^tDsr^
§ A \
I	U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
V^ OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Compliance with the law
Operating efficiently and effectively
Improved EPA Oversight of
Funding Recipients' Title VI
Programs Could Prevent
Discrimination
Report No. 20-E-0333
September 28, 2020
Tl
"No person... shall, on the ground of race,
color, or national origin, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of,
or be subjected to discrimination under any
program or activity receiving Federal
financial assistance."

-------
Report Contributors:
Julie Narimatsu
Kevin Good
Gabby Fekete
James Hatfield
Renee McGhee-Lenart
Abbreviations
C.F.R.
Code of Federal Regulations
DCRO
Deputy Civil Rights Official
ECRCO
External Civil Rights Compliance Office
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
OIG
Office of Inspector General
U.S.C.
United States Code
USCCR
United States Commission on Civil Rights
Cover Image: The EPA's External Civil Rights Compliance Office is responsible for
enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 at the EPA, which
requires it to ensure that any program or activity receiving the
Agency's financial assistance does not discriminate based on race,
color, or national origin. (EPA OIG image)
Are you aware of fraud, waste, or abuse in an
EPA program?
EPA Inspector General Hotline
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW(2431T)
Washington, D.C. 20460
(888) 546-8740
(202) 566-2599 (fax)
OIG Hotline@epa.gov
Learn more about our OIG Hotline.
EPA Office of Inspector General
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2410T)
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 566-2391
www.epa.gov/oiq
Subscribe to our Email Updates
Follow us on Twitter @EPAoig
Send us your Project Suggestions

-------
tfED sr^
.	.	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency	20-E-0333
£	\	Office of Inspector General	September 28,2020
I®/
At a Glance
Why We Did This Project
The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Office of
Inspector General conducted
this evaluation to determine
whether the EPA has
implemented an oversight
system to provide reasonable
assurance that organizations
receiving EPA funding comply
with Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964. All federal agencies
are responsible for enforcing
Title VI, which requires them to
ensure that any program or
activity receiving federal
financial assistance does not
discriminate based on race,
color, or national origin. The
public can use the Title VI
complaint process to report
alleged discrimination by EPA
funding recipients. Under this
process, the EPA's External
Civil Rights Compliance Office,
known as ECRCO, has the
authority to withdraw financial
assistance to compel a recipient
to comply with Title VI.
This report addresses the
following:
•	Compliance with the law.
•	Operating efficiently and
effectively.
This report addresses these top
EPA management challenges:
•	Integrating and leading
environmental justice.
•	Complying with internal control
(policies and procedures).
Address inquiries to our public
affairs office at (202) 566-2391 or
OIG WEBCOMMENTS@epa.gov.
Improved EPA Oversight of Funding Recipients'
Title VI Programs Could Prevent Discrimination
Despite elimination of
the case backlog,
additional improvements
in the EPA's oversight of
Title VI funding
recipients could prevent
discrimination.
What We Found
ECRCO has not fully implemented an oversight
system to provide reasonable assurance that
organizations receiving EPA funding are properly
implementing Title VI. As an initial matter, ECRCO
does not conduct proactive compliance reviews to
determine funding recipients' compliance with
Title VI. Instead, only once an investigation has been
lodged will ECRCO review the foundational
elements of the recipient's nondiscrimination program using a checklist. This
checklist documents the existence of a nondiscrimination program but does not
necessarily document the successful implementation of Title VI. We used the
checklist to conduct a limited review of the nondiscrimination programs in all
50 states and three territories. We found that 81 percent lacked some of the
required foundational elements on their websites. Meanwhile, ECRCO does not
systematically collect program data from EPA funding recipients, and state
personnel told us they need training and guidance to help them address
discrimination complaints related to permits and cumulative impacts. Three of the
seven states we interviewed indicated that they had not received training from
ECRCO.
Since ECRCO assumed management of the EPA's Title VI program in
December 2016, it has focused its efforts on reducing a significant backlog of
discrimination complaints while simultaneously developing policy and guidance
documents. It resolved a backlog of 61 cases from fiscal years 2017 through
2019. Improved oversight could prevent future case backlogs at the EPA and help
assure funding recipients comply with Title VI.
Recommendations and Planned Agency Corrective Actions
To improve oversight of the Title VI program, we recommend that the Office of the
Administrator develop a plan to coordinate across Agency program offices to
develop guidance on permitting and cumulative impacts. We also recommend that
ECRCO use systematic compliance reviews, develop performance measures to
assess its ongoing pilot program working with the states on foundational elements
of nondiscrimination, address potential noncompliance with funding applicants,
develop guidance on the use of data collection, and outline a plan to ensure that
the staff take Title VI training. The Agency did not provide a formal response to
our draft report but did provide informal written technical comments. We
considered the comments and revised the report, as appropriate. The EPA intends
to issue a formal response to this report, which we will post on our website upon
receipt. The six recommendations are unresolved.
List of OIG reports.

-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
September 28, 2020
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Improved EPA Oversight of Funding Recipients' Title VI Programs Could
Prevent Discrimination
Report No. 20-E-0333
FROM: Sean W. O'Donnell
TO:
Doug Benevento, Associate Deputy Administrator
David Fotouhi, Acting General Counsel
This is our report on the subject evaluation conducted by the Office of Inspector General of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The project number for this evaluation is OA&E-FY19-0357.
This report contains findings that describe the problems the OIG has identified and corrective actions the
OIG recommends. Final determinations on matters in this report will be made by EPA managers in
accordance with established audit resolution procedures.
The Office of the Administrator and the Office of General Counsel are responsible for the issues discussed
in this report.
Action Required
We made six recommendations in this report. Your offices did not provide a formal written response or
acceptable corrective actions for any of the recommendations. Therefore, all the recommendations are
unresolved. We request a written response to the final report within 60 days of this memorandum. Your
response will be posted on the OIG's website, along with our memorandum commenting on your response.
Your response should be provided as an Adobe PDF file that complies with the accessibility requirements
of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The final response should not contain data
that you do not want to be released to the public; if your response contains such data, you should identify
the data for redaction or removal along with corresponding justification. If resolution is still not reached,
the Office of the Administrator and the Office of General Counsel are required to complete and submit a
dispute resolution request to the chief financial officer.
We will post this report to our website at www.epa.gov/oig.

