# ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

# YUROK TRIBE 190 K lamath Boulevard • Post Of fi ce Box 1027 • K lama th , CA 95548

I r i na My e rs U SEPA Offi ce of Po lluti o n Preve n tion a nd Ta xi es (O PPT) 1 200 P e nn sy l va ni a Ave nu e, NW M a il C ode : 74 0 8 M W as hin g t o n , DC 20 46 0

RE : R es p o n se t o Tr ib a l Co n s ultation, A u g u s t 27, 2015 , Notifica t i o n of C o n s ult a ti o n a nd C oordin ation o n TSCA W o r k Pl a n Chem ic a l Pro bl e m F or mulation & Initi a l Assess m e nt and Da t a N ee d s Assessm e nt f o r Fl am e Re t a rd ants (FR) C l us t ers

Dear M s. M yers: I a m w ritin g as C h airman of th e Yur o k Trib e, w ho se mi ss ion i s to exe r ci se t h e a bori g in a l and sove r e i g n ri g hts of t h e Y urok Peo pl e to continu e f o reve r our T r ib a l tra dition s of se lf -g ove rn a n ce , cultura l a nd s piritu a l prese rvat i o n , st ew a rd ship of Y uro k l a nd s, wa t e rs and oth e r n a tura l e ndo w m e nts, b a lance d soc ia l a nd eco n o mi c deve l o pm e nt , p eace an d re ciprocity, and resp e ct for t h e di g nity and indi v idu a l ri g ht s of a ll p e r so n s li v in g w i t h i n t h e ju ri sd i c tion of th e Yuro k Trib e , w hil e h o norin g our Cr eat or , our a n cest ors a nd o ur d esce nd a n ts. As the largest Nati ve Ame ri ca n Trib e in C alif o rni a, thi s includ es th e h ea lth a nd w e lfa re of ove r 6, 0 0 0 e nroll e d m em b e r s a nd man y ot h e rs l ivin g in t he num e r o u s co mmuniti es o n ou r R ese rvati o n a n d A n cest ra l T err i tory. Th e Y ur ok T r i b e i s s u b mittin g co mm e nts regardin g t he Tox i c Su bstanc es Con t rol Act (TSC A) Work Pl a n c h e mi ca l s as id e nt if i ed i n th e follo w in g t a bl e with th e co rre spondin g docket numb e rs . Chemical Cluster Docket Number T

e

t ra br o m o bi s ph e n o l A EPA- HQ - OPPT -2 014 - 0730 Chl o rin a t e d Ph osp h at e E st e r s EPA-HQ-OPPT - 2015 - 006 8 C

ycl ic A liph ati c B ro mid es EPA- HQ - OP P T- 2015 - 00 8 1 Bro m i n ated Phth a l at es EPA- HQ-O PPT -2 014 - 04 9 1 EPA Noti ce of Co n s ultat i o n a nd C o o rdin ati o n , Enclo s ur es, "Co n s ul ta ti o n Inform a ti o n ," 0 ?/27/2 01 5, pp . 4

. Th e Yuro k Tr ib e ack n ow l ed ges EP A's e ffo rt s to in clud e th e hi g h - l eve l of fi s h co n s umpti o n r a t es b y trib a l p eo pl e, o r "s ub si s t e n ce fi s h e rs" as d esc rib e d in th e r is k assess m e n ts f o r th e four s ubj ec t fl a m e reta rd a n t clu st e r s. However, w e h o p e EPA rea li zes th e re i s st i ll a lon g wa y to go in co n s id e rin g th e hi g h ri sk a nd p o t ent i a l n egative imp act s t o t he h ea lth ( p hysi cal , m e nt a l a nd spi ri t ua l ) and lif e of our trib a l m e mb ers a nd co mmuniti e s by chemi cals in t h e e nv iron me nt and th e multi ple p a thways of c h r oni c ex po s u re th a t ou r memb ers exper i e nc e in th e i r practic e of tra diti o n a l, cere mon ia l , a nd s ub s i ste n ce acti v iti es. Th e Y ur o k Tr i b e su pp or t s EPA's inclu s ion of fi sh con s umption amounts b y s ub s i ste nc e fi shers a nd th e ir ch i ldre n w h e n eva l uat i n g ex po sure path way s of th e "C PE " fl a m e re t a rd a nt clu s t e rs. W e s pecifically hi g hli g h t EPA's co mmitm en t t o acco unt f or t h e hi g h -e nd f i s h co n sumption of su b s i st e n ce f is h e rs -in cludin g preg n a n t wo m e n , chil d re n a nd a dult s-t h e m a jorit y of w h om a re trib a l popul a tion s. Furth e rmor e, t h e Y uro k Tr i be

