P U B L I C W E B I N A R

M A Y 2 9 , 2 0 1 3

B Y 

U . S . E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O T E C T I O N A G E N C Y

O F F I C E O F E N V I R O N M E N T A L J U S T I C E

O F F I C E O F P O L I C Y

O F F I C E O F R E S E A R C H A N D D E V E L O P M E N T

1

Draft Technical Guidance for 

Assessing Environmental Justice in 

Regulatory Analysis
Webinar Agenda

 Administrative issues for the webinar 

 Presentation of the draft Technical Guidance 

 Question and answer segment 

 Wrap-up with announcements and next steps

2
Administrative Announcements

1. Please mute your phone lines when you are not presenting or 

asking a question

2. The interface for the webinar should feature four screens

 Share; Attendees; Notes; and Chat

3. Please use the “set status” feature (and drop-down menu) in the 

tool bar when attempting to alert us about a question. 

4. Please save your queries for the Q and A segment. 

5. Several administrative points have been typed into the “Notes 

Window”. 

6. This webinar is for the public. 

3
Purpose of Webinar

4

 Provide an overview of the draft guidance

 Highlight development and review process

 Answer questions
Outline

5

 Executive Order 12898

 Background

 Development of draft guidance

 Content

 Review process

 Questions?
Executive Order 12898

6

 E.O. 12898 (1994), Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-income Populations

 “...each Federal agency shall make achieving 

environmental justice part of its mission by 

identifying and addressing, as appropriate, 

disproportionately high and adverse human health 

or environmental effects of its programs, policies, 

and activities on minority populations and lowincome populations...”
Background

7

 Plan EJ 2014 is EPA’s overarching EJ strategic plan

 Rulemaking is one of the priority areas

 Two significant products

 Interim Guidance on Considering Environmental Justice 

During the Development of an Action (EJ Process Guide)

 Issued in July 2010

 Technical Guidance for Considering Environmental Justice in 

Regulatory Analysis (EJ Technical Guidance)

 Under development; subject of this webinar
EJ Technical Guidance

8

 Provides guidance on how to conduct analyses to 

assess potential environmental justice concerns for 

rules

 Audience

 EPA analysts, including risk assessors, economists, and other 

analytical staff

 Important to note that this guidance pertains to 

rules only
Development

9

 Core writing team led by Office of Environmental 

Justice, Office of Policy, and Office of Research and 

Development

 Sub-groups for Risk Assessment and 

Economics/Regulatory Analysis involved at least 30 

technical experts from 12 program offices and 5 

regions 
Table of Contents

10

 Overview and Background

 Section 1: Introduction

 Section 2: Key Analytic Principles and Definitions

 Section 3: Contributors and Drivers of Environmental Justice

 Section 4: Consideration of Environmental Justice when 

Planning a Human Health Risk Assessment

 Section 5: Conducting Regulatory Analyses to Assess 

Environmental Justice Concerns

 Section 6: Research Gaps (to be drafted following peerreview)

 Glossary 

 References

 Appendices 
Section 1: Introduction

Overview

11

 Identify overarching analytic questions for the 

analyst and decision maker

 Provide key analytic steps to guide assessments

 Recommendations to guide assessments
Section 1: Introduction

Key Analytic Questions

12

 1. Is a potential EJ concern associated with the 

affected environmental stressors prior to the 

rulemaking?

 2. For each of the regulatory options under 

consideration, is a potential EJ concern created or 

mitigated for these affected environmental stressors?
At Baseline: For Each Regulatory 

Option:

3. Assess exposures, relevant health 

and environmental outcomes, and 

other relevant effects by 

population group for each option; 

4. Assess differences in these 

exposures, relevant health and 

environmental outcomes, and 

other relevant effects across 

population groups for each option; 

and 

5. Assess how estimated differences 

in these exposures, relevant health 

and environmental outcomes , and 

other relevant effects across 

population groups increase or 

decrease as a result of each option 

compared to the baseline. 