-------
Improved EPA Oversight of Funding Recipients'
Title VI Programs Could Prevent Discrimination
20-E-0333
Table of C
Chapters
1	Introduction		1
Purpose		1
Background		1
Responsible Offices		7
Scope and Methodology		7
2	Improved Oversight Needed to Assure Compliance with Title VI to Prevent
Discrimination		10
Oversight Should Include Compliance Reviews to Identify Weaknesses in
Funding Recipients' Title VI Programs		10
Oversight Should Include Collecting Information from EPA Funding
Recipients to Target Compliance Reviews		12
Regions and States Would Benefit from Additional Guidance and
Training from ECRCO		13
Conclusions		17
Recommendations		17
Agency Response and OIG Assessment		18
Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits		19
Appendices
A Past Actions to Address Title VI Compliance at EPA	 20
B Procedural Safeguards Checklist	 22
C Distribution	 30

-------
Chapter 1
Introduction
Purpose
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's Office of Inspector General
conducted this evaluation to determine
whether the EPA has implemented an
oversight system to provide reasonable
assurance that organizations receiving
EPA funding are complying with
Title VI requirements.
Background
Pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, "no person in the United
States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under
any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." Agencies
providing financial assistance are "authorized and directed to effectuate the
provisions of [42 U.S.C.] section 2000d of this title with respect to such program
or activity by issuing rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability" to
ensure that the goals and objectives of Title VI are achieved.
Title VI requirements apply to EPA funding recipients. Every year, the EPA
awards more than $4 billion in funding for assistance agreements to recipients,
such as state governments and nonprofit agencies. These funding recipients are
prohibited from using EPA funds in ways that would discriminate on the basis of
race, color, or national origin. Title VI allows agencies to achieve compliance by
"termination of or refusal to grant or to continue assistance under such program or
activity to any recipient as to whom there has been an express finding on the
record, after opportunity for hearing, of a failure to comply with such
requirement." Title VI requires agencies to "first determine^ that compliance
cannot be secured by voluntary means."
EPA's Regulatory Framework for Title VI
In 1984, the EPA amended 40 C.F.R. Part 7 to implement Title VI and other
nondiscrimination statutes. The EPA's regulations state, "No person shall be
excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
discrimination under any program or activity receiving EPA assistance" on the
basis of race, color, or national origin. Specifically, the regulations prohibit:
Top Management Challenges
This evaluation addresses the following top
management challenges for the Agency, as
identified in OIG Report No. 20-N-0231.
EPA's FYs 2020-2021 Top Management
Challenges, issued July 21, 2020:
•	Integrating and leading
environmental justice.
•	Complying with internal control
(policies and procedures).
20-E-0333
1

-------
•	Denying any service or benefits on the basis of race, color, or national
origin.
•	Offering services that are different or are provided differently on the basis
of race, color, or national origin.
•	Using "criteria or methods" that have the "effect of subjecting individuals
to discrimination."
• Choosing a "site or location of a facility that has the purpose or effect of
excluding individuals from, denying them benefits of, or subjecting them
to discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin."
The EPA's Title VI regulations direct the External Civil Rights Compliance
Office, or ECRCO,1 under the Office of General Counsel, to explain Title VI
obligations to EPA funding recipients and to provide technical assistance and
guidance as requested. New EPA financial assistance applicants have a different
set of requirements than those who already receive financial assistance (Table 1).
Table 1: Title VI requirements for applicants and recipients of EPA financial assistance
Applicants
Recipients
•	Provide assurance that they will comply
with requirements.
•	Disclose any pending lawsuits alleging
discrimination.
•	Describe other federal assistance and
pending applications to other federal
agencies for assistance.
•	Describe other civil rights compliance
reviews conducted during the previous
two years.
•	Collect, maintain, and, upon request, provide:
o Description of any pending lawsuits that allege
discrimination,
o Racial or ethnic, national origin, and age data that
were submitted with the application,
o EPA Form 4700-4.
o Log of discrimination complaints,
o Compliance review reports conducted by other
agencies.
•	Keep records for three years after completing the
project.
•	Post notice of nondiscrimination in a prominent place;
provide the notice in a language other than English, if
appropriate; and include a point of contact.
•	Adopt grievance procedures, unless certain
conditions apply.
•	Submit other data and information, as required,
"where there is reason to believe that discrimination
may exist," that is relevant to determining compliance.
Source: OIG summary of 40 C.F.R. Part 7. (EPA OIG table)
Before financial assistance is awarded, the regulations direct ECRCO to review
compliance information and, in its discretion, conduct an on-site review if it has
"reason to believe" discrimination may be occurring. If ECRCO finds potential
1 The regulations state that this responsibility lies with the EPA Office of Civil Rights, but the responsibilities for
implementing Title VI at the EPA moved to ECRCO in December 2016.
20-E-0333

-------
noncompliance, ECRCO "must approve" steps to correct it before an award is
given.
After financial assistance is awarded, the EPA investigates Title VI complaints
from the public to determine whether entities that receive federal funds are
fulfilling their civil rights obligations. The EPA's regulations encourage
resolution of discrimination complaints through informal, voluntary approaches
whenever possible. EPA funding recipients are provided opportunities for
informal resolution of Title VI concerns at several points during the process,
including after an investigation ends but before a formal finding of discrimination
is made. ECRCO also has the authority to "periodically conduct compliance
reviews of any recipient's programs or activities receiving EPA assistance,
including the request of data and information, and may conduct on-site reviews
when it has reason to believe that discrimination may be occurring."2 Ultimately,
the EPA may withhold funding from recipients found to have discriminated on the
basis of race, color, or national origin.
2 40 C.F.R. § 7.115(a).
20-E-0333
3

-------
I	j.
Case Study: EPA's First and Only Final Finding of Discrimination—Genesee County, Michigan
1992: Community Discrimination Complaint Filed Against the State of Michigan3
In 1992, the St. Francis Prayer Center of Flint, Michigan, filed a
discrimination complaint with the EPA after learning that the State of
Michigan, a recipient of EPA financial assistance, was considering
permitting the Genesee Power Station in a primarily low-income,
African American neighborhood in Flint, According to the complaint,
the community surrounding the proposed facility had concerns
about the potential emissions from this facility, including lead,
mercury, and arsenic. The complaint alleged discrimination in both
the location of the facility and in the process of permitting the
facility. The complaint cited, among other examples, the burden of
attending the state hearings in Lansing, 65 miles away from Flint, and
alleged that members of the community received fewer
opportunities to speak than others.
EPA Response Delayed
The EPA had 180 days to respond to the 1992 Genesee Power Station complaint and did not meet this deadline. The
power station began operating in 1995, despite the EPA not yet resolving the discrimination complaint. In 2015,
Earthjustice filed an "unreasonable delay" lawsuit on behalf of the St. Francis Prayer Center.
2017: EPA Issues First and Only Final Finding of Discrimination
In January 2017, 25 years after the complaint's submission, the EPA made its first and only final finding of
"discriminatory treatment of African Americans by the State of Michigan in the public participation process" related
to the permitting of the Genesee Power Station. The EPA found that the State of Michigan treated African American
communities surrounding the proposed plant differently than similarly situated non-African American communities.
For example:
•	During one public hearing in 1992, the state gave African Americans fewer opportunities to speak and less
time to review documents related to the Genesee Power Station permit than non-African Americans.
•	The state unnecessarily sent armed security to a hearing in Flint. This EPA finding was based, in part, on the
historic use of police forces to intimidate African Americans attempting to exercise their rights.
The EPA recommended that the state address problems found in its public participation process, such as developing
a policy to ensure that appropriate decisions are made regarding time, location, duration, and security at public
hearings. The EPA also recommended that the state establish a compliant nondiscrimination program, post a
nondiscrimination notice on its website, and adopt grievance procedures to address discrimination complaints.
I
3 "State," in this section, refers specifically to the then-Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, now the
Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy.
4
20-E-0333
r	\
The St. Francis Prayer Center in Flint, Michigan, filed
a discrimination complaint with the EPA.
(EPA OIG photo)

