RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
FY 2023-2024 NATIONAL PROGRAM GUIDANCE
OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND EXTERNAL CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLIANCE OFFICE
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
NACAA applauds EPA's commitment to the Strategic Plan
goal to "provide a cross-cutting foundation for integrating
[environmental justice] EJ and civil rights considerations
into the fabric of work across the Agency." Air pollution
continues to be a significant problem in this country,
threatening public health and welfare, especially in
overburdened environmental justice (EJ) communities
that disproportionately suffer adverse human health and
environmental impacts. On January 15, 2021, NACAA
provided recommendations and priorities for clean air and
climate program to the Biden-Harris Administration. This
document. Improving Our Nation's Clean Air Program:
Recommendations from the National Association of Clean
Air Aaencies to President-EIect Biden's and Vice President-
Elect Harris'Administrate flanuarv 15. 20211. calls upon
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
(NACAA)
Page 4
(Introduction)
Thank you for your comment We are
reviewing the referenced
recommendations.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
EPA to center EJ in its work. Please see the specific
recommendations in this document pertaining to EJ.
1
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
EPA appropriately recognizes the importance of working
closely with state and local agencies on EJ activities. Those
agencies are more than stakeholders, they are co-
regulators. As such, it is imperative that EPA work
collaboratively and in concert with state and local
governments, many of which can make valuable
contributions, based on their tremendous experience and
expertise with EJ issues. EPA should work to blend federal
activities with existing state and local programs that have
been successful.
NACAA
Page 5 (Promote
EJ and Civil
Rights at the
Federal, Tribal,
State, Local, and
Community
Levels)
Thank you for your comment EPA is
prioritizing significant funding from our
increased EJ program budget to support
the EJ efforts of our governmental
partners at the state, local, and tribal
levels.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
In order to carry out this critical EJ work, state and local
air quality agencies require sufficient funding.
Unfortunately, grants to state and local agencies have been
inadequate for many years. Accordingly, NACAA is
recommending that federal grants under Sections 103 and
105 be increased to $500 million annually, beginning in FY
2023. Such increases will help to support agencies in
fulfilling their current responsibilities and taking on new
and high-priority programs, which include additional
activities and programs to address EJ more effectively.
By September 30, 2026, EPA wants to include
Environmental Justice and Civil Rights commitments to
address disproportionate impacts in all written
agreements. We recommend EPA go through a regulatory
process to lay out these commitments rather than doing so
in policies and procedures.
Kent
Woodmansey,
SD DANR South
Dakota
Department of
Agriculture and
Natural
Resources (SD
DANR)
Pages 8 and 10
Thank you for your comment. EPA will
consider this option as we work through
this commitment.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
2
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
appreciates the general guidance provided by OEJ/ECRCO
on EPA Strategic Goal 2 implementation; however, TCEQ
requests additional guidance on how states should
implement the objectives. While the plan develops
objectives, TCEQ requests detailed, specific guidance to
appropriately implement and address the objectives. For
example, additional guidance on how EPA will measure
compliance for the specific goals EPA expects states to
achieve is needed. Further, TCEQ requests additional
information on funding to implement EPA's goals and a
detailed timeline for implementing EPA's objectives.
Texas
Commission on
Environmental
Quality (TCEQ)
Introduction, p.
4
EPA is committed to providing clear
guidance regarding financial assistance
recipient's legal obligations to have in
place procedural nondiscrimination
programs; clarifying and strengthening
existing guidance regarding recipient's
obligations to identify and address
adverse disparate impacts, including
how to consider cumulative impacts;
and providing proactive technical
assistance for recipients on compliance
with civil rights obligations.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
OEJ/ECRCO's guidance focuses on priorities, strategies,
and activities for "overburdened," "underserved,"
"vulnerable," and "disproportionately affected"
communities and "disproportionate impacts," stating that
future guidance will clarify how the agency expects states
to address activities in these communities. What these
terms could mean is subject to wide interpretation;
however, there is no mention of creating guidance for
defining or identifying such communities or impacts.
Further guidance to define and identify the communities
and impacts to which EPA's priorities, strategies, and
activities—and by extension similar efforts by states—
should apply is critical for states' and the public's
understanding of EPA's goals.
TCEQ
"Overburdened,"
p. 2, 3, 5, 8,12-
14,20-23,27
-"Underserved,"
p. 2, 3, 5,10,12-
14,21,27
-"Vulnerable," p.
2,14,15,22
"Disproportiona
te impacts"/
"disproportionat
ely affected" p.
2,4,5, 8, 9,13,
14,23,25,26
Thank you for your comment Details
regarding definitions for some of these
terms have been established previously
while others are currently under
development EPA is working to produce
a more standard lexicon of such terms
outside of planning documents such as
this NPG to provide greater clarity and
stability of the definitions.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
3
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
OEJ/ECRCO explains that "[m]any commitments will need
to be implemented within individual national programs
and regions." How will EPA ensure equitable
implementation of policies and procedures (and, thus,
enforcement) across programs and regions? Additionally,
EPA plans to focus on ECRCO's enforcement of civil rights
laws, including implementing "affirmative compliance
reviews." TCEQ requests additional information on what
those compliance reviews will contain and when such
reviews will begin.
TCEQ
Introduction, p.
4
In its Strategic Plan FY22-26, EPA
embedded its commitment to integrate
environmental justice and external civil
rights considerations throughout all EPA
programs and activities. To that end, by
September 30, 2026, all EPA programs
and regions will have identified and
implemented areas and opportunities to
integrate environmental justice
considerations and achieve civil rights
compliance in their planning guidance,
policy directives, monitoring and
review activities. As for civil rights
compliance reviews, EPA has developed
a process for Prioritizing and Selecting
Affirmative Compliance Reviews, which
is posted on ECRCO's webpage. Under
the Strategic Plan, ECRCO committed to
initiate 45 proactive post-award civil
rights compliance reviews, utilizing this
process, to address discrimination
issues in environmentally overburdened
and underserved communities by
September 30, 2026.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
4
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
OEJ/ECRCO acknowledges that "seeking a resolution of
community concerns" regarding health and environmental
protection requires "invoking a response" from
governmental agencies at the state level and clear
guidance for governmental entities on how to engage with,
and respond to, community-based organizations that
receive grants through EPA's Environmental Justice (EJ)
program. TCEQ requests information on whether this
guidance will explain what governmental response is
required and whether the guidance will recommend
engagement and response practices that are specific to the
goals of different grant programs offered under EPA's EJ
program.
TCEQ
Objective 1 -
Strategy 3, p. 7
Thank you for your comment The
particular details requested for in this
commitment are currently under
development and will be made public in
iterative fashion once finished to both
provide transparency to external
partners and communities and also to
receive feedback for future
enhancements and refinements.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
OEJ/ECRCO states, "[ojnce the universe of written
agreements has been established for FY23, EPA will
develop capacity building materials and other resources
with and for tribes and states on identifying
disproportionate impacts." TCEQ requests that any
guidance or materials be provided as soon as possible for
states to timely and effectively plan and implement EJ and
civil rights compliance measures. TCEQ also requests more
information on 1) the types "formal agreements"; 2) how
EPA will handle these agreements for states that do not
have the resources to fully implement these measures; and
3) how EPA will address jurisdictional limits within states.
Additionally, TCEQ requests that EPA provide guidance
and expectations before requesting states to enter these
agreements.
TCEQ
Objective 1, p. 8
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review and consider your
recommendations.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
5
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The NPG provides that EPA will review formal agreements
between EPA and states to ensure these agreements
reflect "commitments to identify and address
disproportionate environmental and public health impacts
in overburdened communities." TCEQ requests
information on whether the scope of these agreements
will include memoranda of agreements for state
authorization to implement federal environmental
programs. Also, TCEQ would like information regarding
how EPA will consider differences in environmental
regulations between states when determining what
specific commitments to include in the formal agreements
to be covered and how EPA will incorporate those
commitments into the agreements using "standardized
language."