13

Section 1:

Key Analytic Steps

1. Assess exposures, relevant 

health and environmental 

outcomes, and other relevant 

effects by population group in 

the baseline; and

2. Assess differences in these 

exposures, relevant health 

and environmental outcomes, 

and other relevant effects 

across population groups in 

the baseline.
Section 1:

Recommendations

14

 For rules where impacts or benefits are quantified, some 

level of quantitative analysis for EJ is recommended

 When impacts or benefits will not be quantified or 

disaggregated by race/ethnicity or income, present 

information that is insightful with regard to potential EJ 

concerns

 Integrate scoping questions at the planning stage of a 

risk assessment

 Use the same baseline and regulatory scenarios as the 

other types of regulatory analyses

 Analysts should follow identified best practices 

 Consider distribution of costs when appropriate
Section 2: Key Analytic Principles and Definitions

15

 Key Analytic Principles

 Analyses should:

 Be designed to inform the pending decision 

 Rely on generally accepted procedures for conducting risk 

assessment and economic analysis

 Integrate consideration of EJ into existing analytical efforts

 Use existing frameworks and data from other parts of the 

regulatory analysis

 Be transparent with regard to data sources, assumptions, 

analytic techniques, and results

 Use the best available science and data
Section 2 (continued)

16

 Key Definitions

 Minority and indigenous populations

 Low-income populations

 Populations that primarily subsist on fish and wildlife

 Differences versus Disproportionate

 For this guidance document, the terms “differential risks” or 

“differences in impacts” refer to a distinct concept from 

“disproportionate” impacts or risks. 

 Specifically, the terms difference or differential are used to indicate 

an analytically measurable distinction in impacts or risks across 

population groups. 

 The term disproportionate is used to refer to differences in impacts 

or risks that are substantial enough that they may merit Agency 

action.” 
Section 3: Contributors and Drivers

17

 Key scientific reasons health risks may be unevenly 

distributed across social groups in the population

 Some key contributors to and drivers of the uneven 

distribution of health risks that are of concern in 

environmental justice
Section 4: Considering EJ When Planning a 

Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA)

18

 Key elements of planning a HHRA 

 Ensuring it is “Fit for Purpose”

 Planning and Scoping

 Problem Formulation

 Developing a conceptual model and analysis plan 

 Examples of assessments that analysts can plan for 

when conducting a risk assessment for rule 

development
Section 5: Conducting Regulatory Analyses to 

Assess EJ Concerns

19

 How to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a quantitative assessment 

of EJ concerns

 Defines baseline and incremental changes for an analysis of EJ 

concerns

 Summarizes quantitative methods for assessing disproportionate 

impacts

 Key analytic issues, including how to define comparison groups and 

geographic issues

 Discusses costs, non-health impacts, and analytic recommendations 

when information on emissions, risk, exposure and health impacts is 

not available
Review Process

20

 Internal Agency Review

 Completed in November 2012

 Almost 800 comments from across the Agency and regions

 Public Comment Period

 Runs May 9-July 8, 2013

 Two webinars: May 29 and June 6

 Comments will be posted on regulations.gov

 Tribal Outreach

 Outreach to 565 Tribes

 Runs May 10-June 24, 2013

 Two webinars: May 22 and June 3

 External Peer Review

 Conducted via special panel of EPA’s Science Advisory Board

 Panel meeting June 19-20, 2013 in Washington, DC
Question and Comments

 Please click “raise your hand” to ask a question. 

21

 Please “lower your hand” once the question has been 

addressed. 
Final Announcements and Next Steps

 Thank you for participating in the Public Information Webinar for the draft 

EJ Technical Guidance.

 The second Public Information Webinar on the guidance will be Thursday, 

June 6 from 3:00 pm to 4:30 pm EST. 

 The public comment period runs through July 8. Comments may be 

submitted via regulations.gov (docket # EPA-HQ-OA-2013-0320), by email 

or fax to Kelly Maguire (contact information below), or hand delivered. 

 If you have questions, please contact:

 Kelly Maguire Carlton Eley

 202-566-2273 (phone) 202-566-2841

 maguire.kelly@epa.gov eley.carlton@epa.gov

 202-566-2363 (fax)

22