# PLAN EJ 2014



# SCIENCE TOOLS DEVELOPMENT

DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Led by

Office of Research and Development

Plan EJ 2014 is EPA’s roadmap to integrate

environmental justice (EJ) into its programs and policies.

2014 represents the 20 th anniversary of the signing of

Executive Order 12898 on environmental justice.Comments regarding the Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan can be

submitted on Regulations.gov

.

For more information on Plan EJ 2014, visit the US EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice

website at: http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/plan

‐ ej/index.html

.Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011



### INTRODUCTION

Under Plan EJ 2014, EPA has committed to building a strong scientific foundation for supporting

environmental justice (EJ) and conducting disproportionate impact analysis, particularly methods

to appropriately characterize and assess cumulative impacts. These efforts will help to ensure that

EPA brings the best science to decision

‐ making around environmental justice issues.

This Science Implementation Plan discusses overarching goals, strategies, and activities, including a

science and research agenda for the Agency. The science and research activities described in this

plan build upon discussions and recommendations from EPA’s Science of Disproportionate Impacts

Analysis Symposium (March 17

‐ 19, 2010) and an EJ regulatory analysis technical workshop (June 9

‐

10, 2010). The March 2010 Symposium was the principal event for the Agency to identify science

needs for environmental justice and stimulate innovative research to meet those needs.



### 1.1 Goals

Our goal is that, within five years, EPA will substantially support and conduct research that

employs participatory principles and integrates social and physical sciences aimed at

understanding and illuminating solutions to environmental and health inequalities among low

income, minority, indigenous, underserved and overburdened populations and communities in the

US. All Agency decisions will make use of the information, data, and analytic tools produced. Our

goal has two specific elements:

1. Improve the scientific basis for environmental regulatory and policy decisions in order to

ensure that everyone enjoys the same degree of protection from environmental and health

hazards and equal access to the decision

‐ making process to have a healthy environment in

which to live, learn, and work.

2. In order to increase the relevance of science to policy

‐ making, transform how EPA formulates,

designs, prioritizes, conducts, and supports the scientific research enterprise towards more

citizen participatory, inclusive, co

‐ production of knowledge, and collaborative processes.



### 1.2 Strategies

We have five major strategies to achieve our goals.

1. Apply integrated trans

‐ disciplinary and community

‐ based participatory research approaches

with a focus on addressing multi

‐ media, cumulative impacts and equity in environmental

health.

2. Create mechanisms to incorporate perspectives from community

‐ based organizations and

community leaders into EPA research agendas and engaging in collaborative partnerships with

them on science and research to address environmental justice.

3. Leverage partnerships with other federal agencies on issues of research, policy and action to

address health disparities.

4. Build and strengthen the technical capacity of Agency scientists on conducting research in

partnership with impacted communities and translating research results to inform change.

5. Build and strengthen technical capacity of community

‐ based organizations and community

environmental justice and health leaders.

1Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011



### 1.3 Discussion

Multiple aspects of the physical environment in which we live, learn, work, and play can put

certain groups of people “at higher risk.” Also, individuals and groups may experience

disadvantages related to their gender, lifestage, socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, disability,

education, geographic location, and/or other characteristics historically linked to discrimination or

exclusion. This complex interaction between the physical environment and other conditions of

social disadvantage contributes to known social disparities in environmental health outcomes.

Since 1994, as stated in the Executive Order 12898, it has been incumbent upon all federal

agencies including EPA to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health

or environmental effects on minority and low income populations that may result from their

programs, policies, and activities. The concept of disproportionate environmental health impacts

and burdens refers to the finding that some populations systematically experience higher levels of

risks and impacts than the general population. This perspective recognizes that multiple factors,

including social, psychosocial, economic, physical, chemical and biological determinants may

contribute to disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental impacts.

The importance of science in environmental decision

‐ making at the EPA emphasizes the need for

data and information that is sound and defensible, reproducible, and informative. For

environmental justice stakeholders, it is even more important that the science underlying EPA’s

decisions appropriately accounts for the multiple exposures to chemical stressors and cumulative

impacts from such multiple exposures that they experience in their communities. Further, the

social/real world context in which exposures to environmental contaminants occur also needs to

be explicitly considered and reflected in EPA’s scientific research and analysis as emerging

evidence demonstrates that social context may enhance the toxic effects of both single and

multiple environmental contaminant exposures. Such considerations require new models for

assessing the toxicity of environmental hazards, advanced methods for analyzing complex

interactions between multiple stressors, and enhanced access to community level wisdom and

resources.

These emerging needs indicate that new ways of conducting scientific inquiry to inform

environmental decision are needed at EPA. Such expansion and advancement of EPA’s scientific

agenda, methods, models, research inquiry approaches, and information resources is necessary

for the agency to adequately address environmental justice stakeholder’s concerns about

environment, sustainability, and health inequalities. These advancements take on additional

importance when viewed in the context of the Agency’s mandate to achieve environmental justice

as required by Executive Order 12898, and its ability to effectively contribute towards Healthy

People 2020’s overarching goals to achieve health equity, eliminate health disparities, improve the

health of all groups, and create social and physical environments that promote good health for all.

The goals, strategies and activities for this Implementation Plan build upon the science

recommendations articulated at the Strengthening Environmental Justice Research and Decision

‐ Making: A Symposium on the Science of Disproportionate Environmental Health Impacts and the

subsequent “100

‐ Day Challenge” Report developed by the Agency in response to those

recommendations. A consistent theme throughout the March 2010 symposium presentations and

2Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

discussions was the linkages between science and policy. These discussions were framed within

the context of identifying research and scientific needs that are necessary to ensure that

environmental justice concerns and social disparities in environmental health are incorporated in

EPA’s decisions for the purpose of advancing EPA policy on environmental justice. Symposium

participants suggested several actions for EPA to take in order to reduce data gaps in the area of

environmental justice, overcome limitations in the theories and methods for conducting research

on environmental health disparities and particularly research supported by the federal

government, and limitations in practice of risk assessment at the EPA. The science

recommendations from environmental justice advocates and other stakeholders are captured in

Appendix C.

In addition, we draw from several conceptual frameworks published in the last few years that

relate environmental justice and health disparities to upstream, structural determinants of health

(CSDH 2008; Gee and Payne

‐ Sturges 2004; Krieger 2001; Habermann and Gouveia 2008; Morello

‐

Frosch 2002; Morello

‐ Frosch and Shenassa 2006; Schulz et al 2002; Wakefield and Baxter 2010).

We have adapted the Wakefield and Baxter systems framework of “compounded disadvantage

and impacts on well

‐ being” to illustrate a comprehensive yet simple diagramming of key concepts

see below).

Environment Health & Society Conceptual Framework

Social/Institutional Arrangements

e.g, Racism/discrimination;

Poverty/access to resources;

Land use decisions; economic systems;

Legal frameworks Social Standing and Identity

Health

Status Human/

Ecosystem

Well-Being Physical & Social

Environments Allostatic Load/Weathering

May or may not be causally linkedSocial ProcessesOutcomes Age Social Class Race/ethnicity Gender

3Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

This conceptual framework, adapted from Wakefield and Baxter, demonstrates the complex

connections between different environments and social processes on both human health and the

environment. Social standing and individual identity serve as two dimensions that are influenced

by social and institutional arrangements such as public and private sectors, community

‐ based

organizations, zoning, land use decisions, economic systems, residential segregation and

education. Moreover, these categories also shape a person’s health status, just as those same

institutions and their arrangements influence physical and social environments. Where those

environments interact with the health of individuals, the overall wellbeing of both people and the

ecosystem can be measured. Conversely, health and environment status can influence, for

example, the social and institutional arrangements, which can lead to both negative and positive

outcomes cumulatively impacting the health of a community. The cumulative impact has greater

and farther

‐ reaching consequences than any one factor or event alone; this is particularly evident

among vulnerable low

‐ income and underserved populations. In order to determine the positive

and negative health and environmental impacts during some of the social processes described

above, the scientific research requires both quantitative and qualitative approaches.



### 1.4 Organizational Structure

The specific science and research actions described in Section 2.0 were developed through a cross

‐

Agency workgroup for the 100

‐ Day Report follow

‐ up to the March 2010 Symposium.

Representation on the workgroup included Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), Office of Chemical

Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP), Office of Policy (OP), Office of Solid Waste and

Emergency Response (OSWER), Office of Water (OW), Office of Research and Development (ORD),

and Regions 6,7, 8, and 10.

