 42 U.S.C. § 6942(c)(9) (1994).
144. See generally William C. Scott, Environmental Justice: A New Era of Community Empowerment, Political Activism, and Civil Rights Litigation, 7 ENVTL. CLAIMS J. 5 (1994) (discussing Executive Order's recognition of national trends to concentrate high impact solid waste disposal facilities in low-income or minority communities).
145. 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f to 300j-26 (1994).
146. Id. § 300h-2(c)(4)(B)(vi).
147. Id. § 300g-1(b)(7)(C)(i).
148. Id. § 300g-1(b)(3)(B).
149. 3 C.F.R. 859 (1995).
150. 42 U.S.C. § 300g-4(a)(1)(B) (1994).
151. Id.
152. See Gauna, supra note 11, at 32-37 (discussing incentives for facilities to pollute in low-income and minority communities where penalties for noncompliance are significantly lower).
153. See supra Parts II.A to II.D and text accompanying notes.
154. 15 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2692 (1994).
155. Id. §§ 2665(a)(6), 2666(i)(2). Although the assistance provisions of the other laws do not include such a mandate, neither do they expressly preclude such a preference, and based on the Executive Order on Environmental Justice, EPA plainly has the authority to provide it.
156. Id. § 2603(b)(2)(A).
157. Id. § 2601(c) (emphasis added).
158. Executive Order, supra note 15.
159. 7 U.S.C. §§ 136-136y (1994).
160. Id. § 136a(a).
161. See John Megara, The Rose Industry Exception for Early Entry Into Pesticide Treated Greenhouses: Romance in Regulation, 25 B.C. ENVTL. AFF. L. Rev. 941, 945-46 (1998); Ivette Perfecto & Baldemar Velasquez, Farmworkers: Among the Least Protected, EPA J., Mar./Apr. 1992, at 13.
162. See John Megara, The Rose Industry Exception for Early Entry Into Pesticide Treated Greenhouses: Romance in Regulation, 25 B.C. ENVTL. AFF. L. Rev. 941, 945-46 (1998); Ivette Perfecto & Baldemar Velasquez, Farmworkers: Among the Least Protected, EPA J., Mar./Apr. 1992, at 13.
163. 7 U.S.C. § 136a(a) (1994).
164. See generally id.
165. Each EPA Regional Office is responsible within selected states for executing EPA's programs. These, in turn, have programs for specific areas or issues in environmental protection, such as air protection or hazardous site cleanup. The environmental justice permitting protocols are informal or formal procedural guidelines established by the programs for incorporating environmental justice concerns in the permitting process.
166. See U.S. Envtl. Protection Agency, Waste Programs Environmental Justice Program-Specific Issues: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (visited Nov. 17, 1998) 〈http://www.epa.gov/swersops/ej/pdf/rcra.pdf〉.
167. See id.
168. See id.
169. See id.
170. See id.
171. See id.
172. U.S. ENVTL. PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 5, REVISED REGION 5 INTERIM GUIDELINES FOR IDENTIFYING AND ADDRESSING A POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE CASE (1998) (on file with author). This document may also be found at Environmental Justice Regional Team, U.S. Envtl. Protection Agency, Region 5 Interim Guidelines for Identifying and Addressing a Potential Environmental Justice Case (visited July 7, 1999) 〈http://www.epa.gov/envjustice/ejguidelines.html〉.
173. U.S. ENVTL. PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 5, REVISED REGION 5 INTERIM GUIDELINES FOR IDENTIFYING AND ADDRESSING A POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE CASE (1998) (on file with author). This document may also be found at Environmental Justice Regional Team, U.S. Envtl. Protection Agency, Region 5 Interim Guidelines for Identifying and Addressing a Potential Environmental Justice Case (visited July 7, 1999) 〈http://www.epa.gov/envjustice/ejguidelines.html〉.
