table of contents

APPENDIX A: Principles of Environmental Justice

APPENDIX B: Executive Order No. 12898

APPENDIX C: DOT Environmental Justice Strategy

APPENDIX D: Proposed DOT Order

APPENDIX E: Civil Rights Remedies for Environmental Justice

APPENDIX F: Conference Evaluation

APPENDIX G: Attendee List

 

APPENDIX A: PRINCIPLES OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

PREAMBLE

WE THE PEOPLE OF COLOR, gathered together at this multinational People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, to begin to build a national and international movement of all peoples of color to fight the destruction and taking of our lands and communities, do hereby re- establish our spiritual interdependence to the sacredness of our Mother Earth; to respect and celebrate each of our cultures, languages, and beliefs about the natural world and our roles in healing ourselves; to insure environmental justice; to promote economic alternatives which would contribute to the development of environmentally safe livelihoods; and to secure our political, economic and cultural liberation that has been denied us for over 500 years of colonization and oppression, resulting in the poisoning of our communities and land and the genocide of our peoples, do affirm and adopt these Principles of Environmental Justice:

1. Environmental justice affirms the sacredness of Mother Earth, ecological unity, and the interdependence of all species, and the right to be free from ecological destruction.

2. Environmental justice demands that public policy be based on mutual respect and justice for all peoples, free from any form of discrimination or bias.

3. Environmental justice mandates the right to ethical, balanced, and responsible uses of land and renewable resources in the interest of a sustainable planet for humans and other living things.

4. Environmental justice calls for universal protection from nuclear testing, extraction, production, and disposal of toxic/hazardous wastes and poisons, and nuclear testing that threatens the fundamental right to clean air, land, water, and food.

5. Environmental justice affirms the fundamental right to political, economic, cultural, and environmental self-determination of all peoples.

6. Environmental justice demands the cessation of the production of all toxins, hazardous wastes, and radioactive materials; and that all past and current producers be held strictly accountable to the people for detoxification and containment at the point of production.

7. Environmental justice demands the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision-making, including needs-assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement, and evaluation.

8. Environmental justice affirms the right of all workers to a safe and healthy work environment, without being forced to choose between an unsafe livelihood and unemployment. It also affirms the right of those who work at home to be free from environmental hazards.

9. Environmental justice protects the right of victims of environmental injustice to receive full compensation and reparations for damages as well as quality health care.

10. Environmental justice considers governmental acts of environmental injustice a violation of international law, the Universal Declaration On Human Rights, and the United Nations Convention on Genocide.

11. Environmental justice must recognize a special legal and natural relationship of Native Peoples to the U.S. government through treaties, agreements, compacts, and covenants affirming sovereignty and self-determination.

12. Environmental justice affirms the need for urban and rural ecological policies to clean up and rebuild our cities and rural areas in balance with nature, honoring the cultural integrity of all our communities, and providing fair access for all to the full range of resources.

13. Environmental justice calls for the strict enforcement of principles of informed consent, and a halt to the testing of experimental reproductive and medical procedures and vaccinations on people of color.

14. Environmental justice opposes the destructive operations of multi-national corporations.

15. Environmental justice opposes military occupation, repression and exploitation of lands, peoples and cultures, and other life forms.

16. Environmental justice calls for the education of present and future generations which emphasizes social and environmental issues, based on our experience and an appreciation of our diverse cultural perspectives.

17. Environmental justice requires that we, as individuals, make personal and consumer choices to consume as little of Mother Earth's resources and to produce as little waste as possible; and make the conscious decision to challenge and re-prioritize our lifestyles to insure the health of the natural world for present and future generations.

Adopted October 27, 1991, in Washington, DC

top of page

table of contents

APPENDIX B: EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 12898

 

FEDERAL ACTIONS TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN MINORITY POPULATIONS AND LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1-1. Implementation

 

1-101. Agency Responsibilities.

To the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, and consistent with the principles set forth in the report on the National Performance Review, each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States and its territories and possessions, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands.

1-102. Creation of an Inter-agency Working Group on Environmental Justice. (a) Within three months of the date of this order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency ("Administrator") or the Administrator's designee shall convene an interagency Federal Working Group on Environmental Justice ("Working Group"). The Working Group shall comprise the heads of the following executive agencies and offices or their designees: (a) Department of Defense; (b) Department of Health and Human Services; (c) Department of Housing and Urban Development; (d) Department of Labor; (e) Department of Agriculture; (f) Department of Transportation; (g) Department of Justice; (h) Department of the Interior; (i) Department of Commerce; (j) Department of Energy; (k) Environmental Protection Agency; (l) Office of Management and Budget; (m) Office of Science and Technology Policy; (n) Office of the Deputy Assistant to the President for Environmental Policy; (o) Office of the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy; (p) National Economic Council; (q) Council of Economic Advisers; and (r) such other Government officials as the President may designate. The Working Group shall report to the president through the Deputy Assistant to the President for Environmental Policy and the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy.

(b) The Working Group shall: (1) provide guidance to Federal agencies on criteria for identifying disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations and low-income populations; (2) coordinate with, provide guidance to, and serve as a clearinghouse for, each Federal agency as it develops an environmental justice strategy as required by section 1-103 of this order, in order to ensure that the administration, interpretation and enforcement of programs, activities and policies are undertaken in a consistent manner; (3) assist in coordinating research by, and stimulating cooperation among, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and other agencies conducting research or other activities in accordance with section 3-3 of this order; (4) assist in coordinating data collection, required by this order; (5) examine existing data and studies on environmental justice; (6) hold public meetings as required in section 5-502(d) of this order; and (7) develop interagency model projects on environmental justice that evidence cooperation among Federal agencies.

1-103. Development of Agency Strategies. (a) Except as provided in section 6-605 of this order, each Federal agency shall develop an agency-wide environmental justice strategy, as set forth in subsections (b)-(e) of this section that identifies and addresses disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations. The environmental justice strategy shall list programs, policies, planning and public participation processes, enforcement and/or rule makings related to human health or the environment that should be revised to, at a minimum: (1) promote enforcement of all health and environmental statutes in areas with minority populations and low- income populations; (2) ensure greater public participation; (3) improve research and data collection relating to the health of and environment of minority populations and low-income populations; and (4) identify differential patterns of consumption of natural resources among minority populations and low-income populations. In addition, the environmental justice strategy shall include, where appropriate, a timetable for undertaking identified revisions and consideration of economic and social implications of the revisions. (b) Within 4 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall identify an internal administrative process for developing its environmental justice strategy, and shall inform the Working Group of the process. (c) Within 6 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall provide the Working Group with an outline of its proposed environmental justice strategy. (d) Within 10 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall provide the Working Group with its proposed environmental justice strategy. (e) Within 12 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall finalize its environmental justice strategy and provide a copy and written description of its strategy to the Working Group. During the 12 month period from the date of this order, each Federal agency, as part of its environmental justice strategy, shall identify several specific projects that can be promptly undertaken to address particular concerns identified during the development of the proposed environmental justice strategy and a schedule for implementing those projects. (f) Within 24 months of the date of this order, each Federal agency shall report to the Working Group on its progress in implementing its agency-wide environmental justice strategy. (g) Federal agencies shall provide additional periodic reports to the Working Group as requested by the Working Group.

1-104. Reports to the President. Within 14 months of the date of this order, the Working Group shall submit to the President, through the Office of the Deputy Assistant to the President for Environmental Policy and the Office of the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, a report that describes the implementation of this order, and includes the final environmental justice strategies described in section 1-103(e) of this order.

Section 2-2. Federal Agency Responsibilities for Federal Programs

Each Federal agency shall conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment, in a manner that ensures that such programs, policies, and activities do not have the effect of excluding persons (including populations) from participation in, denying persons (including populations) the benefits of, or subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination under, such programs, policies, and activities, because of their race, color, or national origin. 

Section 3-3. Research, Data Collection, and Analysis

3-301. Human Health and Environmental Research and Analysis. (a) Environmental human health research, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall include diverse segments of the population in epidemiological and clinical studies, including segments at high risk from environmental hazards, such as minority populations, low-income populations and workers who may be exposed to substantial environmental hazards. (b) Environmental human health analyses, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall identify multiple and cumulative exposures. (c) Federal agencies shall provide minority populations and low-income populations the opportunity to comment on the development and design of research strategies undertaken pursuant to this order.

3-302. Human Health and Environmental Data Collection and Analysis. To the extent permitted by existing law, including the Privacy Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. section 552a): (a) each Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall collect, maintain, and analyze information assessing and comparing environmental and human health risks borne by populations identified by race, national origin, or income. To the extent practical and appropriate, Federal agencies shall use this information to determine whether their programs, policies, and activities have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations and low-income populations; (b) In connection with the development and implementation of agency strategies in section 1-103 of this order, each Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall collect, maintain and analyze information on the race, national origin, income level, and other readily accessible and appropriate information for areas surrounding facilities or sites expected to have a substantial environmental, human health, or economic effect on the surrounding populations, when such facilities or sites become the subject of a substantial Federal environmental administrative or judicial action. Such information shall be made available to the public, unless prohibited by law; and (c) Each Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall collect, maintain, and analyze information on the race, national origin, income level, and other readily accessible and appropriate information for areas surrounding Federal facilities that are: (1) subject to the reporting requirements under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, 42 U.S.C. section 11001-11050 as mandated in Executive Order No. 12856; and (2) expected to have a substantial environmental, human health, or economic effect on surrounding populations. Such information shall be made available to the public, unless prohibited by law. (d) In carrying out the responsibilities in this section, each Federal agency, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall share information and eliminate unnecessary duplication of efforts through the use of existing data systems and cooperative agreements among Federal agencies and with State, local, and tribal governments.

Section 4-4. Subsistence Consumption of Fish and Wildlife

4-401. Consumption Patterns. In order to assist in identifying the need for ensuring protection of populations with differential patterns of subsistence consumption of fish and wildlife, Federal agencies, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall collect, maintain, and analyze information on the consumption patterns of populations who principally rely on fish and/or wildlife for subsistence. Federal agencies shall communicate to the public the risks of those consumption patterns. 

4-402. Guidance. Federal agencies, whenever practicable and appropriate, shall work in a coordinated manner to publish guidance reflecting the latest scientific information available concerning methods for evaluating the human health risks associated with the consumption of pollutant-bearing fish or wildlife. Agencies shall consider such guidance in developing their policies and rules.

Section 5-5. Public Participation and Access to Information

(a) The public may submit recommendations to Federal agencies relating to the incorporation of environmental justice principles into Federal agency programs or policies. Each Federal agency shall convey such recommendations to the Working Group. (b) Each Federal agency may, whenever practicable and appropriate, translate crucial public documents, notices, and hearings relating to human health or the environment for limited English speaking populations. (c) Each Federal agency shall work to ensure that public documents, notices, and hearings relating to human health or the environment are concise, understandable, and readily accessible to the public. (d) The Working Group shall hold public meetings, as appropriate, for the purpose of fact-finding, receiving public comments, and conducting inquiries concerning environmental justice. The Working Group shall prepare for public review a summary of the comments and recommendations discussed at the public meetings.

