\
^tDS%
&
2
ill
O
^ c>v°
P R 0^
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Evaluation Report
EPA Needs to Conduct
Environmental Justice Reviews of
Its Programs, Policies, and
Activities
Report No. 2006-P-00034
September 18, 2006
-------
Report Contributors:
Lauretta Ansah
Erin Barnes-Weaver
Dan Carroll
Jeffrey Harris
Kalpana Ramakrishnan
Steve Weber
Abbreviations
EJSEAT Environmental Justice Smart Enforcement Assessment Tool
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
OAR Office of Air and Radiation
OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
OEJ Office of Environmental Justice
OIG Office of Inspector General
Cover Photo: Housing impacted by industry. Photo from EPA Region 2 Environmental Justice
Website: http://www.epa.gov/region2/ei/.
-------
^tos%
* o \
ifil
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
At a Glance
2006-P-00034
September 18, 2006
Why We Did This Review
We conducted this review to
determine whether the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA's) program and
regional offices performed
environmental justice reviews of
their programs, policies, and
activities as required by
Executive Order 12898, and
whether they needed additional
guidance.
Background
Environmental justice reviews
seek to identify and address
disproportionately high and
adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority
and low-income populations.
The 1994 Executive Order 12898,
Federal Action to Address
Environmental Justice in
Minority Popidations and Low-
Income Populations, directs
agencies to make environmental
justice part of their mission by
reviewing the effects of their
programs on minority and low-
income populations.
For further information,
contact our Office of
Congressional and Public
Liaison at (202) 566-2391.
To view the full report, click on
the following link:
www.epa.aov/oia/reports/2006/
20060918-2006-P-00034.pdf
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
EPA Needs to Conduct Environmental Justice
Reviews of Its Programs, Policies, and Activities
What We Found
Our survey results showed that EPA senior management has not sufficiently
directed program and regional offices to conduct environment justice reviews
in accordance with Executive Order 12898. Consequently, the majority of
respondents reported their programs or offices have not performed
environmental justice reviews. Though some offices may not be subject to an
environmental justice review, the respondents expressed a need for further
guidance to conduct reviews, including protocols, a framework, or additional
directions. Until these program and regional offices perform environmental
justice reviews, the Agency cannot determine whether its programs cause
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on
minority and low-income populations.
What We Recommend
We recommended that the Deputy Administrator:
(1) Require the Agency's program and regional offices to identify which
programs, policies, and activities need environmental justice reviews and
require these offices to establish a plan to complete the necessary reviews.
(2) Ensure that environmental justice reviews determine whether the
programs, policies, and activities may have a disproportionately high and
adverse health or environmental impact on minority and low-income
populations.
(3) Require each program and regional office to develop, with the assistance
of the Office of Environmental Justice, specific environmental justice
review guidance, which includes protocols, a framework, or directions for
conducting environmental justice reviews.
(4) Designate a responsible office to (a) compile the results of environmental
justice reviews, and (b) recommend appropriate actions to review findings
and make recommendations to the decisionmaking office's senior
leadership.
The Agency accepted our recommendations.
-------
$ A \
\ Wi
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL
September 18, 2006
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
EPA Needs to Conduct Environmental Justice Reviews of Its
Programs, Policies, and Activities
Report No. 2006-P-00034
TO:
Marcus C. Peacock
Deputy Administrator
This is our report on the subject evaluation conducted by the Office of Inspector General (OIG)
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This report contains findings that describe
the problems the OIG has identified and corrective actions the OIG recommends. This report
represents the opinion of the OIG and does not necessarily represent the final EPA position.
Final determinations on matters in this report will be made by EPA managers in accordance with
established resolution procedures.
The estimated cost of this report - calculated by multiplying the project's staff days by the
applicable daily full cost billing rates in effect at the time - is $157,433.
Action Required
In accordance with EPA Manual 2750, you are required to provide a written response to this
report within 90 calendar days. You should include a corrective actions plan for agreed upon
actions, including milestone dates. We have no objections to the further release of this report to
the public. This report will be available at http://www.epa.gov/oig.
