Document ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2021-0683-0027
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2021-12-10T05:00Z

Dear White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council (WHEJAC):
My name is Jerimiah Sanders, and I am the Field Environmental Officer for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Region 8. I have served in this position since June of 2016. Prior to my current position in HUD's Region 8 office, I was in HUD's Office of Environment and Energy in HUD Headquarters for nine years and focused on National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and related compliance as well. I appreciate President Biden, Vice President Harris, Secretary Fudge, and the rest of the Administration taking on these longstanding problems and issues, and I look forward to helping in any way I can. Over the years, my current and former colleagues and I have had concerns in the following areas. I submit these comments in my individual capacity.
Lack of Meaningful Public Participation: Under 24 CFR Part 50, where HUD performs the environmental reviews itself, there is no required public notice or comment period for Environmental Assessments (EA) or Findings of Significant Impacts (FONSI). This means that the day HUD completes the review that construction contracts and activities can commence. This includes the mortgage insurance guarantees amounting to often more than $100 million per project or vouchers being placed for decades into new construction activities. While the reviews are now posted online upon completion, it is unclear how anyone would be aware of the review being posted without prior knowledge, and furthermore, it is unclear how the comment can be meaningfully considered when the project is already being constructed the same day the Environmental Review Record (ERR) is made public. Is this appropriate?
Lack of Monitoring and Accountability: In addition to 24 CFR Part 50, HUD has 24 CFR Part 58. This regulation codifies a provision of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 at Section 104(g) that allows Tribal, state, and local governments to perform NEPA reviews for certain HUD programs. The only program office with any dedicated environmental monitoring is the Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD), which contains the NEPA office, the Office of Environment and Energy. As a member of this office, I routinely monitor grantees that were last monitored 15 to 18 years ago with significant issues, including floodplains and site contamination. Some programs, such as the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP) and all programs within the Office of Public Housing (OPH) including Project-based Vouchers under Section 8, do not have regular environmental monitoring. This means that none of these projects or public housing agencies are monitored at all unless they are in a CPD entitlement community or otherwise receiving other CPD assistance from the state. This means that thousands of public housing agencies' units go unmonitored, including those built prior to our regulations on floodways and site contamination. This is especially problematic given that significant amounts of public housing were constructed on polluted sites.
Within the last 5 years, I have seen the records of two housing agencies that were obviously noncompliant. I received one through an error and the other through a reporter's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. I was told that it is not the policy of the Office of Public Housing to follow-up on known violations. I am not sure how this meets our statutory obligations. These public housing agencies are in two communities that are not subject to my regular monitoring. We had previously made some progress on some of these known issues, but unfortunately, we then started to backslide. Please see the HUD Office of Inspector General (OIG) report on known issues with NEPA and OPH: https://www.hudoig.gov/reports-publications/report/hud-did-not-adequately-implement-or-provide-adequate-oversight-ensure 
Furthermore, I recently encountered a situation where tenants in HUD-assisted public housing units were (and possibly are still) being knowingly exposed to radon for nearly two years at this point. HUD failed to act until the housing authority requested approval for roof repairs on the units, and HUD informed the city that it could not certify that the units were free of radioactive gas when there was a radon professional on the local news indicating that there are known radon exposures. It is unclear how or why HUD would knowingly continue to support units with Federal funds that do not comply with state implied warranties of habitability or our regulatory obligation to keep HUD programs free of radioactive substances and gases under 24 CFR 58.5(i)(2). It is also unclear why the news story and tenants' testimony did not trigger HUD's obligations under 24 CFR 982.405(g) or the requirement to re-evaluate the environmental review due to a change in an environmental condition under 24 CFR 58.47(a)(2). I recently received notice that the entire complex was tested, but I have not received confirmation that mitigation repairs have occurred. These issues were also the subject of a HUD OIG investigation listed below after several news reports. HUD was tasked by Congress to ensure that public housing was free of radon in the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988. The links below document its failure to do so, including a Government Accountability Office (GAO) Report from 1991 stating that HUD has failed to implement testing and mitigation as established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and required by statute. 
      "Cancer Cloud: Government Ignores Radon Risks in Public Housing," The Oregonian: https://projects.oregonlive.com/radon/?fbclid=IwAR1JqNCKWcwfi8YAnlA59qpB-p0APMTyrD--qWLyFBqZGGvKwWCXQCunpvM 
      "CBS4 Investigation Finds Dangerous Radon Levels In Public Housing," CBS Denver: https://denver.cbslocal.com/2020/02/25/dangerous-radon-levels-public-housing-colorado-denver/
      "Denver Housing Authority To Begin Testing All Of Its Public Housing Complexes For Radon," CBS Denver: https://denver.cbslocal.com/2021/04/07/denver-housing-authority-testing-public-housing-complexes-radon/ 
      "`Critical for HUD to act': agency watchdog says public housing tenants need radon protections," The Oregonian: https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2021/04/critical-for-hud-to-act-agency-watchdog-says-public-housing-tenants-need-radon-protections.html 
      "HUD Resists Public Housing Radon Safeguards," PEER.org: https://peer.org/hud-resists-public-housing-radon-safeguards/ 
      "HUD Program Offices' Policies and Approaches for Radon," HUD Office of Inspector General: https://www.hudoig.gov/reports-publications/report/hud-program-offices-policies-and-approaches-radon 
      "Radon Testing in Federal Buildings Needs Improvement and HUD's Radon Policy Needs Strengthening," Government Accountability Office: https://www.gao.gov/assets/t-rced-91-48.pdf 
HUD seemingly codified its neglect into a statute in the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act. OPH staff has not been able to inform me of any remaining provisions to protect tenants in housing with known adverse environmental and health impacts but subject to this exemption, and it remains unclear how 24 CFR 982.405(g) is being applied for indoor air pollution from chemical vapor intrusions or radon. The statutory provision was written under the assumption that NEPA and the related laws and authorities are a regulatory burden without considering that NEPA and the related laws are the agency's operational tool for public health issues. At minimum, there should be a provision for the Secretary to reinstitute or reapply the NEPA regulations on a project or grantee-specific basis if there are public health threats or threats to historic and cultural resources, including and especially concerning those of Native American Tribes. At this time, it does not appear that HUD has a means to address units exposed to toxic and radioactive gases if the units are subject to this exemption. What are an agency's obligations to re-evaluate known exposures to contaminants? 
Small PHA Exemption Regulatory Notice: https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2020-04004.pdf?utm_campaign=pi+subscription+mailing+list&utm_source=federalregister.gov&utm_medium=email 
Contract Renewals and Environmental Reviews: Often, HUD will renew contracts for assistance that will last over decades, and HUD renews these contracts by simply updating the reviews from years ago. Should a new review be performed when renewing these contracts for twenty years and typically, without ever having received a public notice and comment period? What are an agency's responsibilities to ensure its contracts provide for the enforcement of its NEPA regulations including necessary re-evaluations due to known or suspected public health threats?
Thank you for your time and expertise. I am very grateful for this opportunity to offer these comments and this outlet to address environmental justice concerns throughout the country. 
Sincerely,
Jerimiah Sanders