Section 6-6. General Provisions

6-601. Responsibility for Agency Implementation. The head of each Federal agency shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with this order. Each Federal agency shall conduct internal reviews and take such other steps as may be necessary to monitor compliance with this order.

6-602. Executive Order No. 12250. This Executive order is intended to supplement but not supersede Executive Order No. 12250, which requires consistent and effective implementation of various laws prohibiting discriminatory practices in programs receiving Federal financial assistance. Nothing herein shall limit the effect or mandate of Executive Order No. 12250.

6-603. Executive Order No. 12875. This Executive order is not intended to limit the effect or mandate of Executive Order No. 12875.

6-604. Scope. For purposes of this order, Federal agency means any agency on the Working Group, and such other agencies as may be designated by the President, that conducts any Federal program or activity that substantially affects human health or the environment. Independent agencies are requested to comply with the provisions of this order.

6-605. Petitions for Exemptions. The head of a Federal agency may petition the President for an exemption from the requirements of this order on the grounds that all or some of the petitioning agency's programs or activities should not be subject to the requirements of this order.

6-606. Native American Programs. Each Federal agency responsibility set forth under this order shall apply equally to Native American programs. In addition, the Department of the Interior, in coordination with the Working Group, and, after consultation with tribal leaders, shall coordinate steps to be taken pursuant to this order that address Federally-recognized Indian Tribes.

6-607. Costs. Unless otherwise provided by law, Federal agencies shall assume the financial costs of complying with this order.

6-608. General. Federal agencies shall implement this order consistent with, and to the extent permitted by, existing law.

6-609. Judicial Review. This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch and is not intended to, nor does it create any right, benefit, or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party against the United States, its agencies, its officers, or any person. This order shall not be construed to create any right to judicial review involving the compliance or non-compliance of the United States, its agencies, its officers, or any other person with this order.

William J. Clinton
The White House
11 February 1994

top of page

table of contents 

APPENDIX C: DOT ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE STRATEGY

INTRODUCTION

This strategy is issued in response to Executive Order 12898, signed by President Clinton on February 11, 1994, on "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations." This strategy sets forth the Department of Transportation's (DOT) approach to implementing E.O. 12898 in all relevant programs and activities sponsored, supported and undertaken by the Department. The Executive Order requires each Federal agency to develop a specific agency-wide strategy for implementing its provisions. The thrust of the Executive Order is to identify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of each agency's programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations.

The strategy contains the Department's commitment to certain principles of environmental justice embodied in the Secretary's Strategic Plan, and identifies actions the Department intends to take to implement Executive Order 12898. The strategy is published as a final document; however, it should be viewed as a living document that may be adjusted periodically in response to insights acquired while implementing its various provisions. DOT plans further opportunity for public comments on its strategy and implementing actions.

DOT is committed to embracing the objectives of Executive Order 12898 by promoting enforcement of all applicable planning and environmental regulations and legislation, and by promoting non-discrimination in its programs, policies and activities that affect human health and the environment, consistent with Executive Order 12898, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. DOT is also committed to bringing government decision making closer to the communities and people affected by these decisions and ensuring opportunities for greater public participation in decisions relating to human health and the environment.

Many of the objectives of the E.O. are embodied in the missions, goals, and objectives of the Secretary's Strategic Plan and are briefly summarized as follows:

· Improve the environment and public health and safety in the transportation of people and goods, and the development and maintenance of transportation systems and services.

· Harmonize transportation policies and investments with environmental concerns, reflecting an appropriate consideration of economic and social interests.

· Consider the interests, issues, and contributions of affected communities, disclose appropriate information, and give communities an opportunity to be involved in decision making. 

The Department will implement the E.O. by integrating its provisions into existing DOT programs, policies, activities, regulations, and guidance to the greatest extent possible.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOT STRATEGY

1. Secretary's Directive

Upon receipt of the Executive Order and the accompanying Presidential Memorandum, Secretary Pena established a department-wide Working Group and directed the development of a Department-wide strategy.

During senior level staff meetings in December 1994 and March 1995, Secretary Pena emphasized his commitment to comply with Executive Order 12898 and instructed senior level staff to support the executive order and encouraged them to incorporate the principles of environmental justice in program planning, budgeting, program development, program activities, and program evaluation, as appropriate. 

In a recent memorandum to Secretarial offices and operating administrations, Secretary Pena stated his strong personal endorsement of their efforts to carry out the responsibilities set out in the Department's Environmental Justice Strategy in an effective and timely manner.

 a. National Conference on Transportation, Social Equity, and Environmental Justice in Chicago.

This conference, sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration and the Surface Transportation Policy Project, brought together approximately 150 persons, mostly community activists from around the country, with DOT and other public officials. The meeting, held on November 17-18, 1994, in Chicago, identified key transportation- related environmental and social issues of concern to persons living in predominantly low-income and minority communities. Suggestions for actions to redress these concerns were also sought.

b. Inter-departmental Public Meeting in Atlanta

On January 20, 1995, DOT participated, along with other Federal departments/agencies, in a public meeting in Atlanta to solicit comments on environmental justice issues as they relate to Federal Government programs. A portion of the meeting was televised nationwide by satellite to designated down link sites. 

c. Federal Register Notice

DOT published its proposed strategy in the Federal Register on February 21, 1995, with a request for comment. In addition, the Department mailed approximately 3,000 copies of the document to Departmental constituent groups and representatives of the environmental justice community. Based on comments received, DOT modified its strategy and streamlined its description in this document. 

ELEMENTS OF THE DOT STRATEGY

1. Public Outreach on Implementation of the Environmental Justice Strategy 

DOT plans, and will review with environmental justice stakeholders, its plans for the following activities: (1) grass roots meetings to better understand community-based environmental justice concerns and to provide training on the transportation decision making processes; (2) a secretarial level meeting of experts, traditional DOT stakeholders and environmental justice representatives to recommend specific policies and actions to implement Executive Order 12898 and the Department's Environmental Justice Strategy; and (3) regional workshops for state and local officials on implementing the Strategy. 

2. DOT Order on Environmental Justice 

A key component of the DOT Environmental Justice Strategy is a proposed DOT Order providing guidance to be followed by the Department and its operating administrations to implement Executive Order 12898. The DOT Order will apply to all appropriate DOT regulations, policies, guidance, and program activities as well as to any program, project, or activity undertaken by DOT or that receives financial assistance or permits from DOT, which may have environmental justice implications. The proposed DOT Order would ensure that all appropriate components of the Department will apply this strategy to appropriate aspects of their programs, policies, and activities in a way that integrates environmental justice considerations into existing agency operations rather than creating a separate set of requirements.

While the precise contents of the proposed DOT Order have not yet been fully developed, the Department anticipates that the Order will achieve several objectives. First, under the proposed Order, the Office of the Secretary and operating administrations of the DOT would review their regulations, programs, policies, guidance, and procedures that affect human health or the environment, to identify those that should be revised and revise them, as appropriate, to comply with Executive Order 12898. This review will include, but not be limited to, regulations, programs, policies, guidance, and procedures related to short and long- range planning and programming, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), pollution prevention, worker safety, environmental compliance, hazardous materials transportation, research, data collection, training, public participation, and relocation. 

Second, the proposed DOT Order would set forth guidance to be used by DOT, its operating administrations, the recipients of DOT financial assistance, and state and local officials to determine whether a DOT or a DOT-funded program, policy, project, or activity (DOT action) is likely to have a disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on low-income or minority populations. As part of this process, DOT, its operating administrations and recipients of Federal financial assistance will provide appropriate and meaningful opportunities for comment by representatives of affected communities.

Third, under the proposed DOT Order, DOT would develop potential strategies and measures to address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse effects of their actions and those of recipients of DOT funds, consistent with requirements of other statues and procedures. These measures may include pollution prevention, and health and safety measures, as well as mitigation and compensatory measures. This process would include procedures to provide meaningful opportunities for public involvement by low-income and minority populations, including community input in identifying potential mitigation measures for DOT actions. 

The proposed DOT Order also would provide for data collection or research as needed to provide information to comply with Executive Order 12898. Public input will be solicited regarding these activities.

The Dot Order will provide guidance on how to achieve compliance with Executive Order 12898 under existing environmental and civil rights laws in cases where disproportionate impacts have been identified. The DOT Order will be ready for public review in draft form on May 5, 1995.

3. DOT Training on Environmental Justice

In order to ensure that DOT managers are fully aware of their responsibilities under Executive Order 12898 and preexisting statutory mandates, DOT will hold information seminars on environmental justice for selected program managers throughout the Department. Representatives of the environmental justice community will be consulted in the planning of these seminars. 

In addition, in keeping with the Department's philosophy of integrating environmental justice considerations into all appropriate departmental programs and activities, DOT operating administrations will review and modify existing training courses to ensure adequate coverage of environmental justice principles and to use training examples that include environmental justice aspects. These courses include such subjects as compliance with environmental mandates, infrastructure planning and development, public involvement, and management of departmental facilities and resources. The audience for these training courses includes DOT employees and recipients of DOT funding.

ROLE OF KEY DOT ELEMENTS IN COMPLYING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE EXECUTIVE ORDER

Each element of the Department will undertake specific actions needed to implement the DOT Order on environmental justice. The actions undertaken will be developed and refined as the Department's strategy evolves. The following organizations will have key roles to play in the implementation process:

a. Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy maintains liaison with various elements of the Department in an effort to ensure that each appropriate element examines its programs and activities and takes appropriate actions to comply with Executive Order 12898. This office is also responsible for monitoring implementation of the DOT environmental justice strategy to help keep the strategy relevant and foster consistency and comprehensiveness in complying with the principles embodied in the Executive Order. In addition, the office will work to keep high-level Departmental officials properly involved in achieving the strategy's objectives and in maintaining liaison with non-DOT departments and agencies as well as the environmental justice community. 

The Department will review and update, as appropriate, its Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts, DOT Order 5610.1C, to ensure that it is consistent with Executive Order 12898 and DOT's proposed order on environmental justice. Attachment 2 to Order 5610.1C sets forth guidance on the format and content of environmental review documents and compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and other environmental statues, regulations, and executive orders, such as Section 4(f) of the DOT Act (49 U.S.C. 303). This attachment will be updated to reflect the requirements of Executive Order 12898 and to outline the need to address potential disproportionately high and adverse health, or environmental impacts on affected populations and communities. DOT operating administrations also will review and update their own environmental guidance.

b. Departmental Office of Civil Rights

Executive Order 12898 and the accompanying Presidential Memorandum underscore certain provisions of existing laws that can be used to ensure that all persons live in a safe and healthy environment. The Memorandum focuses on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which provides that programs and activities of recipients of Federal financial assistance may not discriminate based on race, color, or natural origin. The proposed DOT Order described above will provide the operating administrations with a framework to ensure that their policies, programs, and procedures comply with the intent of the Executive Order, including meeting the requirements of Title VI. 

