RE: State roles in public participation

[Anne Pamperl <anne.pamperl@hhss.state.ne.us>]

I'm sorry that your experience in Ohio was so poor. My State Drinking Water Program does things quite differently. Our management believes that we are here to serve the public and answer their questions.

Anyhow, demanding that EPA regulate how the States handle public participation is not the correct approach. Smaller states, such as Nebraska, don't have the staff to handle the greatly increased amount of paperwork that we would be required to do. Now my co-workers and I go to public or city council meetings when we're invited, send out mass or individual mailings as needed, answer phone and e-mail questions, make presentations at meetings whenever asked, etc. 

I want to spend my time actually doing public outreach rather than documenting each bit of outreach that I do. Also, I want the flexibility to respond quickly and in the manner the community believes is most appropriate for its circumstances. For example, one community invited me to talk about the new uranium limit in drinking water at a well-advertised town hall meeting. A second community decided that at this point in time, it preferred I make a presentation and answer questions at a city council meeting next Monday. The council meeting is open to the public and I'll be listed on the agenda, but no special effort is being made by the community to advertise my presentation. This decision was made by the utilities superintendent because he wants the council to understand the problem and the potential solutions first as they are, to put it bluntly, being blindsided by a new rule. Then after they've had time to discuss and talk about the uranium issue, the city government will involve the public. I expect, because the town has less than 1200 people, the word will begin getting around fairly soon after the council meeting.

To summarize my point, federal regulation of State public participation programs isn't the best solution. States need to have the flexibility to respond to their own unique needs and devise solutions that work for their state.  Ohio with a population of a few million and several large cities has different needs than Nebraska with a population of 1.7 million and 384 of 536 incorporated municipalities with populations <800.