Filter By Service Area
Filter By Title
Filter By Office

Resources

Has EPA's Environmental Justice Efforts Reached Their Peak?

EPA’s environmental justice efforts have certainly increased since January 2021 when the Biden Administration came into power. From Administrator Regan’s Journey to Justice tour in 2021, embedding environmental justice concepts in all aspects of EPA’s activities, and accepting and aggressively investigating civil rights complaints, it seemed environmental justice was EPA’s Number One priority. While additional efforts were perhaps overdue, EPA’s fast-paced journey to environmental justice has not been without potholes and roadblocks.

One such roadblock is the decision issued by Judge Cain in Louisiana v EPA. Judge Cain issued a preliminary injunction in January 2024 prohibiting EPA from imposing or enforcing any disparate impact-based requirements against the State of Louisiana or any State agency.” EPA even posted a Notice of Compliance on its website stating EPA has “ceased any and all imposition or enforcement of their Title VI disparate-impact requirements and cumulative-impact-analysis requirements under Title VI.” In response to the filing of the lawsuit, EPA had closed several investigations it was actively conducting in Louisiana regarding alleged disparate impacts in agency decision-making along the Mississippi River. Further, after the decision, 23 states petitioned EPA in April 2024 to amend its regulations to conform to Title VI (i.e., remove the disparate impact component in the regulations).

To avoid additional potholes in its environmental justice journey, EPA seems to have allowed other entities to take the wheel, or EPA seems focused on less problematic matters that yield outcomes that can be touted as successes.

One recent example of EPA allowing others to steer the course is the recent agreement entered into between Michigan and the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition. The agreement, to which EPA is not a party, contains significant concessions by Michigan and requires, among other things, environmental justice analyses for hazardous waste permit applicants and cumulative impacts analyses for permitting across the state. The agreement to conduct a cumulative impact analysis is interesting because EPA has not yet issued reliable guidance on how to properly conduct such an analysis.

EPA, for its part, seems to have turned at least some of its focus on procedural issues and less substantive matters which it can tout as a success. In August 2024, it issued the Civil Rights Guidance on Procedural Safeguards: Requirements and Best Practices to assist recipients of EPA financial assistance when developing and improving their legally required civil rights compliance efforts. The guidance document reiterates the requirements of the existing regulations, found at 40 CFR Part 7, and adds suggested best practices to guide a recipient in the proper courses of action to fulfill those requirements.

For example, one requirement in the regulations is that a recipient must “designate a nondiscrimination coordinator” whose overarching role is to help ensure compliance with EPA regulations implementing the federal civil rights laws. The guidance memorandum then sets out best practices to accomplish this requirement, such as giving the nondiscrimination coordinator the authority to provide information externally to the public, provide notice to the public of the grievance procedures and the ability to file a complaint, establish a mechanism to implement the grievance procedures, and ensure proper training is provided. EPA’s environmental justice efforts have been applauded by some and derided by others. States currently aligned with EPA’s vision, such as Michigan, embrace and agree to the additional requirements imposed on their programs. Other states not as fully aligned with EPA, such as perhaps Louisiana, resist the imposition of requirements not explicit in federal law and regulation. For its part, EPA seems to seek whatever progress it can make given the resistance to its efforts.

Has EPA's Environmental Justice Efforts Reached Their Peak?

EPA’s environmental justice efforts have certainly increased since January 2021 when the Biden Administration came into power. From Administrator Regan’s Journey to Justice tour in 2021, embedding environmental justice concepts in all aspects of EPA’s activities, and accepting and aggressively investigating civil rights complaints, it seemed environmental justice was EPA’s Number One priority. While additional efforts were perhaps overdue, EPA’s fast-paced journey to environmental justice has not been without potholes and roadblocks.

One such roadblock is the decision issued by Judge Cain in Louisiana v EPA. Judge Cain issued a preliminary injunction in January 2024 prohibiting EPA from imposing or enforcing any disparate impact-based requirements against the State of Louisiana or any State agency.” EPA even posted a Notice of Compliance on its website stating EPA has “ceased any and all imposition or enforcement of their Title VI disparate-impact requirements and cumulative-impact-analysis requirements under Title VI.” In response to the filing of the lawsuit, EPA had closed several investigations it was actively conducting in Louisiana regarding alleged disparate impacts in agency decision-making along the Mississippi River. Further, after the decision, 23 states petitioned EPA in April 2024 to amend its regulations to conform to Title VI (i.e., remove the disparate impact component in the regulations).

To avoid additional potholes in its environmental justice journey, EPA seems to have allowed other entities to take the wheel, or EPA seems focused on less problematic matters that yield outcomes that can be touted as successes.