If you or your staff have any questions, please contact me at (202) 566-0847 or
roderick.bill@epa.gov, or Jeffrey Harris, Product Line Director for Cross Media Issues, at
(202) 566-0831 orharris.jeffrey@epa.gov.
Sincerely,
-BTTTA Roderick
Acting Inspector General
-------
EPA Needs to Conduct Environmental Justice Reviews of Its Programs, Policies, and Activities
Table of C
Chapters
1 Introduction 1
Purpose 1
Background 1
Scope and Methodology 3
2 EPA Has Not Consistently Performed Environmental Justice Reviews of
Programs, Policies, and Activities 5
Program and Regional Offices Have Not Routinely Performed
Environmental Justice Reviews 5
Need for Protocols, a Framework, or Additional Directions 6
Recommendations 7
Agency Response and OIG Evaluation 8
Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits 9
Appendices
A Regional and Program Office Survey Respondents 10
B Agency Response 11
C OIG's Comments on Agency's Response 16
D Distribution 17
-------
Chapter 1
Introduction
Purpose
The objective of this evaluation was to determine whether U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) program and regional offices have performed
environmental justice reviews of their programs, policies, and activities as
required by Executive Order 12898. The evaluation specifically sought to answer
the following questions:
• Has there been clear direction from Agency senior management to perform
environmental justice reviews of EPA programs, policies, and activities?
• Has the Agency performed environmental justice reviews?
• Does the Agency have adequate guidance to conduct these reviews or is
there a need for additional directions or protocols?
Background
Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, was signed on February 11,
1994. The Executive Order directs all Federal agencies to implement
environmental justice into its programs as follows:
To the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law ... each Federal
agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by
identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United
States.
In August 2001, the EPA Administrator issued a memorandum reaffirming the
Agency's commitment to environmental justice. This memorandum directed EPA
to conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human
health and the environment in a manner that ensures the fair treatment of all
people, including minority and low-income populations. In addition, the
memorandum directed EPA to improve its research and data collection relating to
the health of all people, including minority and low-income populations.
Four years later, on November 4, 2005, the EPA Administrator issued another
memorandum reaffirming the Agency's commitment to environmental justice and
1
-------
directing Agency officials "to implement [EPA] programs and activities to ensure
that they do not adversely affect populations with critical environmental and
public health issues, including minority and low-income communities." The 2005
memorandum also directed "EPA to more fully and effectively integrate
environmental justice considerations into its programs, policies, and activities"
and "to incorporate environmental justice considerations into its planning and
budgeting processes."
However, neither the 2001 nor the 2005 memoranda specifically directed program
and regional offices to assess whether any of their programs, policies, or activities
had disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on
minority and low-income populations.
In response to our 2004 report on environmental justice,1 the Assistant
Administrator of the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA)
responded in part as follows:
Executive Order 12898, rather, requires EPA to review all of its programs,
policies and activities in order to identify and address the disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects ...on minority
populations and low-income populations. This mandate is based on the plain
language of the Executive Order and is supported by the accompanying
Presidential Memorandum.
The Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) advised us that, since our 2004
environmental justice report, the Agency has also:
• Integrated environmental justice into each goal of the Agency's Draft
Strategic Plan;
• Issued the Toolkit for Assessing Potential Allegations of Environmental
Injustice and the Environmental Justice Smart Enforcement Assessment
Tool.,
• Linked its regional and program office environmental justice action plans
to the Agency's Strategic Plan, and developed new action plans for each
program and regional office;
• Established the OEJ as an ex officio member of the Agency's Regulatory
Steering Committee to help ensure that environmental justice
considerations are taken into account during the rulemaking process;
• Developed in-person and on-line training in the "fundamentals of
environmental justice"; and
• Developed in-person and on-line training for EPA staff responsible for
writing permits under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and
the Clean Air Act.
1 EPA OIG Report No. 2004-P-00007, EPA Needs to Consistently Implement the Intent of the Executive Order on
Environmental Justice, March 2004.