174. Id. section VI.
175. See id.
176. Id.
177. Id. section VI, pt. I. The screening guidelines portion of the Region V Interim Guidelines cautions that an impacted community may extend beyond the community in the location of the source and encourages an initial determination of the area of impact based on knowledge of the type and effect of a particular source. The guidelines next advise state agencies to make the results of a demographic analysis publicly available once they are obtained and to contact the division tribal coordinator if an impacted American Indian population is identified. Finally, the guidelines refer state agencies to Section VII of the Interim Guidelines for an "Environmental Justice and Community Involvement Protocol."
178. Id. section VI, pt. II. Three stages of review are outlined in this section of the Interim Guidelines: (A) how to "determine whether there are any other current or pending permits in this area administered by the same Division," (B) how to "determine whether there are any other current or pending permits in this area administered by other Divisions," and finally, (C) how to "consider other environmental stresses which may contribute to disproportionate effects in the community." Id.
179. Id. section VI. pt. III. In an attempt to cushion state agencies from procedural delays, the Interim Guidelines also warn that "self-identification as [environmental justice] by a non-[environmental justice] community should not be allowed to unduly delay EPA's permitting decision." Id.
180. 173. Id. section VI, pt. IV.
181. The "Environmental Justice and Community Involvement Protocol" section of the Interim Guidelines presents four major steps: (1) identifying stakeholders, (2) preparing community involvement plans or communications strategies, (3) hosting public meetings and availability sessions, and (4) following-up after public meetings. Id. section VII.
182. U.S. Envtl. Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division Environmental Justice Implementation Plan FY98 (visited July 7, 1999) 〈http://www.epa.gov/reg5oair/ej/98plan.htm〉 [hereinafter Implementation Plan].
183. See, e.g., In re Genesee Power Station, L.P., 1993 WL 484880 (E.P.A. Sept. 8, 1993) (Genesee I), modified by In re Genesee Power Station, L.P., Order on Motion for Clarification, 1993 WL 473846 (E.P.A. Oct. 22, 1993) (Genesee II).
184. Implementation Plan, supra note 175.
185. SAM AGPAWA & ROY FORD, EPA REGION IX AIR DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE STRATEGY 3 (July 27, 1998) (document in development) (on file with author) [hereinafter STRATEGY].
186. Id. at 6.
187. Id.
188. 40 C.F.R. §§ 7.10-7.135 (1998).
189. U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 1.
190. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4370(e) (1994).
191. Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q (1994).
192. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4601-4655 (1994) (amended 1987).
193. North American Free Trade Agreement, Dec. 17, 1992, Can.-Mex.-U.S., 32 I.L.M. 289.
194. Agreement on Cooperation for the Protection and Improvement of the Environment in the Border Area, Aug. 4, 1983, U.S.-Mex., T.I.A.S. No. 10,827.
195. STRATEGY, supra note 178, at 6.
196. Id.
197. The Environmental Appeals Board is an administrative "court" within EPA, established in 1992, to handle the Agency's administrative appeals process. Changes to Regulations to Reflect the Role of the New Environmental Appeals Board in Agency Adjudications, 57 Fed. Reg. at 5320; see also Tilleman, supra note 131, at 13-14 (describing form and function of Environmental Appeals Board).
198. See Genesee I, 1993 WL 484880. This decision was modified by Genesee II, 1993 WL 473846.
199. See In re Knauf Fiber Glass, GmbH, 1999 WL 64235 (E.P.A. Feb. 4, 1999).
200. Executive Order, supra note 15.
201. See Genesee I, 1993 WL 484880; Genesee II, 1993 WL 473846.
202. See generally In re Envotech, L.P., 1996 WL 66307 (E.P.A. Feb. 15, 1996); In re Puerto Rico Electric Power Auth., 1995 WL 794466 (E.P.A. Dec. 11, 1995); In re Chemical Waste Management, Inc., 1995 WL 395962 (E.P.A. June 29, 1995).