Going forward ORD, as lead for the Science Tools Development Implementation Plan, proposes to

establish a more permanent structure within ORD, which we are planning to name the

Environment Health and Society working group. This working group will serve as the ORD science

experts and points of contact on environmental justice, environmental disparities and

disproportionate impacts science issues. ORD’s National Center for Environmental Research

(NCER) and Office of Science Policy (OSP) will jointly sponsor and co

‐ chair this new working group.

The Co

‐ chairs will also lead the Plan EJ 2014 Science Tools Development workgroup and monitor

the Science Implementation Plan for Plan EJ 2014. ORD is considering re

‐ constituting the intra

‐

agency group on science for the 100

‐ Day Report to serve as the Plan EJ 20114 Science Group. ORD

will coordinate with all the Plan EJ 2014 Implementation workgroups to ascertain how current

activities can be better tailored or leveraged to address Plan EJ 2014 work groups' science needs

under the five strategies and to identify future science activities.

4Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011



### 2.0 IMPLEMENTATION

Below we describe several major science and research activities under the 5 strategies. These

activities will be carried out with existing resources, provided these resources remain available.



### 2.1 Activities

Strategy 1: Apply integrated trans

­ disciplinary and community

­ based

participatory research approaches with a focus on addressing multi

­ media,

cumulative impacts and equity in environmental health.

Activity 1.1 : Establish an Integrated Trans

‐ Disciplinary ORD Research Program on Environment

and Community Health

– Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program

The new Administration at EPA and in particular in the EPA Office of Research and Development

(ORD) recognize that fragmented research programs cannot solve 21 st century environmental

challenges including disparities in environmental health. ORD is leading the way by integrating 12

research programs that were mostly media

‐ specific into 4 trans

‐ disciplinary programs aligned with

the new EPA Strategic Plan. As part of this re

‐ structuring ORD is fully establishing and supporting a

new integrated trans

‐ disciplinary research program on environment and community health known

as “Sustainable and Healthy Communities.” This program seeks to adopt a more holistic view of

environment and health as its conceptual framework, take on research projects that address many

of the topics raised at the Symposium, and conduct research in a manner consistent with

principles of community

‐ based participatory research. Both ORD intramural and extramural

resources from existing human health, land, sustainability and ecosystems research programs

would be directed to support this new program. For this new research program to be successful,

implementation of many of the recommended actions on capacity building within ORD and

incorporating community perspectives is critical.

As part of the new Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program (SHCRP), new EPA

STAR grant solicitations are being considered to support Tribal community environmental health

research and to establish Centers of Excellence on Environment and Health Disparities to examine

the joint impacts of social and physical environmental conditions, processes and systems on health

in collaboration with the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) National Center on Minority Health

and Health Disparities (NCMHD).

Benefits to EPA Stakeholder Communities

 ORD’s new research program is responsive to suggestions from stakeholders to create and

institute new scientific research approach to develop a more holistic understanding of the

environmental and health, and also to integrate perspectives from community residents and

leaders, community

‐ based NGOs, and community health and environmental quality advocates

in the development of EPA’s scientific research agendas as well as in data collection, conduct

of risk and exposure assessments, and risk management decisions.

 The Hallmark of the integrated proposed trans

‐ disciplinary approach is “systems thinking”

which seeks to understand the complex interactions between social, natural and built

environmental systems, conditions and policies that impact human health and wellbeing. To

5Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

explicitly address environmental justice concerns, this program will need to direct its attention

to how these complex interactions result in unequal environmental health conditions or

disproportionate impacts among (diverse) disadvantaged population groups, communities,

neighborhoods and individuals. Anticipated outcomes of this program include new information

and tools to support more holistic environmental decision

‐ making at national, regional, state.

tribal and local levels. It is anticipated that this program will also inform strategies for

alleviating systemic drivers of racial and socio

‐ economic disparities in environmentally

mediated health outcomes (environmental health) and access to healthy environments.

Impacts on EPA Programs and Activities

 Paul Anastas, Assistant Administrator for ORD, announced the re

‐ structuring of ORD’s 12

media

‐ specific research programs into four integrated programs in Fall 2010. The Sustainable

and Healthy Communities Research Program is an important part of this effort. This new

program is currently in the early stages of organizing and development. Input from EPA

programs offices will be sought in early 2011. Then in late spring, input from outside

stakeholder will be solicited. Bringing together diversity of disciplines to plan and implement

integrated research programs will make EPA more effective at developing sustainable solutions

to complex, 21st century environmental problems. It will create a culture where different

disciplines are encouraged to find innovative solutions and will make EPA research more

timely, relevant and responsive to the short, medium and longer term needs of our partners

and stakeholders. Several external advisory committees continue to recommend this

approach.

Timeframe

 Establish and fully support a Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program. (FY

2011)

 Incorporate ideas and concerns from stakeholders and representatives from

disproportionately impacted communities and populations. (FY 2011)

 Issue joint Request for Applications (RFA) or other funding mechanism to collaborate with NIH

National Institute Minority Health and Health Disparities to establish Centers of Excellence on

Environment and Health Disparities (FY 2012)

Activity 1.2 : Develop technical guidance, analytic methods, tools and data to advance the

integration of environmental justice in EPA decision

‐ making

EPA’s regulatory decision

‐ making is informed by scientific data and analysis. To facilitate the

process of using scientific data, EPA scientists and decision

‐ makers, as well as communities,

community advocates and other stakeholders, require consistent and systematic guidance on how

to conduct these analyses. They also depend on scientifically valid tools and methods, as well as

information communicated by environmental data. While the guidance, methods, tools and data

for advancing environmental health protection has been an area of significant investment by the

EPA, these tools of the trade have not been fully adapted or developed to specifically address

environmental justice issues.

EPA’s commitment to integrating environmental justice in all of its decisions, policies and

programs has resuted in investments to develop technical guidance, analytic methods, tools, and

6Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

data. For example, EPA is in the process of developing guidance entitled “Technical Guidance for

Incorporating Environmental Justice into Rulemaking Activities.” This document is expected to aid

EPA staff and managers in incorporating environmental justice into EPA’s analytical frameworks

such as risk assessment, and economic analysis, and other scientific and policy assessments. This

guidance will incorporate approaches to evaluate cumulative impacts of regulatory options.

Meanwhile, EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) is piloting several kinds of analyses that are

useful in informing managers about the potential EJ implications of air rulemakings. OAR is

evaluating and testing several analytical approaches including: (1) proximity

‐ based socio

‐ demographic analyses, which highlight the characteristics of those living closest to sources of air

pollution; (2) exposure and health risk modeling that breaks out data based on socio

‐ demographic

characteristics (e.g., race, income); and (3) benefits mapping that shows the distribution of

benefits of a regulation to various socio

‐ demographic groups. OAR expects to learn from their

experiences in using these approaches. OAR will revise its methods accordingly, as it seeks to do a

better of job of identifying rules that may present EJ concerns and to understand more fully the

implications of air rules on minority, low

‐ income and indigenous populations. OAR’s experiences

will help to inform the overall Agency effort to develop the Technical Guide.

EPA’s ORD is also developing an Environmental Quality Index tool for measuring county level

environmental quality, which will increase understanding about how multiple stressors

simultaneously contribute to health disparities in minority, low

‐ income and indigenous

populations.

ORD plans to evaluate existing tools developed by ORD scientists with respect to appropriateness

and ease of use for lay experts in communities. To improve access to Agency tools, ORD plans to

work with stakeholders to develop a series of free regionally

‐ based trainings on EPA information

and assessment tools. ORD also plans to partner with EPA regional offices, sister federal agencies

and consortia of EJ/community health non

‐ profits and community

‐ based organizations to host

community

‐ based tools workshops, Regional Tools Summits. There will be a specific focus on tools

to evaluate environmental justice and health disparities policies and programs.

ORD proposes to continue to develop cumulative risk/impact assessment techniques/analytics,

tools, and mapping that can be applied at multiple geographic scales. For example, ORD has

committed $8 million in research investment through STAR grants on cumulative risk assessment

methods that incorporate community social contexts (non

‐ chemical stressors) and indicators of

population vulnerability (see http://www.epa.gov/ncer/cumulativerisk ). The Agency will ensure

research results from these new STAR grants on cumulative risks and chemical/non

‐ chemical

stressors are well disseminated and used by EPA program offices.