One recent example of EPA allowing others to steer the course is the recent agreement entered into between Michigan and the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition. The agreement, to which EPA is not a party, contains significant concessions by Michigan and requires, among other things, environmental justice analyses for hazardous waste permit applicants and cumulative impacts analyses for permitting across the state. The agreement to conduct a cumulative impact analysis is interesting because EPA has not yet issued reliable guidance on how to properly conduct such an analysis.

EPA, for its part, seems to have turned at least some of its focus on procedural issues and less substantive matters which it can tout as a success. In August 2024, it issued the Civil Rights Guidance on Procedural Safeguards: Requirements and Best Practices to assist recipients of EPA financial assistance when developing and improving their legally required civil rights compliance efforts. The guidance document reiterates the requirements of the existing regulations, found at 40 CFR Part 7, and adds suggested best practices to guide a recipient in the proper courses of action to fulfill those requirements.

For example, one requirement in the regulations is that a recipient must “designate a nondiscrimination coordinator” whose overarching role is to help ensure compliance with EPA regulations implementing the federal civil rights laws. The guidance memorandum then sets out best practices to accomplish this requirement, such as giving the nondiscrimination coordinator the authority to provide information externally to the public, provide notice to the public of the grievance procedures and the ability to file a complaint, establish a mechanism to implement the grievance procedures, and ensure proper training is provided. EPA’s environmental justice efforts have been applauded by some and derided by others. States currently aligned with EPA’s vision, such as Michigan, embrace and agree to the additional requirements imposed on their programs. Other states not as fully aligned with EPA, such as perhaps Louisiana, resist the imposition of requirements not explicit in federal law and regulation. For its part, EPA seems to seek whatever progress it can make given the resistance to its efforts.

Has EPA's Environmental Justice Efforts Reached Their Peak?

EPA’s environmental justice efforts have certainly increased since January 2021 when the Biden Administration came into power. From Administrator Regan’s Journey to Justice tour in 2021, embedding environmental justice concepts in all aspects of EPA’s activities, and accepting and aggressively investigating civil rights complaints, it seemed environmental justice was EPA’s Number One priority. While additional efforts were perhaps overdue, EPA’s fast-paced journey to environmental justice has not been without potholes and roadblocks.

One such roadblock is the decision issued by Judge Cain in Louisiana v EPA. Judge Cain issued a preliminary injunction in January 2024 prohibiting EPA from imposing or enforcing any disparate impact-based requirements against the State of Louisiana or any State agency.” EPA even posted a Notice of Compliance on its website stating EPA has “ceased any and all imposition or enforcement of their Title VI disparate-impact requirements and cumulative-impact-analysis requirements under Title VI.” In response to the filing of the lawsuit, EPA had closed several investigations it was actively conducting in Louisiana regarding alleged disparate impacts in agency decision-making along the Mississippi River. Further, after the decision, 23 states petitioned EPA in April 2024 to amend its regulations to conform to Title VI (i.e., remove the disparate impact component in the regulations).

To avoid additional potholes in its environmental justice journey, EPA seems to have allowed other entities to take the wheel, or EPA seems focused on less problematic matters that yield outcomes that can be touted as successes.

One recent example of EPA allowing others to steer the course is the recent agreement entered into between Michigan and the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition. The agreement, to which EPA is not a party, contains significant concessions by Michigan and requires, among other things, environmental justice analyses for hazardous waste permit applicants and cumulative impacts analyses for permitting across the state. The agreement to conduct a cumulative impact analysis is interesting because EPA has not yet issued reliable guidance on how to properly conduct such an analysis.

EPA, for its part, seems to have turned at least some of its focus on procedural issues and less substantive matters which it can tout as a success. In August 2024, it issued the Civil Rights Guidance on Procedural Safeguards: Requirements and Best Practices to assist recipients of EPA financial assistance when developing and improving their legally required civil rights compliance efforts. The guidance document reiterates the requirements of the existing regulations, found at 40 CFR Part 7, and adds suggested best practices to guide a recipient in the proper courses of action to fulfill those requirements.

For example, one requirement in the regulations is that a recipient must “designate a nondiscrimination coordinator” whose overarching role is to help ensure compliance with EPA regulations implementing the federal civil rights laws. The guidance memorandum then sets out best practices to accomplish this requirement, such as giving the nondiscrimination coordinator the authority to provide information externally to the public, provide notice to the public of the grievance procedures and the ability to file a complaint, establish a mechanism to implement the grievance procedures, and ensure proper training is provided. EPA’s environmental justice efforts have been applauded by some and derided by others. States currently aligned with EPA’s vision, such as Michigan, embrace and agree to the additional requirements imposed on their programs. Other states not as fully aligned with EPA, such as perhaps Louisiana, resist the imposition of requirements not explicit in federal law and regulation. For its part, EPA seems to seek whatever progress it can make given the resistance to its efforts.

