^tDsr-%
• B \
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
At a Glance
15-P-0274
September 3, 2015
Why We Did This Review
The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA),
Office of Inspector General
(OIG), evaluated how the EPA
incorporates environmental
justice (EJ) into its rulemaking
activities. EJ is the fair treatment
and meaningful involvement of all
people with respect to
developing, implementing and
enforcing environmental laws,
regulations and policies. The OIG
specifically examined the EPA's
actions in accordance with Plan
EJ 2014 to determine (1) why the
EPA has not finalized the Action
Development Process: Interim
Guidance on Considering
Environmental Justice During the
Development of an Action (the
EJ in Rulemaking Guide), (2) the
extent to which the EPA has
adhered to the interim guidance
and can show measurable
results, and (3) the impact upon
the rulemaking process as a
result of the guidance not being
finalized. During our review, the
EPA finalized the EJ in
Rulemaking Guide.
This report addresses the
following EPA goal or
cross-agency strategy:
• Working to make a visible
difference in communities.
Send all inquiries to our public
affairs office at (202) 566-2391
or visit www.epa.gov/oiq.
The full report is at:
www.epa.aov/oia/reports/2015/
20150903-15-P-0274.pdf
EPA Can Increase Impact of Environmental Justice
on Agency Rulemaking by Meeting Commitments
and Measuring Adherence to Guidance
What We Found
The EPA was 3 years behind schedule in
issuing the final EJ in Rulemaking Guide.
According to EPA's Plan EJ 2014, the EJ in
Rulemaking Guide was to have been finalized
and released by the end of 2011. However,
the document was not finalized until May 29,
2015. Also, the draft EJ Technical Guidance—
planned to be a technical complement to the
EJ in Rulemaking Guide—is not projected to
be final until 2016. According to the EPA,
delays in finalizing the guides were due to efforts to address extensive
comments received during the internal agency review process.
Use of the EJ in Rulemaking Guide is voluntary and it is not consistently used
during the rulemaking process, so its impact is uneven across the agency. The
EPA does not currently have an agencywide process for assessing the extent
to which the EJ in Rulemaking Guide is applied. We found that the draft EJ
Technical Guidance is not being used at all.
Without measures and controls that assess when and how the EJ guidance is
used in rulemaking, the EPA limits its ability to encourage broad, consistent use
throughout the agency and to evaluate the guides' impact on rulemaking.
Recommendations and Planned Corrective Actions
We recommend that the Associate Administrator for the Office of Policy
implement a process to measure use of the guides, keep the EPA Administrator
informed if delays occur in issuing the EJ Technical Guidance, and provide
training on using the EJ Technical Guidance. We recommend that the Assistant
Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention provide training on
using the EJ in Rulemaking Guide.
The agency concurred with the recommendations and provided acceptable
corrective actions with planned completion dates. All recommendations are
considered resolved.
Continued delays in issuing
or finalizing EJ guidance
limits the EPA's ability to
broadly and consistently
consider EJ during the
rulemaking process,
potentially impacting
susceptible populations at
high risk of suffering effects
of environmental hazards.

-------