In addition, the Departmental Office of Civil Rights will provide leadership and technical assistance to the operating administrations and to major recipients of DOT funds in the administration of their Title VI responsibilities which relate to environmental justice. This may take the form of guidelines, memoranda of general applicability, and training designed to achieve environmental justice for members of minority populations. 

c. Operating Administrations

DOT and its operating administrations will review the allocation of education and research funds to historically black colleges and universities and other minority institutions and minority students and faculty in light of E.O. 12898. In addition, DOT will review its research programs to determine whether and how minority and low-income populations may be more appropriately included in the scope of particular research projects. Improved outreach to affected populations will be developed. 

Each operating administration will implement the DOT strategy including public outreach and the DOT Order on environmental justice training. Each operating administration will continue to cooperate in these matters with the Departmental Office of Civil Rights and the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy.

top of page

table of contents

APPENDIX D: PROPOSED DOT ORDER 

SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACTIONS TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN MINORITY POPULATIONS AND LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS 

1. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY. 

a. This Order establishes procedures for the Department of Transportation (DOT) to use in complying with Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Relevant definitions are in the appendix. 

b. The objective of this DOT Order is to set forth a process by which DOT and its operating administrations will integrate the goals of the Executive Order with existing requirements set forth in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (URA), and other applicable statues, regulations and guidance that concern planning; social, economic, or environmental matters; public health or welfare; or public involvement. 

2. SCOPE. This Order applies to the Office of the Secretary, all operating administrations, and all other DOT components. 

3. BACKGROUND. Executive Order 12898 requires each Federal agency, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, and consistent with the principles set forth in the report on the National Performance Review, to achieve environmental justice as part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects, including social and economic effects, of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. Compliance with this DOT Order is a key element in the environmental justice strategy adopted by DOT, and can be achieved within the framework of existing laws, regulations, and guidance. 

4. DATA COLLECTION AND RESEARCH. 

a. In complying with this Order, DOT will rely upon the data collected (or readily available) for planning, for demonstrating compliance with NEPA or Title VI, or for other purposes. Consideration of the goals and objectives of Executive Order 12898 and this Order shall be an integral part of future DOT data collection and research activities. 

b. To the extent permitted by existing law, and whenever practical and appropriate, DOT shall collect, maintain, and analyze information on the race, color, national origin, and income level of persons affected by DOT programs, policies, and activities, and use such information in complying with this Order.

5. IDENTIFYING ADVERSE IMPACTS AND DETERMINING WHETHER THEY HAVE A DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH AND ADVERSE EFFECT ON MINORITY OR LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS. 

a. The Office of the Secretary and each operating administration shall develop a process for identifying (1) adverse impacts, (2) mitigation and enhancement measures, and (3) disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority or low-income populations, using the methodology in the appendix. The Office of the Secretary and each operating administration shall determine the most effective and efficient way of integrating the processes and objectives of this Order with their existing regulations and guidance, as outlined in paragraph 7.a. 

b. Actions Having a Disproportionately High and Adverse Effect on Minority Populations or Low-Income Populations. 

(1) If, after taking into account all mitigation and enhancement measures that will be taken and all offsetting benefits to the affected minority or low-income populations, the program, policy, or activity will still have an adverse impact, then DOT shall determine whether such adverse impact on minority populations or low-income populations is disproportionately high, using guidance in the appendix. 

(2) Determinations made pursuant to this paragraph shall be incorporated in the NEPA or other document, described in paragraph 7.b.(3). 

(3) The NEPA or other document described in paragraph 7.b.(3) shall contain a description of any measures that will be taken to address the disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority or low-income populations. 

(4) This paragraph does not restrict the application of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to the program, policy, or activity, or otherwise limit or preclude claims by individuals or groups of people with respect to any DOT program, policy, or activity. 

6. ACTIONS TO ADDRESS DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH AND ADVERSE EFFECTS.

(The following are options for consideration with respect to actions to address disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority populations and low-income populations under the Executive Order. A duty to address disproportionately high and adverse effects on certain populations is also established by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations. The ability to require specific findings and remedial action may differ somewhat for low-income populations and populations expressly protected by Title VI. For this reason, the DOT is considering including a provision in this Order which treats these two groups differently. This difference is seen most clearly in Option B, below. We will continue to consider DOT's authority with respect to low-income populations. 

We are soliciting comments on the following options, which vary in stringency, once a disproportionate impact has been identified. Commenters are invited to suggest additional options that DOT should consider. Comment is also sought on whether minority populations and low-income populations should be treated differently by the DOT Order.) 

OPTION A : 

6. ACTIONS TO ADDRESS DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH AND ADVERSE EFFECTS.

(a) If it is determined, pursuant to paragraph 5.b above, that the program, policy, or activity (including all offsetting mitigation and enhancement measures that will be taken) will have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority or low-income populations, then the program, policy, or activity may not be carried out unless further mitigation measures or alternatives that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effect are not practicable. In determining whether a measure or alternative is "practicable," the social, economic (including costs) and environmental effects of avoiding or mitigating the adverse effects will be taken into account. 

(b) Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, each federal agency is required to ensure that no person, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, is excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. DOT's responsibilities under Title VI and related statues and regulations are not limited by this paragraph, nor does this paragraph limit or preclude claims by individuals or groups of people with respect to any DOT program, policy, or activity under these authorities. 

OPTION B : 

6. ACTIONS TO ADDRESS DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH AND ADVERSE EFFECTS.

(a) If it is determined, pursuant to paragraph 5.b above, that the program, policy, or activity (including all offsetting mitigation and enhancement measures that will be taken ) will have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority or low-income populations, then the program, policy, or activity may not be carried out unless further mitigation measures or alternatives that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effect are not practicable. In determining whether a measure or alternative is "practicable," the social, economic (including costs) and environmental effects of avoiding or mitigating the adverse effects will be taken into account.

(b) In addition, if the program, policy or activity will have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on populations protected by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("protected populations"), then the program, policy or activity may not be carried out unless a substantial need for the program, policy or activity, based on the overall public interest, can be demonstrated, and 

(1) An agreement is reached with the potentially affected protected populations to proceed with the program, policy or activity, or 

(2) Alternatives that will have less adverse effects on protected populations (and still satisfy the need identified in subparagraph (b) above) either 

(A) would have other high adverse social, economic, environmental, or human health impacts that are more severe, or 

(B) would involve increased costs of extraordinary magnitude 

(c) Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, each federal agency is required to ensure that no person, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, is excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under a program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. DOT's responsibilities under Title VI and related statutes and regulations are not limited by this paragraph, nor does this paragraph limit or preclude claims by individuals or groups of people with respect to any DOT program, policy, or activity under these authorities. 

OPTION C : 

6. ACTIONS TO ADDRESS DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH AND ADVERSE EFFECTS.

(a) If it is determined pursuant to paragraph 5.b above that the program, policy, or activity (including all offsetting mitigation and enhancement measures that will be taken) will have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority or low-income populations, then the program, policy or activity may not be carried out unless consideration has been given to the following factors:

(1) whether a substantial need for the program, policy or activity, based on the overall public interest, can be demonstrated, and 

(2) whether alternatives that will have less adverse effects on minority or low-income populations (and still satisfy the need identified in subparagraph (1) above) either

(A) would have other high adverse social, economic, environmental, or human health impacts that are more severe, or 

(B) would involve increased costs of extraordinary magnitude 

(b) Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, each federal agency is required to ensure that no person, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, is excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under and program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. DOT's responsibilities under Title VI and related statutes and regulations are not limited by this paragraph, nor does this paragraph limit or preclude claims by individuals or groups of people with respect to any DOT program, policy, or activity under these authorities. 

7. INTEGRATION WITH EXISTING OPERATIONS 

a. The Office of the Secretary and each operating administration shall determine the most effective and efficient way of integrating the process and objectives of this Order with their existing regulations and guidance, and utilize existing authority in NEPA, Title VI, the URA and other statues, regulations, and guidance that concern planning; social, economic, or environmental matters; public health or welfare; public involvement; or related matters. Within 6 months of the date of this Order each operating administration will provide a report to the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy and the Director of the Departmental Office of Civil Rights describing the procedures it has developed to integrate, or how it is integrating, the processes and objectives set forth in this Order into its operations. Public input on any procedures developed to comply with this Order should be solicited.

b. In undertaking the integration with existing operations described in paragraph 7.a., DOT shall observe the following principles: 

(1) Planning and programming activities, that effect human health or the environment, shall include consideration of such effects on minority populations and low-income populations. Procedures shall be established or expanded, as necessary, to provide meaningful opportunities for public involvement by minority populations and low-income populations. Procedures shall be established or expanded, as necessary, to provide meaningful opportunities for public involvement by minority populations and low-income populations during the planning and development of programs, policies, and activities (including the identification of potential impacts, alternatives, and mitigation measures). 

(2) Affirmative steps shall be taken to provide the public, including minority populations and low-income populations, access to public information concerning the human health or environmental impacts of programs, policies, and activities. 

(3) The assessment of the effects of actions on minority populations or low-income populations, that is required by this Order, shall be included as part of any environmental document prepared in accordance with NEPA. If a program, policy, or activity that DOT determines is subject to the assessment prescribed by this Order is not subject to NEPA, or for any reason such impacts are not addressed in the NEPA document, a separate written analysis of such impacts shall be prepared and made available to the public. DOT may develop simplified assessments to the extent appropriate. Consideration of alternatives in these documents shall include comparisons of the impacts of each alternative on minority and low-income populations.

(4) DOT shall consider mitigation and enhancement measures to avoid or minimize environmental or human health impacts to minority populations and low-income populations in accordance with paragraph 3.b of the appendix. 

c. All future rule-making activities undertaken pursuant to DOT Order 2100.5 (which governs all DOT rule-making), and the development of any future guidance or procedures for DOT programs, policies, or activities, that affect human health or the environment, shall address compliance with Executive Order 12898 and this Order, as appropriate. 

d. The formulation of all future DOT policy statements and proposals for legislation will include consideration of the provisions of Executive Order 12898 and this Order.

8. ONGOING DOT RESPONSIBILITIES

Compliance with the Executive Order is an ongoing DOT responsibility. DOT will continuously monitor its programs, policies, and activities to ensure that potential disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority or low-income populations are avoided, minimized or mitigated in a manner consistent with this Order. The Department's Director of Civil Rights and the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy will have joint authority and responsibility for monitoring and enforcing the implementation of this Order. Nothing in this Order creates any right to judicial review of the compliance or noncompliance of DOT, its officers, employees, or any other persons, with this Order. 