-------
Important Past Actions to Address Title VI Compliance at EPA
Both internal and external entities reviewed the EPA's Title VI program a total of
six times between 1999 and 2019. These entities issued reports containing
recommendations on how to operate a "model civil rights program," as well as
reviews of specific issues, such as how to operate permitting programs that are
Title Vl-compliant. See Appendix A for a list of past actions, including
descriptions of these reports.
In 2013, in response to a recommendation by the EPA's Civil Rights Executive
Committee—an internal group of EPA senior managers tasked to develop a
"model civil rights program"—the Agency issued EPA Order 4700. That Order
established deputy civil rights officials, or DCROs, in all its program and regional
offices to assist ECRCO and provide oversight for the implementation of the civil
rights program within their respective region or office consistent with national
policy and guidance. Table 2 explains the responsibilities of the DCROs.
Table 2: DCRO roles outlined in EPA Order 4700
Management function
Responsibilities
Staffing
Identifying and requesting adequate funding and resources from Agency
management for Title VI work.
Controls
Ensuring their organizations have well-functioning policies, processes, and
management controls.
Training
Training Title VI civil rights staff in their offices or regions.
Performance reviews
Incorporating Title VI language into performance agreements as required
for managers and for certain other positions as necessary.
Investigations
Effectively participating in or leading activities, including investigations, for
the purposes of implementing EPA Order 4701, Title VI Case Management
Protocol.
Implementation
Effectively participating in the Agency's implementation of external civil
rights policies for financial assistance monitoring, compliance, grant
reviews, and other external civil rights laws activities consistent with EPA
Order 4701.
Source: OIG analysis of EPA Order 4700. (EPA OIG table)
Prior to 2016, external and internal civil rights functions were housed in the
Office of the Administrator. In 2016, the EPA transferred responsibility for
external civil rights to ECRCO in the Office of General Counsel.4 According to
the Office of General Counsel, the staffing in ECRCO has remained relatively
steady at 11 to 12 full-time equivalents from fiscal years 2017 to 2019.
4 External Civil Rights Compliance Office Strategic Plan. Fiscal Years 2015-2020.
20-E-0333
5

-------
ECRCO Policy and Guidance
In 2017, ECRCO finalized three policy and guidance documents: a case resolution
manual, a strategic plan, and a compliance toolkit. The case resolution process is
outlined in the Case Resolution Manual, which provides procedural guidance to
case managers to ensure the EPA's "prompt, effective, and efficient resolution of
civil rights cases consistent with science and the civil rights laws."
ECRCO's External Civil Rights Compliance Office Strategic Plan for fiscal
years 2015-2020 outlines its goals regarding managing its complaint docket;
furthering its mission through systematic compliance reviews; developing
strategic policy; engaging EPA, federal, and external partners and stakeholders;
and strengthening its workforce. The plan also states that ECRCO is committed to
developing "strategic policy guidance on cross-cutting issues." Chapter 1 of the
Compliance Toolkit helps funding recipients comply with their federal civil rights
obligations.
ECRCO Title VI Program Efforts
ECRCO originally focused its resources on reducing its complaint docket and
case processing times. As outlined in the ECRCO director's November 20, 2019
congressional testimony, by November 2019, these efforts resulted in the
resolution of and preliminary findings made for the 61 backlogged cases that
existed at the end of 2016. To address future timeliness, ECRCO implemented a
variety of Lean management strategies to improve organizational efficiency and
developed program guidance as mentioned above.
In addition, ECRCO piloted its Cooperative Federalism initiative in 2018 to
provide technical assistance and outreach to funding recipients. The initiative will
partner ECRCO with EPA regional offices and their respective states to build
"effective civil rights programs that other states could model." ECRCO began the
program with Region 1, in part, because there were no existing Title VI
complaints against the states in that region. The Cooperative Federalism initiative
is voluntary. All but one state in Region 1 chose to participate. ECRCO met with
and provided training to the staffs of the environmental departments and agencies
within the participating states. States in Region 1 provided ECRCO with positive
feedback on its voluntary initiative. ECRCO informed us of its plan to engage
Regions 5 and 7 in the near future.
ECRCO's Procedural Safeguards
ECRCO developed a "procedural safeguards" checklist, which contains what the
office considers foundational elements of a nondiscrimination program.5 The
5 These requirements stem from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972, Section 13 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the
Age Discrimination Act of 1975. The scope of our evaluation is limited to Title VI.
6
20-E-0333

-------
procedural safeguards checklist derives from both explicit regulatory
requirements—including posting a nondiscrimination notice in a "prominent
place" and adopting grievance procedures—and more general requirements, such
as not providing services or benefits differently based on race, color, or national
origin. General requirements also include language access, which means ensuring
that members of the public with limited-English proficiency have meaningful
access to information in the languages they understand, as required by Title VI.
The checklist, which can be found in Appendix B, addresses, among other
foundational elements, whether a funding recipient has:
•	Posted a nondiscrimination notice in a prominent place that is accessible
to individuals with English and limited-English proficiency and clearly
identifies the nondiscrimination coordinator as a point of contact for
discrimination concerns. A nondiscrimination coordinator should be
designated to ensure compliance with federal nondiscrimination laws.
•	Adopted grievance procedures that are prominently published in print and
available online.
•	Developed, publicized, and implemented written public participation
procedures.
•	Developed, publicized, and implemented written procedures to ensure
meaningful access to all, including access for individuals with limited-
English proficiency.
Responsible Offices
The Office of the Administrator supports the leadership of the EPA's programs
and activities to protect human health and the environment. The Office of General
Counsel's ECRCO is responsible for enforcing several federal civil rights laws for
applicants and recipients of federal financial assistance from the EPA. This
includes discrimination covered by Title VI— race, color, or national origin—as
well as discrimination based on sex, disability, or age.
Scope and Methodology
We conducted this evaluation from November 2019 through August 2020. We
conducted this evaluation in accordance with the Quality Standards for Inspection
and Evaluation, published in January 2012 by the Council of the Inspectors
General on Integrity and Efficiency. Those standards require that we plan and
perform the evaluation to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a
reasonable basis for our findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on our
objective. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for
our findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on our review.
7
20-E-0333