TCEQ
Objective 1, p. 8
Thank you for your comment EPA is
currently working through the details of
implementing this commitment and will
consider the potential inclusion of MOA
as suggested. EPA also appreciates that
different states have different
relationships vis a vis implementation of
EPA authorities and will pursue a
tailored approach as necessary to
account for these differences.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
The NPG states that EPA will review state-issued permits
to ensure they "are responsive to EJ and civil rights
concerns...consistent with federal law and...underlying
authorities." Also, the NPG reflects that ECRCO will be
tasked with providing clear guidance regarding
obligations that recipients of EPA financial assistance, such
as states authorized to implement federal environmental
regulations and programs, have "to identify and address
adverse disparate impacts, including how to consider
cumulative impacts." Guidance does not establish legal
obligations and is not binding on states. Any obligations
required to fully implement Title VI and clarify to state
recipients, including TCEQ, how to address cumulative
impacts and other EJ and civil rights concerns in
standardized permitting should be promulgated through
notice and comment rulemaking.
TCEQ
Objective 1 -
Strategy 2, p. 9-
10
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
6
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
OEJ/ECRCO states that they wish to "increase
transparency by affirmatively providing information to the
public"; however, during the July 1, 2022 meeting with
states, EPA stated that each EPA region will develop a plan
for EJ and civil rights compliance that will not be made
public. TCEQ requests that EPA be fully transparent and
make the plans public. Additionally, TCEQ requests
additional information on how EPA will ensure that
standards are addressed uniformly across states to ensure
consistency in the implementation process.
TCEQ
Objective 1, p.
10
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to maximum transparency in
the development of such EJ efforts and
language in addition to collaborating
with our governmental partners
throughout the different elements of this
work. EPA will make public summaries
of the regional and program action
plans.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
OEJ/ECRCO establishes general deadlines throughout this
document for September 30, 2026. These deadlines apply
to both implementation and enforcement actions. TCEQ
requests that EPA provide more detailed and practical
timelines with deadlines and provide additional
information on how these policies will be enforced against
states when states have not been provided the proper
implementation resources.
TCEQ
Objective 1, p.
10
Thank you for your comment These
National Program guidances are the
documents which provide more details
regarding definitions, commitments, and
deadlines for various commitments
made in the overarching multiyear
strategic plan.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
OEJ/ECRCO states they will review grant applications,
"including 'four-corners review' of the Form 4700-4, to
determine whether the answers are filled out completely
and consistently with the nondiscrimination regulatory
requirements and based on certification from the
applicant of truthfulness and accuracy." EPA stated during
the July 1, 2022 meeting with states that a letter regarding
this review was sent to all award recipients. TCEQ
requests additional information on when that review will
begin and how it will affect states that are at various
phases of implementation of the NPG or who have not
received additional, detailed guidance on implementing
the NPG.
TCEQ
Objective 1, p.
11
On July 1, 2022, EPA sent notice to all
EPA financial assistance recipients of a
revised Form 4700-4 review process
that will take effect on January 1, 2023.
During the 6- month period from July 1
to January 1, ECRCO will be training EPA
staff on the revised process and
providing outreach to stakeholders. EPA
will also be developing the audit
protocol during this period. Audits will
then begin in the first part of 2023.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
7
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
OEJ/ECRCO states, "EPA will issue guidance on external
civil rights compliance to promote compliance with civil
rights laws and address adverse and disparate impacts by
recipients of federal funds." When will that guidance be
provided?
TCEQ
Objective 2, p.
13
EPA anticipates that it will issue
clarifying guidance regarding recipient's
obligations to identify and address
adverse disparate impacts, including
how to consider cumulative impacts,
within the first two quarters of FY2 3.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
The NPG establishes the following goal: "By September 30,
2026, 80% of significant EPA actions with environmental
justice implications will clearly demonstrate how the
action is responsive to environmental justice concerns and
reduces or addresses disproportionate impacts." TCEQ
requests additional guidance on when and how this goal
will affect states. Does this percentage include actions
taken by recipients of EPA financial assistance?
TCEQ
Objective 2, p.
13
Thank you for your comment This
commitment relates to actions and
decisions taken by EPA, not by
coregulators or recipients of EPA
funding. Other goals/commitments
speak to EPA's priorities regarding
actions taken by coregulators and
recipients of EPA funding.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
OEJ/ECRCO explains that policies and procedures are
needed for performing EJ analysis on "EPA rulemakings
with EJ implications." TCEQ requests information on what
OEJ/ECRCO anticipates as being "EPA rulemakings with EJ
implications." Also, will EPA's focus on rulemaking extend
to promulgating regulations that specifically address
disparate impacts, EJ, and civil rights considerations in the
siting of facilities, issuance of permits, and authorization of
regulated activities with potential impact on human health
and the environment? Or will EPA's approach consist of
analyzing how EPA rulemakings, not specific to EJ, may
address EJ and civil rights concerns?
TCEQ
Objective 2 -
Strategy 1, p. 14
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to maximum transparency in
the development of such EJ efforts and
language in addition to collaborating
with our governmental partners
throughout the different elements of this
work.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
8
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The NPG reflects that ECRCO will work to identify
resources that support development of "model
program/office specific LEP plans and procedures" and
consultation for programs and regions developing
language assistance plans. TCEQ would like information
regarding whether these model plans and procedures will
impact state agencies' implementation of language
assistance plans and, if so, whether they will address the
need for available resources to fund implementation of
language assistance plans once they are developed.
TCEQ
Objective 2, p.
19
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
Regarding the 305 audit EPA plans to complete, will EPA
initiate enforcement for noncompliance? If so, when will
this enforcement process begin and how will the audits be
enforced? Will EPA consider progress that states have
achieved in implementation? What specifically will EPA
evaluate in the audits? Will states have an opportunity to
submit comments on the audit process?
TCEQ
Objective 3, p.
21
On July 1, 2022, EPA sent notice to all
EPA financial assistance recipients of a
revised Form 4700-4 review process
that will take effect on January 1, 2023.
During the 6- month period from July 1
to January 1, ECRCO will be training EPA
staff on the revised process and
providing outreach to stakeholders. EPA
will also be developing the audit
protocol during this period. Audits will
then begin in the first part of 2023.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
9
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The NPG states that ECRCO will implement modifications
to the Pre-Award Compliance Review process and a post-
award audit process to determine whether potential
recipients are complying with civil rights requirements.
TCEQ requests a timeframe for when these modifications
will be implemented relative to ECRCO's planned
affirmative compliance reviews. Also, TCEQ requests
information on whether EPA will conduct rulemakings and
issue additional guidance documents to address EJ and
civil rights concerns before these modifications and audits
take effect
TCEQ
Objective 3, p.
22
On July 1, 2022, EPA sent notice to all
EPA financial assistance recipients of a
revised Form 4700-4 review process
that will take effect on January 1, 2023.
During the 6- month period from July 1
to January 1, ECRCO will be training EPA
staff on the revised process and
providing outreach to stakeholders.
Audits will then begin in the first part of
2023. Separately on January 6, 2022,
ECRCO issued a Process and Criteria for
Prioritizing and Selecting Affirmative
Compliance Reviews. EPA has since
initiated a compliance review on March
18, 2022, according to this process.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
10
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
TCEQ seeks clarification of the timing of the elements of
the OEJ/ECRCO guidance. For example, for the long-term
performance goal to address disproportionate impacts in
all written agreements between EPA and tribes/states,
Strategy 1 discusses integrating commitments to identify
and address disproportionate impacts into written
agreements between EPA and the states. In Strategy 2,
ECRCO indicates that EPA will review state-issued permits
to ensure that EJ and civil rights concerns are met.