FOR THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION 

APPENDIX: Guidance for Implementing Provisions of DOT ------- 

1. DEFINITIONS : The following terms where used in this Order shall have the following meanings : 

a. DOT means the Office of the Secretary, DOT operating administrations, and all other DOT components.

b. Low-Income means a person whose median household income is below the Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines. 

c. Minority means a person who is a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States and who is: 

(1) Black (a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa); 

(2) Hispanic (a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race);

(3) Asian American (a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands); 

(4) American Indian and Alaskan Native ( a person having origins in any of the original peoples of North America, and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition).

d. Programs, policies, and/or activities means all projects, programs, policies, and activities that affect human health and the environment, and which are undertaken or approved by DOT. These include (but are not limited to) permits, licenses, or financial assistance provided by DOT.

e. Regulations and guidance means regulations, programs, policies, guidance, and procedures promulgated, issued, or approved by DOT. 

2. REFERENCES 

a. Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations February 11, 1994, 59 Federal Register 7629. 

b. National Environmental Policy Act, 42 USC 4371.

c. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 42 USC 2000(d). 

3. IDENTIFYING ADVERSE IMPACTS, MITIGATION AND DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACTS ON MINORITY OR LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS. 

a. Identifying Adverse Impacts. 

(1) As part of infrastructure planning and other developmental processes, DOT shall identify social, economic and environmental effects and determine whether such effects are likely to have adverse impacts on the total population and on minority or low-income populations. In making a determination regarding adverse impacts, DOT shall consider both the impacts of individual projects and the cumulative impacts of its programs and projects on all affected populations and shall provide opportunities for the public, including members of minority populations and low- income populations that could be affected, to provide their input on the potential impact of such DOT programs, policies, and projects. 

(2) In the case of DOT programs, policies, or activities that do not involve infrastructure planning or developmental processes, the responsible DOT agency will develop a process for identifying adverse impacts and obtaining public input as appropriate. 

(3) In determining whether or not an action will have an adverse impact, consideration shall be given to individual or cumulative effects, as appropriate. Adverse impacts may include but are not limited to: air, noise, and water pollution and soil contamination; destruction or disruption of manmade or natural resources; destruction or diminution of aesthetic values; destruction or disruption of community cohesion or a community's economic vitality; destruction of the availability of public or private facilities and services; vibration; adverse employment effects; displacement of persons, businesses, farms, or nonprofit organizations; increased traffic congestion; isolation, exclusion or separation of minority or low-income individuals from the broader community; and the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of, benefits of DOT programs, policies, or activities. 

b. Identifying Mitigation and Enhancement Measures 

(1) DOT will use its existing statutory authorities, including NEPA, Title VI, the URA, other crosscutting Federal requirements, and statutes that apply only to one or more DOT operating administration(s) (for example 23 US 109(h)), as well as related regulations and guidance, to develop effective mitigation and enhancement strategies and specific mitigation and enhancement strategies and specific mitigation and enhancement measures that DOT will employ. 

(2) DOT will examine existing programs that have been developed to ensure opportunities for minority populations and low-income populations to develop specific mitigation and enhancement measures that address social, economic, and environmental issues, and will offset disproportionately high and adverse effects. 

(3) In determining whether or not there is an adverse impact, DOT shall take into account any offsetting mitigation and enhancement measures that will be taken (including those developed through the public involvement and community participation process), and any other offsetting benefits that will accrue to the affected minority populations or low-income populations as a result of the programs, policy, or activity.

(4) The following are general approaches to mitigation and enhancement measures that will be utilized as reasonable and necessary, consistent with existing law: 

(a) Avoiding or minimizing adverse impacts by reducing the degree or magnitude of the action or its implementation. 

(b) Mitigating or eliminating adverse impacts by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment and/or community resource. 

(c) Reducing or eliminating adverse impacts over time by long-term preservation and maintenance operations. 

(d) Compensating for adverse impacts by replacing adversely impacted resources or providing substitute resources or environments that enhance the affected area. 

c. Determining Whether an Action Has a Disproportionately High Adverse Effect on Minority Populations or Low-Income Populations. An adverse impact shall be found to have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low-income or minority populations when: 

(1) The adverse impact is predominantly borne by a minority population and/or a low- income population, or 

(2) The adverse impact that will be suffered by the minority population and/or low-income population is more severe or greater in magnitude than the adverse impact that will be suffered by the non-minority population and/or non-low-income population. 

top of page

table of contents

APPENDIX E: Civil Rights Remedies for Environmental Injustice

by Bill Lann Lee 

This presentation discusses the civil rights remedies available for claims of environmental injustice and cases brought by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund on behalf of minority community groups and individuals. The presentation concludes with a list of tips for community activists and others interested in prosecuting civil rights complaints. The Problem of Discriminatory Regulatory Enforcement. Claims of environmental injustice arise not only because of the activities of private entities, but because government regulatory agencies, whether wittingly or unwittingly, provide environmental protection in a racially and economically disparate manner. As a result, the historic tendency of private actors to impose disproportionate environmental burdens on minority and poor communities is often not restrained by the responsible regulatory agencies. The environmental justice movement, in some respects, is a response on various levels -- grass roots community activists, government, environmental organizations and civil rights groups -- to the failure of the federal government to provide for equitable regulatory enforcement.

Two Approaches.

Two approaches have emerged to address discriminatory regulatory enforcement. One approach is to improve enforcement of environmental laws and regulations in minority and poor communities by enhancing community participation in the regulatory and enforcement processes, requiring governmental scrutiny of the impact and bases of decision-making on minority and poor individuals, and increasing citizen suit environmental enforcement. The Environmental Justice Executive Order, Executive Order 12898 (February 11, 1994), with its provision of federal administrative programs and actions to address environmental justice in minority and low income communities, is an example of this approach. Another example is environmental law, or administrative or judicial proceedings brought by minority communities.

Another approach is to address directly the problem of disparate governmental enforcement by invoking civil rights laws and regulations, which require even-handedness in governmental operations. Federal, state or governmental agencies historically have been enjoined from racially discriminatory enforcement under the Constitution or civil rights laws. In Brown v. Board of Education, for instance, the Supreme Court ruled that local Southern school districts were required to desegregate public schools in order to vindicate the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection of the laws. The lower courts later ruled that federal funds could not be used to support unconstitutional segregation. Adams v. Richardson, 480 F.2d 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1973); Simkins v. Moses Cone Memorial Hosp., 323 F.2d 959 (4th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 938 (1964). Examples of this approach in the environmental justice context are complaints brought against regulatory agencies for violating their obligation under the civil rights laws to provide even-handed environmental protection.

These two approaches are complementary. Often they should be combined in a single effort. Thus community activists should participate in environmental decision-making processes as stakeholders. Because discriminatory governmental regulation may result, community activists, where appropriate, should not only invoke environmental law protections but also the requirements of civil right laws in enforcement proceedings. An early case illustrating this synthetic approach of combining environmental and civil rights claims in a single proceeding is Keith v. Volpe, 858 F. 2d 467 (9th Cir. 1988), aff'g 618 F.Supp. 1132 (C.D. Cal. 1986); 506 F. 2d 696 (9th Cir. 1974), aff'g 352 F.Supp. 1324 (C.D. Cal. 1972), a case brought on behalf of several residents and community organizations, including the local chapters of both the Sierra Club and the NAACP, challenging the construction of the Century Freeway in Los Angeles County on environmental and civil rights grounds.

The Civil Rights Laws.

The civil rights laws address both intentional discrimination and unjustified disparate impact. The Fourteenth Amendment and post-Civil War civil rights laws, see, e.g., 42 U.S.C. §§1981, 1982 and 1983, prohibit intentional discrimination by government. Often proof of intentional discrimination is difficult to obtain. Fact-finders have great latitude in assessing intentional discrimination claims, often deferring to the policy choices or decisions of state or local governmental officials. Generally, such claims have been unsuccessful in the environmental justice context because of the difficulty of proving intentional discrimination. An intentional discrimination case, however, does not necessarily require "smoking gun" evidence. Systemic discrimination can be demonstrated by a showing of circumstantial evidence of disparate impact, historical background, departures from normal procedural sequence and substantive departures.

Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 266-67 (1977) (fair housing case).

Minority communities that suffer from the cumulative effects of years of arbitrary environmental impositions, in particular, should consider using the Arlington Heights paradigm. The modern civil rights acts enacted in 1964 and afterward correct some of the shortcomings of the earlier legal framework. The modern statutes often prohibit not only intentional discrimination but unjustified disparate impact. As a practical matter, disparate impact claims usually supplement, rather than replace, intentional discrimination claims. In order to prove disparate impact discrimination, a plaintiff must show that the challenged policy or practice has a significant adverse effect on a protected group. Examples are the location of an environmentally hazardous facility in a minority community rather than a nearby white community or the allocation of mitigation or other benefits. If a plaintiff proves adverse impact, the burden shifts to the defendant to justify the adverse effect by showing business necessity through expert evidence of validity. Such a showing may be difficult for a defendant to meet because it cannot rely on the deference courts ordinarily accord a defendant's discretionary decision-making and policy choices. Even if the defendant carries that burden, a plaintiff may still prevail by showing that a nondiscriminatory alternative exists that the defendant erroneously rejected.

The modern civil rights laws also generally require federal agencies to promulgate implementing regulations and to establish compliance review and complaints procedures. As a result, the modern civil rights statutes usually can be enforced not only judicially but by the action of an administrative agency. Administrative enforcement is often inexpensive and more informal. The administrative agencies may have expertise, but may also be too attuned to the interests of the state and local agencies they regulate or fund. It remains to be seen how effective administrative enforcement will prove to be.

Title VI and its Regulations.

A modern Civil Rights Act relevant to many environmental justice claims is Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000d, which broadly prohibits the use of federal funds by recipients to discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Under the coordinating authority of the U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Order 12250; 28 C.F.R. §42.401 et seq., each federal agency has promulgated enforcement regulations. See, e.g., 49 C.F.R. Part 21(DOT); 23 C.F.R. §710.400 et seq.(FHWA). The Supreme Court has ruled that while the intentional discrimination standard applies in cases brought to enforce only Title VI, the disparate impact standard applies in Title VI administrative proceedings or court cases brought to enforce the Title VI implementing regulations that incorporate such a standard.

Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S. 287, 293 (1985).

All the agencies have promulgated regulations that incorporate a disparate impact standard for assessing claims that Title VI has been violated. The Attorney General reaffirmed these principles on July 14, 1994, the 30th anniversary of the passage of Title VI, in a memorandum to all heads of federal departments and agencies entitled "Use of the Disparate Impact Standard in Administrative Regulations Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." The Attorney General stated that: Enforcement of the disparate impact provisions is an essential component of an effective civil rights compliance program. Individuals continue to be denied on the basis of their race, color, or national origin, the full and equal opportunity to participate in or receive the benefits of programs assisted by Federal funds. Frequently discrimination results from policies and practices that are neutral on their face but have the effect of discrimination. Those policies and practices must be eliminated unless they are shown to be necessary to the program's operation and there is no less discriminatory alternative. Id. (original emphasis).