-------
To answer our objective, we:
•	Reviewed legislation, policies, and guidance regarding Title VI and the
EPA's implementation of:
¦	Title VI.
¦	U.S. Department of Justice policy guidance.
¦	ECRCO' s Case Resolution Manual.
¦	Chapter 1 of ECRCO's Compliance Toolkit.
¦	EPA Orders 4700 and 4701.6
•	Reviewed external reviews and analyses of the EPA's Title VI program,
including those conducted by the United States Commission on Civil
Rights, known as the USCCR, and the EPA-commissioned studies by
Deloitte Consulting.7
•	Reviewed all EPA Title VI cases from fiscal years 2016 through 2020.
•	Interviewed ECRCO management and staff.
•	Interviewed the Office of Grants and Debarment and the DCROs in the
EPA's Office of Air and Radiation and all ten EPA regions.
•	Interviewed other federal agencies. We selected these federal agencies
from our review of the external reports cited above, as well as on
recommendations from experts in the field.
•	Interviewed seven states to discuss their knowledge of the Title VI
program and their work with the EPA on complaints. We selected these
states using a judgmental sample focused on geographic diversity and past
experience with ECRCO.
In addition, we reviewed the websites of the environmental agencies for all
50 states and three territories—Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and
Washington, D.C.— although we did not make any determination about the legal
sufficiency of what was posted. We recognize that recipients of EPA financial
assistance extend beyond the major state and territory environmental agencies to
local agencies and municipalities. We used these larger agencies and departments
as proxies to determine how consistently the states and territories disseminate
nondiscrimination information to the public.
6	The purpose of EPA Order 4701 is to provide cross-Agency support for resolving complaints filed under Title VI
and other nondiscrimination statutes applicable to recipients of the EPA's financial assistance and to ensure that
EPA resources are supportive of the civil rights mission.
7	Our analysis did not include in-depth reviews of relevant court cases.
8
20-E-0333

-------
Further, there were elements that we could not determine from a website review,
such as whether the department or agency was, as outlined in the procedural
safeguards checklist, "providing] or procuring] training services for [their] staff
to ensure that they are appropriately trained on ... non-discrimination policies and
procedures." Therefore, our review of websites included only a subset of the
procedural safeguards ECRCO included in its checklist—those that we believe we
should find online, such as a nondiscrimination notice and grievance procedures.
We defined a program "weakness" as the state not having either the notice or the
grievance procedure or both.
20-E-0333
9

-------
Chapter 2
Improved Oversight Needed to Assure Compliance
with Title VI to Prevent Discrimination
ECRCO has not fully implemented an oversight system to identify and correct
weaknesses in EPA funding recipients' Title VI programs. We found that ECRCO
does not proactively conduct compliance reviews and does not collect information
from funding recipients to target programs with weaknesses for review outside of
the investigation process. ECRCO developed a procedural safeguards checklist to
assess programs when a complaint is filed. We reviewed the Title VI program
websites of all 50 states and three territories to determine whether selected
safeguards existed and found that 81 percent lacked either the nondiscrimination
notice or grievance procedures or both. Further, state personnel from three of the
seven states we interviewed told us that they need training and guidance from the
EPA to help them address discrimination complaints related to permits and
cumulative impacts, which are the compounding effects of multiple sources of
pollution in a certain area. By improving its oversight efforts through systematic
compliance reviews and data collection as well as increased training and
guidance, the EPA will increase its assurance that funding recipients are
complying with Title VI requirements. Better implementation at the recipient
level could help alleviate complaints and prevent future case backlogs.
Oversight Should Include Compliance Reviews to Identify
Weaknesses in Funding Recipients' Title VI Programs
Using systematic compliance reviews to identify weaknesses in recipients'
Title VI programs should be an integral piece of the EPA's oversight system.
After the Agency awards funding, ECRCO does not conduct proactive
compliance reviews to determine funding recipients' compliance with Title VI.
Instead, ECRCO waits until a complaint is filed to review the foundational
elements of the recipient's nondiscrimination program using a checklist.
Employing the ECRCO's procedural safeguards checklist, we found that 81
percent of websites of the states and territories we reviewed lacked some of the
required foundational elements of a Title VI program which indicates that they are
not meeting these minimum requirements. In addition, despite ECRCO's
Cooperative Federalism pilot, we did not find that the states in Region 1 had more
safeguards than states in other regions.
20-E-0333
10

-------
Review of State Agency Websites Using the ECRCO Checklist
Identified Weaknesses in Funding Recipients' Title VI Programs
In our review of state environmental agencies' websites, we found that
43 (81 percent) out of 53 states and territories did not have some of the required
foundational elements (Figure 1).
In general, 60 percent of states and
territories posted nondiscrimination
notices on either their
environmental agency's website or
on another state-associated website.
Of the 32 states with notices,
14 provided notices in languages
other than English.
Despite the Cooperative Federalism
pilot conducted in Region 1, we did
not find Region 1 states to have
more procedural safeguards than
other states. While ECRCO did
receive positive feedback about the
Cooperative Federalism pilot,
ECRCO does not have a system in
place to evaluate the effectiveness
of the program. In addition, it is unclear how ECRCO plans to broaden the
Cooperative Federalism initiative into other regions and states.
Better Oversight Needed to Assure Recipients Are Properly
Implementing Title VI
According to ECRCO, the procedural safeguard reviews conducted by the EPA
are not "labeled as 'compliance reviews'" but accomplish the same goal, which is
"to address issues of strategic national significance in civil rights areas and
provide an efficient and effective vehicle for providing states and other recipients
with important compliance information and assistance."8 However, the EPA
procedural safeguard reviews only address the existence of a nondiscrimination
program and do not determine whether recipients are implementing their Title VI
program in accordance with requirements.
If ECRCO conducted compliance reviews, it could assist states in solving these
problems. For example, the Alabama Department of Environmental
Management's website exhibited four out of the five safeguards we reviewed—
8 Testimony of Lilian Sotolongo Dorka, director of the External Civil Rights Compliance Office in the EPA's Office
of General Counsel, before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee
on Environment and Climate Change, November 20, 2019.
11
20-E-0333
Figure 1: Lack of foundational elements
19% have all elements
(10 of 53 states and
	territories)	
lack foundational
elements
(43 of 53 states
and territories)
Source: OIG analysis. (EPA OIG figure)