2
-------
OEJ provided us with the following definitions of the types of environmental
justice reviews the Agency performs:
• "Environmental justice assessments" are comprehensive analyses of
potential disproportionately high and adverse impacts within a given
geographic area, or that may arise from a proposed activity.
• "Environmental justice reviews" or "environmental justice program
evaluations" address potential disproportionately high and adverse impacts
resulting from a program, policy, or set of activities on all impacted
communities, including minority and/or low-income communities.
For this evaluation, we sought to identify any reviews of the potential to cause
disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority and low-income
populations regardless of how program and regional offices labeled the reviews.
Therefore, this document uses the terms "analysis," "review," and "assessment"
interchangeably.
Scope and Methodology
To determine the direction, frequency, and guidance for environmental justice
reviews, we met with OECA, OEJ, and Office of Air and Radiation (OAR)
representatives. We then conducted an Agency-wide survey of each of the
Deputy Assistant Administrators in the Agency's 13 program offices and each of
the 10 Deputy Regional Administrators on their experience conducting
environmental justice reviews of their programs, policies, and activities. We also
asked them to describe their satisfaction with available guidance and instructions
for conducting these reviews, and whether they needed additional directions or
protocols. We selected this population after discussion with OECA and OEJ
suggested that we would likely receive a more complete picture of environmental
justice reviews and assessments if the Deputy Regional Administrators and
Deputy Assistant Administrators serve as our points of contact.
We received 15 completed surveys: 5 Deputy Regional Administrators responded
and 5 program offices responded. OAR provided responses from five of its
divisions, and the Office of the Administrator provided responses from two of its
offices. We did not design our survey to draw inferences or project results.
Rather we sought to obtain descriptive information on implementing
environmental justice at EPA. Our response rate was 43 percent (10 of 23
offices) which is high for a voluntary survey. While the regional and program
offices that responded may not represent all regional and program offices at EPA,
we received responses from those offices directly responsible for environmental
programs (e.g., OAR, Office of Water, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response), as opposed to offices that function in more of a support capacity (e.g.,
Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Office of General Counsel). We considered
3
-------
all responses when summarizing results in order to use the most information
available to us. See Appendix A for a list of offices that responded to our survey.
This evaluation began on January 9, 2006, and field work ended on May 18, 2006.
We conducted the review in accordance with Government Auditing Standards.
4
-------
Chapter 2
EPA Has Not Consistently Performed Environmental
Justice Reviews of Programs, Policies, and Activities
Our survey results showed that EPA program and regional offices have not
performed environmental justice reviews in accordance with Executive Order
12898. Respondents stated that EPA senior management has not sufficiently
directed program and regional offices to conduct environment justice reviews.
Also, respondents expressed a need for further guidance on conducting these
reviews, including protocols, a framework, or additional directions. Until these
program and regional offices perform reviews, the Agency cannot determine
whether its programs cause disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority and low-income populations.
Program and Regional Offices Have Not Routinely Performed
Environmental Justice Reviews
Although Executive Order 12898 requires environmental justice reviews, EPA
program and regional offices have not consistently performed them. In our
survey of program and regional office directors, 9 of the 15 respondents (60
percent) had not performed reviews as required by the Executive Order. Reasons
for not performing these reviews included the absence of a specific directive as
well as confusion regarding how to perform the reviews.
In our survey, 13 of the 15 respondents (87 percent) stated that EPA management
had not requested them to perform reviews of the Agency's programs, policies,
and activities as required by the Executive Order. Section 6.601 of the Executive
Order states that the Office of the Administrator is responsible for ensuring that
internal reviews are conducted to demonstrate compliance with the Executive
Order.
One program office respondent said:
Framework, protocols, or further directions would help a program office
scope an environmental justice review. Program Offices wouldfind useful
and relevant a framework, etc., that is flexible and weighed against existing
commitments and programs that compete for program resources.