ORD’s Office of Science Advisor and National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) have launched

an initiative to develop a web

‐ based cumulative risk assessment tool, the Cumulative Risk

Assessment Environmental Justice Wizard (the CRA

‐ EJ Wizard). This tool will enable a more

complete and thorough evaluation and understanding of multi

‐ level stressors that result in

cumulative impacts in U.S. communities and populations. This broader framework for decision

‐ making leads to inherently more sustainable outcomes as a result of a more complete

7Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

understanding of the factors constituting and contributing to risk in identified populations. The

CRA

‐ EJ Wizard is designed to implement a multi

‐ media approach to cumulative contamination

exposures in communities facing environmental justice issues. It will reflect the cumulative

impacts considerations outlined in the “Technical Guidance for Incorporating Environmental

Justice into Rulemaking Activities” and inform the EPA CRA guidelines. The project is directly

responsive to the recognition that vulnerability and health disparities are interrelated and must be

studied within the risk assessment paradigm. The developers of the CRA

‐ EJ Wizard intended to

engage with environmental justice and community

‐ based stakeholders to inform the development

of the CRA

‐ EJ Wizard and related agency cumulative risk assessment guidelines. This approach

purposely builds skills among EPA/ORD scientists to design research and risk assessment protocols

informed by collaboration with affected communities.

At the March 2010 Symposium, participants requested EPA to develop easy

‐ to

‐ use Geographic

Information System (GIS) tools. ORD’s National Atlas of Ecosystem Services is developing an Urban

Atlas which will include high

‐ resolution mapping for 100

‐ 250 urban areas selected along several

gradients of concern (e.g., size, location, demographics, environmental and health condition). By

mapping the current availability of “green” infrastructure and applying existing models for

pollutant removal, water storage, and other functions, ORD’s National Atlas will estimate the

extent to which ecosystem services contribute to the basic needs of urban populations.

Additionally, the Atlas will reveal under

‐ served areas where management to enhance specific

ecosystem services would benefit community health and well

‐ being. The urban component of the

Atlas will include demographic mapping to identify low

‐ income and other vulnerable sub

‐ populations that may benefit disproportionately from “green” infrastructure and/or are

disproportionately under

‐ served. The Atlas will stratify urban areas to develop separate estimates

of ecosystem services for communities identified as socially vulnerable. Additionally, it will

incorporate accessible health data to map aspects of population susceptibility to diminished or

degraded services. EPA is conducting this project in collaboration with multiple federal agencies,

including the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention, as well as academic and other educational organizations. Interaction with

communities is occurring in conjunction with EPA Regions and ORD’s Human Health Research

Program to identify priority issues and build capacity for working with mapping tools to inform risk

evaluation and management decisions.

Benefits to EPA Stakeholder Communities

 The development of guidance, methods, tools and data to advance the integration of

environmental justice into EPA’s decision

‐ making processes is responsive to several comments

provided by stakeholders. For example, these activities address suggestions that EPA go

beyond science to consider the areas of policy, capacity building and promoting healthy and

sustainable communities. These stakeholder comments recommend EPA to: (1) develop

analytic and assessment tools and data collection approaches that can be used by community

health advocates and EJ groups; (2) adopt multi

‐ media cross

‐ program approaches to

addressing cumulative environmental exposures in stakeholder communities, and as well as

restructuring risk assessment to better account for multiple stressors; (3) increase community

capacity to assess their environment; (4) develop a more holistic understanding of

environment and health; and (5) integrate environmental justice in all its decisions. Better

8Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

integration of environmental justice into EPA’s decisions directly benefits communities

impacted by EPA’s regulatory activities. The overarching goal of developing these tools of the

trade is to aid EPA staff to develop regulatory options that fully protect the health and

environment of all people, as well as helping communities to better understand their

environmental problems.

 Community

‐ based “stakeholders” will benefit from CRA

‐ EJ Wizard through access to improved

information that integrates their own understanding of local conditions with data drawn from

EPA’s databases. Depending upon application, benefits may include improved capacity to

collaborate with Agency experts, identify priorities, and pursue risk reduction strategies to

improve public health and the environment.

 Key outcomes of the Urban Atlas will be to inform community members and decision

‐ makers

as to how natural resources are critical community assets, and how their absence or

degradation may be contributing to cumulative burdens on human health and well

‐ being.

Furthermore, the integrated, multi

‐ media approach of the Urban Atlas will provide information

on the co

‐ benefits accrued to the community when applying ecosystem services to mitigate

specific environmental contaminants or other priority health risks.

Impacts on EPA programs and activities

 These actions are also responsive to several core focus areas of EPA’s Plan EJ 2014 and the

principles on environmental justice articulated in EPA’s Strategic Plan for 2011

‐ 2015. It is also

responsive to the mandate in EO 12898 which requires that EPA identify and address

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its policies,

programs and activities on minority, low income and tribal populations.

 Results produced by the new research grants on cumulative risks/impacts will demonstrate

successful approaches to incorporating community knowledge into the development of such

tools and the application of qualitative approaches and social science methods into cumulative

impact assessments. EPA programs will benefit from the development of the CRA

‐ EJ Wizard

through engaging with stakeholders to address the community

‐ based assessment of

cumulative risks with environmental justice concerns.

 Intensive engagement with environmental justice stakeholders will improve the incorporation

of these issues in the design of the guidelines. The CRA

‐ EJ Wizard will improve the capacity of

EPA Regional risk assessors to assist communities in understanding the complexity of risk, and

provide the means by which to identify priorities. Also the CRA

‐ EJ will assist programs in

implementing the planned “Technical Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice into

Rulemaking Activities” by facilitating a step

‐ by

‐ step approach to evaluating cumulative risks

and impacts. More broadly CRA guidelines will affect risk

‐ based decision

‐ making across the

full range of EPA programs, both nationally and in the Regions and communities.

Incorporation of EJ into CRA will introduce EJ considerations throughout EPA policy and

decision

‐ making.

 The process for developing these tools, data, methods and guidance will lead to innovative

approaches and tools for incorporating environmental justice concerns in EPA’s regulatory and

policy decision

‐ making. Other innovations include identifying research needs and data gaps on

topics such as environmental public health indicators to assess disparities, equity impact

9Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

assessment methods, metrics to assess inequities in risk assessments to support rule making,

and policy and program evaluation. ORD plans to bridge these data gaps through both

intramural and extramural research programs.

 Initial community interaction for the development of the Urban Atlas will proceed through

existing EPA initiatives such as the CARE and EJ SHOWCASE programs and the EPA/HUD/DOT

Partnership for Sustainable Communities, and their EPA liaisons. Information about ecosystem

services will expand options for improving community health and well

‐ being, and clarify

economic and other trade

‐ offs involved in alternate environmental mitigation and remediation

decisions. The selection of focal urban areas along several gradients is designed to facilitate

the application of observed linkages between community welfare and ecosystem services to

additional populated areas of concern to EPA.

Timeframe

 Develop first draft of Technical Guidance for incorporating EJ into regulatory development by

FY 2012

 Develop final draft of Technical Guidance by FY 2013

 Develop and refine screening tools that identify air rules that raise potential EJ concerns (FY

2011)

 Determine the analytical tools are most appropriate for particular types of air rulemaking (FY

2011

‐ 12)

 Identify any additional analytical tools that may be needed to better understand the EJ

implications of air rulemakings (FY 2011

‐ 12)

 Host community

‐ based tools workshop(s), Regional Tools Summits, with focus on

environmental justice and health disparities to solicit recommendations to inform EPA’s

actions on tools under Plan EJ 2014. (FY 2012

‐ 2013)

 Develop final Environmental Quality Index (Long term)

 The CRA

‐ EJ Wizard is planned for beta testing by the end of 2011

 First phase of the Urban Atlas will be completed in FY 2013; incorporation of additional

populated areas will begin in FY 2012 and FY 2013, contingent upon funding.

Strategy 2: Incorporate perspectives from community

­ based organizations and

community leaders into EPA research agendas and engaging in collaborative

partnerships on science and research to address environmental justice.

A few initiatives are highlighted here to better engage with communities in EPA science activities

and implementation of regulatory programs.

Activity 2.1 : Establish Community Engagement Initiative

The Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) has launched the Community

Engagement Initiative (CEI), www.epa.gov/oswer/engagementinitiative /

, which is designed to

enhance OSWER and regional offices' engagement with local communities and stakeholders (e.g.,

state and local governments, tribes, academia, private industry, other federal agencies, non

‐ profit

organizations) to help them meaningfully participate in government decisions on land cleanup,

emergency preparedness and response, and the management of hazardous substances and waste.

10Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

Activity 2.2 : Re

‐ engage with National Environmental Justice Advisory Committee

ORD intends to establish a health and research work group or subcommittee within National

Environmental Justice Advisory Committee (NEJAC) to advise EPA Administrator and ORD in the

area of scientific research, health impacts and environmental risks and exposures that directly

relate to environmental justice. An initial task of the working group will be to advise ORD on the

development of the Sustainable and Health Communities Research Program.