### agre es with the need to evaluate the hazard endpoints that go beyond cancer risk a nd include targe t organ effects, reproductive and d evelopmental effects and neurotoxicity. (CPE Problem Formulation, 08/15 , pp. 32 and 34) · Howev er, the Yurok Tribe imp e l s EPA to a l so include fish consumption rate s of subsistence f is hers in the risk assess ment work on all the flame retardant clusters. For instance, in the TBBPA Problem Fo r mulation , EPA plan s to on l y u se co nsumption rates for recreational fishers, does not consider exposure fr o m backyard open burning which i s common in rural re se rvations and comm unitie s, and does not consi d er other tradit io nal subsistence foods known to bioaccumulate these chemica l s, suc h as non -c ommerci a l f ish spec i es su ch as l amprey and st urgeon, fresh water mu ss els, marin e mammals and bird s.

• Additionally, regarding fish consumption and the population scenario, th e Y u rok Tribe bel ieves t h e tribal population sce nario is the most appropriate to u se for ri sk assessments by EPA , becau se EPA's own rule s indi cate th at th ey are to protect the population of h ighest risk. Fo r example, as i de n t ified in the prob l em formu la tion for the HBCD c lu s t er, fi sh consumption rates for subsistence fi shers at 142 .5 gra m s p er d ay n ee d to be used in to b e prot ec tive of aggregate ex po sure for t hose w ho re ly heavi ly on locally so urce d fish. Tribal people are at the hi g h est risk due to th e ir known hig h- l eve l cons u mp tion of fis h, ma r in e mammal s, and bird s as well as extended time spent in the natu ral env i ronment, all of which incr eases th eir potentia l exposure to env ironm enta l chemicals. • In t e rm s of cumulat ive ri sk, th e Yurok Tribe in s i s

t s th at EPA look at the overall body burd en of chemicals a nd th e interaction of the flame r etardant s with other chemicals. Tribal p eo ple are es pe cially exposed to l arger volumes of chemical s du e to the ir traditional diets, lifeways and th eir geographic loca t ion s t hat are often in areas of endpoint aggregat ion and pollut ant deposition. • Fina ll y, the Yurok Trib e remind s EPA that trib es a nd s ub sistence communitie s have resourc e u se- in both 

### types of resou rce s and 

### volume of u se- that are important factors in r i sk assessments t hat EPA mu s t not overlook any lon ger. For examp l e, high - level use of local plants by tribal p eo ple may put them a t r i sk du e to d er mal expo sure when harve s ting the plants and exposure by ingest ion or i nhala tio n wh e n eating, mouthing or burning th e plants for traditional uses. Of s p e cial concern for th e Yurok Tribe are the l eve l s of persistent organic pollut a nts detected in our heavi ly ut iliz ed s ub s istence spec ie s that were analyzed in an EPA NCER 2010 g rant and altho u g h o u r staff ca n not affo rd ongoing tis s ue analysis, we feel that it i s a justified and probable concern t hat if tho se common chemica l s of concern had made their way through the environment into our foods, th ese n ewe r chemicals in your docket today hav e a high probability of reaching these same endpoints. For example of 11 specie s tested (Chi nook sa lmon , Coho, s te e lhead , Oung e n ess crab, lamprey eel, fres hwater mussels, marine mu ssels, clams, seawee d , s turgeo n , a nd whale) all had detections of dioxin /furan s, PAHs, and PCBs; 9 had r esidues of organochlorine p esticid es; and 5 had detection s of the earlier flame retardants, th e PBDE s in their tis sues. As a T ri be, our members are exper iencing di sproportionate adverse h ea lth effects and s trongly advise the EPA to utilize tribal lif

eways in their risk exposure scenarios. Thank you for al l owi n g the Yurok Tribe the opportunity to provide meanin gfu l input on t he gathe rin g of data and preparation of problem formu l ations for these four f lam e retardant clusters.



### s;nme ly , 

# ~



# ~~ 

# r

Tribal C hairman Yurok Tribal Co uncil