Has EPA's Environmental Justice Efforts Reached Their Peak?

EPA’s environmental justice efforts have certainly increased since January 2021 when the Biden Administration came into power. From Administrator Regan’s Journey to Justice tour in 2021, embedding environmental justice concepts in all aspects of EPA’s activities, and accepting and aggressively investigating civil rights complaints, it seemed environmental justice was EPA’s Number One priority. While additional efforts were perhaps overdue, EPA’s fast-paced journey to environmental justice has not been without potholes and roadblocks.

One such roadblock is the decision issued by Judge Cain in Louisiana v EPA. Judge Cain issued a preliminary injunction in January 2024 prohibiting EPA from imposing or enforcing any disparate impact-based requirements against the State of Louisiana or any State agency.” EPA even posted a Notice of Compliance on its website stating EPA has “ceased any and all imposition or enforcement of their Title VI disparate-impact requirements and cumulative-impact-analysis requirements under Title VI.” In response to the filing of the lawsuit, EPA had closed several investigations it was actively conducting in Louisiana regarding alleged disparate impacts in agency decision-making along the Mississippi River. Further, after the decision, 23 states petitioned EPA in April 2024 to amend its regulations to conform to Title VI (i.e., remove the disparate impact component in the regulations).

To avoid additional potholes in its environmental justice journey, EPA seems to have allowed other entities to take the wheel, or EPA seems focused on less problematic matters that yield outcomes that can be touted as successes.

One recent example of EPA allowing others to steer the course is the recent agreement entered into between Michigan and the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition. The agreement, to which EPA is not a party, contains significant concessions by Michigan and requires, among other things, environmental justice analyses for hazardous waste permit applicants and cumulative impacts analyses for permitting across the state. The agreement to conduct a cumulative impact analysis is interesting because EPA has not yet issued reliable guidance on how to properly conduct such an analysis.

EPA, for its part, seems to have turned at least some of its focus on procedural issues and less substantive matters which it can tout as a success. In August 2024, it issued the Civil Rights Guidance on Procedural Safeguards: Requirements and Best Practices to assist recipients of EPA financial assistance when developing and improving their legally required civil rights compliance efforts. The guidance document reiterates the requirements of the existing regulations, found at 40 CFR Part 7, and adds suggested best practices to guide a recipient in the proper courses of action to fulfill those requirements.

For example, one requirement in the regulations is that a recipient must “designate a nondiscrimination coordinator” whose overarching role is to help ensure compliance with EPA regulations implementing the federal civil rights laws. The guidance memorandum then sets out best practices to accomplish this requirement, such as giving the nondiscrimination coordinator the authority to provide information externally to the public, provide notice to the public of the grievance procedures and the ability to file a complaint, establish a mechanism to implement the grievance procedures, and ensure proper training is provided. EPA’s environmental justice efforts have been applauded by some and derided by others. States currently aligned with EPA’s vision, such as Michigan, embrace and agree to the additional requirements imposed on their programs. Other states not as fully aligned with EPA, such as perhaps Louisiana, resist the imposition of requirements not explicit in federal law and regulation. For its part, EPA seems to seek whatever progress it can make given the resistance to its efforts.

Has EPA's Environmental Justice Efforts Reached Their Peak?

EPA’s environmental justice efforts have certainly increased since January 2021 when the Biden Administration came into power. From Administrator Regan’s Journey to Justice tour in 2021, embedding environmental justice concepts in all aspects of EPA’s activities, and accepting and aggressively investigating civil rights complaints, it seemed environmental justice was EPA’s Number One priority. While additional efforts were perhaps overdue, EPA’s fast-paced journey to environmental justice has not been without potholes and roadblocks.

One such roadblock is the decision issued by Judge Cain in Louisiana v EPA. Judge Cain issued a preliminary injunction in January 2024 prohibiting EPA from imposing or enforcing any disparate impact-based requirements against the State of Louisiana or any State agency.” EPA even posted a Notice of Compliance on its website stating EPA has “ceased any and all imposition or enforcement of their Title VI disparate-impact requirements and cumulative-impact-analysis requirements under Title VI.” In response to the filing of the lawsuit, EPA had closed several investigations it was actively conducting in Louisiana regarding alleged disparate impacts in agency decision-making along the Mississippi River. Further, after the decision, 23 states petitioned EPA in April 2024 to amend its regulations to conform to Title VI (i.e., remove the disparate impact component in the regulations).

To avoid additional potholes in its environmental justice journey, EPA seems to have allowed other entities to take the wheel, or EPA seems focused on less problematic matters that yield outcomes that can be touted as successes.