However, additional guidance regarding key elements of
its strategies (e.g., how to identify and address cumulative
and disparate impacts) will be forthcoming. It is unclear
from the NPG if this critical guidance will be completed
before states must integrate commitments into their
agreements with EPA and before EPA begins reviewing
state permits for EJ and civil rights concerns. Assuming
the guidance will be completed before these actions, it is
unclear whether sufficient time will be given to states to
implement the guidance before EPA begins requiring
commitments in agreements and reviewing state permits
for EJ and civil rights concerns. The guidance suggests
sufficient time may not be available (e.g., it sets a
performance measure of 25% completion for written
agreements with states by FY23). Similarly, in the long-
term performance goal regarding initiation of 45 post-
award civil rights compliance reviews, ECRCO commits to
beginning compliance reviews in FY23, however it is
generally unclear when critical guidance will be available.
TCEQ
Objective 1, p. 8-
10; FY 2023
NPG Measures
chart, p. 25;
Objective 3, p.
20-21
EPA is committed to providing clear
guidance regarding financial assistance
recipient's legal obligations to have in
place procedural nondiscrimination
programs. That guidance should be
issued yet in FY22 or early FY23. In
addition, in the first part of FY2 3, ECRCO
will clarify and strengthen existing
guidance regarding recipient's
obligations to identify and address
adverse disparate impacts, including
how to consider cumulative impacts. As
for civil rights compliance reviews, EPA
has developed a process for Prioritizing
and Selecting Affirmative Compliance
Reviews, which is posted on ECRCO's
webpage. Under the Strategic Plan,
ECRCO committed to initiate proactive
post-award civil rights compliance
reviews, utilizing this process, to
address discrimination issues in
environmentally overburdened and
underserved communities.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
11
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
We commend OEJ-ECRCO for releasing draft national
program guidance for the first time, and including explicit
commitments to advance environmental equity and
justice. However, there are several crucial gaps in the
guidance, as well as programs and commitments
currently not included, all of which are essential to
advancing these goals. Specifically:
- The guidance does not define key terms,
including but not limited to: "environmental justice
communities," "community-driven," "meaningful
involvement," "equitable practices," and "underserved and
overburdened communities." These definitions should, at
minimum, clarify the relationship between members of
"underserved and overburdened communities,"
"environmental justice communities," and protected
classes under Title VI.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Missing from
draft guidance
Thank you for your comment Details
regarding definitions for some of these
terms have been established previously
while others are currently under
development EPA is working to produce
a more standard lexicon of such terms
outside of planning documents such as
this NPG to provide greater clarity and
stability of the definitions.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
12
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
Title VI compliance and enforcement is central to OEJ-
ECRCO's mission, but the draft NGP does not address the
receipt, processing, investigation, or resolution of
Title VI complaints, nor the issuance of Title VI
compliance guidance for recipients of federal funding,
including clarifying that Title VI compliance imposes both
procedural and substantive obligations on recipients.
Please see the attached letter and appendices submitted
on November 24, 2021 to Administrator Regan, OEJ, and
ECRCO, as well as the attached February 24, 2022, letter
to the Office of General Council and ECRCO for our
detailed recommendations on these and other concerns.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Missing from
draft guidance
ECRCO's Case Resolution Manual (CRM)
describes EPA's processes to ensure
prompt, effective, and efficient
resolution of civil rights complaints
consistent with the civil rights laws,
including investigation steps and
resolution of civil rights complaints
through agreements and preliminary
findings. Also, EPA is committed to
providing clear guidance regarding
financial assistance recipient's legal
obligations to have in place procedural
nondiscrimination programs; clarifying
and strengthening existing guidance
regarding recipient's obligations to
identify and address adverse disparate
impacts, including how to consider
cumulative impacts; and providing
proactive technical assistance for states
on compliance with civil rights
obligations.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
The draft NPG does not address if and when EPA will
withdraw or defer federal funds if a Title VI violation is
found. Clarifying the thresholds for imposing these
consequences is essential to ensuring compliance with
Title VI.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Missing from
draft guidance
Thank you for your comment EPA's
nondiscrimination regulation at 40 CFR
7.130 states that if compliance cannot be
assured by informal means, EPA may
terminate or refuse to award or to
continue assistance, and that EPA may
also use any other means authorized by
law to get compliance, including a
referral of the matter to the Department
of Justice. ECRCO's Case Resolution
Manual further discusses preliminary
findings, voluntary compliance and
initiation of enforcement action at
Chapters 5-7.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
13
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The draft NPG does not include or reference the
commitments made by EPA in its Sep. 2021 letter
responding to the Office of the Inspector General
regarding ECRCO, including the release of a public Title VI
complaint database. These commitments, benchmarks,
and associate timelines should be incorporated into the
draft NPG under the relevant Program Priorities. This
letter can be found here:
https: //www.epa. gov/svstem / files / documents/2 0
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Missing from
draft guidance
ECRCO's commitments to the EPA OIG
are public and can be found on EPA
OIG's website. Many of those
commitments have been subsumed
under the EPA FY22-26 Strategic Plan,
including under LTPGs 2.1, 2.2. and 2.3.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
21- 10/ epaoig 20-e-0333 agencv response2.pdf.
The draft NPG does not address if and how ECRCO plans
to involve Title VI complainants in the investigation,
negotiation, resolution, and settlement of Title VI
complaints with recipients. Notably, the NPG does not
address, standardize, or in any way make transparent its
initiation of an informal resolution agreement "plus"
process.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Missing from
draft guidance
ECRCO's Case Resolution Manual (CRM)
describes EPA's processes to ensure
prompt, effective, and efficient
resolution of civil rights complaints
consistent with the civil rights laws,
including investigation steps and
resolution of civil rights complaints
through agreements and preliminary
findings. The CRM is a living document
to be periodically updated to account for
new developments and processes, such
as the IRA plus process.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
The draft NPG does not discuss how OEJ or ECRCO will
engage with the Environmental Council of the States
(ECOS), including outreach to, training of, and guidance for
ECOS members on civil rights compliance.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Missing from
draft guidance
EPA is committed to continuing its
engagement with ECOS and other
stakeholders with respect to civil rights
compliance, including providing regular
and meaningful technical assistance,
guidance, and training such as the
recently conducted 3-part civil rights
training workshops, as well as soliciting
feedback from ECOS and other
stakeholders on environmental justice
and civil rights issues and concerns.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
14
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
Some simple revisions would greatly improve the
organization, readability, and utility of the NPG:
• The codes for Measures on PP. 25-26 should
also be inserted in the main text to facilitate
easy references (e.g., "EJCR15" should be
inserted next to the corresponding measure on
p. 20, etc.).
The Program Priorities, Long Term Performance Goals,
Strategies, and Activities should all be numbered. There
should be a consistent numbering scheme throughout the
document that makes the organization and tiering of the
various categories (objectives, strategies etc etc.) more
useful and clear.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Throughout
Thank you for your comment The codes
for measures on pages 25-26 have been
integrated into the main text of the
guidance for easier reference. For
formatting, the NPG follows a template
provided by EPA. We will keep your
comment for consideration in future
editions.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
The NPG states EPA plans to "request[] commitments by
EPA programs and regions and other governmental
partners to include the principles of meaningful
involvement and equity in their work and with
underserved and overburdened communities." This
commitment falls under Objective 1 related to non-EPA
partners (Federal, Tribal, State, Local, and Community
entities). Therefore this request should be explicitly
extended to those non-EPA partners.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Pg 5
Thank you for your comment By stating
that this will extend to "other
governmental partners" it explicitly
includes co-regulators at the state, local,
and tribal levels.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
15
-------
The NPG contains several references to grantmaking to
support capacity building and technical assistance and
compensate organizations and individuals for their
expertise and participation. To have an impact, EJ grants
need to go directly to grassroots organizations with
accountability structures in place to ensure that funds
priority needs as defined by the communities most
impacted by environmental and climate risks and
burdens. This begins with an explicit commitment to
making funding decisions and establishing oversight
mechanisms as part of a community-led process.