Fair Housing Act.

Environmental justice claims can also be raised under the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §3601 et seq., which prohibits discriminatory conduct affecting fair housing opportunities. As in cases using Title VI and its implementing regulations, it is not necessary to prove discriminatory intent to prevail under Title VIII. Plaintiffs must initially prove that the challenged conduct results in discriminatory impact; if the defendant can prove that the conduct is justified, plaintiffs must then illustrate that a less discriminatory alternative exists. Huntington Branch NAACP v. Town of Huntington, 844 F.2d 926 (2d Cir.), review declined in part and aff'd, 109 S. Ct. 276 (1988); Betsy v. Turtle Creek Assoc., 736 F.2d 983 (4th Cir. 1984).

Title VIII is a useful supplement to Title VI because, unlike Title VI, it reaches private defendants and governmental defendants whether or not they receive federal funds. See, e.g., United States v. Real Estate Develop. Co., 374 F. Supp. 776 (D.C. Mass. 1972). However, for Title VIII to apply, the challenged conduct must involve fair housing opportunities or the provision of services associated with housing like police and fire protection and garbage collection. See, e.g., Campbell v. City of Berwyn, 815 F. Supp. 1138 (N.D. Ill. 1993). A proposed land use involves fair housing opportunities if it, for example, affects access to housing by people of color -- such as a case in which housing in minority communities will be demolished or displaced by a freeway or bus repair facility -- or results in increased segregation. See United States v. City of Parma, Ohio, 494 F. Supp. 1049 (N.D. Ohio 1980), aff'd, 661 F.2d 562 (6th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 926 (1982).

Community Development Block Grant Program.

The Community Development Block Grant program of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §5301 et seq., like the general Title VI provision specifically bars discrimination in state or local government use of federal block grant funds. The disparate impact standard applies to complaints brought under the Community Development Block Grant program. In addition to race, color, or national origin, the Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex and religion. While employment issues may be difficult to raise under the Title VI regulations, such issues may be raised under the Act.

Comparing Civil Rights and Environmental Enforcement.

The civil rights and environmental claims of a minority community can often be presented in tandem. Pursuing civil rights claims, moreover, may offer distinct benefits unavailable under environmental statutes. As a substantive law matter, application of the disparate impact standard results in less deference to state and local agency policy and decision making than may occur under an environmental statute. Meeting the expert business necessity standard and rebutting the existence of nondiscriminatory alternatives entail substantial effort. The two inquiries inevitably result in greater judicial scrutiny of agency policies and practices. Under a disparate impact analysis, "it is an insufficient response to demonstrate some rational bases for the challenged practices"; the standard "involves a more probing judicial review of, and less deference to, the seemingly reasonable acts of administrators and executives" than is usual.

Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229, 246-48 (1976).

The civil rights statutes may also offer procedural benefits. As noted above, the modern civil rights statutes are usually implemented by agency regulations and procedures separate from those offered by environmental law enforcement schemes. Thus Title VI administrative complaints can be filed with the offices of civil rights of the particular federal agencies that administer federal funds to the state or local agencies whose conduct is being challenged. Title VIII and Community Development Block Grant administrative complaints can be filed with the Office for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Civil rights enforcement may also be more "user-friendly" than environmental enforcement. Administrative exhaustion requirements are usually less stringent than under environmental laws. Neither Title VI nor Title VIII administrative claims need be exhausted before a lawsuit can be filed to enforce the Title VI statute, its regulations or Title VIII. The statute of limitations is often longer than in many environmental enforcement processes, although such limitations should be carefully adhered to no matter what their duration. As a result, fewer claims should lapse as a result of the passage of time, a common problem for poor and minority communities.

Perhaps the most striking procedural benefit is that civil rights claims are tried de novo by courts so plaintiffs potentially can conduct discovery, engage in trial preparation, and present witnesses and evidence in open court. Unlike judicial proceedings under many environmental statutes in which the courts merely review an administrative record compiled by an agency, courts hearing civil rights claims are not limited to the administrative record. In some cases, therefore, a civil rights lawsuit may approximate a "second bite at the apple."

Legal Defense Fund Cases.

A recent administrative complaint filed by LDF in a California case illustrates the use of civil rights protections. Mothers of East Los Angeles, El Sereno Neighborhood Action Committee, El Sereno Organizing Committee, et al. v. California Transportation Commission, et al. (before the U.S. Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development.) The administrative complaint filed under both Titles VI and VIII by community groups and individual families who live on the proposed route alleges that the state agencies seek to construct a 4.5 mile freeway extension in East Los Angeles through El Sereno, a Latino neighborhood of the City Los Angeles, and the predominantly white cities of Pasadena and South Pasadena. The state agencies, however, propose that mitigation measures be discriminatorily distributed by proposing that all of the freeway in Pasadena and 80% in South Pasadena be below ground level, thus diminishing noise, air and visual pollution, while most of the proposed route in El Sereno will be placed above grade with undiminished pollution. While a mile of the freeway in white areas will be covered over, little of the El Sereno portion will be covered. All of the historic preservation measures are limited to the white areas in spite of many historic structures in the El Sereno area. The state agencies intend to accommodate a private school in Pasadena and a public school in South Pasadena with cut and cover tunnels over the adjacent freeway; the freeway will run above grade adjacent to El Sereno's Sierra Vista public elementary school

Discriminatory siting and mitigation disparities were issues in Clean Air Alternative Coalition v. United States Department of Transportation (N.D. Cal. C-93-0721-VRW), another highway case that was settled by plaintiff community organizations, churches and individuals for enhanced mitigation measures along the route of the Cypress Freeway in West Oakland, California. The same issues are raised in James City Historical Society v. North Carolina Department of Transportation (before the Federal Highway Administration, U. S. Department of Transportation), involving a highway bridge proposed for James City, North Carolina, a predominantly African -American town, instead of adjacent white areas. LDF is also litigating two cases concerning funding decisions by state agencies.

In Labor/Community Strategy Center v. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (C.D. Cal.CV 94-5936 TJH (Mcx)), LDF has sued local agencies on behalf of a class of 350,000 minority, poor bus riders represented by the Labor/Community Strategy Center, the Bus Riders Union, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Korean Immigrant Workers Advocates and individual bus riders. Plaintiffs challenge inequitable funding and operation of bus transportation used by poor, minority Los Angeles residents. The lawsuit followed two years of organizing by the Strategy Center and the Bus Riders Union. One of the key issues is plaintiffs' allegation that the Transit Authority has used federal funds to pursue a policy of raising the cost to riders of bus service and reducing quality of bus service in order to fund rail and other projects for predominantly white, suburban residents. In September 1994, the federal district court preliminarily enjoined the elimination of a low-cost $42 monthly bus pass and a hike of the basic fare. The parties then stipulated to retention of a still-affordable $49 bus pass along with a fare hike pending trial on all issues. The trial is presently scheduled for September.

Nettie L. Thomas, et al. v. City of Macon, Georgia, et al. (before the U.S. Department of Transportation), concerns a similar set of issues arising out of the long history of discriminatory allocation of funds by Macon and Bibb County authorities. Representing African-American individuals, LDF and Georgia Legal Services have challenged the local officials' practice of spending funds on highways that principally serve white residential areas while starving the bus system that is exclusively used by black Macon residents. Both the Macon and Los Angeles MTA cases involve not only Title VI but related Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), 49 U.S.C. App. §1607, obligations.

These cases demonstrate not only the variety of issues that can be addressed under the civil rights laws, but also suggest larger issues, such as failure to document possible adverse impact on minority groups, failure to impose ISTEA and business necessity justification requirements, and failure to consider nondiscriminatory alternatives. Moreover, none of these cases would have arisen had federal agencies been more vigilant in discharging their obligation to guarantee the nondiscriminatory use of federal funds under Title VI and duties imposed by other civil rights measures. The level of federal environmental justice enforcement should increase if the Environmental Justice Executive Order is faithfully implemented.

Tips for Prosecuting Administrative Civil Rights Complaints.

Attached hereto, as Appendix I, is a copy of LDF's administrative complaint in the El Sereno case.

1. Why file? The practical effect of the Environmental Justice Executive Order is to make federal agencies that fund many of the projects raising environmental justice concerns potential allies for minority communities. It is as yet unclear whether the federal agencies will actually utilize this Title VI authority to enforce Title VI and the Environmental Justice Executive Order in a meaningful fashion. This is a period of some flux. How agencies treat early complaints is obviously an indication of their commitment as is the level and quality of staffing of the enforcement effort.

2. A checklist.

a. Complaints should state why a federal agency has jurisdiction: Does the agency fund the work of the state or local governmental agency or other entity whose conduct is being challenged? Does Title VI and its regulations or the Community Development Block Grant Program apply? Are fair housing opportunities affected? Does the Fair Housing Act apply? Does the Environmental Justice Executive Order apply?

b. Whose conduct is being challenged? Is the entity a federal fund recipient under the Title VI regulations and/or the Community Development Block Grant program? Does the entity's conduct affect housing opportunities of minorities?

c. When did the challenged conduct occur? Is it within the 180 day Title VI regulatory complaint period? If the conduct occurred earlier, is the challenged conduct part of a larger course of conduct that is continuing in nature and did some part of the course of conduct occur within the 180 day period? Is there any other reason the agency should excuse a late submission? 

d. What is the conduct being challenged? What happened? How are minority persons or other groups protected by the civil rights statutes adversely affected by the conduct? How are white persons favored?

e. What remedy do you want? What do you want the state or local governmental entity to do? What do you want the federal agency to do? 

3. How do we file? Environmental justice administrative complaints are rare. No one yet has very much experience with them. Generally, agency officials most familiar with the Environmental Justice Executive Order and civil rights remedies are at agency headquarters rather than regional, district or local offices, which are often criticized for working hand-in-glove with state and local agencies receiving federal assistance. Complaints should generally be sent to the head of the agency with copies to other officials.

4. Do we need a lawyer? A knowledgeable lawyer should be consulted, even though the complaint process is informal. Optimally, a lawyer should assist in preparing the complaint and monitoring its progress. A lawyer should also be consulted about alternatives such as court litigation.

