Listen to this post

The Environmental Protection Agency recently issued draft guidance updating how agencies are to evaluate environmental justice (EJ) concerns when undertaking regulatory actions, entitled “Technical Guidance for Assessing Environmental Justice in Regulatory Analysis” (the “Guidance”). This 130-page document outlines analytic expectations and technical approaches that can be used by agency analysts in such an evaluation. 

The draft revision updates and expands on EPA’s original guidance issued in 2016. The draft guidance addresses scientific advancements, peer-reviewed Agency guidance, and the Biden administration’s new priorities, policies, and direction on EJ by incorporating Executive Order 14096. The draft guidance highlights early integration of EJ in the rulemaking process and provides approaches for using analytics to ensure EJ concerns are addressed as regulatory actions are developed.

The main updates that EPA has included in the draft Guidance include updating several key definitions and concepts so that they align with the terms used in Executive Order 14096.

“EJ Concerns.” In its 2016 guidance, EPA defined “EJ concern” as:

the actual or potential lack of fair treatment or meaningful involvement of minority populations, low-income populations, tribes, and indigenous peoples in the development, implementation.

EPA updated the definition used in the draft Guidance to mirror the EJ groups identified in EO 14096, including the adding national origin, color, and disability status—

An EJ concern is the actual or potential lack of just treatment or meaningful involvement on the basis of income, race, color, national origin, Tribal affiliation, or disability status in the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies.

The draft Guidance also updates how to identify and define these populations groups of concern, noting that agency analysts should be most concerned with identifying groups with increased vulnerability based on economic and social factors. This may include additional considerations, such as linguistic isolation, gender, age, and employment status.

“Meaningful Involvement.” Additionally, based on how the term is defined in EO 14096, EPA proposes updating “meaningful involvement” to focus on active and early engagement with EJ communities. EPA suggests that to meaningfully involve or engage EJ communities, it must go beyond the minimum requirements of standard notice and comment periods, and the agency should actively work to engage EJ communities early in the process well before a proposed rule is published.

Cumulative Impacts and Climate Change. As directed in the Executive Order, EPA places a higher priority on cumulative impacts and climate change in the proposed Guidance. Under the proposal, EPA analysts should consider a community’s vulnerability, including cumulative impacts and climate change. While these were considerations in the 2016 guidance, the proposed Guidance puts cumulative impacts and climate change front and center, including more information and tools on how to incorporate these considerations.

In addition to the changes based on Executive Order 14096, EPA also proposes:

  • Incorporating an analysis of compliance and enforcement history in determining whether policy options that encourage better compliance (such as publicly available real-time monitoring data or enhanced reporting requirements) can reduce exposure to EJ communities.
  • Evaluating the underlying heterogeneity (i.e., diversity or differences) of the regulated industry in question, the populations at risk, and the risks themselves when determining the correct analytical approach. For example, with respect to selecting a geospatial unit for analysis, EPA explains that it is important to weigh any potential tradeoffs between fully capturing the populations at risk and the heterogeneity in risk which may mask information about those most at risk by including populations that are much less affected.

While focused on technical metrics in this Guidance, EPA is clear that it is not proposing a bright line test to determine whether an EJ concern results in disproportionate and adverse health and environmental effects. That determination is “ultimately a policy judgment.” Nor does the proposed Guidance require EPA analysts to conduct a specific type of technical review for EJ concerns. Rather, it includes key considerations that should be taken into account when completing an EJ review, and it encourages analysts to provide transparent justification for their choices.

While the Guidance is not directly applicable to non-government actors, it provides insight into methods EPA considers appropriate for analyzing EJ concerns that private actors should bear in mind when conducting their own EJ analysis for use in seeking federal approval for proposed activities. Comments on the proposed Guidance are due by January 15, 2024.

The Liskow Environmental Justice practice group closely follows environmental justice developments. Please contact us with any environmental justice inquiries.

Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the law firm of Liskow & Lewis, APLC (“Liskow & Lewis”) and the individual Liskow & Lewis lawyers posting to this site for educational purposes and to give you general information and a general understanding of the law only, not to provide specific legal advice as to an identified problem or issue. By using this blog site you understand and acknowledge that there is no attorney-client relationship formed between you and Liskow & Lewis and/or the individual Liskow & Lewis lawyers posting to this site by virtue of your using this site. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state regarding a particular matter.

Privacy Policy: By subscribing to Liskow & Lewis’ E-Communications, you will receive articles and blogs with insight and analysis of legal issues that may impact your industry. Communications include firm news, insights, and events. To receive information from Liskow & Lewis, your information will be kept in a secured contact database. If at any time you would like to unsubscribe, please use the SafeUnsubscribe® link located at the bottom of every email that you receive.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Emily von Qualen Emily von Qualen

Emily is an environmental litigator practicing in the firm’s New Orleans office.

Prior to joining the firm, Emily practiced complex business law in the litigation group at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP in Houston.  Immediately after law school, she clerked in…

Emily is an environmental litigator practicing in the firm’s New Orleans office.

Prior to joining the firm, Emily practiced complex business law in the litigation group at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP in Houston.  Immediately after law school, she clerked in the Western District of Louisiana with Judge Minaldi.

Emily received her Juris Doctor from Tulane University Law School in 2016, graduating first in her class.  During law school, she also served as a judicial extern to the Honorable James L. Dennis of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the Honorable James Brady of the United States District Court, Middle District of Louisiana.

Photo of Amy Tomlinson Amy Tomlinson

Amy is an associate in the Houston office of Liskow. She is a member of the Energy Litigation Practice Group. Before joining Liskow, Amy worked in both public and private practice in various industries. She has successfully managed large dockets and is a…

Amy is an associate in the Houston office of Liskow. She is a member of the Energy Litigation Practice Group. Before joining Liskow, Amy worked in both public and private practice in various industries. She has successfully managed large dockets and is a proven litigator with first and second-chair trial experience. She has represented many clients in high-stakes litigation matters.

Amy has a wide-ranging motion practice in state and federal courts. She advises clients in all aspects of dispute resolution, from pre-litigation to trial to post-trial proceedings. Amy has worked to defend employers in class action and single-plaintiff employment matters asserting violations of the law. Amy represents employers in federal, state, and administrative courts, as well as before administrative agencies.

Photo of Clare M. Bienvenu Clare M. Bienvenu

Clare Bienvenu is an environmental regulatory and litigation lawyer who has practiced in both Louisiana and California, working with clients across the United States. Clare counsels clients regarding complex environmental regulatory, enforcement, and permitting issues spanning the range of federal and state environmental…

Clare Bienvenu is an environmental regulatory and litigation lawyer who has practiced in both Louisiana and California, working with clients across the United States. Clare counsels clients regarding complex environmental regulatory, enforcement, and permitting issues spanning the range of federal and state environmental laws. Clare additionally facilitates the permitting and regulatory aspects of developing new facilities on behalf of energy, petrochemical, and industrial clients. Her substantive environmental experience includes air permitting, hazardous waste regulation, land remediation, land use regulation, coastal regulation, carbon sequestration projects, and renewable energy projects.

Clare has played a key role in various administrative matters, proceedings, and enforcement actions. She has participated in consent decree negotiations and the termination of consent decrees with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Justice, as well as settlement negotiations with the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality and the California Air Resources Board. Clare has also represented clients in permitting matters involving the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management. She also advises on environmental justice considerations in the context of agency permitting.