The clock is ticking on a proposal that could reshape how quickly Texans obtain federal records about environmental risks in their communities.
The Environmental Protection Agency is accepting public comment through February 26 on a proposed rule that would eliminate its “Environmental Justice Expedited Processing” category under the Freedom of Information Act. This provision currently allows certain requesters to seek faster responses and fee waivers when records relate to environmental justice concerns.
Only three public comments had been submitted to the docket as of mid-February, according to Regulations.gov. Anyone may submit a comment before the deadline.
Cost Savings vs. Public Benefit
The proposal would remove the environmental justice expedited processing criteria finalized in November 2023 as part of a broader FOIA update.
Under the current rule, requesters can seek expedited processing and a fee waiver if they demonstrate that the records relate to actual or alleged federal government activity; there is a pressing need to inform a community; the community may be experiencing disproportionate health or environmental effects; and the requester intends to convey the information effectively.
EPA said in the proposed rule that “less than 2.7% of EJ EP requests were granted from November 13, 2023, to August 31, 2025,” and argued that staff time spent reviewing such requests “outweighs the benefit to the public.”
The agency cited federal law, which allows agencies to create expedited processing categories “in other cases determined by the agency,” but does not require them to do so.
EPA said eliminating the category would provide “cost-reduction benefits to the agency.”
The proposal would not change the statutory “compelling need” standard for expedited processing, which applies in cases involving an imminent threat to life or safety or an urgency to inform the public by someone primarily engaged in disseminating information.
EPA stated the move is consistent with President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14151, titled “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing.”
The original Federal Register entry indicated that the policy was intended to be race-neutral.
“EPA has recognized environmental justice concerns for many decades and has defined Environmental justice (EJ) as the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies,” it read.
What the Rule Change Could Mean For Dallas County
The potential impact could be significant for Dallas County, which has one of the highest cumulative environmental justice risk scores in Texas, according to the Texas Environmental Justice Explorer.
Dallas County, with more than 2.5 million residents, has an environmental justice risk score of 81.4 out of 100, reflecting combined environmental and social burdens. Its pollution burden score is 89.2, with indicators including ozone concentration, traffic density, hazardous waste sites, and air toxics cancer risk.
If finalized, the rule could require those seeking records about potential contamination, permitting decisions, or enforcement actions to rely solely on the narrower “compelling need” standard or to pursue traditional FOIA processing timelines.
EPA has previously acknowledged that “timely access to information contained in EPA records may play” a role in allowing communities to meaningfully engage in environmental decision-making, according to the 2022 Federal Register notice that helped establish the criteria.
Environmental justice concerns have also been raised in high-profile incidents elsewhere, including the train derailment and chemical release in East Palestine, Ohio, which some academics have characterized as an environmental justice issue in recent literature.
Deadline for Comments: Submit by February 26
One commenter, Allan Blutstein, a public records attorney and former federal FOIA official, wrote on January 30 that he supports rescinding the provision.
“Given the finite resources generally available for fulfilling FOIA requests, unduly generous use of the expedited processing procedure would unfairly disadvantage other requestors who do not qualify for its treatment,” Blutstein wrote, quoting a 1996 House report.
Blutstein argued that FOIA “should not be repurposed by agencies to advance substantive policy objectives or to prioritize requests based on their perceived political or social value.”
An anonymous commenter, writing January 27, opposed the proposal, stating, “I believe the impacted communities should have the ability to expedite and waive fees of their FOIA request. This proposed rule is just meant to stifle transparency.”
EPA is specifically seeking comment on “the effects of removing this provision on the FOIA requester community.”
Comments may be submitted through Regulations.gov before 11:59 p.m. Eastern on February 26.