This language should be included as part of Strategy 3.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Too often, federal grants and other funds flow through
intermediary institutions or organizations before
reaching communities. These intermediaries often take a
significant percentage to cover indirect costs before
reallocating those funds, sometimes over 50%. To
ensure the benefits of federal grants actually reach
communities, EPA should add a Measure under
Strategy 3 on P. 7 that quantifies and reports out the
percentage of funds that directly reach community-
level grantees, and the percentage retained by
intermediary institutions.
Another potential mechanism to facilitate direct,
effective funding to grassroots organizations is to create
regional Environmental Justice Advisory Councils
(EJACs) so that EJ leaders can be directly integrated into
decision-making and assist in oversight in the
distribution of that funding.
Overreliance on intermediary organizations can also
manifest in gatekeeping and implicit bias in the
distribution of fund, as well as hindering relationship-
building and information exchange between EPA and
community members. A regional EJAC approach could
mitigate those impacts while fostering relationships and
exchange of information.
Thank you for your comment EPA's EJ Made no
program deeply appreciates and shares changes to
the expressed concern over the use of the NPG.
intermediaries and the potential for
significant funding to be taken up in
administrative overhead instead of
reaching the intended community-based
organizations. EPA is committed to
transparently showing year over year
the amount of total funding that flows
out of the EJ program in addition to
where and how much of that funding
reaches recipients on an individual
basis. EPA also appreciates the desire to
establish regional EJ councils and is
working towards that idea with the
additional funding provided to EPA's
regions through the EJ budget increase
in the FY2022 budget
16
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
Under Strategy 3, the Measure (EJCR03 on P. 2) is based
on eliciting "a governmental response" but does not
specify what types of responses are meaningful or how to
track them. The draft NPG should elaborate on what
"governmental response" means, including providing
examples of adequate responses indicative of success
under Strategy 3, to ensure the Measure is meaningful.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
PP. 7-8, 25
Thank you for your comment The
particular details requested for in this
commitment are currently under
development and will be made public in
iterative fashion once finished to both
provide transparency to external
partners and communities and also to
receive feedback for future
enhancements and refinements.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
To strengthen the Long-Term Performance Goal to
"include commitments to address disproportionate
impacts in all written agreements between EPA and tribes
and states," those agreements should also include
commitments to produce documentation of how those
disproportionate impacts were addressed, and specifically
how they were reduced, eliminated, and/or mitigated.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 8
Thank you for your comment This detail
and commitment will be kept in
consideration as EPA implements this
commitment. The point of the comment
is also reflected in another commitment
in the NPG regarding EPA review of
state issued permits.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
On PP. 8-9, the draft NPG mentions the "review" of state-
led implementation activities, including the issuance of
environmental permits. This language should be revised to
expressly include the many forms of oversight
available to EPA, including commenting, audits,
evaluations, appeals etc.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
PP. 8-9
Thank you for your comment EPA will
apply the appropriate form of oversight
given the unique details of each
particular instance.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
17
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The draft NPG includes a commitment to "launch a
workgroup with the permitting programs to develop a
framework that lists the expectations for permits that
are responsive to EJ and civil rights concerns."
EPA has convened numerous, similar workgroups over
the past 25 years with minimal impact. To ensure this
workgroup's success, the NPG should explicitly commit
to:
1. Rely on available studies and documents,
including NEJAC reports on permitting
cumulative impacts, and collaborative
approaches;
2. Tap the expertise of, but not be under the
management of, EPA's media/program
offices (air, water etc);
3. Emphasize lessons-learned across EPA
programs;
4. Involve and interact with the NEJAC on an
ongoing basis;
5. Periodically report out on identified "best
practices" to EPA staff, federal funding
recipients, and the public; and
6. Support "pilot" projects, including with
select state/local agencies, to test and
advance the developed framework within an
established timeframe.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 9
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
ECRCO's commitment at the bottom of p. 9 to "identify and
address" adverse disparate impacts should be clarified to
read "identify, address, reduce, or eliminate" adverse
disparate impacts.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 9
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
18
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
Under Strategy 2, the EJ Program commits to partner
with EPA program offices to "establish which
permitting programs under which statutes to focus on"
including NPDES, UIC, and CAA Title V.
To promote transparency and accountability, the
Activities should include a process to document and
publicize which programs have been selected, and
the results of EPA's civil rights performance
analyses.
The Strategy should also include community-driven
processes for selecting and reviewing priority programs.
For example, we recommend in addition to the listed
programs, EPA should prioritize review of
• RCRA programs, especially hazardous
waste landfills and coal ash disposal sites;
• FIFRA programs and the re-registration of
pesticides; and
• the NAAQS program, including setting new
standards and the evaluation of SIPs to
meet past and current PM annual and
daily standards.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 9
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
19
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
Under Objective 1, OEJ-ECRCO commits to "clarify and
strengthen existing guidance regarding recipient's
obligations to identify and address adverse disparate
impacts, including how to consider cumulative impacts."
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 9-10,25
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
The associated Measure EJCR05 on p. 10 and 25
("percentage of state-issued permits reviewed by EPA that
include terms and conditions that are responsive to
environmental justice concerns and comply with civil
rights obligations") should be revised to measure the
"number of state-issued nermits reviewed bv EPA that
include terms and conditions that are responsive to
environmental justice concerns and comply with
nrocedural civil rights obligations as well as
reauirements to reduce, mitigate, or eliminate
disnronortionate imnacts."
The commitment at the top of p. 10 to provide "proactive
technical assistance with civil rights obligations..." should
be clarified to include both "procedural and substantive"
civil rights compliance. This edit is consistent with
ECRCO's commitments made in EPA's September, 2021
letter to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG).
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 10
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
20
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
OEJ-ECRCO appears to conflate two different goals under
the Program Priority on p. 10 ("Collaboration with state
recipients of EPA financial assistance and partnerships
with academic institutions"). While Strategy 1 addresses
state recipients, Strategy 2 (pp. 11-12) is primarily focused
on paid internships within EPA, which are unrelated to the
Program Priority. We recommend moving Strategy 2 into
its own Program Priority on diverse workforce
development and training and more clearly articulate the
relationships between advancing environmental justice
and civil rights, "building capacity of underserved
communities to provide their experience to EPA," and
creating a path to employment at EPA through paid
internships.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
p. 10-12
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
21
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The long-term performance goal on p. 10 gives state
recipients of EPA financial assistance four years (by Sep.
30, 2026) to come into compliance with foundational
civil rights laws. However, there are many state
recipients that have been the subject of repeated civil
rights complaints that are either under investigation, in
negotiations, or under an informal resolution agreement.
Funding recipients with a track record of non-
compliance should not be allowed another four years
before they are forced to comply.
Therefore, the long-term performance goal should be
revised to say "By September 30, 2026, all state
recipients of EPA financial assistance will have
foundational civil rights programs in place. For those
programs that have been found to be in violation of
civil rights laws by ECRCO, OECA, or DOJ, the
associated state recipients will have foundational
civil rights programs in place within twelve months
of finalizing the NPGs.