203. See, e.g.. In re Knauf Fiber Glass, GmbH, 1999 WL 64235 (E.P.A. Feb. 4, 1999); In re Environmental Disposal Systems, Inc., 1998 WL 723912 (E.P.A. Oct. 14, 1998); In re Ash Grove Cement Co., 1997 WL 732000 (E.P.A. Nov. 14, 1997); In re EcoElectrica, L.P., 1997 WL 160751 (E.P.A. Apr. 8, 1997).
204. Genesee I, 1993 WL 484880.
205. Executive Order, supra note 15.
206. 42 U.S.C. § 7475 (1994).
207. See Genesee I, 1993 WL 484880, at *4.
208. See id.
209. See id. at *6.
210. See id. at *7.
211. See id. at *6.
212. See id. at *5.
213. Id.
214. See id. at *6.
215. See id.
216. Id. 210. Genesee II, 1993 WL 473846.
217. Id. at *1.
218. See id.
219. See id. at *2.
220. Executive Order, supra note 15.
221. See, e.g.. In re Envotech, L.P., 1996 WL 66307, at *11 (E.P.A. Feb. 15, 1996); In re Puerto Rico Electric Power Auth., 1995 WL 794466, at *3 (E.P.A. Dec. 11, 1995); In re Chemical Waste Management, Inc., 1995 WL 395962, at *8-9 (E.P.A. June 29, 1995).
222. 1995 WL 395962 (E.P.A. June 29, 1995).
223. 42 U.S.C. § 6925 (1994).
224. See Chemical Waste Management, 1995 WL 395962, at *3.
225. See id. at *4.
226. See id. at *3.
227. See id.
228. Id. at *4.
229. Id. at *5 (emphasis added).
230. Id.
231. 42 U.S.C. § 6925(c)(3) (1994).
232. Chemical Waste Management, 1995 WL 395962, at *6.
233. Id.
234. Id.
235. Id.
236. Id. (footnote omitted).
237. Id.
238. Id.
239. Id.
240. Id. at *5 (emphasis added).
241. See id. at *6.
242. See id.
243. See id.
244. 1995 WL 794466 (E.P.A. Dec. 11, 1995).
245. See id.
246. Id. at *3 (citation omitted).
247. Id.
248. See id. at *2 (describing petition as a "two page letter" "lacking in specificity").
249. See, e.g., id.; Genesee I, 1993 WL 484880; Genesee II, 1993 WL 473846.
250. Puerto Rico Electric Power Auth., 1995 WL 794466, at *2 (citing 40 C.F.R. § 124.19(a)).
251. See id. at *2 (rejecting petition as "so lacking in specificity as to why the Region's decision is erroneous that petitioner has provided the Board with no basis for review").
252. 1996 WL 66307 (E.P.A. Feb. 15, 1996).
253. See id.
254. See id. at *2.
255. See id. at *7-11.
256. See id. at *11.
257. See id. at *26.
258. See id. at *8.
259. Id.
260. See id. at *9.
261. Id.
262. Id. at *13 (citing Chemical Waste Management, 1995 WL 395962, at *9).
263. Id. at *14.
264. 40 C.F.R. § 144.52(a)(9) (1998).
265. 42 U.S.C. § 6925(c)(3) (1994).
266. Envotech, 1996 WL 66307, at *14.
267. Id. (footnotes omitted).
268. Id.
269. Id.
270. See id. at *15.
271. See id.
272. See id. at *14.
273. 1995 WL 395962, at *9 (citing 40 C.F.R. pt. 124 and RCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 6925(c)(3) (1994)).
274. See Envotech, 1996 WL 66307, at *14.
275. Id. at *14 n.25.
276. See id. at *14 (noting that such "exercise of discretion" is a "matter of policy" in implementing the Executive Order).
277. See id.
278. 1997 WL 160751 (E.P.A. Apr. 8, 1997).
279. See id. at *9-10.
280. See id.
281. Id. at *9 (quoting the Responsiveness Summary at 5).
282. Executive Order, supra note 15, § 5-5.
283. EcoElectrica, 1997 WL 160751, at *9 (quoting Committee's Petition at 4).
284. See id. at *9.
285. 1995 WL 395962, at *6.