-------
the nondiscrimination notice posted online and provided in different languages,
grievance procedures, and public participation procedures. It also had the most
Title VI complaints filed with and accepted by ECRCO for investigation of any
state, tribe, or territory between fiscal years 2016 and 2020. The State of
Alabama's grievance procedures are designed to address discrimination
complaints filed by the public. If the grievance procedures worked as intended,
Alabama would receive and address complaints before they reach ECRCO.
However, Alabama is the subject of 25 percent of the complaints that ECRCO
accepted nationwide for review between fiscal year 2016 and March 2020. The
high number of complaints received and accepted, along with our interviews with
ECRCO and the State of Alabama, suggest weaknesses in the state's
nondiscrimination program despite the existence of the procedural safeguards.
ECRCO is not identifying or targeting nondiscrimination programs that may be
noncompliant to review their programs in any proactive or systematic way, as
evidenced by the results of our safeguards checklist review. Systematic
compliance reviews were recommended by several internal and external entities
and are included in ECRCO's Strategic Plan. Thus, communities and individuals
face the burden of filing Title VI complaints rather than relying on the EPA to
provide oversight that would result in recipients' effective implementation of
Title VI.
Oversight Should Include Collecting Information from EPA Funding
Recipients to Target Compliance Reviews
New applicants for EPA funding must fill out EPA Form 4700-4, which requests
an assurance that they will comply with all applicable civil rights statutes and
EPA regulations. When the forms indicate potential noncompliance, ECRCO is
notified by the EPA's grants officer and works with the applicant to comply with
Title VI. ECRCO has the authority to delay or deny financial assistance to EPA
grant recipients based on the results of the pre-award compliance review. Our
review of recipients' websites suggests that many recipients do not have Title VI
safeguards. This creates a risk that the EPA's pre-award reviews are not
successful in identifying these Title VI weaknesses. The Office of Grants and
Debarment staff confirmed that ECRCO has never denied funding or held up an
award due to Title VI concerns.
Besides EPA Form 4700-4, ECRCO does not otherwise systematically collect
data from EPA funding recipients, such as program data or statistical data about
the composition of the populations they serve. In a 2019 report, the USCCR found
that the EPA was not receiving the information it needs to determine Title VI
compliance. ECRCO reported to the USCCR that it does not have any policies or
procedures to routinely collect data from recipients but collects additional
information from complainants as necessary to determine whether ECRCO has
the jurisdiction to investigate a complaint or conduct a compliance review and to
resolve complaints informally. The USCCR reiterated the importance of
compliance monitoring and noted that ECRCO lacked policy or guidance for
20-E-0333
12

-------
routine data collection and could benefit from collecting basic data about
recipients' Title VI programs, thereby helping to "ensure that recipients of EPA
funding ... take steps to come into compliance."
The EPA's Civil Rights Executive Committee recommended in a 2012 report that
the Agency require recipients to submit data on "affected persons and
communities and on [limited-English proficiency] compliance." Regularly
collecting and analyzing these data would support ECRCO efforts to identify and
target recipient programs that may be at risk for noncompliance or may be
struggling with Title VI implementation. ECRCO could then complete a
procedural safeguard checklist review or a compliance review to determine
whether the recipient's program has any weaknesses.
Regions and States Would Benefit from Additional Guidance and
Training from ECRCO
Recipients of EPA funding lacked guidance and training from ECRCO to address
common cross-cutting environmental concerns that drive a significant percentage
of Title VI complaints. For example, regional and state personnel we interviewed
cited both permitting and cumulative impacts as concerns.
Guidance Needed to Assist in Title VI Cases Related to Permitting
Permitting is a key concern in Title VI complaints filed with the EPA. We found
that the EPA received or resolved 57 Title VI complaints from 2016 through
March 2020. The EPA accepted 16 (28 percent) of these 57 cases for
investigation. Of the 16 cases accepted and investigated, 11 cases (69 percent)
were related to concerns about permits issued to sources that emit or discharge
pollutants into the environment (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Accepted EPA Title VI cases, 2016-2020
of Title VI cases
were permit-related
k (11 of 16 cases)
Source: OIG analysis. (EPA OIG figure)
13
20-E-0333

-------
Regions 3, 4, and 6 oversee the states that received Title VI complaints in
37 (65 percent) of the 57 cases received or resolved, and 19 (51 percent) of these
37 cases were related to permits (Figure 3). Regional staff told us that they
receive Title VI complaints regarding permitting issues and that more guidance is
needed to address permit-related issues.
Figure 3: Regional caseload for Title VI cases from 2016-2020
Source: OIG analysis. (EPA OIG figure)
ECRCO should work with EPA program offices on providing needed guidance on
permitting to assist with the large caseload. In 2000, the EPA addressed permit-
related Title VI challenges in its notice of two draft guidance documents in the
Federal Register, under the single title of Draft Title VI Guidance for EPA
Assistance Recipients Administering Environmental Permitting Programs (Draft
Recipient Guidance) and Draft Revised Guidance for Investigating Title VI
Administrative Complaints Challenging Permits (Draft Revised Investigation
Guidance); Notice. These draft guidance documents specifically targeted
permitting programs. According to ECRCO, both documents have been rescinded.
On March 21, 2006, the EPA finalized a new version of the Draft Recipient
Guidance, titled Title VI Public Involvement Guidance for EPA Assistance
Recipients Administering Environmental Permitting Programs (Recipient
Guidance). This guidance encourages public involvement in the permitting
process. However, despite these guidance documents, additional permit-related
Title VI challenges remain.
14
20-E-0333

-------
Case Study: Brandywine, Maryland

Key» fcrwrgy Canter
-#

Panda Mallawonian


#Panda Brandywine Power

Legend


BianiJywme Region
GCPV Si- Charles Fncrgy Center

Power Plants


# Piximad and otMrobng

•Chalk Point
O Permitted W rot operating



" ¦- Cflt. r. van

Source: OIG analysis using Esri's ArcMap, a mapping and location analytics
platform.
Title VI Complaint Filed with the EPA
In May 2016, Earthjustice filed a Title VI complaint with
the EPA against the Maryland Department of the
Environment and other state agencies responsible for
authorizing the construction of a natural gas-fired power
plant—Mattawoman Power Plant, The complaint stated
that the population within ten miles of the approved
location of the plant is 67 percent Black, according to EPA
data. The Brandywine community is bordered by several
other fossil fuel-fired power plants and is the site of other
types of facilities, including numerous open pit sand and
gravel mines; a coal ash disposal facility; a facility that
processes soil contaminated with petroleum products
and heavy metals; and the Brandywine Superfund site,
which was used to store hazardous military waste.
EPA Decision and Resolution
The EPA investigated both the decision to authorize the
construction of the plant and whether the public
participation process was discriminatory. The EPA did not
make a formal finding of discrimination but did enter into
an Informal Resolution Agreement with the state
agencies in January 2019. The agreement directed the
state permitting authority to use the EPA's data to
identify "affected communities that may be subject to
additional impacts." Maryland agreed to make air quality
information publicly available during its review of permit
applications as well as to evaluate any citizen science,
which is scientific research conducted by the public.
ECRCO Stakeholders Need
More Guidance and Training to
Address Cumulative
Impact Issues
We found that six of the ten regional
EPA offices have encountered
cumulative impact issues. The 1999
Report of the Title VI Implementation
Advisory Committee, an EPA-convened
group made up of representatives from
different stakeholder groups directly
affected by Title VI and academia,
included several principles for Title VI
that highlighted the importance of
addressing cumulative impacts. It noted
that "community concerns about
cumulative impacts are at the heart of
many Title VI disputes ... [T]o address
the communities' fundamental
concerns effectively, appropriate
authorities and other responsible parties
should recognize the cumulative nature
of such impacts and to attempt to take
action to reduce and ultimately,
eliminate the impacts."
The EPA's EJScreen is an
environmental justice mapping and
screening tool that provides a
nationally consistent dataset. This tool
can be helpful to stakeholders in
understanding the racial composition of
areas adjacent to proposed facilities.
Being aware of existing facilities and
racial composition in an area is
imperative to knowing whether
cumulative and disparate impacts exist.
An EPA regional office attorney stated
that cumulative impacts are the genesi s
for many Title VI complaints, but
guidance is not available on how to
address the issues.
20-E-0333
15