Activity 2.3 : Support Community

‐ based Participatory Research

Additionally participatory research methods will be integrated into ORD new research program on

Sustainable and Healthy Communities and new extramural research solicitations to support CBPR

are under consideration. A significant feature of the Sustainable and Health Communities Research

program will be community and regional based projects. Applying participatory research methods

will be the hallmark of this new program within ORD.

Benefits to EPA Stakeholder Communities

 These actions are in agreement with suggestions from environmental justice stakeholders to

integrate perspectives from community residents and community leaders in the development

of EPA’s scientific research agendas as well as in data collection.

 OSWER’s CEI will include direct outreach to state and local governments, tribes, academia,

private industry, other federal agencies, non

‐ profit organizations. The CEI is designed to help

stakeholders have meaning participation in EPA decisions on land cleanup, emergency

preparedness and response, and the management of hazardous substances and waste. It will

also improve OSWER efforts to protect human health and the environment through site clean

‐

ups and other risk reduction activities.

 Re

‐ establishing a NEJAC health and research work group or subcommittee would provide a

critically needed formal mechanism for environmental justice stakeholders, community

‐ based

organizations to provide input and feedback into EPA/ORD research initiatives. Presently, ORD

lacks any mechanism for public input into its research agenda. If concerns about

environmental and health inequalities are not “on the table” they will be not be addressed by

the EPA research enterprise. However it must be recognized that a NEJAC subcommittee

cannot be the only approach for soliciting the contribution of environmental justice

stakeholders. ORD will need to identify additional approaches for soliciting input and

collaborating with EJ stakeholders (e.g. through regional outreach, the RARE program, and

partnering with EPA program offices and other federal agencies). Creating formal mechanisms

for receiving stakeholder input assures that community wisdom, perspectives and values are

duly considered and accommodated in the development of ORD’s new program, and the

results of such program that will subsequently influence decision

‐ making at EPA.

11Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

Impacts on EPA programs and activities

 Nearly all of the OSWER programs and activities will be impacted by the various CEI actions.

The CEI is designed to enhance OSWER and regional offices' engagement with local

communities and stakeholders, and to help them meaningfully participate in government

decisions on land cleanup, emergency preparedness and response, and the management of

hazardous substances and waste.

 The first task for this NEJAC work group could be to advise ORD on developing the Sustainable

and Healthy Communities Research Program initiative which is currently being discussed. Since

this research program is in its early stages of development, engaging a NEJAC working group

now could be extremely beneficial to ORD to help set the course, identify critical research

questions that should be addressed and how best to solicit input and potential partnerships

with community

‐ based organization and EJ leaders such as hosting public forums on the

Sustainable Community Environments and Public Health research program.

Timeframe

 Each of the CEI actions has defined deliverables and timeline for their completion. Nearly all of

the actions have significant deliverables due in FY 2011.

 Incorporate ideas and concerns from stakeholders and representatives from

disproportionately impacted communities and populations. (FY 2011)

 Establish a NEJAC working group on research by FY 2012

 Issue joint RFA or other funding mechanism to collaborate with NIH National Institute Minority

Health and Health Disparities to establish national research Centers of Excellence on

Environment and Health Disparities (FY 2012)

Strategy 3: Leverage partnerships with other federal agencies on issues of

research, policy and action to address environmental and health disparities.

Environmental justice and related concerns for health inequalities are complex and multi

‐

dimensional. Solutions to these societal problems require intersectoral and intergovernmental

actions. Environmental justice is not solely an EPA responsibility, just as health disparities cannot

be seen solely as a Department of Health and Human Services problem. At present, governmental

approach to promoting and managing health and it determinants, namely the environment, is

fragmented. Symposium participates recognized in order to achieve environmental justice; multi

‐

stakeholder, multi

‐ system approach is required. Within the federal family, we need to strengthen

federal inter

‐ agency collaboration to improve research that can impact environmental and health

practice, programs, and policy and formulate solutions for communities.

Activity 3.1 : Join the Federal Collaboration on Health Disparities

EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) will actively participate on the interagency

Federal Collaboration on Health Disparities and represent EPA on the Executive Steering

Committee ( http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/fchdr / ) .The Executive Committee of the FCHDR was

created to bring together selected agency representatives to seek practical solutions to advance

health disparities research, and foster greater federal coordination, collaboration, and

12Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

communication around the elimination of health disparities. Federal Departments represented on

the Executive committee include:

• Department of Education

• National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

• Department of Housing and Urban Development

• Department of Justice

• Department of Veterans Affairs

• Environmental Protection Agency

• National Science Foundation

• HHS, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

• HHS, Health Resources and Services Administration

• HHS, National Institute for Minority Health and Health Disparities

• HHS, Office of Minority Health

FCHDR’s goal is to ensure that health disparities research is conducted as an integrated and

inclusive field of study, rather than as an aggregate of independent research activities occurring in

separate research domains. FCHDR Members will work together to explore needs and

opportunities for pooling scientific expertise and resources to conduct, translate, and disseminate

research most needed to accelerate the elimination of health disparities.

FCHDR Goals and Strategies are to:

1. Identify health disparities challenges including the scientific and practical evidence most

relevant to underpinning future policy and action;

2. Increase and maintain awareness about federal government efforts and opportunities to

address health disparities;

3. Determine how evidence can be translated into practice to address health disparities and

promote innovation;

4. Advise on possible objectives and measures for future research, building on the successes and

experiences of health disparities experts; and

5. Publish reports that will contribute to the development of the FCHDR strategic vision and plan.

Activity 3.2 : Engage with President’s Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

to Children

EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), Office of Children’s Health Protection (OCHP), ORD and

others are collaborating and participating with other federal agencies on the newly re

‐ established

President’s Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. One focal area

of their work is on asthma disparities among minority and disadvantaged children. Recently in

early December 2010, a Federal Workshop on Asthma Disparities was held in Washington DC to

foster interagency coordination on development and implementation of a detailed Federal Action

Plan to address asthma disparities.

Benefits to EPA Stakeholder Communities

 More coordinated federal approach to research, policy and action to address environmental

justice health disparities.

13Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

Impact on EPA programs and activities

 EPA’s participation in these three federal initiatives will identify and create opportunities to

combine resources to tackle issues of disparities in health and access to clean environments;

and will increase access and exposure of all EPA offices, including ORD, to non

‐ traditional EPA

disciplines such as social science and concepts such as social determinants of health.

Timeframe

• ORD’s participation with the Federal Collaboration is ongoing.

• Participation with other federal agencies on the President’s Task Force on Environmental

Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children to work on asthma disparities among minority and

disadvantaged children that can be addressed through interagency coordination on

development and implementation of a detailed Federal Action Plan (FY 2011

‐ 2015)

.

Strategy 4: Build and strengthen the technical capacity of EPA scientists on

conducting research and related science activities in partnership with

impacted communities and translating research results to inform change



### .

Concomitant with efforts to increase technical capacity in communities, EPA needs to build up its

capacity to work with communities in order for real progress to be made. Several

recommendations from the Symposium address this issue: “train EPA staff on effective outreach

and dialog with communities; develop capacity within the agency; provide training for EPA risk

assessors and managers on community engagement; consider using qualitative approaches in risk

assessment; multi

‐ disciplinary teams are needed to work on issues; encourage multidisciplinary

teams in environmental health research; social science disciplines like social epidemiology indicate

that EPA needs to look more at upstream factors

– social processes that ultimately process the

disparities in risks and health outcomes; explore approaches for interacting with communities that

can build collective efficacy and social capital; support participation of communities as equal

partners in research; include them as equal partners in the co

‐ production of knowledge; and

include community representatives and perspectives in the design of studies/research.”

Activity 4.1 : Provide training to EPA scientists on CBPR

Both ORD and the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) intend to provide

training to scientists on principles of community

‐ based participatory research, health disparities,

and environmental justice. Both offices will look for opportunities to collaborate on providing

training for staff. For example, OSWER’s Community Involvement and Program Initiatives Branch

(CIPIB) sponsors a Community Involvement University (CIU) to provide training courses for

Superfund Program Community Involvement Coordinators (CIC) and other EPA and EPA

‐ affiliated

staff. Participants are provided with the necessary skills, techniques, and practices to engage the

community in the Superfund process. CIU offers a variety of courses each year at regional offices

and at national conferences or training events. These courses could be offered to ORD scientists

and modified to address community

‐ engagement in more of the research context.

In order to design appropriate capacity training program, ORD will first evaluate current

understanding and research capacity of ORD sciences regarding principles of community

‐ based

14Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

participatory research, health disparities, and environmental justice. ORD will then design and

implement training for its staff.

