For Immediate Release
June 29, 2006
Local Press Conference:
1:30 pm, 1801 Stillman, Reverend Harold Brand residence, Corpus Christi, Texas, 78407
Contacts:
Suzie Canales, Citizens for Environmental Justice (CFEJ), 361-334-6764
(cell: 361-816-9134)
Denny Larson, Refinery Reform Campaign (RRC), 415-845-4705
Beth O’Brien, Public Citizen Texas Office, 512-477-1155
New Report outlines flaws in U.S. EPA Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs)
Corpus Christi, Texas Environmental Justice Activist travels to Washington, D.C. to address Refinery Reform Issues
(Corpus Christi, TX) Suzie Canales, chair of Citizens for Environmental Justice (CFEJ) releases a report she wrote, "Supplemental Environmental Projects: The Most Affected Communities are not Receiving Satisfactory Benefits." The National Refinery Reform Campaign and Public Citizen's Texas Office sponsored the report. In addition, Suzie Canales traveled to Washington D.C. this week to convene with a delegation of other Environmental Justice activists and to meet with Congressional and U.S. Senate Representatives and U.S. EPA Headquarter Representatives to discuss refinery concerns, public health impacts, and legislation to protect human health and the environment.
A Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) is an environmental project that a violator voluntarily chooses to perform as part of the settlement in an enforcement action. Although a violator is not legally required to perform a SEP, the cash penalty is lowered significantly, in most cases reduced by half, if the company performs one.
The report examines the history of SEPs in Corpus Christi and reveals that the communities most impacted by companies' violations routinely are not directly benefiting from the resulting SEPs.
"There is no special consideration given to the population that has to bear the burden to their health from the company's violation that prompted the SEP," said the report's writer, Suzie Canales.
EPA's SEP policy states, in part: There is an acknowledged concern, expressed in Executive Order 12898 on environmental justice, that segments of the nation's population, i.e., low-income and/or minority populations, are disproportionately burdened by pollutant exposure. Emphasizing SEPs in communities where environmental justice concerns are present helps ensure that persons who spend significant portions of their time in areas, or depend on food and water sources located near, where the violation occurred would be protected.
A review of documents available through open records requests indicate that repeatedly, in the Corpus Christi area, SEPs do not directly benefit the communities affected by the violations. For example, an enforcement action against Citgo (August 1999) that included operating a surface impoundment without a permit and emitting hydrogen fluoride, VOCs, and hydrogen sulfide without a permit resulted in a SEP contribution that would benefit a bird nesting site on Shamrock Island.
"EPA and TCEQ have failed to follow the letter of the law in implementing SEPs, especially in Environmental Justice communities," said Denny Larson, coordinator of the National Refinery Reform Campaign. "Instead our government agencies have become another tool of the polluters' public relation schemes by approving projects that don't help the people who were hurt by the violations."
"The people living next door to industrial facilities are burdened daily by toxic emissions. It is infuriating that when a company is caught violating the law and the state agency actually takes an enforcement action against the company, the SEPs aren't doing anything for the innocent citizens whose health and lives are further harmed from the company's illegal actions," said Beth O'Brien of Public Citizen. "The company is getting to significantly reduce their penalty by performing a SEP; that project must contribute directly to the communities affected by the violation or it is not worth the penalty reduction."
The Report's Recommendations include:
Address the root of the problem - Take the power to choose SEPs out of the hands of the violators. There is something terribly wrong with a system that allows the violator to choose which SEP it will perform. SEPs are a result of an enforcement action and it makes absolutely no sense that the violator is given any special privileges.
Legislators must introduce bills that will change the current law that gives violators the authority to choose their own SEPs. Until this much-needed change takes place, industry has a responsibility to choose SEPs that will directly benefit the community, SEPs the community would like to see performed - and TCEQ, EPA, and the U.S. Department of Justice should strongly encourage the considerations of the affected community.
Investigate Public Health Impacts: The EPA Supplemental Environmental Project Overview "Public Health" category states that a SEP may include examining residents in a community to determine if anyone has experienced any health problems because of the company's violations. A project that looks at the health impact from companies' violations is long overdue.
Require Meaningful Community Input: In order for input from the community to be consequential, the input has to be obtained before negotiations between the violator and government are complete. Asking the community to comment after the negotiations are complete, during the public comment period, is pointless. It gives the illusion of meaningful community input when in fact that is not the case.
"Although this report explores the history of SEPs in Corpus Christi, TX, it mirrors what many other communities are struggling with around the country, due to current policy," added Suzie Canales, "We will work to bring about change through legislation so that the people impacted by the polluters' violations will benefit directly from SEPs."
A copy of the report is available at www.refineryreform.org and www.citizen.org/texas beginning Thursday, 10 am CST, June 29, 2006.