One recent example of EPA allowing others to steer the course is the recent agreement entered into between Michigan and the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition. The agreement, to which EPA is not a party, contains significant concessions by Michigan and requires, among other things, environmental justice analyses for hazardous waste permit applicants and cumulative impacts analyses for permitting across the state. The agreement to conduct a cumulative impact analysis is interesting because EPA has not yet issued reliable guidance on how to properly conduct such an analysis.

EPA, for its part, seems to have turned at least some of its focus on procedural issues and less substantive matters which it can tout as a success. In August 2024, it issued the Civil Rights Guidance on Procedural Safeguards: Requirements and Best Practices to assist recipients of EPA financial assistance when developing and improving their legally required civil rights compliance efforts. The guidance document reiterates the requirements of the existing regulations, found at 40 CFR Part 7, and adds suggested best practices to guide a recipient in the proper courses of action to fulfill those requirements.

For example, one requirement in the regulations is that a recipient must “designate a nondiscrimination coordinator” whose overarching role is to help ensure compliance with EPA regulations implementing the federal civil rights laws. The guidance memorandum then sets out best practices to accomplish this requirement, such as giving the nondiscrimination coordinator the authority to provide information externally to the public, provide notice to the public of the grievance procedures and the ability to file a complaint, establish a mechanism to implement the grievance procedures, and ensure proper training is provided. EPA’s environmental justice efforts have been applauded by some and derided by others. States currently aligned with EPA’s vision, such as Michigan, embrace and agree to the additional requirements imposed on their programs. Other states not as fully aligned with EPA, such as perhaps Louisiana, resist the imposition of requirements not explicit in federal law and regulation. For its part, EPA seems to seek whatever progress it can make given the resistance to its efforts.

Has EPA's Environmental Justice Efforts Reached Their Peak?

EPA’s environmental justice efforts have certainly increased since January 2021 when the Biden Administration came into power. From Administrator Regan’s Journey to Justice tour in 2021, embedding environmental justice concepts in all aspects of EPA’s activities, and accepting and aggressively investigating civil rights complaints, it seemed environmental justice was EPA’s Number One priority. While additional efforts were perhaps overdue, EPA’s fast-paced journey to environmental justice has not been without potholes and roadblocks.

One such roadblock is the decision issued by Judge Cain in Louisiana v EPA. Judge Cain issued a preliminary injunction in January 2024 prohibiting EPA from imposing or enforcing any disparate impact-based requirements against the State of Louisiana or any State agency.” EPA even posted a Notice of Compliance on its website stating EPA has “ceased any and all imposition or enforcement of their Title VI disparate-impact requirements and cumulative-impact-analysis requirements under Title VI.” In response to the filing of the lawsuit, EPA had closed several investigations it was actively conducting in Louisiana regarding alleged disparate impacts in agency decision-making along the Mississippi River. Further, after the decision, 23 states petitioned EPA in April 2024 to amend its regulations to conform to Title VI (i.e., remove the disparate impact component in the regulations).

To avoid additional potholes in its environmental justice journey, EPA seems to have allowed other entities to take the wheel, or EPA seems focused on less problematic matters that yield outcomes that can be touted as successes.

One recent example of EPA allowing others to steer the course is the recent agreement entered into between Michigan and the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition. The agreement, to which EPA is not a party, contains significant concessions by Michigan and requires, among other things, environmental justice analyses for hazardous waste permit applicants and cumulative impacts analyses for permitting across the state. The agreement to conduct a cumulative impact analysis is interesting because EPA has not yet issued reliable guidance on how to properly conduct such an analysis.

EPA, for its part, seems to have turned at least some of its focus on procedural issues and less substantive matters which it can tout as a success. In August 2024, it issued the Civil Rights Guidance on Procedural Safeguards: Requirements and Best Practices to assist recipients of EPA financial assistance when developing and improving their legally required civil rights compliance efforts. The guidance document reiterates the requirements of the existing regulations, found at 40 CFR Part 7, and adds suggested best practices to guide a recipient in the proper courses of action to fulfill those requirements.

For example, one requirement in the regulations is that a recipient must “designate a nondiscrimination coordinator” whose overarching role is to help ensure compliance with EPA regulations implementing the federal civil rights laws. The guidance memorandum then sets out best practices to accomplish this requirement, such as giving the nondiscrimination coordinator the authority to provide information externally to the public, provide notice to the public of the grievance procedures and the ability to file a complaint, establish a mechanism to implement the grievance procedures, and ensure proper training is provided. EPA’s environmental justice efforts have been applauded by some and derided by others. States currently aligned with EPA’s vision, such as Michigan, embrace and agree to the additional requirements imposed on their programs. Other states not as fully aligned with EPA, such as perhaps Louisiana, resist the imposition of requirements not explicit in federal law and regulation. For its part, EPA seems to seek whatever progress it can make given the resistance to its efforts.