Activity 4.2 : Build Social Science Capacity within ORD

The National Center for Environmental Research (NCER) is developing an ORD research agenda for

behavioral and social sciences as they impact and affect environmental protection as well as the

evolution of environmental policy. Environmental justice consideration will be critical to this

research agenda. ORD will conduct Individual and focus group interviews of behavioral and social

science experts to solicit their thoughts and identify the most relevant current research as well as

known gaps in four areas: behavioral economics, decision theory, management science, and risk

perception. Following the expert interview, NCER will host a workshop with the scientific leaders

(30

‐ 50 people) identified through the interview phase.

Additional NCER plans to establish a cooperative agreement with a professional society concerned

with applying the social science research to contemporary environmental health issues. This effort

is intended to help ORD devise approaches and methods for truly incorporating the social sciences

into its research and assessment activities. Activities under the cooperative agree could include:

 Providing training to ORD staff on incorporating qualitative approaches and social science

methods into cumulative impacts assessments;

 Developing approaches to incorporate community knowledge in such tools for cumulative

impact assessments; and

 Offering webinars and training to cultivate analytical skills among ORD staff to examine the

social and economic systems that create cumulative adverse environmental impacts in

communities.

Activity 4.3 : Develop EJ Risk Management Training for OPP

The Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) has created a new training module as a part of its regular

staff training program to ensure that EJ and sensitive population considerations are fully

incorporated and more clearly characterized in the pesticide risk assessment process. The training

module consists of two components: (1) addressing general background on environmental justice,

and (2) integrating EJ considerations through OPP risk management to address EJ issues identified

by the risk assessments.

Benefits to EPA Stakeholder Communities

 Impacted communities and EJ leaders should see improved interactions with Agency scientists.

 The goal of OPP’s training is to provide the tools to better identify potential environmental

justice issues. Enhanced risk assessment methodologies will result from a closer and more

focused look at the toxicity and exposure patterns specific to each pesticide and pesticide use

that could present a disproportionate risk. Areas now considered in pesticide risk assessment

(hazard assessment, dietary exposure, occupational and resident exposure, incident data) will

be considered through an EJ lens.

15Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

Impact on EPA programs and activities

 We anticipate that the capacity of Agency scientists to conduct research in partnership with

impacted communities, to understand and employ social science methods in environmental

research and translate research results to inform change will be greatly improved. This will

help ORD’s Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program meet its objectives.

 The OPP training program will improve how EJ is incorporated by risk managers. This training is

expected to influence pesticide registration and re

‐ registration decisions to more robustly

incorporate EJ considerations. To date, ten training sessions on the first component and a

total of 160 OPP staff completed the training.

Timeframe

 Host scientist to science workshop on behavioral and social sciences (late FY 2011).

 Design a research capacity training program for ORD scientists which could include self

‐ paced

training on community

‐ based and participatory research CBPR offered by Michigan Public

Health Training Center and joint courses through OSWER’s Community Involvement University

(FY 2012–2013).

 OPP will complete the new module on risk management training by early FY 2012. The goal will

be to have 100% risk assessors and managers trained by the end of FY 2012.

Strategy 5: Build and strengthen technical capacity of community

­ based

organizations and community environmental justice and health leaders

Community capacity has been defined as “a set of dynamic community traits, resources, and

associational patterns that can be brought to bear for community

‐ building and community health

improvement” (Norton et al 2002). “Community capacity building” are activities designed to

increase community capacity and emphasizes (1) assets and empowerment (versus disease and

deficiency); (2) the role of bottom

‐ up, community

‐ determined processes and agendas (versus top

‐ down/externally determined ones); and (3) the processes for developing community competence.

The commissioned paper on community

‐ capacity presented at the March 2010 Symposium

identified important domains of action to strengthen community capacity, including leadership,

participation, skills, resources, social and organizational networks, sense of community, and

understanding of community history, community power, community values, community cohesion,

language capacity, and community information.

(See http://www.epa.gov/ncer/events/ calendar/2010/mar17/papers.html )

In addressing all of these domains strategies for enhancing community capacity may include

training and technology transfer, technical assistance, community

‐ based participatory research,

empowerment approaches, and community organizing/social action. Commissioned paper

authors noted that capacity

‐ building strategies that give more control to communities (e.g., CBPR,

empowerment, and community organizing) may more fully address the fundamental causes of

environmental disparities than more agency

‐ controlled processes (e.g., training and technical

assistance).

(See http://www.epa.gov/ncer/eve nts/calendar/2010/mar17/pres entations/freudenberg.pdf )

16Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

These community

‐ driven strategies are more labor and resource intensive and require a higher

level of commitment from communities, researchers and agencies, as well as a new set of

capabilities on the part of agency personnel with regard to the skills needed to, for example,

facilitate meetings, communicate clearly, and create an atmosphere of inquiry and trust.

In order to more effectively reduce disparate environmental exposure and engage the public in

making environmental policy decisions, EPA must engage relevant constituencies in participation

processes early, provide these constituencies with the resources and information that can

contribute to effective participation, and ensure that the outcomes reflect participation.

Specifically, helping communities develop the capacities to create, access, use and interpret

scientific information and changing agency practices to better incorporate community voices in

scientific activities and decisions will be a key and proper task for EPA. EPA therefore proposes the

following actions to establish programs and provide federal government support to increase

technical and scientific capacity in communities.

Activity 5.1 : Build Awareness and Community Capacity to Address Asthma Disparities

In response to the growing asthma problem where minority, low

‐ income and indigenous

populations are disproportionately affected, the EPA’s Office or Air and Radiation (OAR)

established the Asthma Program to promote scientific understanding of environmental asthma

triggers and ways to manage them. The program collaborates with partners to support research

and educate the public about asthma and ways to manage environmental triggers. Partners

include government agencies, universities and research centers, the health care community,

nonprofit organizations, and community programs. Major program activities center around the

Communities in Action for Asthma Friendly Environments initiative, and include support for real

time peer

‐ to

‐ peer learning, technology transfer and resources for community

‐ based asthma

programs through an online network ( www.AsthmaCommunityNetwork.org ), “pacing” events

(National Asthma Forum, regional events and webinars), and support to non

‐ profit organizations

focused on health care provider training, improving school environments and raising public

awareness about asthma.

Activity 5.2 : Build Tribal Community Capacity to Monitor Air Quality

OAR has a long history of supporting capacity building among tribal environmental professionals,

primarily through its partnership with the Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals (ITEP) at

Northern Arizona University, which OAR has supported for over 15 years. Consistent with our

trust responsibility to tribes, OAR works with Tribes to increase their capability to address their

environmental concerns. OAR supports the training and educational efforts of ITEP in the areas of

air quality and climate change impacts and adaptation planning, as well as the work of the Tribal

Air Monitoring Support (TAMS) Center, which builds and strengthens the technical capacity of

tribal staff.

Activity 5.3 : Increase Citizen Participation in Science and Decisions

ORD proposes to create a program, in partnership with other governmental agencies, private non

‐ profits, professional societies and private foundations, to develop the capacity of community

leaders to understand the role of science in decision

‐ making and influence the decision

‐ making

17Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

process and on the use of data and other information to document disparities and concerns in

their communities.

Activity 5.4 : Establish Centers of Excellence on Environment and Health Disparities

Several new extramural research solicitations are under consideration to fund research that

address specific research needs and topics raised at the March 2010 Symposium and that fully

employ CBPR approaches such as establishing Centers of Excellence on Environment and Health

Disparities. The aim for these Centers will be to examine the joint impacts of social and physical

environmental conditions and processes on health, link with community health clinics to increase

their capacity to address occupational and environmental health concerns of their constituents,

and design policy solutions to ameliorate and prevent disparities.

Activity 5.5 : Build diverse environmental workforce and enhancing the capacities of minority

academic institutions (MAI) to engage in scientific research and workforce training

The National Center for Environmental Research’s (NCER) Fellowship Program is implementing

several initiatives to strengthen EPA efforts to encourage and support EJ research among the next

generation of environmental scientists and engineers. For example, Environmental Justice

Research topics are highlighted in the Science to Achieve Research (STAR) Fellowships RFA and

environmental justice considerations have been included as review criteria under "Broader

Societal Impacts" for all fellowship applications.

As part of the Greater Research Opportunities (GRO) fellowship, NCER has a goal of enhancing

capacity at academic institutions that are not well funded for environmental research capacity,

including HBCUs. ORD considers ineligible those institutions identified as receiving more than $35

million in annual federal research. NCER has increased resources allotted to the GRO program to

increase GRO funded students which can enhance our efforts in this area.

The Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) will support research through the

Faculty and Student Teams (FaST) Program, a cooperative effort between the Department of

Energy (DOE) Office of Science and the National Science Foundation (NSF). Faculty from colleges

and universities with limited research facilities and those institutions serving populations, women

and minorities underrepresented in the fields of science, engineering, and technology are

encouraged to apply for the FaST program. The FaST program will support a team comprised of

one faculty member and two to three undergraduate students. The program provides hands

‐ on

research opportunities in DOE or EPA national laboratories during the summer. The faculty

member identifies a mutually beneficial research area amenable to collaboration by the faculty

member and the laboratory scientist.

EPA Region 6 University

‐ Community Partnerships initiative will facilitate and nurture a partnership

between universities and community groups to increase vulnerable communities’ capacity to

address their environmental challenges through technical assistance. Memorandums of

Understanding (MOU) are in place between EPA Region 6 and the University of Texas El Paso

(UTEP) and EPA Region 6, EPA’s Office of Water and Texas A&M Kingsville.

18Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

Benefits to EPA Stakeholder Communities

 These capacity

‐ building actions can help the public to address environmental health issues and

to allow them to effectively participate in environmental health decision making and will

increased confidence that concerns about the power dynamics between academic,

government researchers, and communities will be taken seriously.

 Actions undertaken by the Asthma Program will equip stakeholder communities and

organizations to assess, organize and sustainably deploy community resources to reduce or

eliminate exposure to asthma triggers, and improve health outcomes and the quality of life for

people with asthma. The actions help support and strengthen the capacity of health care and

environmental professionals, schools, and community

‐ based organizations to develop

comprehensive asthma care strategies in partnership with impacted communities and to

spread their results to accelerate improvements across the national asthma care landscape.

 Through the partnership with ITEP, tribes are better able to fashion their own responses to

environmental issues including climate change, and have a better understanding of how they

can effectively participate in the environmental decision

‐ making of federal, state and local

regulatory agencies.

 Research through the proposed Centers of Excellence will be specially aimed at benefiting

disadvantaged, undeserved, and environmentally overburdened communities or groups.

 Requiring NCER fellowship applicants to consider and explain the EJ implications of their

research will help develop a new generation of environmental scientists, engineers, and policy

makers who are cognizant of EJ

‐ related issues that can arise in research and thus adjust

approaches accordingly to promote broad environmental protection.

 Increasing the reach of the GRO program will promote research and training at Minority

Serving Institutions (MSIs) which may have special expertise on EJ matters.

 Through the Region 6 partnerships with University of Texas and Texas A&M Kingsville, EPA will

increase knowledge about best approaches for community–university partnerships.

Im pact on EPA programs and activities

 The Communities in Action initiative and the online Network, AsthmaCommunityNetwork will

surface important, field

‐ tested community strategies that the Asthma Program will use to

bolster the Agency’s national asthma education and outreach efforts.

 When tribal perspectives are effectively communicated, EPA is more cognizant of Tribal issues

and is able to make more informed and responsive decisions concerning its rules, programs

and policies. As tribes take more responsibility for implementing air programs, EPA may be

able to reduce some of its implementation efforts.

 The proposed research oriented activities will help institute program development and

strategic institutional change within EPA. The goal is to increase democratization in the

conduct of and community access to EPA/ORD research. The proposed activities will produce:

(1) consistent and validated principles of community

‐ engagement in research for ORD and EPA

programs; (2) improved science and research results that are more relevant to environmental

problems faced by the public and more effectively translated to inform policy change and

intervention; and (3) inclusion of EJ considerations as review criteria can serve as a model for

other competition

‐ based EPA programs. These results will promote a culture that considers EJ

implications in all agencies funding actions and activities.

19Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

 The process of increasing the reach of the GRO program will translate into stronger outreach

to MSIs and highlight the critical role MSIs play in the nation's research and development

enterprise to solve pressing environmental protection challenges.

 The intent of Region 6’s existing MOU’s are to: (1) improve the quality of environmental

science and technical education; (2) increase the relevance of UTEP research projects to EPA’s

environmental and public health mission; and (3) increase number of culturally diverse

students electing to pursue graduate study and research careers in areas including science,

engineering, and mathematics. It is expected that UTEP‘s capacity to develop environmental

specialists for potential EPA employment will be significantly enhanced while important

contributions will be made to EPA’s overall research and developmental programs.

Timeframe

 Support and grow an online community network of stakeholders, that serves as a real time

resource for mentoring and collaboration to support community asthma management

programs (FY 2011 and ongoing)

 Develop web

‐ based tools that facilitate collaboration, problem solving, and learning among

leaders of asthma programs (FY 2011 and ongoing)

 Facilitate knowledge transfer among stakeholders through EPA sponsorship of “pacing” events

including the National Asthma Forum, regional events and webinars for community

‐ based

asthma programs (FY 2011 and ongoing)

 Train health care professionals to improve their ability to integrate the assessment of

environmental factors into a comprehensive, culturally appropriate asthma care plan, based on

national standards of care. (FY 2011 and ongoing)

 Continue funding for ITEP and the TAMS Center (ongoing)

 Continue OAR involvement in developing ITEP’s curriculum and training, and oversight of the

TAMS Center (ongoing)

 Institute a pilot program on “meet the decision makers” on environmental health and

environmental justice that would accommodate up to 15 community leaders (FY 2013)

 Issue joint RFA or other funding mechanism to collaborate with NIH National Institute Minority

Health and Health Disparities to establish national research Centers of Excellence on

Environment and Health Disparities( FY 2012)

 Highlight Environmental Justice Research topics in the Science to Achieve Research (STAR)

Fellowships RFA (ongoing)



### 2.3 Community Engagement and Stakeholder Partnership Plan

Community outreach and engagement plans are integrated into the individual science actions

described above. The most significant science actions that will include community outreach and

partnerships are ORD’s Sustainable and Health Communities Research Program, OSWER’s

Community Engagement Initiative and the extramural research funding under consideration.

20Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011



### 3.0 DELIVERABLES

Strategy 1: Apply integrated trans

­ disciplinary and community

­ based participatory

research approaches with a focus on addressing multi

­ media, cumulative impacts and

equity in environmental health.

ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES MILESTONES

Activity #1.1 : Establish an  Research program framework  February, 2011

Integrated Trans

‐ disciplinary developed (ORD

‐ SHCRP Team)

ORD Research Program on

Environment and Community  Regional listening sessions to gather

Health

– Sustainable and

Healthy Communities input from communities. Incorporate

ideas and concerns from stakeholders  Spring 2011

Research Program and representatives from

disproportionately impacted

communities and populations ( ORD

‐

SHCRP Team)

 RFA to support Extramural research on

Tribal Community Health (ORD

– NCER)

 RFA to support Extramural research to

support Centers of Excellence on

Environment and Health Disparities

(ORD

– NCER)  FY 2012

 FY 2012

Activity #1.2 : Develop

technical guidance, analytic

methods, tools and data to

advance the integration of

environmental justice in EPA

decision

‐ making  EJ Technical Guide for regulatory

assessments (ORD,OEJ, OP)

 Environmental Justice Wizard (the CRA

‐

EJ Wizard) (ORD

‐ NERL and OSA)

 Environmental Quality Index Tool (ORD

– NHEERL)

 Regional Tools Summits (ORD

‐ OSP and

SHCRP Team)

 EJ screening tools for air rules (OAR)

 Urban Atlas (ORD

– NHEERL)  First draft by FY 2012

 Early FY2012

 Long

‐ term

 FY 2012

– 2013

 FY 2011

– 2012

 First phase of the Urban

Atlas will be completed in

FY13

21Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

Strategy 2: Incorporate perspectives from community

­ based organizations and

community leaders into EPA research agendas and engaging in collaborative

partnerships on science and research to address environmental justice.



### ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES MILESTONES

Activity #2.1 : Establish

Community Engagement

Initiative (OSWER)  Conduct training of OSWER staff on

CBPR (OSWER)  On

‐ going

Activity #2.2 : Re

‐ engage  Establish a research working group  FY 2012

National Environmental under NEJAC to advise ORD on the

Justice Advisory Committee development of the Sustainable and

Health Communities Research

Program. (ORD

‐ NCER and OSP; OEJ)

Activity #2.3 : Support  RFA to support extramural research on  FY 2012

Community

‐ Based Tribal Community (ORD

‐ NCER)

Participatory Research

 RFA to fund Extramural research to

support Centers of Excellence on

Environment and Health Disparities

(ORD

– NCER)

Regional listening sessions to gather

input from communities. Incorporate

ideas and concerns from stakeholders

and representatives from

disproportionately impacted

communities and populations ( ORD

‐

Rick Linthurst and SHCRP Team)  FY 2012

 Spring 2011

Strategy 3: Leverage partnerships with other federal agencies on issues of research,

policy and action to address environmental and health disparities.

ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES MILESTONES

Activity #3.1 : Join the Federal

Collaboration on Health

Disparities  Potential collaboration on research

funding with sister federal agencies;

better coordination of research needs

on health disparities across federal

government. (ORD)  Ongoing

22Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES MILESTONES

Activity #3.2 : Engage with

President’s Task Force on

Environmental Health Risks

and Safety Risks to Children  Federal Action Plan to address asthma

disparities. (OCHP, ORD, OAR)  FY 2011

‐ 2015

Strategy 4: Build and strengthen the technical capacity of EPA scientists on conducting

research and related science activities in partnership with impacted communities and

translating research results to inform change.

ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES MILESTONES

Activity #4.1 : Provide training  Survey ORD scientists needs and  FY 2012

– 2013

to EPA scientists on CBPR awareness about CBPR(ORD

‐ OSP and

NCER)

 Develop a training plan for ORD

scientists ( ORD

‐ OSP and NCER)

 Collaborate with OSWER to modify and

offer courses under the Community

Involvement University (ORD and

OSWER)  FY 2012

– 2013

 FY 2012

– 2013

Activity #4.2 : Build Social  Host scientist to science workshop on  FY 2011

– 2012

Science Capacity within ORD behavioral and social sciences (ORD

‐ NCER)

 An ORD research agenda for

behavioral and social sciences (ORD

‐ NCER)

 Cooperative Agreement with a Social

Science professional society (ORD

‐ NCER)  FY 2012

– 2013

 FY 2012

– 2013

Activity #4.3 : Develop EJ Risk  Training module to ensure EJ and  By early FY2012

Management Training for sensitive population considerations are

OPP fully incorporated and more clearly

integrated throughout OPP risk

management processes (OPP)

 100% of OPP risk assessors and

managers properly trained on EJ in risk

management (OPP)  End of FY2012

23Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

Strategy 5: Build and strengthen technical capacity of community

­ based organizations

and community environmental justice and health leaders

ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES MILESTONES

Activity #5.1 : Build  Establish an online community network  FY 2011 and ongoing

Community Capacity to available to stakeholders as a year

‐ Address Asthma Disparities round resource for mentoring and

collaboration and designed to support

community asthma management

programs (OAR)

 Develop web

‐ based tools that facilitate

collaboration, problem solving, and

learning among leaders of asthma

programs (OAR)

 Hosting the National Asthma Forum

and Awards Program and regional

pacing events for community

‐ based

programs (OAR)

 Train health care professionals, to

improve their ability to integrate the

assessment of environmental factors

into a comprehensive

, culturally

appropriate asthma care plan, based

on national standards of care (OAR)  FY 2011 and ongoing

 FY 2011 and ongoing

 FY 2011 and ongoing

Activity #5.2 : Build Tribal

Community Capacity to

Monitor Air Quality  Continue funding for ITEP and the

TAMS Center (OAR)  Ongoing

Activity #5.3 : Increase Citizen  Cooperative agreement to support a  FY 2013

Participation in Science and citizen scientist fellowship program

– a

Decisions meet the decision makers” on

environmental health and

environmental justice (ORD

‐ NCER)

Activity #5.4 : Establish  RFA to support Extramural research to  FY 2012

Centers of Excellence on support Centers of Excellence on

Environment and Health Environment and Health Disparities

Disparities (ORD

– NCER)

24Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES MILESTONES

Activity #5.5 : Build diverse  Highlight environmental justice  Completed and ongoing

environmental workforce and research topics in the Science to

enhancing the capacities of Achieve Research (STAR) Fellowships

minority academic RFA. Include environmental justice

institutions (MAI) to engage considerations as review criteria under

in scientific research and "Broader Societal Impacts" for all

workforce training fellowship applications (ORD

‐ NCR)

 Support research through the FaST

Program and provide university faculty

and students to have hands

‐ on

research opportunities in DOE or EPA

national laboratories (OSWER)

 Establish a University

‐ Community

Partnerships initiative to provide

technical assistance to local community

groups and increase number of

culturally diverse students electing to

pursue graduate study and research

careers (Region 6)  Ongoing

 TBD



### 3.2 Reports

There is no overall reporting plan for the science activities at this time. However program

reporting may occur by the individual program offices responsible for each activity. For

information, please contact: Devon Payne

‐ Sturges, 703

‐ 347

‐ 8055, payne

‐ sturges.devon@epa.gov

or Chris Saint, 202

‐ 564

‐ 9839, saint.chris@epa.gov

.

25Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011



### 4.0 APPENDICES

Appendix A: References

CSDH (2008). Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social

determinants of health. Final Report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva,

World Health Organization.

Gee GC and Payne

‐ Sturges DC. 2004. Environmental Health Disparities: A Framework Integrating

Psychosocial and Environmental Concepts

. Environmental Health Perspectives. VOLUME 11,

NUMBER 17. pp1645

– 1653.

Krieger N. 2001. Theories for social epidemiology in the 21 st century: an ecosocial perspective.

International Journal of Epidemiology

. Vol 30: pp 668

‐ 677.

Habermann M and Gouveia N. 2008. Environmental Justice: an ecossocial health approach. Rev

Saúde Pública 42(6). Pp 1

– 7.

Morello

‐ Frosch RA. 2002. Discrimination and the political economy of environmental inequality

.

Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy

. volume 20, pages 477

– 496

Morello

‐ Frosch R. Shenassa ED. 2006. The Environmental “Riskscape” and Social Inequality:

Implications for Explaining Maternal and Child Health Disparities Environmental Health

Perspectives VOLUME 114. NUMBER 8. Pp. 1150

– 1153.

Norton B. Mcleroy K, Burdine J, Felix M, Dorsey A. 2002. Community capacity: Concept, theory and

methods, in DiClemente R, Crosby R, Kegler M eds. Emerging Theories in Health Promotion

Practice and Research. San Francisco: Jossey

‐ Bass; 2002.

Schulz AJ, Williams DR, Israel BA, Lempert LB. 2002. Racial and Spatial Relations as Fundamental

Determinants of Health in Detroit. The Milbank Quarterly

, Vol. 80, No. 4. pp677

‐ 707

Wakefield S.E.L. and Baxter J.2010.Linking Health Inequality and Environmental Justice:

Articulating a Precautionary Framework for Research and Action ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

Volume 3, Number 3. pp 95

‐ 102.

26Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011



### Appendix B: Acronyms

CBPR

– Community

‐ Based Participatory Research

NCER

– National Center for Environmental Research

NEJAC

– National Environmental Justice Advisory Committee

NERL

– National Exposure Research Laboratory

NHEERL

– National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory

OCHP

– Office of Children’s Health Protection

OPP

– Office of Pesticide Programs

ORD

– Office of Research and Development.

OSA

– Office of the Science Advisor

OSWER

– Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

RARE

– Regional Applied Research Effort Program

FCHDR

– Federal Collaboration on Health Disparities

27Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

Appendix C

– Science Recommendations from the March 2010 Symposium



### Disproportionate Impacts Symposium

March 17

– 19, 2010

Recommendations from the Symposium Participants

Science: Symposium participants recommended several ac tions to reduce research or data gaps,

overcome limitations in the theories and me thods for conducting environmental research,

particularly research supported by Federal gover nment, and limitations in practice of risk

assessment. The science recommendations are descri bed below. The first sentence is a summary

statement meant to capture the main points of the individual recommendati ons from the Symposium

that follow, including recommendations from the EJ Caucus letter that was sent to Lisa Garcia,

Senior Advisor to EPA Administrator for Environmental Justice.

1. Create and institute a new scientific research approach to develop more holistic

understanding of environment and health. One of the potential outcomes of this new

framework is to inform environmental policies related to environmental justice and address

environmental health disparities

. Several recommendations from the symposium point to EPA to

adopt a more holistic view of the environment and the impacts on population health: “ EPA/ORD’s

research agenda needs to be reframed, inequality and inequity needs to be a part of the discussion

[and research]; there needs to be a shift to not only look at risks and exposures, but to consider

root and fundamental causes, need to start where it (inequality) begins; EPA likes to start the

analysis and research at a level that does not address the history and root causes of health

endpoints, risks and exposures; analyze the environment in a broader context, evaluate the

interaction between the social and the physical environments; a better framework is needed for

combining physical and psychosocial science in research and practice; use social determinants of

health and health disparities research framework to conduct research on cumulative

impacts/risks; encourage multidisciplinary teams in environmental health research; develop the

science of interactive effects; social science disciplines like social epidemiology indicate that EPA

needs to look more at upstream factors

– social processes that ultimately process the disparities in

risks and health outcomes; develop measures for the social environment; test the validity of

available vulnerability indices and tools; encourage multidisciplinary approach to research and

analysis; address the role of institutionalized racism in poor community environmental health;

encourage the consideration of environmental justice in land use planning; and conduct research

with direct policy implications

‐ not research for the sake of research.”

