Tribal Chief 

Brenda Commander 

Tribal Council 

Crystal Tucker 

Mary Tomah 

Linda Raymond 

John Flewelling 

Clarissa Sabattis 

Suzanne Desiderio 

HOULTON BAND OF MALISEET INDIANS 

88 Bell Road 

Littleton, ME 04730 

Administration 

Telephone: 

(207)532-4273 

In State: 

1-800-564-8524 

Out-of-State: 

1-800-545-8524 

Fax: 

(207) 532-2660 

12.10.15 

Irina Myers ! 

USEPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) ! 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Mail Code: 7408M 

Washington, DC 20460 

AA 

l ~± 

RE: Response to Tribal Consultation, August 27, 2015, Notification of Consultation and Coordination on 

TSCA Work Plan Chemical Problem Formulation & Initial Assessment and Data Needs Assessment for 

Flame Retardants (FR) Clusters 

Dear Ms. Myers: 

On behalf of the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, a federally recognized Indian Tribe of 1607 

members located in northern Maine, I respectfully submit these comments regarding the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) Work Plan for the chemicals identified in the foliowiniz table: 

Chemical Cluster pocket Number 

Tetrabromobisphenol A EPA—HQ—OPPT-2014-0730 

Chlorinated Phosphate Esters EPA—HQ-OPPT-2015-0068 

Cyclic Aliphatic Bromides EPA—HQ-OPPT-2015-0081 

Brominated Phthalates EPA—HQ—OPPT-2014-a491 

EPA Notice of Consultation and Coordination, Enclosures, "Consultation Information, ° 

08/27/2015, pp. 4. 

As Chief of my Tribe, I am charged with the responsibitity of protecting the health and welfare of my 

Tribe. We have worked for many years to improve the Indoor environments of our members through 

a BIA housing improvement program and in HUD low-income housing located on tribal land. One year 

we received surplus trailers built to address housing needs created by Hurricane Katrina and spent a 

summer airing them out to reduce the elevated levels of formaldehyde we measured there. Here in 

northern Maine, winters can be long and cold, and our tribal citizens must spend a lot of time indoors. 

Our Health Clinic staff observes a high rate of respiratory disease within our community. 

I also know that toxic substances in commercial products enter the environment and expose our 

members to unacceptable health risks through traditional cultural practices. Over the past 20 years, we 

have conducted several assessments and found elevated levels of inercury, dioxin, PCBs and other toxic 

substances in culturally important foods we fish, hunt or gather. 
I understand you are working to take into account the high rate of fish consumption by tribal people 

in preparing risk assessments for the four subject flame retardant clusters. Thank you for that. 

However, I also understand that there is much more that needs to be done in considering the high risk 

to health and life of the first peoples of tribal nations by chemicals regulated under the Toxics 

Substance Control Act. 

Please take into strong consideration the technical comments described below: 

The Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians supports EPA's inclusion of fish consumption amounts by 

subsistence fishers and their children when evaluating exposure pathways of the "CPE" flame 

retardant clusters. We specifically endorse and support EPA's commitment to account for the highend fish consumption of subsistence fishers—including pregnant women, children and adults—the 

majority of whom are the tribal population. We agree with the need to evaluate the hazard 

endpoints that go beyond cancer risk and include target organ effects, reproductive and 

developmental effects and neurotoxicity. (CPE Problem Formulation, 08/1S, pp. 32 and 34) 

Please also include fish consumption rates of subsistence fishers in your risk assessment work on the 

three other fiame retardant clusters. For instance, in the TBBPA Problem Formulation, EPA plans to 

only use consumption rates for recreational fishers, does not consider exposure from backyard open 

burning which is common in rural reservations and villages, and does not consider other traditional 

subsistence foods known to bio-accumulate these chemicals, such as marine mammals and birds. 

• Additionally, regarding fish consumption and the population scenario, we support the tribal population 

scenario as the most appropriate to use for risk assessments by EPA, because EPA's own rules indicate 

that they are to protect the population of highest risk. As identified in the problem formulation for the 

HBCD cluster, fish consumption rates for subsistence fishers at 142.5 grams per day need to be used in 

aggregate exposure for those who rely heavily on locally sourced fish. Tribal people are at the highest 

risk due to their known high-level consumption of fish, marine mammals, and birds. 

• In terms of cumulative risk, we strongly encourage EPA to look at the overall body burden of chemicals 

and the interaction of the flame retardants with other chemicals. Tribal people are especially exposed 

to larger volumes of chemicals due to their traditional diets and their geographic locations in relation to 

manufacturing and pollutant deposition. Studies on PCB's, another type of flame retardant, showed 

their synergism with other bromine-based chemicals. 

• Finally, we reminds EPA that resource use—both types of resources and volume of use—are 

important factors in risk assessments that EPA must not overlook any longer. For example, high-level 

use of local plants by tribal people may put them at risk due to dermal exposure when harvesting the 

plants and exposure by ingestion or inhalation when eating, mouthing or burning the plants for 

traditional uses. 

I appreciate this opportunity to comment on your draft plan re: data gathering of data and 

preparation of problem formulations for these four flame retardant clusters. 

Woliwon 

_?"c,"zda C-,,.,,,"~ l— 

Chief Brenda Commander