Day: August 17, 2021

By: Ruth Rodriguez, Communications Intern
Nearly 600 federal and state prisons are within 3 miles of a Superfund site in the United States. Over 100 are within 1 mile. These numbers are staggering. To make matters worse, the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world with 655 incarcerated per 100,000. Further, people of color are overrepresented in the incarcerated population, and are more likely to live near toxic waste sites. 
The siting of prisons is an environmental injustice. These facilities are built next to mines, landfills, and as previously mentioned, Superfund sites. Some are legitimately built on top of toxic land. Inmates, as well as the communities nearby, are bearing the threats of harsh pollution. 
The 1969 National Environmental Policy Act states that all federally funded construction must report to the Environmental Protection Agency to continue. In these reports consideration is often taken into the impact of the project onto the environment and how the environment would, in turn, impact its residents. Paul Wright, the director of the Human Rights Defense Center, says that the EPA does not consider the impact on prisoners in its environmental reviews. Additionally, advocates say that even though most of the prison population is made up of people of color and people from low income communities, the EPA does not apply its environmental justice regulation to prisoners. This is due, in part, to inmates not being counted in overall population data.
Here are just a few of the many facilities putting inmates in harm’s way:

• State Correctional Institution Fayette in Labelle, Pennsylvania is located next to a coal ash dump.
• Victorville Federal Correctional Institution in California is on top of, former Superfund site, George Air Force Base.
• Rikers Island in New York was built on top of a landfill and even had a lawsuit in which former correctional officers claimed the facility gave them cancer.

The State Correctional Institution (SCI) Fayette in Labelle, Pennsylvania is nearby two coal slurry ponds and 40 million tons of coal waste. The ash dump is made up of toxics like mercury, lead, arsenic, and thallium. Because many prisoners were complaining of health issues, the Abolitionist Law Center and the Human Rights Coalition issued an investigation into the health of those incarcerated. More than 80 percent of inmates were “suffering from exposure” to the coal ash. Health problems included cancer, thyroid disorders, fatigue, throat and sinus conditions, dizziness, and headaches. Residents in the town of La Belle had similar symptoms and illnesses.
When Marcus Santos arrived at SCI Fayette he knew something was wrong. That led him to begin keeping notes of his symptoms. During his time at SCI Fayette, Santos had multiple emergency medical treatments for things like skin rashes, vision loss, and throat swelling. When he was finally relocated to another facility his health noticeably improved. Though Marcus was able to leave, the consequences from pollution exposure can be long lasting, especially on long-term inmates of SCI Fayette. 
Other environmental health issues inmates deal with are sewage and sanitation violations in their institutions, furthering the threats to their health. 
Those incarcerated are being further criminalized and punished by being prevented from living in a clean environment that is not a threat to their well-being. No one deserves to be breathing toxic air, drinking unclean water, and living on top of contaminated land. A clean environment is a basic human right, and no one should be subjected to these conditions.
Photo Credit: Bruno Mallart

By: Kristen Millstein, Communications Intern
In the summer of 2016, I traveled to the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. I was in high school and had not spent significant time outside my California bubble. Pine Ridge was like a different world. While there, I learned from tribal leaders about the continual violation of their sovereignty and the trauma caused by a history of massacres and loss of sacred land. At the time, I looked at these atrocities through the lens of colonization. It has only been since I joined CHEJ as an intern that I began to look at these issues as environmental justice issues as well. Treaties were often violated because white colonizers found something valuable on tribal land–either agricultural opportunity, mineral wealth, or lumber, and greed for these natural resources continues to drive violation of tribal sovereignty. The resulting industries have done irreparable damage to the environment and Indigenous communities.
Pine Ridge Reservation has a poverty rate as high as 80% by some estimates and is 59th out of 60 counties in South Dakota for overall health outcomes. The region is clearly struggling, and it’s harrowing history is the primary culprit. Pine Ridge was once part of the much larger Great Sioux Reservation, established by treaty in 1868. This treaty was broken only six years later in 1874, and tribes continued to lose land over the next several decades as the U.S. government violated treaties to access gold, lumber, and other natural resources. The remaining tribal land is only a small fraction of their rightful land. Despite these already great losses, attacks on tribal sovereignty and land rights continue.
High profile protests like the ones surrounding the Dakota Access Pipeline are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to recent activism against encroachments on tribal sovereignty. Indigenous activists also fought hard against the Keystone XL Pipeline despite fierce opposition by law enforcement, and scored a major victory when President Biden revoked the pipeline’s permit and halted construction. Pine Ridge activists are currently embroiled in a fight against the proposed Dewey-Burdock uranium mine that will threaten the water supply as well as countless cultural sites. 
Each of these projects has been vehemently opposed by tribes on the grounds of damage to human health and the environment and violation of tribal sovereignty. But under our current system, agencies are not required to make their plans contingent on the consent of tribes, rendering their input effectively meaningless. Changing this provision and requiring ongoing, informed consent of tribal governments for projects that encroach on their land or threaten their cultural heritage would represent a major shift in the U.S. government’s relationship with tribes. It would be a victory for tribal sovereignty and for environmental justice. The Supreme Court ruling that declared about half of Oklahoma to be under tribal jurisdiction and the cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline by the Biden Administration are steps in the right direction and a sign that there may be an opportunity for real progress, but the threats are not over. We must continue to support Indigenous communities in their fight to preserve their culture, heritage, and environment against attacks on their sovereignty.
Photo Credit: JYM via Facebook