5. What should we do after the complaint is submitted? The agency may not have sufficient resources properly to investigate the complaint. A complete investigation should be pressed for. Documents, witnesses or other assistance should be provided to assist the agency investigation.

top of page

table of contents

APPENDIX F: CONFERENCE EVALUATION

Feedback was solicited from participants throughout the conference. Evaluation check-off forms were administered after the conference closing. A total of 52 conference attendees completed the evaluation form. The results are as follows:

CONFERENCE EVALUATION ITEMS:

First time attending a transportation conference
Yes 44% (23)
No 56% (29)

Familiarity with environmental justice issues before conference
Not Familiar 27% (14)
Fairly Familiar 25% (13)
Familiar 31% (16)
Very Familiar 17% (9)

Familiarity with environmental justice issues after conference
Not Familiar 4% (2)
Fairly Familiar 14% (7)
Familiar 42% (22)
Very Familiar 40% (21)

Goal #1: Ensuring greater stakeholder participation and public involvement in transportation
decision making.
Accomplished 77% (40)
Fair 15% (8)
Not Accomplished 8% (4)

Goal #2: Directing resources to identify and address discriminatory outcomes, disproportionate
impacts, inequitable distribution of transportation investments, and their civil rights implications.
Accomplished 73% (38)
Fair 19% (10)
Not Accomplished 8% (4)

Goal #3: Improving research, data collection, and assessment techniques.
Accomplished 65% (34)
Fair 27% (14)
Not Accomplished 8% (4)

Goal #4: Promoting interagency cooperation in transportation planning, development, and
program implementation to achieve livable, healthy, and sustainable communities.
Accomplished 83% (43)
Fair 27% (7)
Not Accomplished 8% (2)

Evaluation of conference as a whole/meeting needs of participant.
Met needs good to very well 50% (26)
Average met needs 25% (13)
Slightly met needs 15% (8)
Not met needs 10% (5)

top of page

table of contents

APPENDIX G: ATTENDEE LIST

 