The draft NPG should also clarify that "foundational civil
rights programs" impose procedural requirements only,
and that recipients of federal funding must also comply
with the terms and conditions associated with their
grant(s), including affirmative obligations to avoid
disproportionate impacts.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 10
Thank you for your comment The EPA
FY22-26 Strategic Plan includes annual
performance measures with respect to
each LTPG to be met along with the
overall FY26 measure. Also, EPA is
committed to providing clear guidance
both with regard to financial assistance
recipient's legal obligations to have in
place procedural nondiscrimination
programs, as well as clarifying and
strengthening existing guidance
regarding recipient's obligations to
identify and address adverse disparate
impacts, including how to consider
cumulative impacts. In addition, EPA
will continue to provide technical
assistance for recipients on compliance
with procedural and substantive civil
rights obligations, both proactively
outside of a complaint or compliance
review and during the
complaint/compliance review
resolution processes.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
22
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
On p. 14, OEJ commits to "develop additional guidance
on conducting a robust environmental justice analysis
for disproportionate impacts in communities."
Both OGC and ECRCO have significant experience and
obligations related to this commitment. Yet the draft
NPG does not specify OGC's or ECRCO's role in
developing this guidance, nor does it include a
commitment to develop this guidance as part of a
community-driven process.
We urge OEJ-ECRCO to include these specifications, in
addition to a commitment for EPA programs to then
document how the analysis affected their decision.
We also point to our attached November 2021 letter to
Adm. Regan, OEJ, and ECRCO with more specific
considerations regarding guidance on environmental
justice and equity analyses.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
PG. 14
Thank you for your comment OGC and
ECRCO are both centrally involved in the
development of this commitment EPA is
committed to the involvement of
communities as a central driver in the
development of this work and is
currently working on multiple
opportunities for communities to help
inform this commitment as it moves
forward. A separate commitment in the
strategic plan speaks to the use of
cumulative impacts guidance within EPA
decisions and actions.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
On p. 14, the Measure under Strategy 1 is the "percentage
of significant EPA actions with environmental justice
implications that respond to environmental justice
concerns and reduce or address disproportionate impacts."
We applaud the guidance's focus on "reducing" impacts,
and recommend specifying responses to "reduce,
mitigate, or eliminate disproportionate impacts."
Citizen group of
16 individuals
PG. 14
Thank you for your comment EPA will
ensure to include that "addressing"
disproportionate impacts includes their
reduction, mitigation, and/or
elimination.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
23
-------
On P. 15, the Long-Term Performance Goal prioritizes
"community-driven, coordinated and collaborative"
approaches. This discussion is invaluable and reflects a
long needed evolution of EPA's collaborative
approaches, including collaborative problem solving.
For this language to be meaningful, the draft NPG
should include a working definition of "community-
driven." One approach could be to define this as
"projects or methodologies in which the impacted
community or communities play a significant leadership
role, including co-leading significant activities including
determining scope, agendas, and processes, including
decision-making processes."
Ideally, this working definition should be developed
in close consultation with advocates and
representatives of overburdened communities. Some
model examples also include:
• The community engagement process to create
H.R. 2021. the Environmental Justice for All Act,
modeled on the Environmental justice Principles, a
foundational document of the environmental justice
movement drafted at the First People of Color
Environmental Leadership Summit
• Executive Order 13175 on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
(supporting "self-determination"):
https: / /www, govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR- 2000- 11-
09/pdf/00-29003.pdf
The draft NPG should also include another Measure
under this Long-Term Performance Goal: Best
practices identified for implementing "community-
driven, coordinated and collaborative" approaches,
including examples from EPA's prior work under CARE,
CPS, EJ Small grants and other programs. There are
significant longstanding models available across the
country, in West Oakland and elsewhere. Participants in
those projects should also be engaged to surface "lessons
learned".
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to the development of this
community-driven, coordinated, and
collaborative approach to both fully
involve community stakeholders and
build upon successes of previous efforts
cited in the comment. The suggestion of
also including a "best practices"
component of this commitment is
excellent and will be updated in the
national program guidance for this goal.
In section
bullet on
page 16
under
activities,
modified as:
Provide
guidance,
best
practices,
and develop
training
materials
along with...
24
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The draft NPG cites "the three Key Principles for
Community Work," which, according to footnote 9,
"were developed as an outcome of many years of
experience of EPA working in and with communities."
However, there is no publicly available version of this
document, and there is no reference or documentation
of how these principles were developed and with
whom. Furthermore, there is no definition for the key
terms offered ("community-driven," "collaborative,"
etc).
All references to the "Key Principles for Community
Work" should be corrected. There are no such
Principles that have been agreed upon by the
environmental justice and civil rights advocacy
community. References to such principles having
already been "developed" or "recognized" should be
removed and instead the NPG should include a
commitment to develop such principles in close and
meaningful collaboration with advocates.
NEJAC involvement or advice should be sought as part of
this process.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 16
Thank you for your comment The three
key principles reference principles
established across various previous
efforts such as CARE, Collaborative
Problem Solving, NEJAC public
participation recommendations, etc.
This current commitment is focused on
pulling these past efforts together into a
working and implementable
commitment across EPA activities. EPA
is committed to implementing this
commitment openly and with the
involvement of community stakeholders
and we look forward to engaging the
NEJAC as a necessary and valuable body
in this effort. EPA has modified the
language, so it doesn't come across that
EPA has developed new key principles
for community work.
On pages 16-
17 of the
guidance,
references
to "the three
Key
Principles
for
Community
Work" have
been
modified to
"key
principles
for
community
work".
Footnote 9
has been
updated as
well.
25
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
Any activities associated with the Program Priority
regarding "meaningful language access to EPA programs
and activities" must not rely solely on the internet to
solicit or receive feedback or provide information to
the public. Many households across the U.S. lack access
to the internet, in particular, households within
environmental justice communities.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
P. 18
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
The Activities listed under this Program Priority should
therefore be amended to state that trainings, technical
assistance, model LEP plans and procedures, and other
programs will include mechanisms and strategies to
reach households without internet access as well as
households whose residents communicate primarily
in oral languages only.
26
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
We commend OEJ-ECRCO's commitment to conduct 45
proactive post-award civil rights compliance reviews by
Sep. 30, 2026.
To ensure this goal leads to the fulfillment of Objective 3
("Strengthen Civil Rights Enforcement/') we strongly
urge ECRCO to issue civil rights compliance guidance
for federal funding recipients.
Furthermore, the draft NPG should include
commitments to meaningfully engage impacted
communities in deciding where compliance reviews
should be prioritized, and in the compliance
reviews themselves. The meaningful engagement
needs to be both in where compliance reviews are
needed and in the compliance reviews themselves.
Finally, to further ensure OEJ-ECRCO meet Objective 3, the
Activities listed at the top of p. 22 should include a
commitment to regularly extract, educate, and
promote lessons learned and best practices from the
post-award compliance reviews.
Citizen group of
16 individuals
PG. 20-22
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to providing clear guidance
regarding financial assistance recipient's
legal obligations to have in place
procedural nondiscrimination
programs; as well as clarifying and
strengthening existing guidance
regarding recipient's obligations to
identify and address adverse disparate
impacts, including how to consider
cumulative impacts. Also, on January 6,
2022, ECRCO issued a Process and
Criteria for Prioritizing and Selecting
Affirmative Compliance Reviews. The
compliance review criteria include
consideration of input from impacted
communities and other internal and
external stakeholders. EPA has since
initiated a compliance review on March
18, 2022, according to this process.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
27
-------
The Strategies and Activities under Objective 3 are
incomplete and overemphasize procedural
("foundational") over substantive civil rights
requirements, and thus are inadequate to ensure the
Objective will be met. This Objective should be
revisited in concert with our November 2021 letter
submitted to Adm. Regan, OEJ, and ECRCO to, at
minimum, include substantive obligations for
federal funding recipients.
