February 17, 2011

MEMORANDUM 

To: Commercial and Institutional Waste Incinerators (CISWI) Rule Docket 

From: OAR OAQPS 

Subject: Addendum to Docket: “Preliminary Review of the Environmental Justice Impacts 

for the Following Proposed: Standards of Performance for New Stationary 

Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Commercial and 

Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) Units; National Emission Standards 

for Hazardous Air Pollutants or Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and 

institutional Boilers; National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters; Identification 

of Non-hazardous Secondary Materials (NHSM) that are Solid Waste (April 28, 

2010).”

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

 This addendum transmits the results of the reassessment of the environmental 

justice (EJ) demographics of those populations located in the vicinity of CISWI units. Based on 

data amendments and corrections that were incorporated following public comment on the 

proposed rule, EPA revised its estimates of the number of units covered by this rule downward 

from 176 units to 100 units, including incinerators, cement kilns, and energy recovery units 

(ERU). As a result of the reduction in the number of units in the source category, it was 

determined that a re-evaluation of the EJ demographics was appropriate. 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes Federal executive 

policy on EJ. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and 

addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 

effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

In addition to the Executive Order, EPA policy defines “Environmental Justice” to 

include meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income 

with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and polices1

. To promote meaningful involvement, EPA has developed a 

communication and outreach strategy to ensure that interested communities have access to a 

proposed rule, are aware of its content, and have an opportunity to comment during the comment 

 

1 Whitman, Christine T., Administrator, US Environmental Protection Agency, “EPA’s Commitment to

Environmental Justice.” August 9, 2001
period. EPA implemented this strategy during the comment period for the proposed CISWI rule. 

EPA publicized the rulemaking via EJ newsletters, Tribal newsletters, EJ listservs, and the 

internet, including the Office of Policy’s (OP) Rulemaking Gateway website 

(http://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/RuleGate.nsf/). EPA also provided general rulemaking fact sheets 

(e.g., why is this important for my community) for EJ community groups and conducted 

conference calls with interested communities. In the final rule, state and federal permitting 

requirements will provide state and local governments and members of affected communities 

with the opportunity to provide comments on the permit conditions associated with permitting 

the sources affected by this rulemaking. 

2.0 DEMOGRAPHICS

The following analysis uses a revised data set of sources coupled with “proximity-to-asource” as a surrogate for exposure to identify those populations considered to be living near 

affected sources, such that they have notable exposures to current emissions from these sources. 

The demographic data for this analysis is census block level data extracted from the 2000 census 

which was provided to the EPA by the US Census Bureau. The socio-demographic parameters 

used in the analysis included the following categories: Racial (White, African American, Native 

American, Other or Multiracial, All Other Races); Ethnicity (Hispanic); and Other (Number of 

people below the poverty line, Number of people with ages between 0 and 18, Number of people 

greater than or equal to 65) 

As with the original report contained in the docket, this proximity analysis determined the 

demographic composition of those census blocks whose centriods lay within a circular distance 

of 3 miles (approximately 5 km) of the affected sources. This study area radius has been used in 

previous demographic analyses focused on areas around industrial sources2,3. Also, beyond three 

miles the air emissions influence of an individual source is generally considered to be small, both 

in absolute terms and relative to the influence of other sources (assuming there are other sources 

in the area, as is typical in urban areas. The results of the analysis are contained in Table 2.1 (see 

below): 

Table 2.1 Summary of CISWI Demographic Proximity Analyses 

Nationwide 

Original CISWI Universe 

(176 units) 

Revised CISWI Universe 

(100 units) 

Total population 285,339,125 2,095,561 1,644,267 

Race by percent 

White 75 71 69 

All Other Races 25 29 31 

 

2 Mohai P, Saha R. “Reassessing Racial and Socio-economic Disparities in Environmental Justice Research.” 

Demography. 2006; 43(2): 383–399.

3 Mohai P, Saha R. “Reassessing Racial and Socio-economic Disparities in Environmental Justice Research.” 

Demography. 2006; 43(2): 383–399. 
Race by percent 

White 75 71 69 

African American 12 17 13 

Native American 0.9 1 1 

Other and 

Multiracial 12 12 17 

Ethnicity by percent 

Hispanic 14 13 15 

Non-Hispanic 86 87 85 

Income by percent 

Below poverty level 13 14 14 

Above poverty level 87 86 86 

Age Level 0 to 18 by percent 

Age 0 to 18 years 

old 27 27 27 

Age > 18 years old 73 73 73 

Age Level Greater Than or Equal to 65 by percent 

Age > 65 years old 12 12 12 

Age < 65 years old 88 88 88 

This EPA analysis revises the demographic data presented in “Exhibit 1 – Populations 

Within Three-Mile Proximity to Major Source Boilers and CISWI Units” as contained in the 

report referenced as the subject of this memorandum. When compared to the original 

demographic analysis, the results of this re-analysis indicate that the total number of people in 

proximity to, and potentially impacted by, this source category have declined by approximately 

22%. This decrease in the total population has resulted in corresponding changes in the 

percentage composition of the demographics in the study areas. The percentage of White and 

African American both decreased by 2% and 4% respectively from the previous study, while the 

percentage of Native Americans, the number of people with ages between 0 and age 18, the 

number of people greater than or equal to age 65, and the number below the poverty level 

remained relatively unchanged. Other demographic variables, specifically Other or Multiracial, 

Hispanics, and All Other Races, also decreased in total numbers, but their percentage 

composition in this re-analysis increased by approximately 5%, 2%, and 2% respectively. 

When compared to the national averages of these demographics, EPA’s re-analysis shows 

that the study areas tend to have lower proportions of Whites than the national average (i.e., 69% 

versus 75%). The proportions of Native Americans (1%), people with ages between 0 and 18 

(27%), and those greater than or equal to age 65 (12%) are very close, if not identical, to their 

respective national averages. However, the proportions for the demographic variables African 

American, Hispanics, Other or Multiracial, the number of people below the poverty line, and All 

Other Races are higher than their respective national averages with the greatest change occurring 

in the category Minority (All Non-White). These values compared to their national averages are 

as follows: African American (13% v. 12% respectively) Hispanics (15% v 14% respectively), 

other or Multiracial (17% v 12% respectively), the number of people below the poverty line 

(14% v 13% respectively), and All Other Races (31% v 25% respectively) 
Based on the fact that the final rule does not allow emission increases from this source 

category, EPA has determined that the rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects on minority or other subpopulatons.