Other program offices responded that the nature of their programs does not lend
themselves to reviewing impacts on minority and low-income populations and, as
a result, they believe their programs are not subject to Executive Order 12898
requirements. However, the Agency has not yet determined the programs,
policies, and activities subject to the Executive Order's analysis.
5
-------
EPA has focused on integrating environmental justice into its programs, policies,
and activities through developing action plans from each of the program and
regional offices, and through other activities as described in Chapter 1. Action
plans provide staff with a strategic instrument to ensure environmental justice
considerations are integrated into all Agency activities. In some cases, the action
plans provide for assessment and performance measurement.
For example, in 2003, OEJ initiated the Collaborative Problem-Solving
Cooperative Agreement Grants Program. This program provides $100,000
cooperative agreements to affected community-based organizations to help find
practical solutions to environmental concerns. The Agency awarded $3,000,000
in Fiscal Year 2004 for these cooperative agreements to 30 projects. The Agency
also provides financial assistance to external stakeholders through the
Environmental Justice Small Grants Program. In Fiscal Year 2004, EPA
awarded 17 grants totaling $423,454 to community-based organizations focusing
primarily on environmental and/or public health problems of the affected
community.
Need for Protocols, a Framework, or Additional Directions
Program and regional offices lack clear guidance to follow when conducting
environmental justice reviews. The majority of our survey respondents (12 of 15,
or 80 percent) stated they would find protocols, a framework, or additional
directions useful for conducting environmental justice reviews (see Figure 1).
One of the survey respondents said:
Given there isn 't a common understanding of what a [environmental justice]
review is, it was difficult to answer "yes " or "no " to questions that really
required more explanation. ... We advocate the nationwide Agency use of a
consistent methodology for conducting [environmental justice] reviews.
Figure 1. Summary of Survey Respondents' Need for Additional Guidance
Usefulness of Protocols, Frameworks, or Further
Directions from EPA
Very Useful |
Somewhat Very Useful |
Useful |
Somewhat Useful | ~|
Not Useful ~~|
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6
-------
No Agency-wide guidance exists on environmental justice program or policy
review. However, the Agency issued a Toolkit for Assessing Potential
Allegations of Environmental Injustice on November 3, 2004. OECA issued the
Toolkit given its role as the National Program Manager for Environmental Justice.
Because no single office has authority to establish binding environmental justice
policy, each national program office was required to approve the document prior
to its issuance. OEJ stated, "The Toolkit represents current Agency policy with
respect to environmental justice and provides a structured, but flexible,
framework for conducting an environmental justice analysis." OEJ did advise
that they did not design the Toolkit for conducting environmental justice reviews
of programs and policies, but for conducting site-specific activities, such as
issuing a permit.
OECA, with OEJ, has subsequently developed its own environmental justice
review based on the Toolkit's Environmental Justice Indicators Framework.
According to the Environmental Justice Smart Enforcement Assessment Tool
(EJSEAT) guidance document, OECA uses a set of indicators to:
(1) Proactively identify, in a consistent manner, potential disproportionately
high and adversely affected areas ("Areas with Potential Environmental
Justice Concerns") to assist OECA in making fair and efficient resource
deployment decisions, including targeting inspections; and
(2) Analyze these areas, in a consistent manner, based on demographic (race
and income) information, to evaluate and measure how OECA's actions
affect areas with minority and/or low-income populations.
Thus, EJSEAT serves as both a tool for integrating environmental justice into
OECA's work, as well as a methodology for reviewing EPA's compliance
program with respect to environmental justice. OEJ envisions that other
program/regional offices will develop similar guidance documents for performing
environmental justice reviews. EPA advised that some regions and program
offices, such as the Office of Water, have stated in the draft Strategic Plan and in
their respective Fiscal Year 2006 action plans that they will establish
methodologies, like EJSEAT, which identify areas with potential environmental
justice concerns and assess progress.
Recommendations
We recommend that the Deputy Administrator:
(1) Require the Agency's program and regional offices to identify which
programs, policies, and activities need environmental justice reviews and
require these offices to establish a plan to complete the necessary reviews.