These strategies and activities also undercut and
contradict the EPA's commitments made to the OIG in
September, 2021:
https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2Q21-
10/ epaoig 20-e-0333 agency response2.pdf. These
commitments represent crucial first steps towards
substantive Title VI compliance, i.e. reforming recipient
decision-making processes to comply with the
prohibition of making decisions with discriminatory
effect. Specifically, there are three commitments from
that letter that ECRCO promised to complete during
FY22, i.e., before the start of the work under the NPGs
commencing Q1FY23 (10/1/2022).
The NPG should acknowledge, incorporate, carry
forward, and build on these commitments, including:
1. Issuing a "Dear Colleague" letter (p. 3 of
EPA's letter);
2. Updating Chapter 1 of the Toolkit, which
currently serves as the best resource from EPA
that goes beyond procedural Title VI
compliance (p. 3 of EPA's letter), and
3. Defining ECRCO's approach for requiring
federal funding recipients to go beyond
Form 4700-4's data collection requirements
and use that data "...in their decision-making
process to promote equity and ensure program
decisions, including permitting decisions, are
Citizen group of
16 individuals
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to providing clear guidance
regarding financial assistance recipient's
legal obligations to have in place
procedural nondiscrimination programs,
including the requirement to collect and
maintain data; as well as clarifying and
strengthening existing guidance
regarding recipient's obligations to
identify and address adverse disparate
impacts, including how to consider
cumulative impacts. Also, on July 1,
2022, EPA sent notice to all EPA
financial assistance recipients of a
revised Form 4700-4 review process
that will take effect on January 1, 2023.
During the 6-month period from July 1
to January 1, ECRCO will be training EPA
staff on the revised process and
providing outreach to stakeholders.
Following on EPA's commitment to the
EPA OIG, as well as those in the Strategic
Plan, these changes are being made to
enforce compliance with the civil rights
obligations identified in the Form 4700-
4 and to more effectively carry out EPA's
obligation to make a pre-award
compliance determination under 40
C.F.R. §7.110.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
28
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
consistent with civil rights laws." (P. 7 of EPA's
letter).
We also point to our attached February 2022 letter
to OGC and ECRCO with more specific considerations
regarding refinement of the process for reviewing
Form 4700-4, including specific recommendations
regarding requirements for collection and analysis
of data.
29
-------
Consistent with the stated Program Priority on P. 20
("Civil rights compliance by decision makers that receive
EPA financial assistance"), the NPG must go beyond
relying on the pre-award 4700-4 Forms and
incorporate education and compliance with EPA's
detailed Terms and Conditions regarding affirmative
compliance with Title VI.
In its September, 2021 letter to the OIG, EPA said:
"ECRCO accepts Recommendation 4 and plans to use the
4700-4 pre-award process, the EPA General Terms and
Conditions, which are binding on recipients and
subrecipients of funds, and the process described below
to implement this Recommendation." (Emphasis added).
Citizen group of
16 individuals
EPA has since confirmed with members of the Title VI
Alliance that these "General Terms and Conditions" in
fact refer to the detailed terms and conditions at
https://www.epa.gov/grants/epa-general-terms-and-
conditions-effective-october-l-2021-or-later. specifically
including #39 (page 25) regarding "Civil Rights
Obligations" at
https://www.epa.gov/system/flles/documents/2021-
09/fy 2022 epa general terms and conditions effec
tive October 1 2021.pdf.
These Terms include "an affirmative obligation to
implement effective Title VI compliance programs and
ensure that its actions do not involve discriminatory
treatment and do not have discriminatory effects even
when facially neutral. The recipient must be prepared to
demonstrate to EPA that such compliance programs exist
and are being implemented or to otherwise demonstrate
how it is meeting its Title VI obligations." This condition
has been in EPA grants since January 2013. It is
beyond time for the Agency to educate and enforce this
condition.
Thank you for your comment On July 1,
2022, EPA sent notice to all EPA
financial assistance recipients of a
revised Form 4700-4 review process
that will take effect on January 1, 2023.
During the 6-month period from July 1
to January 1, ECRCO will be training EPA
staff on the revised process and
providing outreach to stakeholders.
Following on EPA's commitment to the
EPA OIG, as well as those in the Strategic
Plan. These changes are being made to
enforce compliance with the civil rights
obligations identified in the Form 4700-
4 and to more effectively carry out EPA's
obligation to make a pre-award
compliance determination under 40
C.F.R. §7.110.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
30
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
The draft Guidance states that "OEJ and ECRCO are working
with EPA's regions and programs to determine how best to
integrate these measures and take advantage of every
opportunity to advance EJ and civil rights compliance in
light of each region and program's financial capacityand
statutory limitations."
The final OEJ/ECRCO NPG should also consider the financial,
other resource/capacity, and statutory limitations of state
and local agencies.
Association of
Air Pollution
Control
Agencies
(AAPCA)
Section I.
Introduction
Page 4
Thank you for your comment We will
consider your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
EPA states that "As EPA reviews such state issued permits¦,
we will work to ensure the permits are responsive to EJ and
civil rights concerns that have been made clear through
engagement, the use of tools, or the performance of an EJ
and civil rights analyses; consistent with federal law and our
underlying authorities."
State and local agencies are interested in more information,
including potential training, regarding EPA's expectations
for state and local-issued permits.
AAPCA
Section II.
Program
Priorities,
Strategies, and
Activities
Objective 1.
Promote EJ and
Civil Rights at
the Federal,
Tribal, State,
Local, and
Community
Levels (Strategy
2)
Page 9
Thank you for your comment We will
consider your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
31
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
State and local agencies should be engaged early as EPA
begins "delineating the responsibilities of programs and
regions towards meeting their objectives, identifying data
gaps; building tracking systems¦, and putting in place any
needed policyguidance, or regulatory changes."
AAPCA
Section II.
Program
Priorities,
Strategies, and
Activities
Objective 2.
Embed EJ and
Civil Rights in
EPA Policies,
Programs and
Activities
Page 13
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to maximum transparency in
the development of such EJ efforts and
language in addition to collaborating
with our governmental partners
throughout the different elements of this
work.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
A A PC A appreciates ECRCO's commitment to provide
technical assistance and training for state and local
agencies to better understand civil rights compliance,
including procedural safeguards and best practices.
AAPCA
Section II.
Program
Priorities,
Strategies, and
Activities
Objective 3.
Strengthen Civil
Rights
Enforcement in
Communities
with
Environmental
Justice Concerns
Pages 21 -22
Thank you for your comment
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
32
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
EPA's draft OEJ/ECRCO Guidance sets as a program priority
"Meaningful and regular opportunities to converse with and
listen to communities," indicating in the Agency's strategy
that "Increased information sharing and outreach will
establish and imbed a continuous and transparent pathway
for open dialogue between EPA and communities."
As co-regulators responsible for Clean Air Act
implementation, air agencies are critical partners in this
outreach. State and local air agencies can bring important
details and history as well as gain insight that could inform
environmental decision-making. AAPCA underscores that
working together to provide meaningful and consistent
communication from federal, state, and local partners is
crucial for effective public outreach efforts.
AAPCA
Section II.
Program
Priorities,
Strategies, and
Activities
Objective 3.
Strengthen Civil
Rights
Enforcement in
Communities
with
Environmental
Justice Concerns
Page 22
Thank you for your comment EPA
appreciates and agrees that our
coregulators are necessary partners in
this work and critical to its success. EPA
is committed to maximum transparency
and collaboration with our
governmental partners in the
implementation of this commitment
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
EPA Statement: "EPA will take, whenever possible and
most effective, an agency-wide approach to implementing
the commitments and actions contained in this NPG,
especially those that require new investments in resources
or staffing."
MoDNR Comment: The department lauds EPA for
focusing on an agency-wide approach, and strongly
encourages EPA to proactively and robustly coordinate
with other federal agencies to ensure a "whole of
government" approach in implementing these
commitments, including developing consistency in
procedure and substance.
