The Environmental Protection Agency announced Tuesday that it will investigate a civil rights claim that alleges the proposed Midland Sewage Treatment Plant violates the rights of Syracuse residents.

The claim, filed by the Syracuse University public interest law firm five months ago, alleged that there was a lack of public participation in the planning process and the final design of the plant would harm the well-being of those living near the site. The EPA agreed to investigate the design of the plant, but not the claim of a lack of public participation.

‘We’re glad that we’ve reached a decision at this point to review at least part of the claim,’ said Enesta Jones, spokeswoman for the EPA. ‘I think it puts a lot of people at ease that we at least decided to look into it further.’

A panel of disinterested parties chosen by the EPA will have 180 days to investigate the proposed plant’s design and decide whether Onondaga County and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation have violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with the project.

‘To have even this part accepted is a big accomplishment,’ said Louise Poindexter, spokeswoman for the Partnership for Onondaga Creek. ‘It’s important to let everyday people see that every now and then, the system comes together and it works to help everybody.’

Despite the decision to review the case, the EPA does not have the power to stall the construction process nor halt its funding, Jones said.

‘The EPA can’t prevent the county from going forward, and I think the county should think carefully before going forward with the project,’ said Alma Lowry, the director of the Syracuse University public interest law firm. ‘If the county wanted to take the negotiations seriously enough, they could have a proposal ready in a reasonably short period of time.’

Lowry said that the EPA would, if they side in favor of the claim, likely seek to resolve the issue through negotiations between the city residents and the DEC and Onondaga County.

‘It means that the EPA has now agreed to actively investigate the impact that the facility is going to have on the surrounding community, and whether those impacts are enough,’ Lowry said. ‘It means the fight is not going away.’

Few similar claims to the EPA have been accepted, however, let alone decided in favor of the party asking for an investigation.

‘The EPA has not found anything to be a violation of Title VI in the nine years,’ Lowry said. ‘But I certainly think we have a valid complaint and strong support for this.’

Plans for the plant were conceived by the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation during the 1990s and presented to area residents in 1998. Since then, the Partnership for Onondaga Creek has protested the construction, claiming it is a case of environmental racism and injustice, as the residents near the proposed construction site are mostly black.

The claim was filed by the Syracuse University Public Interest Law Firm, which allows College of Law students to receive practical experience by participating in real legal cases.

‘We’re very happy about what we did win, we want to move forward with this, we’re hoping we can do something with it,’ Poindexter said. ‘The one thing about civil rights, they don’t go away.’

Kim Wentworth, spokeswoman for the DEC, did not return phone calls.

Published on September 23, 2004 at 12:00 pm