RE: Communication

[Denise Battaglia <battaglia.denise@epa.gov>]

Hi, I'm Denise Battaglia, head of the community involvement section in U.S. EPA's regional office in Chicago. The section is made up of 14 community involvement coordinators, who all directly work with community members to involve them in the decision-making process at Superfund sites in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin. In the last five years or so, we've also become much more involved in our other programs, most notably the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program.  We also focus on specific geographic areas to maximize resources and partnerships with local organizations, so that we're able to address all environmental issues in a given area, not just a single media issue like Superfund.  The areas we're now focusing on are Northwest Indiana, Greater Chicago, Southeast Michgan, Gateway (East St. Louis, IL), and Cleveland. 

I'd like to respond to Kelley's comment about not adequately notifying the public about upcoming meetings. You're right, placing a legal notice in the back of a newspaper is not the right way to invite people to a meeting. With the Superfund program in this region, it's our practice to place a display ad in the front news section of the most widely read paper in the area. Sometimes we run the ad several times, if time and money allows.  We also usually send a letter or fact sheet to everyone on the site mailing list.  And, of course, we issue a news release to the media. These basic things are routinely done in Superfund.  However, I think we have a ways to go yet in our other programs. In some programs, there are no requirements for public involvement. Of course, that doesn't mean we shouldn't hold public meetings, etc., on a permit for an underground injection well, for example. But unfortunately something like this would usually score much lower on our priority list. It's also worth mentioning that some of our programs are delegated to the states and, therefore, they have the lead on these efforts.

Just a quick word about Kelley's last point about involving the public early in its planning efforts.  I agree that we can definitely do a better job.  We do a good job at some sites, but not all of them. One way we're trying to improve is by helping to organize community advisory groups (CAGs). CAGs are comprised of diverse members in a community who are very interested in site activities and who want to be involved in the process early and often. (Bri Bill talked about CAGs in a posting earlier today.) We also have the Technical Assistance Grant (TAG) and Technical Outreach Services to Communitites (TOSC)programs.  Both TAG and TOSC are aimed at providing a community independent assistance in interpreting technical information. With a better understanding of the underlying technical issues, people can participate more meaningfully in the entire decision-making process.

I'm interested in hearing from others about how well we do (or do not)involve community members -- specifically at Superfund sites. Any residents or local groups dealing with a SF site out there?