Such coordination will be particularly important for any
duplicative or overlapping expectations placed by federal
partners onto co-regulators.
Hannah
Humphrey,
Deputy
Director
Missouri Dept
of Natural
Resources
(MDNR)
Page 4
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to strengthening intra-
agency collaboration with respect to
environmental justice and civil rights
compliance, including with DOJ as the
federal government's primary civil
rights coordinating agency.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
33
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
EPA Statement: "OET and ECRCO continue to work in
partnership with programs and regions to determine
scope, applicability, and flexibility for the work outlined in
this document"
MoDNR Comment: OEJ and ECRCO should make every
effort to include co-regulators and our feedback when
considering determinations on scope, applicability, and
flexibility, particularly where those decisions will
ultimately be part of expectations placed upon co-
regulators.
MDNR
Page 5
Thank you for your comment We will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
EPA Statement:
• "Once the universe of written agreements has been
established for FY23, EPA will develop capacity
building materials and other resources with and
for tribes and states on identifying
disproportionate impacts," and
• "As EPA determines the universe of written
agreements to include in this measure, EPA will
provide guidance on formulating and
implementing these commitments into those
written agreements," and
• "Once the universe of written agreements is
determined, work with programs to develop and
provide recommended standardized language on
addressing disproportionate impacts that can be
included in those written agreements."
MoDNR Comment: The department encourages EPA to
develop these materials, commitments, and standardized
language cooperatively with co-regulators, particularly
where those decisions will ultimately be part of
expectations placed upon co-regulators.
MDNR
Page 8
Thank you for your comment EPA
agrees and is committed to working
transparently and in a spirit of
collaboration with our governmental
partners in recognition of the fact that
many of our partners have already
blazed many valuable trails regarding
cumulative impacts.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
34
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
EPA Statement: "Clarify and strengthen existing guidance
regarding recipient's obligations to identify and address
adverse disparate impacts, including how to consider
cumulative impacts."
MoDNR Comment: The department urges EPA to provide
clear, practical, and distinct definitions for
"disproportionate impact," "disparate impact," and
"cumulative impact"
Any vague, ambiguous, or overlapping use of these terms,
particularly where case law or technical definitions
already exist, will only serve to create confusion and
challenges to success.
MDNR
Page 9
Thank you for your comment Details
regarding definitions for some of these
terms have been established previously
while others are currently under
development EPA is working to produce
a more standard lexicon of such terms
outside of planning documents such as
this NPG to provide greater clarity and
stability of the definitions.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
EPA Statement: "Svstemize [state partners'] compliance
with foundational civil rights program requirements ...
through pre-award review, technical assistance and
training, additional clarifying guidance and enhanced civil
rights enforcement"
MoDNR Comment: The department urges EPA to ensure
that the proposed additional clarifying guidance is
particular, clear, and practical. See above comment
regarding definitions.
MDNR
Page 11
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to providing clear guidance
regarding financial assistance recipient's
legal obligations to have in place
procedural nondiscrimination programs
and clarifying and strengthening
existing guidance regarding recipient's
obligations to identify and address
adverse disparate impacts, including
how to consider cumulative impacts.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
35
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
EPA Statement: In the 4th Ouarter of FY 2023. ECRCO will
clarify and strengthen civil rights policy guidance about
what states and other recipients need to do to identify and
address adverse disparate impacts, including how
cumulative impacts are evaluated within the disparate
impacts analysis.
MDNR
Pages 17-18
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
MoDNR Comment: The department urges EPA to ensure
that the proposed additional clarifying guidance is
particular, clear, and practical. See above comment
regarding definitions. Note that even within this proposed
NPG, EPA has used the terms "disparate impacts" and
"adverse disparate impacts" implying a distinction. Clarity
is paramount
EPA Statement: "Measure: Percentage of EPA programs..."
or "Measure: Percentage of [co-regulators]..." or "Measure:
Number of..."
MoDNR Comment: The department cautions EPA
measuring "success" with a number, or, percentages.
Standalone numbers and percentages do not capture the
complexities of co-regulator relationships, existing legal
authorities, and state and federal policy. This concern is
heightened where those measures will ultimately lead to
expectations placed upon co-regulators.
MDNR
EPA
Pages:
6, 7,12,14,15,
16,18, 19, 20,
[Co-regulator]
Pages:
8, 9,10,11
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
EPA Statement: "Permit reviews utilize the framework that
lists expectation for permits that are responsive to EJ and
civil rights concerns to see if the expectations have been
met."
MDNR
Page 10
Thank you for your comment EPA
appreciates and shares this concern and
will be mindful of during
implementation of this priority.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
MoDNR Comment: The department urges EPA to be wary
of unintentionally creating guidance expectations that,
once incorporated into funding agreements, become
requirements inconsistent with state and federal
obligations under statute and regulation.
36
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
EPA appropriately recognizes that integrating
Environmental Justice (EJ) measures at the federal level
must be done "in light of each region and program's
financial, capacity, and statutory limitations." ECOS asks
that EPA also recognize that integrating EJ measures at the
state level must also be done "in light of each [state's]
financial, capacity, and statutory limitations."
EPA should conduct an analysis of workload impact and
address increased resource requirements and, when
requiring additional work from state and local agencies,
should provide additional resources to state and local
agencies. ECOS is recommending that federal grants to
states related to this work be increased to $257.90 million
annually beginning in FY 2023. This will better enable
states to fulfill current, underfunded responsibilities as
well as integrate these new process requirements to
address EJ.
ECOS
Page 4
(Introduction)
Thank you for your comment EPA is
prioritizing significant funding from our
increased EJ program budget to support
the EJ efforts of our governmental
partners at the state, local, and tribal
levels.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
37
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
EPA's EJ program provides grants directly to community-
based organizations and notes that "[t]hose projects
focused on seeking resolution necessitate invoking a
response from a governmental agency at the local, state,
tribal, or federal level." EPA proposes to measure activities
related to Strategy 3 by the "percentage of environmental
justice grantees whose funded projects result in a
governmental response." What type of governmental
response is required? EPA should define this "measure" in
more detail so as not to encourage a government response
when the outcome of a project shows one is not needed
and would be a waste of resources to pursue. While many
projects will likely result in actions that should be taken by
government agencies, it is possible that data gathered in
some projects may serve to ameliorate fears and show that
the federal, state, local, or tribal government does not need
to take any action other than the actions it is already
pursuing. The metric should be expanded to allow for this
scenario.
ECOS
Page 7-8
(Section II;
Objective I;
Program
Priority:
Empower and
build capacity of
underserved
and
overburdened
communities;
Strategy 3)
Thank you for your comment The
particular details requested for in this
commitment are currently under
development and will be made public in
iterative fashion once finished to both
provide transparency to external
partners and communities and also to
receive feedback for future
enhancements and refinements.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
ECOS supports EPA's work to strengthen relationships
between states and tribes, and ECOS appreciates EPA's
involvement with the ECOS EJ Steering Committee and
Workgroup.
Regarding disproportionate impacts, ECOS supports EPA's
development of capacity building materials and other
resources related to identifying disproportionate impacts.
Many states are also presently engaging in defining
disproportionate impacts at the state level. ECOS
appreciates the dialogue EPA and the states have already
begun on this topic through the ECOS EJ Workgroup. ECOS
encourages EPA to continue this dialogue and leverage
valuable state knowledge on this topic.
ECOS
Page 8 - 9
(Section II;
Objective I;
Program
Priority: Strong
partnerships
with tribes and
states, Strategy
1)
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to continuing in this fashion.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
38
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
EPA proposes to launch a workgroup to develop a
framework that lists expectations for permits that are
responsive to EJ and civil rights concerns. ECOS
recommend, that ECOS members, through the leadership
of the ECOS EJ Steering Committee, be included in this EPA
led workgroup.