7
-------
(2) Ensure that environmental justice reviews determine whether the
programs, policies, and activities may have a disproportionately high and
adverse health or environmental impact on minority and low-income
populations.
(3) Require each program and regional office to develop, with the assistance
of OEJ, specific environmental justice review guidance, which includes
protocols, a framework, or directions for conducting environmental justice
reviews.
(4) Designate a responsible office to (a) compile the results of the
environmental justice reviews, and (b) recommend appropriate actions to
review findings and make recommendations to the decisionmaking
office's senior leadership.
Agency Response and OIG Evaluation
The Agency agreed with our recommendations. We reviewed the Agency's
comments to the draft report and made changes to the final report where
appropriate. Appendix B provides the full text of the Agency's response.
8
-------
Status of Recommendations and
Potential Monetary Benefits
RECOMMENDATIONS
POTENTIAL MONETARY
BENEFITS (In $000s)
Rec.
No.
Page
No.
Subject
Status1
Action Official
Planned
Completion
Date
Claimed
Amount
Agreed To
Amount
Require the Agency's program and regional offices
to identify which programs, policies, and activities
need environmental justice reviews and require
these offices to establish a plan to complete the
necessary reviews.
Ensure that environmental justice reviews conclude
whether the programs, policies, and activities have
a disproportionately high or adverse health or
environmental impact on minority and low-income
populations.
Require each office to develop, with the assistance
of the Office of Environmental Justice, specific
environmental justice review guidance, which
includes protocols, a framework, or directions for
program and regional offices.
Designate a responsible office to (a) compile the
results of the environmental justice reviews, and (b)
recommend appropriate actions to address
findings.
Deputy Administrator
Deputy Administrator
Deputy Administrator
Deputy Administrator
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
1 0 = recommendation is open with agreed-to corrective actions pending
C = recommendation is closed with all agreed-to actions completed
U = recommendation is undecided with resolution efforts in progress
9
-------
Appendix A
Regional and Program Office Survey Respondents
Program Offices
Respondents
1
4
5
8
9
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Water
Office of Research and Development
Office of the Administrator
Total
5 (out of 10)
5 (out of 13)
Agency-wide Response Rate
10 (out of 23, or 43%)
10
-------
Appendix B
Agency Response
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Response to Draft Evaluation Report 2004-000929, "EPA Needs to Conduct
Environmental Justice Reviews of Its Programs, Policies, and Activities"
FROM: Granta Y. Nakayama
Assistant Administrator
TO: Jeffrey Harris
Director for Program Evaluation, Cross-Media Issues
Office of Inspector General
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) appreciates the opportunity to
comment on the Office of Inspector General's (OIG) Draft Evaluation Report 2004-000929, "EPA
Needs to Conduct Environmental Justice Reviews of Its Programs, Policies, and Activities."(Draft
Report). I am sending this memorandum on behalf of EPA Deputy Administrator Marcus Peacock.
EPA believes that the Draft Report sets forth cogent recommendations that, with some
modification, will help to strengthen EPA's environmental justice program.
EPA believes that the integration of environmental justice considerations into the
Agency's decisionmaking processes represents an essential first step in making environmental
justice part of its mission, as directed by Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations" (Feb. 16, 1994).
Environmental justice program review is the next appropriate step to follow. Accordingly, the
OIG's Draft Report is especially timely, and EPA appreciates the OIG's efforts in this regard.
EPA concurs, in general terms, with the OIG's finding that, instead of conducting
environmental justice reviews, "[t]he Agency has focused on integrating environmental justice
into its programs, policies, and activities through the development of action plans from each of
the EPA program and regional offices. These action plans provide Agency staff with a strategic
instrument to ensure environmental justice considerations are integrated into all Agency
activities." However, as noted in comments to earlier drafts, certain aspects of the Draft Report's
research methodology and analysis can be made clear.
