Sign-On Letter from over 50 organizations supporting legislation to strengthen the independence of the EPA Ombudsman's Office

Representative Dennis Hastert

Representative Richard Gephardt

United States House of Representatives

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representatives,

Our organizations submit this letter in support of H.R. 3656, the Ombudsman Reauthorization Act of 2000, or amendments to the VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act for FY2001 that are made on the House floor that would implement H.R. 3656. This legislation will greatly aid citizens' efforts to ensure that their needs and views are fully considered in the EPA's decision-making process regarding Superfund and other toxic waste sites. Many Members of Congress have worked with the Ombudsman's Office and there is bipartisan support for the vital role this office plays.

The EPA National Ombudsman, or "EPA watchdog," receives requests and complaints from Members of Congress and citizens concerning Superfund and other hazardous materials programs and conducts investigations into those complaints. The EPA National Ombudsman then makes findings of facts and non-binding recommendations to the EPA on how to resolve the dispute(s).

For numerous communities who have felt the EPA was unresponsive to community needs, the National Ombudsman has assisted in resolving problems. The EPA National Ombudsman's Office has investigated and brought to resolution conflicts at Superfund sites around the nation. For example, over the last eight years, the National Ombudsman's Office has helped citizens from the states of California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Ohio, Missouri, Montana, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington. In some instances, assistance was in response to a request from Members of Congress. Likewise, citizens and Members of Congress have praised the work of the Ombudsman's Office. Enclosed is a recent Tampa Tribune editorial entitled "The Eroding Credibility of the EPA," that highlights the type of conflicts the Ombudsman often works hard to resolve and a Washington Post article that illustrates some of his accomplishments.

Essential to our support for the Ombudsman's reauthorization is the American Bar Association's (ABA) Model Ombudsman Statute as referenced in this legislation. The ABA Standards embodied in this Model Statute will provide the Ombudsman with the ability to convene public hearings and meetings on the record; interview witnesses on the record; subpoena witnesses and documents relevant to Ombudsman investigations; and select and conduct cases with critical independence from the EPA. It is also essential that the EPA National Ombudsman's Office have adequate resources to operate effectively.

For over twenty years the ABA's "twelve essential characteristics" have provided guidance to mainstream public-sector ombudsman positions across the country (see attachments). The States of Alaska, Nebraska, Hawaii, Iowa and Arizona have empowered their Ombudsmen with some of these essential characteristics. A number of Federal Agencies also have Ombudsman positions with some aspects of the "twelve essential characteristics" including the IRS, FDA and Commerce Departments.

Some members of Congress have expressed concerns that this legislation would give too much power to the Ombudsman. However, the legislation imposes important limitations on the role the Office plays. For example, under the amendment, the Ombudsman does not have the direct power to 1) compel any decision; 2) make, change, or set aside a law, policy or administrative/managerial decision, nor to compel an entity or any person to make those changes; or 3) substitute for an administrative or judicial proceeding for determining anyone's rights.

The EPA National Ombudsman serves the invaluable function of being the last recourse available to Superfund communities. The Ombudsman is also, in some cases, the first office to adequately investigate and resolve the problems faced by communities and individuals affected by hazardous waste. We respectfully submit that reauthorization, as described above, would allow the EPA National Ombudsman's Office to continue providing a vital service to the American public.

Sincerely,

For further information:

Danielle Brian (202) 466-5539

Project On Government Oversight, Washington, DC

Grant Cope (202) 546-9707

U.S.Public Interest Research Group, Washington, DC

Lisa Mosca, (202) 544-2714

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know, Washington, DC

Cc: Members of the House of Representatives

Enclosures

ATTACHMENT A

The twelve essential characteristics for Federal, state and local governments that want to create an Ombudsman, as per the ABA's 1969 Resolution:

1. Authority of the ombudsman to criticize all agencies, officials, and public employees except courts and their personnel, legislative bodies and their personnel, and their chief executive and his personal staff;

2. Independence of the ombudsman from control by any other officer, except for his responsibility to the legislative body;

3. Appointment by the legislative body, preferably more than a majority of the legislative body, such as two thirds;

4. Independence of the ombudsman through a long term, not less than five years, with freedom from removal except for cause, determined by more than a majority of the legislative body;

5. A high salary equivalent to that of a designated top officer;

6. Freedom of the ombudsman to employ his own assistants and to delegate them, without restrictions of civil service and classifications acts;

7. Freedom of the ombudsman to investigate any act or failure to act by any agency, official, or public employee;

8. Access of the ombudsman to all public records he finds relevant to an investigation;

9. Authority to inquire into fairness, correctness of findings, motivation, adequacy of reasons, efficiency, and procedural propriety of any action or inaction by any agency, official, or public employee; 10. Discretionary power to determine what complaints to investigate and to determine what criticisms to make or to publicize;

11. Opportunity for any agency, official, or public employee criticized by the ombudsman to have advance notice of the criticism and to publish with the criticism an answering statement; and,

12. Immunity of the ombudsman and his staff from civil liability on account of official action.

ATTACHMENT B

Current and prior Ombudsman investigation sites and their locations:

Alberton- MT

Brio Refining-TX

Bunker Hill-ID

Drake-PA

East Liverpool-OH

IEL-OH

McFarland-CA

Quincy-WA

Shattuck Chemical-CO

Stauffer Chemical-FL

Times Beach-MO