ECOS
Page 9 (Section
II; Objective 1;
Program
Priority: Strong
partnerships
with tribes and
states; Strategy
2; Activities; EJ
Program)
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
In the July 1st discussion regarding the draft OEJ FY23-24
NPG between EPA and state leadership, EPA stated that it
issues approximately 4% of the country's environmental
permits under the RCRA Subtitle C and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). ECOS would
appreciate sharing of sample text that EPA includes in the
permits it issues under the RCRA Subtitle C and NPDES
programs.
ECOS
Page 9 (Section
II; Objective 1;
Program
Priority: Strong
partnerships
with tribes and
states; Strategy
2; Activities; EJ
Program)
Thank you for your comment EPA will
do so and is committed to maximum
transparency in the development of such
EJ efforts and language.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
39
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
ECOS supports EPA's work to pursue a process for
assessing cumulative impacts. Many states have begun
work to incorporate a cumulative impacts assessment into
their program activities as well. States are at varying
points in this process. ECOS encourages EPA to reach out
through the ECOS EJ Steering Committee to work with
states to leverage states' knowledge and experiences.
ECOS
Page 9 (Section
II; Objective 1;
Program
Priority: Strong
partnerships
with tribes and
states; Strategy
2; Activities;
ECRCO)
Page 17 (Section
II; Objective 2;
Program
Priority: EPA's
implementation
of
environmental
justice and civils
rights
compliance)
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to continuing in this fashion.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
40
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
ECOS supports EPA activities to ensure compliance with
civil rights laws. ECOS notes that EPA is still in the process
of developing new guidance related to clarify
interpretations of requirements and expectations for
compliance with civil rights laws. ECOS requests that EPA
give states time to process and incorporate any necessary
changes needed as a result of this clarified guidance before
conducting affirmative guidance reviews.
ECOS notes that the guidance clarifying interpretations of
civil rights law requirements and expectations is one of
ECRCO's current "Activities" for FY23 (page 11).
Conducting "1 or more compliance reviews to determine
compliance with Title VI" is also one of ECRCO's
"Activities" for FY23 (page 21). EPA should allow
delegated authorities time to process and integrate any
new guidance and consider revising the deadline for "1 or
more compliance reviews" mentioned on page 21 to be a
time centric deadline. Instead of stating "In FY 2023"
include language such as, "six months after the release of
guidance clarifying requirements and expectations for
compliance with civil rights laws, conduct 1 or more
compliance reviews...."
ECOS
Page 11 and
Page 21
Page 11 (Section
II; Objective 1;
Program
Priority:
Collaboration
with state
recipients of
EPA financial
assistance and
partnership
with academic
institutions;
Strategy 1,
Activities,
ECRCO)
Page 21 (Section
II; Objective 1;
Program
Priority:
Collaboration
with state
recipients of
EPA financial
assistance and
partnership
with academic
institutions;
Strategy,
Activities,
ECRCO)
Thank you for your comment EPA will
review your recommendation.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
41
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
ECOS supports EPA's goal to "set ambitious goals of
achieving meaningful change on the ground for
communities with EJ concerns." ECOS requests that EPA
work with the local state environmental agency and
approach communities in partnership with the local state
environmental agency.
ECOS
Page 12 (Section
II; Objective 2;
Program
Priority:
Reducing
disparities in
environmental
and public
health
conditions)
Thank you for your comment
Governmental partners at all levels are
critically necessary parts of this effort.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
As EPA develops guidance regarding the use of EJ tools,
such as EJScreen, to integrate EJ into programmatic
contexts, ECOS encourages EPA to also acknowledge the
important benefits of state EJ related mapping tools and
their place in the decision making process for both the
states and EPA.
ECOS
Page 14 (Section
II; Objective 2;
Program
Priority: EPA
accountability to
overburdened
and
underserved
communities,
Strategy 2;
Activities; EJ
Program)
Thank you for your comment EPA fully
agrees and is committed to supporting
the further development and
enhancement of state and locally based
screening, mapping, and analytical tools
for EJ integration.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
As EPA advances the work EPA does in communities, EPA
should advance this work in coordination with the local
state environmental agency. Further, as EPA develops "Key
Principles for Community Work," ECOS suggest that EPA
request input on these principles through the ECOS EJ
Steering Committee. Many states, have established
practices in this area and EPA would likely benefit from
these resources.
ECOS
Page 16 (Section
II; Objective 2;
Program
Priority: EPA
effectively
working in
communities;
Activities:
OCR/EJ
Program)
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to maximum transparency in
the development of such EJ efforts and
language in addition to collaborating
with our governmental partners
throughout the different elements of this
work.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
42
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
ECOS supports EPA's goal to clarify and strengthen civil
rights policy guidance regarding what states and other
funding recipients need to do to identify and address
adverse disparate impacts, including how cumulative
impacts are evaluated within the disparate impacts
analysis. ECOS encourages EPA to work with states on this
topic and share any guidelines EPA establishes regarding
how to identify and account for cumulative impacts as part
of a disparate impacts analysis.
ECOS
Page 17 (Section
II; Objective 2;
Program
Priority: EPA's
implementation
of EJ and civil
rights
compliance;
Activities:
ECRCO)
EPA is committed to continuing its
engagement with ECOS and other
stakeholders with respect to civil rights
compliance, including providing regular
and meaningful technical assistance,
guidance, and training such as the
recently conducted 3-part civil rights
training workshops, as well as soliciting
feedback from ECOS and other
stakeholders on environmental justice
and civil rights issues and concerns.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
ECOS supports EPA's effort to regularly converse with and
listen to communities. ECOS recommends that EPA
conduct these activities in partnership with the local state
environmental agency as well as any other appropriate
government partners.
ECOS
Page 22 (Section
II; Objective 3;
Program
Priority:
Meaningful and
regular
opportunities to
converse with
and listen to
communities;
Strategy)
Thank you for your comment EPA
appreciates and agrees that our
coregulators are necessary partners in
this work and critical to its success. EPA
is committed to maximum transparency
and collaboration with our
governmental partners in the
implementation of this commitment
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
43
-------
Comment
Commenter(s)
Location in
Draft Guidance
National Program Offices Response
Action
Taken in
Final
Guidance
In the discussion regarding the draft OEJ FY23-24 NPG
between EPA and state leadership, EPA stated that all
program offices and regions will be creating specific
implementation plans regarding EJ integration and
implementation; however, these plans may remain
internal to EPA. EPA also stated that EPA believes this
process should be done in full view of and cooperation
with EPA's partners at the state level so it is a meaningful,
not just bureaucratic, exercise.
ECOS agrees with EPA's statement referencing the full
view and cooperation of EPA's partners. It is essential that
EPA and states work together to implement EJ actions and
principles. It is essential that states and EPA maintain a
transparent and productive relationship as co-regulators.
EPA should develop each program and regional EJ
implementation plan in an open and transparent manner
and recommends EPA publish each plan publicly.
States have identified challenges regarding the process of
developing agency-wide definitions of disadvantaged
communities. ECOS recommends that EPA work closely
with the states as guidelines for defining disadvantaged
communities are established. ECOS also notes that other
federal agencies may have their own definitions and
encourages EPA to work with state environmental
agencies to develop a consistent approach to defining this
work.
ECOS
Page 8 (Section
II; Objective 1;
Program
Priority: Strong
partnerships
with tribes and
states)
Thank you for your comment EPA is
committed to maximum transparency in
the development of such EJ efforts and
language in addition to collaborating
with our governmental partners
throughout the different elements of this
work. EPA will make public summaries
of the regional and program action
plans.
Made no
changes to
the NPG.
44
------- |