FR 2025-01040

The notice from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reflects the agency's ongoing efforts to enhance environmental and climate justice in communities disproportionately affected by pollution and climate change. This document, titled "Environmental and Climate Justice Community Change Grant Program: Post-Award Reporting," outlines a new request for the collection of information, aimed at ensuring transparency and accountability in the administration of grant funds. These grants are intended to support community-driven projects that address environmental and health challenges faced by underserved populations.

General Summary

The document describes an initiative by the EPA that seeks approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to gather reporting information from participants of a new grant program. This grant, supported by the Inflation Reduction Act, provides financial assistance to communities that design projects to curb the adverse effects of environmental issues. The EPA calls for public input on this initiative, giving stakeholders another 30 days to submit comments.

Significant Issues or Concerns

Several concerns arise from the document:

• Lack of Detailed Breakdown: The document mentions a substantial anticipated burden of 9,100 hours per year for respondents but does not explain how this figure is derived. Similarly, the projected annual cost of $521,339 is provided without a detailed justification or breakdown, raising questions about the allocation and management of funds.

• Technical Language: The use of complex regulatory references, such as 2 CFR parts 200 and 1500, may not be clear to the general public. This can hinder understanding and engagement with the document's content.

• Transparency and Selection Criteria: There are no specific details on how community projects will be selected for funding. This omission could lead to concerns about favoritism or a lack of transparency in the selection process.

• Outcome Explanation: While the document emphasizes the importance of evidence-based learning and improvement, it lacks detailed explanations of how collected information will lead to such outcomes.

• Identifying Underserved Communities: Although the program targets underserved and overburdened communities, there is no clear criteria or guidance on identifying and prioritizing these areas.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

Broader Public: The initiative's transparency and inclusion of public comments indicate an effort to involve the broader public in decision-making processes related to environmental justice. However, the technical language and unexplained financial estimates may limit effective public participation.

Specific Stakeholders: For communities burdened by pollution and climate change, this grant program may offer crucial resources and support. However, the lack of clear criteria and transparency in the selection process could negatively impact the equitable distribution of resources. For organizations applying for the grant, mandatory reporting and compliance requirements might pose an administrative burden, especially for those with limited resources.

Overall, while the EPA's initiative reflects a positive step towards addressing environmental inequities, the document highlights several areas where clarity and transparency could be enhanced to ensure effective and fair implementation.

The document discusses a funding initiative led by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Community Change Grants (CCG) program. The program is designed to distribute financial assistance to underserved and overburdened communities to address environmental, public health, and energy challenges.

Total Estimated Cost and Burden

The document specifies a total estimated cost of $521,339 per year related to the collection activities under this program. This figure is noteworthy, as it reflects the financial commitment involved in supporting EPA's goal of monitoring and assessing the progress and outcomes of funded projects. The document also estimates a total annual burden of 9,100 hours for respondents — those receiving the financial awards — to comply with reporting requirements.

However, the document does not provide a detailed breakdown of this estimated cost, leaving open several questions about the specific allocations of these funds. For instance, it lacks clarity about whether this amount includes administrative expenses, direct grants to communities, or other related activities. Without this breakdown, assessing the reasonableness or efficiency of the allocation becomes challenging.

Relating to Identified Issues

The unidentified specifics in the estimated costs contribute to one of the identified issues, which is the absence of a detailed explanation of how various costs are justified or calculated. The broad mention of a $521,339 annual cost without clarity can lead to concerns over the efficient and effective use of taxpayer money.

Moreover, while the document mentions efforts to provide funds to underserved communities, it does not specify how the financial allocation will prioritize these groups. This omission might cause uncertainty about the equitable distribution of the $521,339 budgeted for these efforts.

Lastly, the stated annual burden of 9,100 hours for the respondents lacks explanation on the activities contributing to this burden. This leaves a gap in understanding the practical implications for grantees and whether the financial support adequately covers their needs.

In conclusion, while the document lays out a significant estimated cost tied to the project, additional details and transparency regarding how these funds are allocated and managed would be beneficial. This would help address concerns around the financial efficacy and prioritization of underserved communities within the program.