Needed Technical Assistance

[Alma Lowry <alowry@sugarlaw.org>]

My name is Alma Lowry and I am the Environmental Justice Staff Attorney at the National Lawyers Guild/Maurice and Jane Sugar Law Center for Economic and Social Justice (usually called the Guild Law Center) in Detroit.   Our office provides technical assistance, education and direct representation to low-income and minority communities around the country who are faced with environmental problems. I'm happy to be one of the panelists today, because I think this topic is central to ensuring adequate public participation. 

In my role, I often find myself interpreting technical data for my clients and being asked to make recommendations about whether a particular clean-up plan or pollution control device is sufficiently protective.    While I may have opinions about that, my goal is to ensure that my client group has enough information and unbiased technical assistance to make that decision themselves.  In general, I think that, as a society, we often rely too heavily on scientific experts to make the decision about how much risk is acceptable or how safe is safe enough when, at best, all that science can tell us is what the risk is. As a society or as a community faced with an environmental problem, we need to decide how much risk is okay.  I believe that it is crucial for communities to have access to the financial and technical assistance necessary to make that decision for themselves.  The question for discussion today is what kinds of information, technical assistance and financial assistance is needed to reach that goal? 

	While my experiences may be different than others, my community work suggests that communities need the knowledge to develop a healthy skepticism of agency decisions and industry representations.   Without this information, communities may become either overly complacent and willing to accept anything or truly terrified and willing to accept nothing.  Because many of the communities with which I work are skeptical of both the regulatory agency and industry, I believe that the information is best delivered by a relatively neutral source, like a university, a non-governmental research center or a public interest group.  The key for these technical advisors to give communities their opinions about the issue at hand and the reasons for those opinions.  The EPA's role should perhaps be to find funding for such neutral information providers and to help direct communities to these resources.  

	The information needed, I think, falls into three categories:

(1) A basic understanding of the potential effects of the environmental pollutants being emitted by a facility or the toxins present on a contaminated site.

(2) An understanding of the rationale and assumptions behind the "safe" standards set by regulation and law.  For example, what assumptions about the length of exposure, the size of the person exposed, the behaviors that result in exposure are made in setting "safe" exposure levels?  What level of risk is considered safe?  What assumptions are made about background exposure or additional sources of exposure in setting "safe" levels?

(3) A working knowledge of the other options for clean-up or pollution control that are available.

This message is long enough, so I'll stop for now.  I look forward to reading the rest of the discussion.

Alma