Marilyn Ababio Sunshine Environmental Services 12 Bendix Lane Willingboro, NJ 08046 609-871-7424	Ibrahim Abdullah Disabled in Action, Inc. PO Box 566 Atlanta, GA 30301 404-758-7866
Femi Adesanya Director, Environmental Justice Info Ctr Hampton, VA 23668 804-727-5530 / 804-728-3958 (fax)	Connie Alexander U.S. EPA 345 Courtland Avenue, NE Atlanta, GA 30365 404-347-3555
April Allen CAU/Graduate Student 360 Ardmore Cir., Apt. 15 Atlanta, GA 30309 404-352-1524 / 404-880-6909 (fax)	Aretha Allen Baltimore Empowerment Zone 7188 McClean Blvd. Baltimore, MD 21234 410-783-4400 / 410-783-0526 (fax)
Michelle Allen NICE 5565 Kensington Detroit, MI 313-881-2245	Susana Almanza SW Network for Environmental Justice 6602 Woodhue Drive Austin, TX 78745 512-472-9921 / 512-472-9922 (fax)
A. Sha-King Alston NE Environmental Justice Network UMass Lowell 1 University Avenue Lowell, MA 01854 508-934-3296 / 508-452-5711 (fax)	Raul Alvarez PODER 55 North Interstate Hwy. 35 Suite 205 B Austin, TX 78702 512-472-9921 / 512-472-9922 (fax)
Dania Aponte Georgia DOT 3993 Aviation Circle Atlanta, GA 30336-1593 404-699-4417 / 404-699-4440 (fax)	Efrain Areizaqa Center for Urban Transportation Research 4202 E. Fowler Avenue , ENB #118 Tampa, FL 813-974-3120 / 813-974-5168 (fax)
Elizabeth Avants Louisiana Environmental Action Network 58135 Main Street Plaquemine, LA 70764 504-687-2439	Teresa Banks FHWA 555 Zang Street, Room 400 Lakewood, CO 80228 303-969-6707
Warren Banks U.S. EPA 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460 202-260-4625	Ajamu Baraka Southern Organizing Committee P.O. Box 10518 Atlanta, GA 30310 404-755-0575
Jim Bednar FHWA 400 7th Street, SW Room 3311 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-2048	Carla Berroyer ILL DOT 2300 S. Dirksen Parkway Springfield, IL 62764 217-782-7868 / 217-785-0468 (fax)
Doug Birnie FTA 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-4018 / 202-366-3475 (fax)	Samaad Bishop South Bronx Clean Air 2432 Grand Concourse Room 504 New York, NY 10458 718-893-0704
Margaret Blechman DOT Office of Civil Rights 400 7th Street, SW S-33 Room 10217 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-9264	Willie Bond CAU, Graduate Student 223 James P. Brawley Drive, Atlanta, GA 30314 404-378-5956
Alyce Boyd-Stewart US DOT 400 7th Street Washington, DC 20460 202-366-9366	Barbara Boylan Teamsters Union 25 Louisiana Washington, DC 20001 202-624-6963 / 513-542-5230 (fax)
Robert Bradley DOT Equal Opportunity #2 Capital Square Room 262 Atlanta, GA 30334 404-656-5323 / 404-656-3507 (fax)	Carol Bradley-West Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League P.O. Box 824 Cherokee, NC 28719 704-497-3571
Rev. G. L. Britt Jr. New Moriah Missionary Baptist Church 2735 Marder St. Dallas, TX 75215 214-428-1170	Donna Brown Wisconsin DOT P.O. Box 7913 Madison, WS 53707-7913 608-267-0445 / 608-267-0294 (fax)
Linda Brown FHWA 400 7th Street SW Room 4132 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-0471 / 202-366-1599 (fax)	Meg Bryson Georgia DOT 2 Capitol Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-657-6696 / 404-656-3507 (fax)
Robert Bullard Clark Atlanta University J.P. Brawley Drive, SW Atlanta, GA 30314 404-880-6911 / 404-880-6909 (fax)	Frank Burkett Burgess & Niple, Limited 5085 Reed Columbus, GA 43320 614-459-2050 / 614-451-1385
Ernest Burnhauser Federal Railroad Administration 1720 Peachtree Road, NW Suite 404 North Tower Atlanta, GA 30309 404-347-2751 / 404-347-5295 (fax)	Bill Burns Environmental Awareness Foundation 1083 Austin Avenue Atlanta, GA 30307 404-521-3555
Marion Butler Arkansas DOT P.O. Box 2261 Little Rock, AR 72203 501-569-2281 / 501-568-4921 (fax)	Julie Cabrales New Mexico Board Rt. 2 Anthony, NM 88021 505-882-4045
Michelle Cain Georgia DOT 3993 Aviation Circle Atlanta, GA 30336-1598 404-699-4441	Antonio Califa US DOT 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-4648
Robert Callan FHWA 227 N. Bronough Street Room 2015 Tallahassee, FL 32301 904-942-9583	Cheryl Calloway Environics Box 322 Okemos, MI 48805 517-349-7944
Michael Cameron EDF 5655 College Avenue #304 Oakland, CA 94621 510-658-8008	Charles Campbell Pennsylvania DOT T and S Building, Room 1009 Harrisburg, PA 17120 717-772-2563
Margaret Carey Center for Constitutional Rights 213 Main Street Greenville, MS 404-478-9328	Martin Carney Choctaw / Chickasaw Member 8240 Brittany Lane Riverdale, GA 30274 404-478-9328
Philip Carroll, III MARTA 2775 East Ponce de Leon Avenue Decatur, GA 30030-2797 404-848-3122	Jim Chapman Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia 1083 Austin Atlanta, GA 30307 404-659-5675
Dr. Velma Charles-Shannon USDA 14th & Independence SW Room 41-W Admin. Building Washington, DC 20250-9400 202-690-3509	Erika Chisholm CAU/Graduate Student 6542 Carriage Cove, I Union City, GA 30291 404-306-8887
Jacqueline Clarke Atlanta-Fulton County EMA 130 Peachtree Street Suite 3147 Atlanta, GA 30303 404-730-5600 / 404-730-5625 (fax)	David Clawson AASHTO 444 North Capitol Street, NW Suite 249 Washington, DC 20001 202-624-5800 / 404-624-5806 (fax)
Eugene Cleckley FHWA 400 7th Street, SW Room 3301 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-2058 / 202-366-3409 (fax)	Arthur Cole MLK Jr. Center 250 Auburn Avenue Atlanta, GA 30303 404-526-8937 / 404-521-6840 (fax)
Brent Cook Georgia DOT 2 Capitol Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-656-5560	Sally Cooper FTA 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-0173 / 202-366-7688 (fax)
Cecil D. Corbin - Mark West Harlem Environmental Action 271 West 125th Street Suite 211 New York, NW 10027 212-961-1000 / 212-961-1015 (fax)	Teresa Cordova University of New Mexico 2414 Central Avenue, E Alburquerque, NM 87131 (505) 277-2903 / 505-277-0076 (fax)
Sandra Coulberson ATSDR 1600 Clifton Road (E 28) Executive Park, Building 37 Atlanta, GA 30303 404-639-0566 / 404-639-0715 (fax)	Marvin Crafter Woolfork Citizens Response Group PO Box 899 Fort Valley, GA 31030 912-822-9714
Wilbert Crockett Ohio DOT 25 South Front Street Columbus, OH 43216- 614-466-1163	Frank Danchetz Georgia DOT 2 Capital Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-656-5206
Yvonne Daniely Caltrans / NICE 259 Cinnabar Way Hercules, CA 94547 510-799-1174	Emma Darnell Fulton County Board of Commission 141 Pryor Street, NW Atlanta, GA 30303 404-730-8222 / 404-730-8258 (fax)
James Davis Curry Temple Community Dev. Corp. 307 N. Tamarind Avenue Suite 4C Compton, CA 90220 310-763-8066	James Davis, II NICE 12566 Brookshire Ave. #3 Downey, CA 90242 310-869-7043
Dr. Kenneth Davis The Atlanta Project PO Box 5317 Atlanta, GA 30307 404-881-3400	Sid Davis Southern College of Technology Marietta, GA 30060 404-875-0793 / 404-875-8559 (fax)
Jim De La Loza Los Angeles MTA 818 West 7th Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 213-244-6261	Dale Deese Lumbee River Legal Services PO Box 939 Pembroke, NC 28372 910-521-2831 / 910-521-9824 (fax)
Michelle DePass NY City Environmental Justice Alliance 25 Cedar Road Westbury New York, NY 11590 212-866-4120 / 212-866-4511 (fax)	Gladys Diawara NICE PO Box 2622 Philadephia, PA 19141 215-477-4113
Deborah Dickerson-Cortez Spanish Speaking Unity Council Fruitvale Avenue Suite 2-A Oakland, CA 94601 510-535-6900	Rolinda S. Dorris River Area Planning Group 192 West 9th Street Vacherie, LA 70090 504-265-9053
George Duffy FHWA 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-2925	Warrenell Ellis APA/Planning & The Black Comm. 11312 Newport Drive Firsco, TX 75034 214-670-3635
Lorenzo Ervin Coalition Opposing MARTA Rate Hike 673 Wyle Street, SE Atlanta, GA 30316 404-524-2146	Hugh Esco Atlanta Greens - "Free Motor Fuel Tax" PO Box 5332 Atlanta, GA 30307 404-368-2805
Betty Ewing Southern Organizing Committee PO Box Atlanta, GA 30310 404-755-2855	Deeohn Ferris WA Office on Environmental Justice 1511 K. Street, NW, Suite 1147 Washington, DC 20005 202-637-2467 / 202-637-9435
Dicy Franklin U.S. Army Corps of Engineers PO Box 2288 Mobile, AL 36628-0001 334-690-2668	Peter Frantz Illinois DOT 2300 S. Dirksen Parkway Room 330 Springfield, IL 62764 217-782-4770
Fredaly Frasier University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue ENG #18 Tampa, FL 33620 813-974-3120	Anna Frazier Dine' CARE, HCR-63 P.O. Box 263 Winslow, AZ 86047 520-607-1073
John Frederick Nehemiah Homeowners Association 5471 Watkins Street Brooklyn, NY 11212 718-485-2808	Gloria Gaines MARTA 2424 Piedmont Road Atlanta, GA 30324 404-848-5323
Clifford Garner Development Dynamic 340 Dickson Street Riverdale, GA 30296-1102 404-991-7112	Kahina Ghafoor Disabled In Action, Inc. PO Box 566 Atlanta, GA 30301 404-756-0583
Keith Golden Georgia DOT 2 Capitol Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-657-6686	Tom Goldtooth Indigenous Environmental Network PO Box 485 Bimidji, MN 56601 218-751-4967 / 218-751-0561
Solomon Goodrich Southern Queens Park Association 119th & Merrich Boulevard Jamaica, NY 11434 718-276-4630	Timothy Goodwin Greenhorne & O'Mara 9001 Edmoston Road Greenbelt, MD 20770 202-319-1979
Richard Green Self Representative 5924 West Lindenhurst Los Angeles, CA 90036 213-934-1665	Wilfred Greene River Area Planning Group 4356 Highway 18 Vacherie, LA 70090 504-265-4356
Roy Griffis, Jr. Macon-Bibb Planning & Zoning Comm. 682 Cherry Street Southern Trust Bldg., Suite 1000 Macon, GA 31201 912-751-7460	Jackie Grimshaw Center for Neighborhood Technology 2125 West North Avenue Chicago, IL 60647 312-278-4800 / 312-278-3840 (fax)
Bryan Hager Sierra Club 2314 Pleasant Ridge Road Breman, GA 30110 404-537-9480	Helen Hagin US DOT 400 7th Street, SW Room 8419 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-9638
Grover Hankins Thurgood Marshall School of Law Texas Southern University 3100 Cleburne Avenue Houston, TX 77004 713-527-7287 / 713-639-1049	Paulette Hansen Intertribal Transportation Association 444 North Capitol Street Suite 414 Washington, DC 20001 202-434-4768 / 202-434-4766 (fax)
Rita Harris Mid-South Peace & Justice Center PO Box 11428 Memphis, TN 38111-0428 901-452-6997	William Hartwig Michigan DOT PO Box 30030 Lansing, MI 48909 517-373-2316
Albertha Hasten LA Environmental Awareness Network 32365 Doc Dean Street White Castle, LA 70788 504-928-1315	Wilbert Hasten, Jr. Louisiana Environmental Action Network 32365 Doc Dean Street White Castle, LA 70788 504-928-1315
Mr. Tim Haugh FHWA 1720 Peachtree Road, NW Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30367 404-347-4499	Angela Hawkins East Meyer Community Asso. 6639 Walbash Kansas City, MO 64132 816-361-8070
Jim Hayes The Greater Treme Consortium 704 North Claiborne Avenue New Orleans, LA 70116 504-524-7586	Milbrey Heard Atlanta Regional Commission 3715 Northside Parkway 200 Northcreek, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30327 2809 404-364-2500
Martin Hernandez Labor/Community Strategy Center 3780 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1200 Los Angeles, CA 90010 213-387-2800 / 213-387-3500 (fax)	Eric Hill University of South Florida 4202 Fowler Avenue ENB 188 Tampa, FL 33620 813-974-9845 / 813-974-5168 (fax)
Vernita Hilliard De Leuw, Cather & Company 57 Executive Park South, NE Suite 500 Atlanta, GA 30329-2265 404-235-2461	Bob Holmes Clark Atlanta, University 223 James P. Brawley Drive Atlanta, GA 30314 404-880-8045
Henry Holmes Urban Habitat Program 300 Broadway, Suite 28 San Francisco, CA 415-788-3666 / 415-788-7324 (fax)	Shelia Hudson Georgia DOT 276 Memorial Drive Atlanta, GA 30303 404-651-9207
John Humeston FHWA 1720 Peachtree Road, NW Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30367 404-347-4499	Myra Immings US DOT 1720 Peachtree Road NW Atlanta, GA 30309 404-347-1882
Gladys Inman-Diawara NAPAA Cynwyd Road Bala Cyncyd, PA 19001 215-477-4113	Ann Irwin Texas DOT 125 E. 11th Street Austin, TX 78701 512-416-3001
John Isom Arkansas DOT PO Box 2261 Little Rock, AR 72203 501-569-2281	Donald Itzkoff Federal Railroad Administration 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-0857 / 202-366-7009 (fax)
Mary Jackson Clark Atlanta University/HBCU/MI J.P. Brawley Drive, Atlanta, GA 30314 404-880-6910 / 404-880-6909	Patricia Jackson People For Community Recovery 13116 South Ellis Avenue Chicago, IL 312-468-1645
Gloria Jeff FHWA 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-0585 / 202-366-9626	Larson Jerry Minnessota DOT 3485 Hudley Avenue, North Oakdale, MN 55115 612-779-5094
Neeka Jeter GOD's Earth Interdenominational Theologial Center 610 Beckwith #210 Atlanta, GA 30314 404-614-6327	Samuel Johnson HPAIC, Inc. 203 Aragon Drive Augusta, GA 30901 706-793-5309
Hazel Johnson People for Community Recovery 13116 South Ellis Avenue Chicago, IL 60627 312-468-1645 / 312-468-8105 (fax)	Cheryl Johnson People for Comm. Recovery 13116 South Ellis Avenue Chicago, IL 60627 312-468-1645 / 312-468-8105 (fax)
Rosalind Johnson Environmental Economic Dev. Program 1608 North Carlisle Street Philadelphia, PA 19121 214-821-3920	Thina Johnson Georgia Tech 271 Candler Road Decatur, GA 30032
Mark Johnson People for Community Recovery 13116 South Ellis Avenue Chicago, IL 60627 312-468-1645	Darlita Jones Clark Atlanta University/EJRC J.P. Brawley Drive Atlanta, GA 30314 404-880-6911 / 404-880-6909
Robin Joseph De Leuw, Cather and Company 1133 15th Street, NW 7th Floor Washington, DC 20005-2701 202-775-3392	Adam Josephson Minnesota DOT Metropolitan Division 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 612-582-1320
Harvey Keepler Georgia DOT 3993 Aviation Circle Atlanta, GA 30336-1593 404-699-4455	Lori Kennedy De Leuw, Cather and Company 57 Executive Park South Suite 500 Atlanta, GA 30329-2265 404-235-2458
Calvin King Arkansas Land & Farm Development Center Route 2, Box 291 Brinkley AR 72021 501-734-1140	Bob Knox U.S. EPA 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460 202-260-4625 / 202-260-0852 fax
Edward Kussy FHWA 400 7th St., SW HCC-2, Room 4213 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-0764	Gerald Larson Minnesota DOT 3485 Hadley Avenue, N Oakdale, MN 55128 612-779-5094
Jerry Larson Minnesota DOT 3485 Hadley Aveue, N Oakdale, MN 55128 612-799-5094	Leon Larson FHWA 1720 Peachtree Road, NW Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30367 404-347-4078
Ira Laster U.S. DOT 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-4859	Bill Lee NAACP LDF 315 W. 9th Street Los Angeles, CA 90015 213-624-2405
Pam Tau Lee University of California 2515 Channing Way 2nd Floor Berkley, CA 94720 510-643-7594 / 510-643-5698 (fax)	Steve Lee National Institute for Dispute Resolution 1726 M. Street, NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036 202-466-4764
Sydney Lewis-Picard Clark Atlanta University 223 James P. Brawley Drive, SW Atlanta, GA 30314 404-880-6911 / 404-880-6909 (fax)	Charles Lewter Prarie View A&M University P.O. Box 2576 Prarie View, TX 77446 409-857-2616
Gordon Linton FTA 400 7th Street Washington, DC 20590 202-366-4040	Sulaiman Mahdi Atlanta Environmental Coalition P.O. Box 11348 Atlanta, GA 30310 404-524-5717 / 404-524-5851 (fax)
Dr. Steve Maheras 545 Shoup Ave. Idaho Falls, ID 83402 208-528-2103	Holly Malloy NICE 2922 Swiss Ave. Dallas, TX 75204 214-821-3290
Terry Manago FHWA 1720 Peachtree Street Suite 222 Atlanta, GA 30367 404-347-4791	April Marchesc FHWA 400 7th Street, SW HCC-2, Room 4213 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-0764
William Marx Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20591 202-267-7685	Moctar Mbacke CAU, Graduate Student 3028 Chamblee Tucker Apt. A-2 Chamblee, GA 30341 404-457-7465
Caretta McCarter People for Community Recovery 13116 South Ellis Ave. Chicago, IL 60627 312-468-1645	Lucius McDowell Georgia Transportation Alliance 741 Piedmont Avenue Atlanta, GA 30303 404-914-7909 / 404-875-4341 (fax)
Joseph McDuffie Federal Highway Administration 321 E. 18th Avenue Apt. 103 Denver, CO 80203 303-969-5772	William McFarland Peoples Town Revitalization 915 Capital Ave. Atlanta, GA 30315 404-521-9070
Micheal McIntosh Atlanta Fulton Co. Emergency Management 130 Peachtree St., SW Suite 3149 Atlanta, GA 30303 404-730-5426	James McLaughlin National Rural Dev. & Finance 711 Navarro Suite 350 San Antonio, TX 78205 210-212-4552
Doug Meiklejohn New Mexico Envr. Law Center 103 Cienega Street Santa Fe, NM 87501 505-455-2273 / 505-989-3769 (fax)	Cynthia Mendy Deep South Center for Envr. Justice 7440 Stoelitz Street Room 102 New Orleans, LA 70125 504-488-3075
Martine Micozzi FHWA 400 7th Street, SW # 3311 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-4093	Albertine Miller Board Member, Deep South Envr. Justice 1945 Lemon Street Vacherie, LA 70090 504-265-4119
Vernice Miller NRDC 40 West 20th Street New York, NY 10011 212-727-4461 / 212-727-1773 (fax)	John Mitchell Prudential Comm. Interaction Consultine 1300 Parkwood Circle Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30339 404-612-6103
Bob Moore Georgia DOT 2 Capitol Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-657-6912	Wendy Morgan West Policy Institute 1872 Pratt Drive Suite 1600 Blacksburg, VA 24060 703-231-3324
Edward Morris, Jr. FHWA 400 7th Street, SW Room 4132 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-0693	Cynthia Myers Indiana DOT 100 N. Senate Ave. # N-855 Indianapolis, IN 46204 317-232-5083
Mildred Myers 320 Congares Church Road Gadsden, SC 29052 803-353-8423 / 803-256-4919 (fax)	Dr. M.B. Neace Mercer University/Envr. Macon, GA 31207 912-752-2841
Joseph Neal South Carolina State Legislature P.O. Box 495 Columbia, SC 29202 803-695-2643 / 803-256-4919 (fax)	Ruth Neal, Esq. Clark Atlanta University 223 James P. Brawley Drive Atlanta, GA 30314 404-880-6706
Rev. Susan Newman First Congregational UCC 105 Courtland Street, SE Atlanta, GA 30303 404-659-6255 / 404-688-2227 (fax)	Michael E. O'Neal Neighborhood Transportation Network 1901 Elliot Ave., S Minneapolis, MN 612-872-4079
Dr. David Oedel Mercer University School of Law 1021 Georgia Avenue Macon, GA 31201 912-752-2629 / 912-752-2259 (fax)	Joseph Ossi FTA 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-1613
Gerald Pacucki MARTA 2424 Piedmont Road Atlanta, GA 30324 404-848-5323 / 404-848-5321 (fax)	David Padgett Austin State University P.O. Bos 4418 Clarksville, TN 37044 615-572-1009
Susan Panzitta ICF, Inc. 955 L'Enfant Plaza, SW Washington, DC 20024-2119 202-646-6670	Shirley Paschal President - CSRA/Enterprise Communities 326 Commerce Street Crawfordville, GA 30631 706-456-2207
Ernesto Perez U.S. EPA - Region 4 345 Courtland St., NE Atlanta, GA 30365 404-347-7109	Reverend Calvin Peterson P.O. Box 566 Atlanta, GA 30301 404-758-7866
John Perry U.S. Department of Housing Development 75 Spring Street Atlanta, GA 30303 404-331-5139 / 404-331-6997 fax	David L. Platerio Shoshone Info. Network 1636 Sagebrush Elko, NV 89801 702-738-3618
Dr. Gerald Poje NIEHS 31 Center Drive Bethesda, MD 20892-2256 301-496-3511 / 301-496-0563 fax	Bernice Powell Jackson Commission for Racial Jackson 700 Prospect Avenue Cleveland, OH 44115-1110 216-736-2100
Debra Price Conf. of Minority Transportation Officials 1330 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 320 Washington, DC 20036 202-289-0567	Robert Radics FHWA 1720 Peachtree Road, NW Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30367 404-347-4757
Doretta Reaves U.S. EPA 401 M. Street, SW Washington, DC 20460 202-260-3534	Joyce Rhyan NICE 2922 Swiss Avenue Dallas, TX 75204 214-670-3628 / 214-821-3573 (fax)
Kathryn Rice Atlanta Empowerment Zone P.O. Box 2745 Atlanta, GA 30301 404-330-6804 / 404-658-6406 (fax)	Margie Richards Concerned Citizens of Norco 28 Washington Street Norco, LA 70079 504-764-8135
Rev. James Richey GOD's Earth 610 Beckwith #210 Atlanta, GA 30314 404-614-6327	Gregory Riley St. James AME 440 N. Arlington Ave. East Orange, NJ 07017 201-672-8481
Jerome Ringo Progressive Resources Inc. P.O. Box 178 Lake Charles, LA 70602 318-477-1721	Alicia Roman City of Sunland Park 3800 McNutt Road P.O. Box 470 Sunland Park, NM 88063 505-589-7565
Diane Russell CH2M Hill 115 Perimeter Center Place, NE Suite 700 Atlanta, GA 30346 404-604-9095	Vernon Ryle, III Macon-Bibb County Planning and Zoning 682 Cherry Street, Suite 10001 Macon, GA 31201 912-751-7460