286. 1996 WL 66307, at *26.
287. EcoElectrica, 1997 WL 160751, at *10 n.17.
288. See id.
289. See id. at *9 n. 15 (quoting Chemical Waste Management, 1995 WL 395962, at *11).
290. 1995 WL 395962, at *15.
291. 1996 WL 66307, at *28.
292. EcoElectrica, 1997 WL 160751, at *9 n. 15.
293. 1997 WL 732000 (E.P.A. Nov. 14, 1997).
294. 1998 WL 723912 (E.P.A. Oct. 14, 1998).
295. 1997 WL 732000, at *4-5.
296. See id.
297. See Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and Industrial Furnaces, 56 Fed. Reg. 7134, 7171 (1991) (codified at 40 C.F.R. pts. 260, 261, 264-66, 270, 271).
298. See Ash Grove Cement, 1997 WL 732000, at *6.
299. See id.
300. U.S. ENVTL. PROTECTION AGENCY, STRATEGY FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE MINIMIZATION AND COMBUSTION (1994) [hereinafter COMBUSTION STRATEGY].
301. The Region actually claimed that it did not rely on the Combustion Strategy, but that its actions were merely consistent with the Combustion Strategy. The Appeals Board rejected this, stating that it is "clear that the Combustion Strategy was an important factor in the Region's decision to conduct risk assessment." Ash Grove Cement, 1997 WL 732000, at *10.
302. COMBUSTION STRATEGY, supra note 294, at 23.
303. See Ash Grove Cement, 1997 WL 732000, at *9.
304. See id. at *10 (relying on In re Environmental Waste Control, Inc., 1994 EPA App. LEXIS 20, at *23-24 (E.P.A. May 13, 1994)).
305. See id. at *11.
306. Id.
307. See id. at *18.
308. Id.
309. See id.
310. Id. (citing EcoElectrica, 1997 WL 160751, at *18 n.17).
311. See id. at *2.
312. Id.
313. 1998 WL 723912 (E.P.A. Oct. 14, 1998).
314. See id. at *10.
315. See id. at *16-17.
316. INTERIM GUIDELINES, supra note 166.
317. See Environmental Disposal Systems, 1998 WL 723912, at *17-18.
318. See id. at *16-18.
319. Id. at *18 (relying on Envotech, 1996 WL 66307, at *15 and Chemical Waste Management, 1995 WL 395962, at *9).
320. See id.
321. See id. at *18-19.
322. See id. at *19.
323. 1999 WL 64235 (E.P.A. Feb. 4, 1999).
324. See id. at *68.
325. See id. at *69.
326. See id.
327. Id. (citing Memorandum from R. Michael Kussow to Knauf Fiberglass File (June 3, 1998)).
328. Id. at *70.
329. See id.
330. See id.
331. 1999 WL 345288 (E.P.A. May 27, 1999).
332. Id. at *2-3.
333. Id. at *1-2.
334. See supra text accompanying notes 197-324.
335. 1999 WL 345288, at *18-19.
336. See id.
337. Id. at *19.
338. The Appeals Board reviewed the "environmental justice analysis" performed by the Region, the steps the Region took "to require that many elements of the air quality analyses performed during the permit process be reconfirmed after the permit is issued," the additional monitoring requirements included by the Region as permit conditions, the supplemental information distributed by the Region to the community in response to community public health concerns, and the "expanded public comment opportunities" undertaken by the Region, including "steps to ensure that comments could be received in either English or Spanish." Id. at *19-20.
339. See supra text accompany notes 197-209.
340. See, e.g., Environmental Disposal Systems, 1998 WL 723912, at *17-18; Ash Grove Cement Co., 1997 WL 732000, at *11; EcoEtectrica, 1997 WL 160751, at *9-10.
341. See, e.g., Knauf Fiber Glass, GmbH, 1999 WL 64235, at *69.
342. As previously noted, EPA has recently begun to explore more formally its use of some of the statutory permitting authorities discussed in this Article. See supra note 28.