-------
During our interviews, state environmental departments also noted a need for
guidance to help address cumulative impact issues. Three of the seven states we
spoke to said that guidance addressing cumulative impact issues would be helpful.
One additional state indicated that cumulative impact analysis was done on an
ad hoc basis.
ECRCO personnel said that their office is not primarily responsible for
developing guidance for permitting and cumulative impacts because those are
predominantly environmental issues that should be addressed by the EPA's
program offices. In 2012, the EPA's Civil Rights Executive Committee reported,
however, that "a stronger cross-connection is needed between program guidance
designed to assist states in carrying out delegated authorities under environmental
statutes such as monitoring or permitting guidance, with the obligations and grant
conditions of Title VI for recipients of federal funds." ECRCO has the authority
to provide this type of guidance and leads the Agency's Title VI program.
ECRCO should collaborate with the regions and program offices to address the
development of policy and guidance for cross-cutting issues, such as permitting
and cumulative impacts.
EPA Needs to Increase Training for EPA Staff and State Civil
Rights Officers
Most of the states we interviewed indicated that they had not received training
from ECRCO on Title VI issues. One state told us that the EPA used to have
training videos available online and that it would appreciate something similar
being available again to train their staff. In addition, staff from four of the ten
regions we interviewed did not recall receiving training or were offered little
training from ECRCO. In most cases, DCROs and regional staff are only involved
in Title VI if there is an active case in their region. ECRCO is the lead for all
cases and relies on regional staff for on-the-ground knowledge and contacts.
Considering our findings with respect to the lack of procedural safeguards on a
large number of state environmental agency websites, ECRCO could improve
Title VI implementation within the regions and states by providing regular and
consistent communication beyond its Cooperative Federalism efforts. ECRCO
could improve the implementation of Title VI by developing and implementing
greater outreach tools to partners and recipients. This includes issuing guidance to
assist EPA regions and states in developing stronger connections between cross-
cutting environmental issues—such as permitting and cumulative impacts—to
civil rights and to provide Title VI training to more fully integrate Title VI
prevention and compliance activities into regular and routine EPA activities
across all Agency programs.
20-E-0333
16

-------
Conclusions
The EPA should assure that funding recipients' Title VI programs are compliant
and prevent discrimination by conducting more robust, systematic oversight
activities. ECRCO could improve the implementation of Title VI by collecting
additional data from recipient programs. This will enable it to target vulnerable
programs to assess and assure Title VI compliance. In addition, ECRCO could
improve Title VI implementation by working with EPA program offices to
develop and implement guidance for recipients and training for EPA and state
staff. These efforts would assure recipients have the tools they need to carry out
delegated programs in compliance with their Title VI obligations. Without better
oversight to assure compliant Title VI programs, the primary option for a
community seeking relief from discriminatory practices would be to file a Title VI
complaint with the EPA.
Recommendations
We recommend that the associate deputy administrator:
1.	Develop and implement a plan to coordinate relevant Agency program,
regional, and administrative offices with the External Civil Rights
Compliance Office to develop guidance on permitting and cumulative
impacts related to Title VI.
We recommend that the general counsel:
2.	Develop and implement a plan to complete systematic compliance reviews
to determine full compliance with the Title VI program.
3.	Develop metrics to assess the effectiveness of the Cooperative Federalism
pilot and other technical assistance efforts, such as the procedural
safeguards checklist. Revise these tools and programs as needed based on
the metrics.
4.	Verify that EPA funding applicants address potential noncompliance with
Title VI with a written agreement before the funds are awarded.
5.	Determine how to use existing or new data to identify and target funding
recipients for proactive compliance reviews, and develop or update policy,
guidance, and standard operating procedures for collecting and using those
data.
6.	Develop and deliver training for the deputy civil rights officials and EPA
regional staff that focuses on their respective roles and responsibilities
within the EPA's Title VI program.
20-E-0333
17

-------
Agency Response and OIG Assessment
The Agency did not provide a formal response to the draft report with a corrective
action plan and milestones but did provide us with informal written technical
comments. On September 9, 2020, we met with the Office of General Counsel to
discuss the technical comments. We incorporated them into the final report, as
appropriate. In addition, we modified Recommendations 1 and 5. The EPA
intends to issue a formal response to this report, which will be posted on the
OIG's website.
20-E-0333
18

-------
Status of Recommendations and
Potential Monetary Benefits
RECOMMENDATIONS






Potential





Planned
Monetary
Rec.
Page



Completion
Benefits
No.
No.
Subject
Status1
Action Official
Date
(in $000s)
17 Develop and implement a plan to coordinate relevant Agency
program, regional, and administrative offices with the External
Civil Rights Compliance Office to develop guidance on permitting
and cumulative impacts related to Title VI.
17 Develop and implement a plan to complete systematic
compliance reviews to determine full compliance with the Title VI
program.
17 Develop metrics to assess the effectiveness of the Cooperative
Federalism pilot and other technical assistance efforts, such as
the procedural safeguards checklist. Revise these tools and
programs as needed based on the metrics.
17 Verify that EPA funding applicants address potential
noncompliance with Title VI with a written agreement before the
funds are awarded.
17 Determine how to use existing or new data to identify and target
funding recipients for proactive compliance reviews, and develop
or update policy, guidance, and standard operating procedures
for collecting and using those data.
17 Develop and deliver training for the deputy civil rights officials
and EPA regional staff that focuses on their respective roles and
responsibilities within the EPA's Title VI program.
Associate Deputy
Administrator
General Counsel
General Counsel
General Counsel
General Counsel
General Counsel
1 C = Corrective action completed.
R = Recommendation resolved with corrective action pending.
U = Recommendation unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.
20-E-0333
19

-------
Appendix A
Past Actions to Address Title VI Compliance at EPA
The EPA's Title VI program has been reviewed and evaluated several times from 1999 through
2019 by both internal and external entities. These groups have issued several reports with
recommendations on how to operate a "model civil rights program," as well as reviewed specific
issues such as how to operate permitting programs that are Title VI compliant.
•	The EPA issued amendents to Title VI
implementing regulation.
Wj		
•	The Title VI Implementation Advisory
Committee issued its report.
1 The USCCR issued its first report.
\/
• The USCCR issued its second
report.
Deloitte Consulting issued its report.
• The EPA Civil Rights Executive
Committee issued its report.
DCROs were established.
•	Title VI functions moved from the
Office of Civil Rights to ECRCO.
•	USCCR issued its third report.
•	ECRCO issued its Strategic Plan, Case
Resolution Manual, and Chapter 1 of
the Compliance Toolkit.
	