Elizabeth Sanford Atlanta Regional Commission 200 Northcreek, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30327 404-364-2575	Howard Sarasohn California DOT 650 Howe Avenue, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95608 916-263-3418
Richard Schneider Georgia DOT 2 Capitol Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-657-6914	Susan Schruth Federal Transit Administration 1720 Peachtree Road, NW Suite 400 Atlanta, GA 30309 404-347-3948
Darcy Seaver Alliance for Metropolitan Stability 2226 Garfield Ave., S Minneapolis, MN 55405	Wayne Shackleford Georgia DOT 2 Capital Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-656-5206
Josh Shaw Atlanta Fulton County 130 Peachtree Street Suite 3147 Atlanta, GA 30349 404-730-5600	Fern Shepard Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund 1531 P Street, NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20005 202-667-4500 / 202-667-2356 (fax)
Becky Shortland The Georgia Conservancy 711 Sandtown Road Savannah, GA 31410 912-897-6462	Chris Simons Georgia DOT 2 Capitol Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-656-5726
Frederick Skaer FHWA 400 7th Street, SW Room 3301 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-2065 / 202-366-3244 (fax)	Rodney Slater FHWA 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-0650 / 366-9227 (fax)
Dean Smeins FHWA 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590 202-366-9227	Karen Smith Metropolitan Washington Council of Govt. 777 North Capital Street, NE Suite 300 Washington, DC 20002 202-962-3385
Ernestine Smith Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence St. Room 426 Washington, DC 20591 202-267-7685	Lois Smith CRWMS/Woodward Clyde 600 Maryland Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20024 202-488-2326
Barbara Smith Philadelphia Empowerment Zone 1618 Pine Street Apt. 4-7 Philadelphia, PA 19103 215-751-9993 / 215-751-9935 (fax)	Arthur Smith Hyde Park Improving Comm. Inc. 1528 Twiggs Street Augusta, GA 30901 706-793-5309
Phyllis Smith Concerned Citizens of Agriculture 3301 Press Drive New Orleans, LA 70126 504-944-0821	Larry Smith Mid South Peace & Justice Center 499 Patterson Ave. Memphis, TN 38111-0428 901-452-6997
Paul Sonn NAACP- LDF 99 Hudson Street 16th Floor New York, NY 10013 212-219-1900 / 212-226-7592 (fax)	Carol Spinks Georgia DOT 2 Capitol Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-657-6688
Bill Stein Georgia Tech Graduate Student 388 Richard Street Atlanta, GA 30328 404-892-2206	Wendell Stills Council on Environmental Quality 722 Jackson Place, NW Washinton, DC 20503 202-395-5750 / 202-395-3744 (fax)
Samara Swanston NY State Dept. of Envr. Conservation Eastern Field Unit 200 White Plains Road Tarrytown, NY 10591 914-332-1835 / 914-332-5116 (fax)	Harry Takai U.S. Coast Guard 2100 2nd Street, SW Washington, DC 20593-0001 202-267-6024
William Taylor CAU, Graduate Student 223 James P. Brawley Drive Atlanta, GA 30314 404-319-3951	Curtis Thomas FHWA 1835 Assembly Street Suite 758 Columbia, SC 29201 803-765-5414 / 803-765-5413 (fax)
Shiwand Thomas River Area Planning Group 188 West 9th Street Vacherie, LA 70090 504-265-9053	Doris Thomas Concerned Citizens for EJ 15055 Grandville Detroit, MI 48223 313-838-0105
James Thomason, III FHWA 1720 Peachtree Road, NW Sutie 200 Atlanta, GA 30367 404-347-4990	Elizabeth Toomer SE Michigan Occupational Safety & Health 2727 2nd Avenue Detroit, MI 48201 313-961-3345 / 313-961-3588 (fax)
Jennifer Toomer Students of Color for the Environment 5245 Bedford Detroit, MI 48201 213-888-5211	Diane Torres Sunland park 20 13th Street, NE P.O. Box 167 Sunland Park, NM 88063 404-876-0782
Connie Tucker Southern Organizing Committee P.O. Box 10518 Atlanta, GA 30310 404-755-2855 / 404-755-0575 (fax)	Haywood Turrentine Laborers/ AGC Education & Trust Fund P.O. Box 37-1 37 Deerfield Road Pomfret Center, CT 06259 203-974-0800 / 203-974-1459 (fax)
Donald Tussing Macon-Bibb Planning and Zoning Comm. Southern Trust Bldg. 682 Cherry Street, Suite 100 Macon, GA 31201 912-751-7460	Charles Utley Hyde Park Improvement, Inc. 3417 Sutton Place Augusta, GA 30906 706-798-7833
Laraine Vance Georgia DOT 4026 Pinehurst Valley Drive Decatur, GA 30034 404-651-9214	Debra Walker Greenehorne & O'Mara 9001 Edmoston Road Greenbelt, MD 20770 202-319-1979
Sharron Wallace Atlanta Committee on the Olympics Games P.O. Box 1996 Atlanta, GA 30301-1996 404-548-2050	Beverly Ward University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave. Tampa, FL 33620-5350 813-974-3120
Sharon Watson-Garner Development Dynamics 340 Dickson Street Riverdale, GA 30296-1102 404-991-7112	Lilly Webb Center for Community Development P.O. Box 572 Sparta, GA 31087 706-444-7897
Olin Webb S.E.E.J.A. 186 Maddox Ave. San Francisco, CA 94124 415-822-8132	Michael Whitehead HPAPIC 203 Aragon Drive Augusta, GA 30901 706-793-5309
Donele Wilkins Detroiter's Working for EJ 19248 Marlowe Street Detroit, MI 48238 313-273-5360	Diane Williams HPAPIC 2041 Walnut Street Augusta, GA 30901 706-793-5309
Bover Williams Hyde Park Improvement Community 2041 Walnut Street Augusta, GA 30901 706-793-5309	Dr. John Williams Prarie View A&M University P.O. Box 2576 Prarie View, TX 77446 409-857-2616
Orin Williams People for Community Recovery 13116 South Ellis Avenue Chicago, IL 60627 312-468-1645	Warren Williams GA Transportation Alliance 741 Piedmont Avenue Atlanta, GA 30303 404-914-7909 / 404-875-4341 (fax)
Ellis Woodall GA DOT 2 Capitol Square Atlanta, GA 30334 404-657-5227	Dr. Beverly H. Wright Deep South Envr. Justice Center 7440 Stroelitz New Orleans, LA 70125 504-483-7374 / 504-488-7977 (fax)
A. Hakim Yamine The Atlanta Empowerment Corporation 250 Auburn Avenue, NE Atlanta, GA 30303 404-688-0026 / 404-524-5851 (fax)

top of page

table of contents

Operating administrations, a.k.a. modal administrations, include: The United States Coast Guard, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, the Maritime Administration and Research and Special Programs Administration. In the event government-wide definitions are issued under the Executive Order, these definitions will be modified as necessary to conform to them.