11
-------
EPA points out that, in addition to the action plans, the Agency has taken steps to
integrate environmental justice into its work. For example, EPA, for the first time, is integrating
environmental justice considerations into its Strategic Plan, which will improve the Agency's
ability to plan, coordinate, and evaluate its environmental justice priorities. Moreover, EPA has
significantly enhanced its on-line environmental justice mapping and assessment capabilities,
which should lead to improved accountability, efficiency, and, most importantly, improved
conditions in environmentally burdened communities.
I am attaching EPA's comments to the Draft Report. If you have any questions regarding
the enclosed comments or any other aspect of EPA's environmental justice program, please
contact me, or your staff may contact Barry E. Hill, Director, Office of Environmental Justice,
(202) 564-2515.
Attachment (1): Response to OIG Draft Evaluation Report, "EPA Needs to Conduct
Environmental Justice Reviews of Its Program, Policies, and Activities
12
-------
Response to OIG Draft Evaluation Report, "EPA Needs to Conduct
Environmental Justice Reviews of Its Programs, Policies, and Activities"
General Comments:
While EPA finds the Draft Report recommendations to be quite useful, certain aspects, such as
the "Scope and Methodology" Section should be made clearer and more understandable.
Specifically, EPA recommends the following:
1. Identify Data and Analysis Limitations and Explain Survey Methodology
The "Scope and Methodology" Section should include an explanation of the data and
analysis limitations of the Draft Report, given that only half of the Agency's regional
offices (5/10) responded to the OIG's survey. (Draft Report Page 3). This section
should also explain the analytical basis for: (1) aggregating the results from the
regional and the program offices, which are entities with very different institutional roles
within EPA and have different needs (e.g., programmatic policy operations versus more
location-specific functions); and (2) counting, as separate responses, the submissions of
different offices located within a single region or program office. A discussion of the Draft
Report's limitations would help the reader know whether the data and analysis should be
considered representative of conditions and/or needs Agency-wide. Including raw or
tabularized data in an appendix to the Final Report would also increase the transparency of
the evaluation's data and analysis.
e OIG
ment in
endix C
ote 1
2. Distinguish between Categories of Environmental Justice Reviews e OIG
EPA reiterates its previous recommendation that the survey and analysis of results ment in
should distinguish between "environmental justice assessments," "environmental endix C
justice reviews," and "environmental justice program evaluations." The Draft ote 2
Report's interchangeable use of these terms (Draft Report Page 3) leads to confusion
and potentially misleading conclusions. For example, while OECA agrees that the "[tjhere is
no Agency-wide guidance in place on environmental justice program or policy review," it is
incorrect to state that there exists "no established parameters or protocols to follow in
conducting an environmental justice review." (Draft Report Page 6). As noted in the Draft
Report, the Toolkit for Assessing Potential Allegations of Environmental Injustice provides
guidance "for conducting site-specific activities, such as issuing a permit. . . [and] provides a
structured, but flexible, framework for conducting an environmental justice analysis." Id.
Specific Comments:
1. Page 2, first full paragraph. The first sentence should read, "However, neither the
2001 nor the 2005 memoranda ..."
e OIG
ment in
endix C
ote 3
13
-------
2. Page 2, bullet #6. The sentence should be revised for clarity: "Developed in-
person and on-line training for EPA staff responsible for writing permits under
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Clean Air Act."
3. Page 3, "Scope of Methodology," paragraph 1. As noted above in General
Comment 1, identify the Draft Report's data and analytical limitations and
explain the survey methodology with greater clarity.
4. Page 3, "Scope of Methodology," paragraph 2, sentence 2. The sentence should
be modified, as follows: "The Office of Inspector General designed the sampling
process after consultation with OECA and OEJ."
5. Page 5, paragraph 3, sentence 1. The sentence should be modified, as follows, to
accurately show the range of mechanisms that EPA has used to integrate
environmental justice into its programs, policies, and activities:
"The Agency has focused on integrating environmental justice into its programs,
policies, and activities through planning and budgeting processes, development of on-
line assessment tools, training courses, policy guidance documents, and action plans2
which are submitted by each EPA program and regional offices, as well as through
OEJ's participation in the regulatory rulemaking process as an ex officio member of
the Regulatory Steering Committee.