•	The USCCR issued its fourth report.
Source: OIG analysis. (EPA OIG figure)
In 1998, then-EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner
commissioned the Title VI Implementation Advisory
Committee, which comprised representatives from
industry; community advocacy groups; federal, state,
and local governments; and academia to review and
evaluate "existing techniques" and tools that EPA
recipients could use to operate permitting programs
that are Title VI compliant and address Title VI
concerns. The committee developed eight consensus
principles that it believed should guide the EPA's
future Title VI efforts. Some of the committee's key
consensus principles included "early, proactive
intervention ... to deter Title VI violations and
complaints;" "transparent and comprehensive
standards and decision-making processes;" and the
recognition that "cumulative impacts are at the heart
of many Title VI disputes" and that they should be
researched and addressed to "reduce and ultimately,
eliminate the impacts."
Congress established the USCCR in 1957 to, among
other things, study and collect information on
discrimination and submit reports, findings, and
recommendations to the president and Congress. The
USCCR has studied the EPA's Title VI and
environmental justice programs and has issued
reports in 2002, 2003, 2016, and 2019. These reports
called on the EPA to provide more guidance to
recipients, collect basic program data, and
implement formal compliance review programs to
ensure nondiscrimination.
In 2010, while trying to address a significant backlog of Title VI cases, then-EPA Administrator
Lisa Jackson commissioned an external consulting firm to conduct an "in-depth evaluation" of
the EPA's civil rights program. The purpose of the assessment was to "determine the extent to
which the structure, policies, procedures, and resources of the [Office of Civil Rights] facilitate
20-E-0333
20

-------
accomplishment of EPA's equal employment opportunity and equal opportunity mission, and to
assess whether [the Office of Civil Rights] operates in accordance with applicable laws and
regulations."
With respect to the EPA's Title VI program, the firm found that the Agency's Office of Civil
Rights had not "adequately adjudicated Title VI complaints" and had "not completed compliance
checks of EPA grantees, in a timely or effective manner, to ensure that grantees are not engaging
in discrimination in their work." The firm attributed these deficiencies to a lack of qualified and
trained staff and limited organizational infrastructure to guide the work of the Office of Civil
Rights, including "well-documented policies and procedures, standardized processes, and
effective systems." Finally, the firm found that the Office of Civil Rights had operated in an
"insular fashion that... limited its effectiveness" and did not take full advantage of the technical
expertise available within the EPA and state governments. Further, the Office of Civil Rights did
not conduct much outreach to state environmental entities to build awareness of these entities'
civil rights obligations.
In response to the report, the then-EPA deputy administrator was tasked with leading the EPA's
Civil Rights Executive Committee, an internal group of EPA senior managers at headquarters
and in the regions, to develop a "model civil rights program." The committee's recommendations
for the Title VI program included establishing a case management protocol, mobilizing resources
across the EPA to address the backlog of cases, and "strengthening Title VI compliance and
prevention through grant mechanisms." An April 2012 report by the committee directed the EPA
to consider its authorities to improve oversight, including data collection, compliance,
monitoring, and reporting, and recognized that recipients' Title VI obligations could be viewed
as "pro forma." According to the report:
[Significantly more effort is needed to communicate Title VI responsibilities to
recipients of federal funding, and to monitor - through systematic processes -
recipient compliance with Title VI requirements. In addition, a stronger cross-
connection is needed between "program" guidance designed to assist states in
carrying out delegated authorities under environmental statutes (e.g., monitoring
or permitting guidance), with the obligations (and grant conditions) of Title VI for
recipients of federal funds.
20-E-0333
21

-------
Appendix B
Procedural Safeguards Checklist
ECRCO developed a "procedural safeguards" checklist, which contains what the office considers
foundational elements of a Title VI program. It derives from both explicit regulatory
requirements—such as posting a nondiscrimination notice in a "prominent place"—and more
general requirements—such as not providing services or benefits differently based on race, color,
or national origin.
The version of the procedural safeguards checklist used in our review is below. The final page of
the checklist outlines ECRCO's recommended text for a nondiscrimination notice.
20-E-0333
22

-------
(Revised July 2019)
PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS CHECKLIST FOR RECIPIENTS
FEDERAL NON-DISCRIMINATION OBLIGATIONS
Federal Non-Discrimination Laws: Collectively, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, the Age Discrimination Act of1975, Section 13 of Federal Water Pollution Control Act of1972, and Title IX of the
Education Amendments of1972; and EPA's implementing non-discrimination regulations at 40 C.F.R. Parts 5 and 7. 	
Item
Yes, with Supporting
Documentation
In Progress
No
Notice of Non-Discrimination under the Federal Non-Discrimination Laws1
(See Attachment for recommended text of notice.)



Post the non-discrimination notice in a prominent place:



• in your offices and facilities



• on your website's homepage



• in general publications distributed to the public



Ensure the non-discrimination notice



• is accessible to limited-English proficient individuals and
individuals with disabilities



• clearly identifies the non-discrimination coordinator, including
name and contact information



Grievance Procedures to Process Discrimination Complaints filed under the Federal Non-Discrimination Laws2
Adopt grievance procedures that are prominently published3 in print and
online and that:



• clearly identify the non-discrimination coordinator, including name
and contact information



• explain the role of the non-discrimination coordinator relative to the
coordination and oversight of the grievance procedures



• state who may file a complaint under the grievance procedures and
describe the appropriate bases for filing a complaint



1	40 C.F.R. § 7.95(a); 40 C.F.R. § 5.140.
2	40 C.F.R. § 7.90; 40 C.F.R. § 5.135(b).
3	40 C.F.R § 5.135(b).
20-E-0333
23

-------
Item
Yes, with Supporting
Documentation
In Progress
No
• describe which formal and informal processes are available, and the
options for complainants in pursuing either



• state that the preponderance of the evidence standard will be applied
during the analysis of the complaint



• contain assurances that intimidation and retaliation are prohibited4
and that claims of intimidation and retaliation will be handled
promptly and fairly pursuant to your grievance procedures in the
same manner as other claims of discrimination



• assure the prompt and fair resolution of complaints which allege
violation of federal non-discrimination laws



• state that written notice will be promptly provided about the
outcome of the investigation, including whether discrimination is
found and the description of the investigation process5



• are reviewed on an annual basis (for both in-print and online
materials), and revised as necessary, to ensure prompt and fair
resolution of discrimination complaints



Non-Discrimination Coordinator6



Designate at least one non-discrimination coordinator to ensure compliance
with the federal non-discrimination laws, who will:



• provide information to individuals internally and externally that you
do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin,
disability, age, or sex in administration of your programs or
activities, and you do not intimidate or retaliate against any
individual or group because they have exercised their rights to



4	See 40C.F.R. § 7.100.
5	Whether ECRCO would consider a recipient's complaint investigation and resolution to be "prompt" will vary depending on the complexity of the investigation
and the severity and extent of the alleged discrimination. For example, the investigation and resolution of a complaint involving multiple allegations and
multiple complainants likely would take longer than one involving a single allegation of discrimination and a single complainant.
6	40 C.F.R. § 7.85(g): 40 C.F.R. § 5.135(a).
2
20-E-0333
24

