1

MEMORANDUM

To: OSWRO Docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0360)

From: Paula Hirtz, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Date: November 19, 2014

Subject: Updated Environmental Justice Review: Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations 

RTR

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal executive policy

on environmental justice. 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 lowincome populations in the United States. E.O. 12898 informed the development and 

implementation of the EPA’s Environmental Justice (EJ) program and EJ policies. Consistent 

with the E.O. and the Presidential Memorandum that accompanies the E.O., the agency’s EJ 

policies promote environmental protection by focusing attention and agency efforts on 

addressing the types of environmental harms and risks that are prevalent among minority, lowincome and indigenous populations. E.O. 12898 and the agency’s EJ policies do not mandate 

particular outcomes for an action, but they demand that decisions involving the action be 

informed by a consideration of EJ issues. Where feasible, actions should prevent or address and 

mitigate EJ concerns.

A key element of environmental justice is ensuring that all people have an opportunity for 

meaningful involvement in the decision-making process. Certain groups may not have 

participated in the decision-making process historically because of economic (e.g., income), 

social (e.g., language barriers, education levels, distrust of government) and structural reasons. A 

critical concern is whether, and the extent to which, communities have the ability to influence the 

types and number of regulated activities taking place in their community, as well as the 

requirements, conditions and parameters by which such regulated activities must operate (e.g., 

permit conditions).

The EPA aims to notify and engage the public in a variety of ways. Each rule is reviewed to 

identify appropriate mechanisms to promote meaningful involvement, which may include notices 

on the EJAir website, community call discussions, fact sheets, community meetings and/or 

webinars. Additionally, when reliable source location data is available, the EPA strives to 

provide a screening report of near source populations. It is important to note that while the EPA 

provides near-source data, whether or not a facility-level analysis is appropriate depends on the 

Clean Air Act’s (CAA) authority for the subject rule. For example, CAA sections 112 (d) and 

112(f), which address hazardous air pollutants, require the EPA to establish emission standards 

that apply to all sources in specified categories or subcategories. In the case of the CAA 112(f), 

the EPA sets standards to ensure the public is protected with an ample margin of safety based on 

the maximum exposed individual risk (MIR) or the facility in the source category that poses the 

highest risks to the public, and must consider specific statutory factors, including costs, energy
2

and safety.

2.0 DEMOGRAPHICS

The EPA has determined that this final rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects on minority, low income or indigenous populations 

because it increases the level of environmental protection for all affected populations without 

having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on any 

population, including any minority, low income or indigenous populations.

However, the agency has reviewed the areas surrounding existing facilities to determine if there 

is an overrepresentation of minority, low income, or indigenous populations near the sources 

such that they may currently face disproportionate risks from pollutants. 

To gain a better understanding of the source category and near-source populations, the EPA 

conducted a proximity analysis at a study area of 3 miles for this rulemaking (Table 1). This 

analysis identifies, on a limited basis, the subpopulations that may be exposed to air pollution

from the regulated sources and thus are expected to benefit most from this regulation. This 

analysis does not identify the demographic characteristics of the most highly affected individuals 

or communities, nor does it quantify the level of risk faced by those individuals or communities. 

To the extent that any minority, low-income or indigenous subpopulation is disproportionately

impacted by hazardous air emissions due to the proximity of their homes to sources of these 

emissions, that subpopulation also stands to see increased environmental and health benefit from 

the emission reductions called for by this rule.

The analysis of demographic data used proximity-to-a-source as a surrogate for exposure to 

identify those populations considered to be living near affected sources, such that they have 

notable exposures to emissions from these sources. The demographic data for this analysis were 

extracted from the 2010 census data, which were provided to the EPA by the United States 

Census Bureau. Distributions by race were based on demographic information at the census 

block level, and all other demographic groups were based on the extrapolation of census block 

group level data to the census block level. The socio-demographic parameters used in the 

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

Other or Multiracial, and 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, number of people over age 25 without a high school diploma). 

In determining the aggregate demographic makeup of the communities near affected sources, the 

EPA focused on those census blocks within 3 miles of affected sources, determined the 

demographic composition (e.g., race, income, etc.) of these census blocks, and compared them to 

the corresponding compositions nationally. The radius of 3 miles (or approximately 5 km) is 

consistent with other demographic analyses focused on areas around potential sources1234

however, not necessarily associated with the distance health risks are seen. 

 

1 U.S. GAO (Government Accountability Office). Demographics of People Living Near Waste Facilities. 

Washington DC: Government Printing Office; 1995.

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

Demography. 2006; 43(2): 383–399.
3

Since the proposed rulemaking, the EPA received information from an additional four facilities 

in the source category and updated the agency’s 2010 census data. Results from these changes 

are reflected in Table 1. 

 

3 Mennis, J. “Using Geographic Information Systems to Create and Analyze Statistical Surfaces of Populations and 

Risk for Environmental Justice Analysis”. Social Science Quarterly, 2002; 83(1): 281-297.

4 Bullard, RD, Mohai, P., Wright, B., Saha, R., et al. Toxic Waste and Race at Twenty 1987-2007. United Church of 

Christ. March, 2007.
4

Table 1. Summary of Demographic Analysis for OSWRO facilities