6. Page 6, paragraph 3, sentence 2. The sentence should be modified as follows to
clarify that policy exists with respect to environmental justice assessments. In
addition, consistent with Recommendation #3, page 7, the sentence should be
modified to state that the regions and program offices, rather than EPA, as a
whole, have not established guidance on environmental justice program evaluation or
policy review:
"The regions and program offices have not established guidance on environmental
justice program or policy review. Further, except for the Toolkit, which addresses site
specific assessments, and for assessments conducted under the National Environmental
Policy Act and in the compliance assurance context, we found no established parameters
or protocols to follow in conducting an environmental justice analysis."
See OIG
Comment in
Appendix C
Note 4
See OIG
Comment in
Appendix C
Note 5
See OIG
Comment in
Appendix C
Note 6
See OIG
Comment in
Appendix C
Note 7
See OIG
Comment in
Appendix C
Note 8
14
-------
7. Page 6, paragraph 5, sentence 2. Clarify that other program offices, such as the
Office of Water, and regions have stated in the draft Strategic Plan and in their
respective Fiscal Year 2006 Action Plans that they will establish methodologies,
like EJSEAT, which identify areas with potential environmental justice concerns
and assess progress.
Recommendations:
(1) Require the Agency's program and regional offices to identify which programs,
policies, and activities need environmental justice reviews and require these
offices to establish a plan to complete the necessary reviews.
EPA accepts this Recommendation without modification.
(2) Ensure that environmental justice reviews conclude whether the programs, policies, and
activities may have a disproportionately high e^and adverse health or environmental
impact on minority and-or low-income populations.
EPA accepts this Recommendation with modifications, as above. The inclusion of the term
"may" provides a protective margin. The use of the conjunctions "and" and "or" have been
conformed to track the language of Executive Order 12898.
(3) Require each program and regional office to develop, with the assistance of the Office
of Environmental Justice, specific environmental justice review guidance, which includes
protocols, a framework, or direction for conducting environmental justice reviews.
program and regional offices.
EPA accepts this Recommendation with modifications, as above. The modifications clarify
that each region and program office will be responsible for developing its own guidance with
the assistance of the Office of Environmental Justice. A successful environmental justice
review must combine expertise both in environmental justice issues and the relevant science
surrounding a particular program and pollutant.
(4) Designate a responsible office to (a) compile the results of the environmental justice
reviews, and (b) recommend appropriate actions to review findings and make
recommendations to the decisionmaking office's senior leadership.
EPA accepts this Recommendation with modification, as above. The modification is
necessary to maintain existing delegations of authority and to maintain decisionmaking
authority with the office accountable for implementing its program, or overseeing operations
within its region.
See OIG
Comment in
Appendix C
Note 9
See OIG
Comment in
Appendix C
Note 10
15
-------
Appendix C
OIG's Comments on Agency's Response
1. We edited the "Scope and Methodology" section to elaborate and clarify our discussion
on the data and analysis used in our report. (See Page 3)
2. As suggested, we edited the report section on categories of environmental justice reviews
to clarify our position. (See Pages 3 and 7)
3. We made the correction. (See Page 2)
4. We revised the sentence as suggested. (See Page 2)
5. See the first comment above.
6. We made the suggested modification. (See Page 3)
7. We modified the sentence by referring to the Chapter 1 "Background" section of our
report which provides this information. (See Page 6)
8. We did not change the report since existing statements provide the same information.
9. We added the suggested statement to the report. (See Page 8)
10. We added the suggested word changes and additional information to our
recommendations. (See Page 8)
16
-------
Appendix D
Distribution
Office of the Administrator
Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Agency Followup Official (the CFO)
Agency Followup Coordinator
Audit Followup Coordinator, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
General Counsel
Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
Associate Administrator for Public Affairs
Acting Inspector General
17
------- |