-------
Item
Yes, with Supporting
Documentation
In Progress
No
participate in or oppose actions protected/prohibited by 40 C.F.R,
Parts 5 and 7, or for the purpose of interfering with such rights



• provide notice of your formal and informal grievance processes and
the ability to file a discrimination complaint



• establish a mechanism (e.g., an investigation manual) for
implementation of your grievance procedures to ensure that all
discrimination complaints filed with you under federal non-
discrimination laws are processed promptly and fairly. One element
of any policy and procedure or mechanism must include providing
meaningful access for limited-English proficient individuals and
individuals with disabilities to your programs and activities



• track all complaints filed with you under federal non-discrimination
laws, including any patterns or systemic problems



• conduct semiannual reviews of all formal and informal
discrimination complaints filed with you under federal non-
discrimination laws and/or any other complaints independently
investigated by you to identify and address any patterns or systemic
problems



• ensure that appropriate training is provided for your staff in the
formal and informal processes available to resolve complaints filed
with vou under federal non-discrimination laws



• provide or procure training services for your staff to ensure that they
are appropriately trained on your non-discrimination policies and
procedures, as well as the nature of your obligation to comply with
federal non-discrimination laws



• ensure that complainants are updated on the progress of their
discrimination complaints filed with you under federal non-
discrimination laws and promptly informed as to any determinations
vou have made



3
20-E-0333
25

-------
Item
Yes, with Supporting
Documentation
In Progress
No
• undertake periodic evaluations of the efficacy of your efforts to
provide services, aids, benefits, and participation in any of your
programs or activities without regard to race, color, national origin,
disability, age, sex or prior exercise of rights or opposition to
actions protected under federal non-discrimination laws



• not have other responsibil ities that create a conflict of interest (e.g.,
serving as your non-discrimination coordinator as well as your legal
advisor or representative on civil rights issues)



Public Participation
Ensure your public involvement process is available to all persons
regardless of race, color, national origin, disability, age, sex or prior
exercise of rights or opposition to actions protected under federal non-
discrimination laws.



Ensure that the factors used to determine the appropriate time, place,
location, duration, and security at public meetings are developed and
applied in a non-discriminatory manner.



Develop, publicize and implement written public participation procedures
(consistent with EPA's Public Participation Guidance found at 71 FR
14207, 14210 (March 21, 2006)), that include implementation of steps for
effective public participation that is accessible to all persons regardless of
race, color, national origin (including LEP), disability, age, and sex each
time you engage in a public participation or public involvement process.
For example:



• develop a description of the community (including demographics,
history, and background)



• provide a contact list of your relevant staff members, including
phone numbers and email addresses, to allow the public to
communicate via phone or internet



• develop a list of past and present community concerns (including
any complaints filed under the federal non-discrimination laws)



4
20-E-0333
26

-------
Item
Yes, with Supporting
Documentation
In Progress
No
• develop and implement a detailed plan of action (outreach activities)
you will take to address concerns



• develop and implement a contingency plan for unexpected events



• identify location(s) where public meetings will be held (consider the
availability and schedules of public transportation



• develop a list of contact names for obtaining language assistance
services for limited-English proficient persons, including translation
of documents and/or interpreters for meetings



• develop a list of appropriate local media contacts (based on the
culture and linguistic needs of the community



• provide the location of the information repository



Meaningful Access to Programs and Activities for Persons with Limited English Proficiency
Conduct an appropriate analysis described in EPA's LEP Guidance, found
at 69 FR 35602 (June 25, 2004) and http://www.lep.gov, to determine what
language services or mix of language services you need to provide to
ensure that limited-English proficient individuals can meaningfully
participate in your programs and activities, and



• develop a language access plan consistent EPA's LEP Guidance



• develop, publicize, and implement written procedures to ensure
meaningful access to all your programs and activities for all
persons, including access for limited-English proficient individuals



• translate vital documents of general interest into prominent
languages



• translate vital documents of individual interest to LEP individuals



• provide for simultaneous oral interpretation of live proceedings
(e.g., town hall meetings and public hearings) in prominent
languages



• provide for simultaneous interpretation of proceedings, meetings,
etc., for individual LEP person participating in one of your



20-E-0333
27

-------
Item
Yes, with Supporting
Documentation
In Progress
No
programs or activities (e.g., a LEP individual wishing to file a
grievance or complaint)




Meaningful Access to Programs and Activities for Persons with Disabilities
Develop, publicize and implement written procedures to ensure meaningful
access to your programs and activities for individuals with disabilities that:



• provide, at no cost, appropriate auxiliary aids and services,
including but not limited to, qualified interpreters to individuals
who are deaf or hard of hearing, and to other individuals as
necessary to ensure effective communication and an equal
opportunity to participate fully in the benefits, activities, programs
and services provided by you in a timely manner and in such a way
as to protect the privacy and independence of the individual



• ensure that your facilities and other facilities utilized by you (e.g., if
you hold a public hearing at a recreational center) are physically
accessible for individuals with disabilities



6
20-E-0333
28

-------
ATTACHMENT - NOTICE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION RECOMMENDED TEXT
[Recipient Name] does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age, or sex in administration of its
programs or activities, and, [Recipient Name] does not intimidate or retaliate against any individual or group because they have
exercised their rights to participate in actions protected, or oppose action prohibited, by 40 C.F.R. Parts 5 and 7, or for the purpose of
interfering with such rights.
[Insert name and title of non-discrimination coordinator] is responsible for coordination of compliance efforts and receipt of inquiries
concerning non-discrimination requirements implemented by 40 C.F.R. Parts 5 and 7 (Non-discrimination in Programs or Activities
Receiving Federal Assistance from the Environmental Protection Agency), including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975; Title IX of the Education Amendments
of 1972; and Section 13 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (hereinafter referred to collectively as the
federal non-discrimination laws).
If you have any questions about this notice or any of [Recipient NameJ's non-discrimination programs, policies or procedures, you
may contact:
[Insert name and title of non-discrimination coordinator]
[Insert Recipient Name and Address]
[Insert phone number of non-discrimination coordinator]
[Insert email address of non-discrimination coordinator]
If you believe that you have been discriminated against with respect to a [Recipient Name] program or activity, you may contact the
[insert title of non-discrimination coordinator] identified above or visit our website at [insert Recipient website address] to learn how
and where to file a complaint of discrimination.
7
20-E-0333
29

-------
Distribution
The Administrator
Assistant Deputy Administrator
Associate Deputy Administrator
Chief of Staff
Deputy Chief of Staff/Operations
Agency Follow-Up Official (the CFO)
Agency Follow-Up Coordinator
General Counsel
Principal Deputy General Counsel
Deputy General Counsel for Operations
Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
Associate Administrator for Public Affairs
Director, Office of Continuous Improvement, Office of the Administrator
Director, External Civil Rights Compliance Office, Office of General Counsel
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of the Administrator
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of General Counsel
Audit Follow-Up Coordinators, Regions 1-10
20-E-0333

-------