To Whom It May Concern:

The Chicago Environmental Justice Network (CEJN) an alliance of several

environmental justice organizations that are active in the Chicago area. These
organizations include the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization1, People for
Community Recovery2 and the Southeast Environmental Task Force3.
By way of summary, CEJN seeks to ensure that U.S. EPAs CEIP adheres to EPAs wellestablished commitment to environmental justice. CEJN urges U.S. EPA to establish clear
directions to states mandating that their development and implementation of CEIPs must
achieve the following goals:
1. States must provide a full and complete opportunity for environmental justice
stakeholders to participate in the development and implementation of their CEIPs.
2. State CEIPs must affirmatively ensure access to benefits, for example, residential
energy efficiency and community-based renewable energy programs. Specifically, these
programs should be required to demonstrate that they directly benefit low-income and
vulnerable residents and households, not other individuals, entities and institutions that
may be located in or otherwise serve low-income, vulnerable communities.
3. States should be given clear guidance about what constitutes low-income and
vulnerable communities. CEJN strongly encourages U.S. EPA to consult with the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, which has existing definitions of
extremely low, low and low-moderate income households as well as a census tract level
analysis of communities characterized by these lower income households. When
combined with resources available on U.S. EPAs own EJ Screen, this will provide an
initial template of low-income and vulnerable communities for states, activists and
entities engaging in CEIP-related activities.
4. U.S. EPA must ensure that state CEIPs do not cause or perpetuate significant, adverse
and disproportionate environmental consequences in environmental justice communities.
The residents of a state that aggressively encourages CEIP adoption could benefit by
comparison to residents of state that has a poorly executed CEIP. Moreover, the credits
that result from qualifying activities in a high performing CEIP state could be directed
through trading to a poor performing state as an alternative to GHG reductions and the
co-benefits that accompany these reductions.
CEJN offers the following more specific and detailed comments to support its assertions
regarding the fundamental importance of environmental justice in the execution of the
CEIP by U.S. EPA and states.

http://lvejo.org/
http://www.peopleforcommunityrecovery.org/
3
http://setaskforce.org/
2

Comment One: The Proposed CEIP Must Adhere To U.S. EPAs Responsibilities Under
Executive Order 12898, the Agency Strategy To Achieve Environmental Justice and Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
More than twenty years ago, U.S. EPA developed this definition of environmental justice:
1. the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures and incomes with respect to the
development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations,
programs and policies;
2. that no racial, ethnic or socioeconomic group should bear a disproportionate share of
negative environmental consequences resulting from the operation of industrial,
municipal and commercial enterprises and the execution of federal, state and local
programs and policies; and,
3. that communities, private industries, local governments, states, tribes, federal
government, grass roots organizations and individuals act responsibly and ensure
environmental protection to all communities.4
U.S. EPA operates under the mandates of Executive Order 12898, which requires U.S.
EPA to make achieving environmental justice part of its core mission, and which requires
EPA to develop an agency strategy to achieve environmental justice.5 In the most recent
iteration of its environmental justice strategy, Plan EJ 2014, U.S. EPA made a
commitment to incorporate environmental justice into the fabric of its rulemaking
process, and further called upon EPA decision makers to consider environmental justice
throughout all phases of the so-called Action Development Process from the point of its
inception through all the stages leading to promulgation and implementation.6
U.S. EPA must also ensure that its state-funded partners conform to Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964.7 As interpreted by U.S. EPA, Title VI compliance dictates that state
actions: 1. provide a full and complete opportunity for public participation, and, 2. do not
cause a significant, adverse and disproportionate effect on people receiving Title VI
protections.8
In light of U.S. EPAs responsibility arising from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
EPA must provide clear, consistent and meaningful directions to states about how they
must incorporate environmental justice considerations into the development and
implementation of their CEIPs. Explicit, proactive environmental justice guidance to
states will avoid havoc for years into the future. States must know what they are required
to do to incorporate environmental justice into the development or substance of their
plans. Environmental justice communities must have assurance that state efforts are not
4

58 Fed. Reg. 63955, 63957 (December 3, 1993).

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/pdf/12898.pdf
6
http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/resources/policy/plan-EJ-2014/plan-EJ-rulemaking-2011-09.pdf
5

7
8

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=49639&st=Environmental+Justice&st1=

http://www.epa.gov/ocr/docs/frn_t6_pub06272000.pdf

ad hoc, but instead are consistently administered pursuant to clear U.S. EPA guidance. In
the absence of clear guidance, the ire of both states and environmental justice advocates
will be directed to U.S. EPA to resolve after the fact, which is a poor substitute for
proactive, clear and consistently administered guidance.
CEJN urges U.S. EPA to address its expectations for its state partners related to
environmental justice, and to explicitly indicate that adherence to these expectations will
be a basis by which state CEIPs will be evaluated. At a minimum, and consistent with its
own interpretation of state responsibilities pursuant to Title VI, U.S. EPA must mandate
measures to ensure full and complete public participation in the development of state
CEIPs and that state CEIPs do not cause a significant, adverse and disproportionate effect
on people receiving Title VI protections.
Comment Two: States Must Provide a Full and Complete Opportunity For Environmental
Justice Stakeholders To Participate In the Development And Implementation Of Their
CEIPs.
As part of evaluating the adequacy of proposed state CEIPs, EPA should employ an
empirical tool that demonstrates the participation of low-income and vulnerable
communities throughout the CEIP design and implementation process. Some suggested
elements that will characterize meaningful public engagement by states are:
1. Involving Communities Early In the Process
2. Conducting Outreach Appropriate to the Affected Communities
3. Going Beyond Minimum Legal Community Involvement Requirements
4. Engendering Informed and Empowered Community Involvement
5. Acknowledging and Incorporating Community Vision and Planning
6. Engaging All Segments of the Population
7. Recognizing Impacts on All Lands Possessing Historical, Cultural and Spiritual Values
8. Maintaining Ongoing Outreach and Communication with Communities
9. Using Neutral Third Party Facilitators
10. Ensuring Outreach Materials Are Accessible to Members of These Communities
11. Addressing Public Health Issues
12. Addressing the Creation of Jobs, Workforce Training and Economic Development

13. Re-Engaging Existing Land Use Patterns to Diminish Segregation and to Enhance
Neighborhoods
14. Creating Community-Private-Governmental Partnerships
These kinds of nationally consistent public participation benchmarks will provide clarity
for states and stakeholders. While this kind of checklist will not foreclose the ability of
states to tailor their CEIP public involvement initiatives, the checklist provides both a
helpful beginning point and a means for U.S. EPA to evaluate state programs according
national benchmarks.
DRAFT
Sharon Wyskiel