Further, the EJ

‐ Caucus participants recommend that “EPA should develop a plan to ensure

incorporation of the concept of vulnerability, particularly its social and cultural aspects in the

Agency’s research agendas” and “... in consultation with EJ constituencies, incorporate community

principles in its funding guidelines for research in environmental health and planned and existing

actions that adversely impact public health and quality of life.”

28Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

2. Integrate perspectives from decision

‐ makers such as community residents, community

leaders, community

‐ based NGOS and community health and environmental quality advocates in

the development of EPA’s scientific research agendas as well as in data collection, conduct of

exposure/risk assessments and risk management decisions.

A common recommendation articulated in both the EJ

‐ Caucus letter and through discussions the

Symposium is the need to incorporate community perspectives in the development of EPA’s

science/research agendas and in the conduct of exposure/risk assessments. Signatories to the EJ

Caucus letter recommend that “EPA and other publicly funded research require the expertise of

environmental justice communities in the research design, implementation, recommendations and

programmatic design that may result from the research” and “EPA should develop a plan to ensure

incorporation of the concept of vulnerability, particularly its social and cultural aspects in the

Agency’s research agendas.” Related recommendations from the Symposium state “include

community representatives and perspectives in the design of studies/research; communities

would like to be involved as EPA sets its research priorities and agenda as well as the regulatory

agenda and priorities; and there needs to be a research workgroup formed within the NEJAC.”

Although the following recommendations from the Symposium stem from discussions on

regulatory actions and capacity building, they also suggest that EPA/ORD needs to approach its

research planning and its contributions to the development of Agency risk assessment guidance

differently: “create effective mechanisms to listen to community concerns; develop culturally

competent outreach processes. Hire local community folks with cultural expertise and community

knowledge; and improve incorporation of exposure information for smaller communities and

population groups in national risk assessments.”

3. Create EPA funding mechanisms for community

‐ based participatory research (CBPR) and

trans

‐ disciplinary research, with a specific focus on studies that will benefit disadvantaged,

undeserved, and environmentally overburdened communities or groups. The EJ

‐ Caucus letter

states that “affected communities need to be involved in the conduct of research to insure that

that results are disseminated in an effective and understandable manner and that research

recommendations are reviewed by the community.” Similar recommendations were made at the

Symposium including “support/fund community originated and owned research; increase

support/funding for community based participatory research; support participation of

communities as equal partners in research; include them as equal partners in the co

‐ production of

knowledge; include community representatives and perspectives in the design of studies/research.

Further, EJ

‐ Caucus letter recommends that EPA should also “develop a set of guidelines for federal

environmental health research that would require community participation with binding ethical

and Title VI guidelines for federally funded researchers in EJ communities and tribal nations.” This

is consistent with comments raised at the symposium encouraging “federal funders of University

researchers to address the unequal power dynamic that often arises between Universities and

impacted communities that are subject of environmental and public health research.”

4. Collaborate with other federal government agencies on research, policy

‐ making and other

kinds of actions to address environmental health disparities. Many comments were made about

the need to strengthen interagency efforts: “to address EJ, need inter

‐ agency collaboration;

29Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

government approach to promoting and managing health is fragmented; agencies need to work

together to formulate solutions for communities; other agencies should integrate EJ in all their

activities.”

5. Enhance the capacities of minority academic institutions (MAI) to engage in scientific research

and workforce training. For instance, help MAI institutions to provide training opportunities for

minority students in relevant scientific disciplines. Several statements were made at the

Symposium that there was a lack of diversity in the academic institutions represented at the

meeting and as presenters. HBCUs need to be involved in this new and expanded area of research

on environmental health disparities.

6. Develop and implement a multi

‐ media approach to cumulative contamination exposures in

environmental justice communities

. Restructure risks assessment practice to better account for

multi

‐ stressors that cumulatively impact community and population health and recognize that

the concepts that vulnerability and health disparities are interrelated. These recommendations

from the EJ

‐ Caucus letter echo many of the concerns and other recommendations raised at the

Symposium on the topic of cumulative impacts. Comments from the Symposium include

“communities see their environment as a whole not pieces.; EPA needs to address the issue of

non

‐ concordance between risk assessment results and community experience; vulnerability

should be an integral part of cumulative risk assessment even it must be analyzed using qualitative

measures; incorporate social vulnerabilities and cultural risks in risk assessments and cumulative

risks/impact assessments; incorporate background risk in risk assessment; consider using

qualitative approaches in risk assessment; adopt a quality of life approach; risk assessment should

move away from individual lifestyles to one that considers the social context; focus on health and

well

‐ being as opposed to risk, illness and death; EPA should recognize that stressors in

communities that are unaccounted for are not considered in risk assessments; adopt a systems

approach to risk assessment and decision

‐ making; and EPA should use information on cumulative

impacts in all its decisions.

7. Establish programs and provide federal government support to increase technical and

scientific capacity in communities. This capacity

‐ building can help the public to address

environmental health issues and to allow them to effectively participate in environmental

health decision

‐ making

. The EJ

– Caucus letter recommends that “grant/funding programs be

expanded to provide support directly to EJ communities, EJ organizations and networks, Tribes and

Native organizations to assess and act on EJ issues.” Additionally Symposium participants

advocated that “EPA include community

‐ based organizations, leaders and residents in the co

‐ production of knowledge and the scientific bases for environmental decision

‐ making; make

resources available to develop technical skills of community leaders on science and decisions;

develop technical expertise within the communities; and commit resources to develop networks

and centers/consortia with universities to support community groups with technical matters and

participation in decision

‐ making.”

30Plan EJ 2104: Science Tools Development Draft Implementation Plan, March 1, 2011

8. Develop analytic and assessment tools, and data collection approaches that could be used by

community health advocates and EJ groups. Availability of appropriate tools and training on use

of such tools would also help increase technical capacity of communities. For example

recommendations include “work with local governments to provide access to data sources;

influence their [local governments] data collection approaches; develop mapping tools that

communities can use; encourage community engagement in the collection of data by government;

explore the approach of using communities to collect data to overcome limitations of government

data such as privacy issues and poor geospatial resolution; and develop zoning maps that are

accessible to communities; regional councils of government can provide accurate city level data

for community research.”

9. Build capacities and skills among EPA/ORD staff and scientists to conduct research and other

science related activities in equal partnership with impacted communities. This step must

include diversifying EPA’s technical and scientific expertise in the social sciences. Concomitant

with efforts to increase technical capacity in communities, EPA/ORD needs to build up its capacity

to work with communities in order for real progress to be made. Several recommendations from

the Symposium address this issue: “train EPA staff on effective outreach and dialog with

communities; develop capacity within the agency; provide training for EPA risk assessors and

managers on community engagement; consider using qualitative approaches in risk assessment;

multi

‐ disciplinary teams are needed to work on issues; encourage multidisciplinary teams in

environmental health research; social science disciplines like social epidemiology indicate that EPA

needs to look more at upstream factors

– social processes that ultimately process the disparities in

risks and health outcomes; explore approaches for interacting with communities that can build

collective efficacy and social capital; support participation of communities as equal partners in

research; include them as equal partners in the co

‐ production of knowledge; and include

community representatives and perspectives in the design of studies/research.”

10. EPA and other agencies should integrate environmental justice (EJ) in all EPA activities,

including policy making, regulatory actions, research and public outreach

. An important place

for intervention for environmental justice is regulation and rule

‐ making. Example

recommendations from the Symposium on the use of science and information to address EJ

concerns in decision

‐ making include “develop measures of environmental health disparities to

monitor temporal and spatial trends in disparities, and also whether environmental regulation is

effective; stratify research data by race and income to better analyze disparate impacts; account

for differences in the effect of Pb on hypertension which is more pronounced in chronically

stressed individuals in regulatory assessments and policies; develop tools for equity assessment;

test the validity of available vulnerability indices and tools; base decisions on good science that

passes the tests of reliability, repeatability and peer review; good data are legally defensible; and

present policy choices and equity impacts to Administrator as a standard consideration in decision

‐ making.”

31