(a) As to any program or activity receiving EPA assistance, a recipient shall not directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements on the basis of race, color, national origin or, if applicable, sex:
(1) Deny a person any service, aid or other benefit of the program or activity;
(2) Provide a person any service, aid or other benefit that is different, or is provided differently from that provided to others under the program or activity;
(3) Restrict a person in any way in the enjoyment of any advantage or privilege enjoyed by others receiving any service, aid, or benefit provided by the program or activity;
(4) Subject a person to segregation in any manner or separate treatment in any way related to receiving services or benefits under the program or activity;
(5) Deny a person or any group of persons the opportunity to participate as members of any planning or advisory body which is an integral part of the program or activity, such as a local sanitation board or sewer authority;
(6) Discriminate in employment on the basis of sex in any program or activity subject to section 13, or on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity whose purpose is to create employment; or, by means of employment discrimination, deny intended beneficiaries the benefits of EPA assistance, or subject the beneficiaries to prohibited discrimination.
(7) In administering a program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance in which the recipient has previously discriminated on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin, the recipient shall take affirmative action to provide remedies to those who have been injured by the discrimination.
(b) A recipient shall not use criteria or methods of administering its program or activity which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination because of their race, color, national origin, or sex, or have the effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the program or activity with respect to individuals of a particular race, color, national origin, or sex.
(c) A recipient shall not choose a site or location of a facility that has the purpose or effect of excluding individuals from, denying them the benefits of, or subjecting them to discrimination under any program or activity to which this part applies on the grounds of race, color, or national origin or sex; or with the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing the accomplishment of the objectives of this subpart.
(d) The specific prohibitions of discrimination enumerated above do not limit the general prohibition of § 7.30.
[49 FR 1659, Jan. 12, 1984, as amended at 68 FR 51372, Aug. 26, 2003]
Notes of Decisions
South Camden Citizens in Action v. New Jersey Dep't of Env't Prot., 145 F. Supp. 2d 505 (D.N.J. 2001).
· cites it 5× “40 C.F.R. § 7.35 (b). Furthermore, Congress granted the agency which issued the regulations not merely the authority to promulgate such regulations, but a directive to do so, in the plain language of § 602: Each Federal department and agency which is empowered to extend Federal…”
South Camden Citizens in Action v. New Jersey Dep't of Env't Prot., 145 F. Supp. 2d 446 (D.N.J. 2001).
· cites it 5× “The NJDEP therefore equates its compliance with the current PM-10 NAAQ standard with meeting its obligation to Plaintiffs under the EPA’s Title VI implementing regulations, codified at 40 C.F.R. § 7.35 . 91. Neither NJDEP nor SLC disputes either the EPA’s or Dr.”
Keith v. Lefleur, 256 So. 3d 1206 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “§ 2000 ; 40 C.F.R. § 7.35 (b). They asserted that each recipient of the EPA's financial assistance is required to adopt grievance procedures to assure the prompt and fair resolution of complaints that allege a violation of that regulation.”
Sandoval v. Hagan, 7 F. Supp. 2d 1234 (M.D. Ala. 1998).
“3d at 929 (citing 40 C.F.R. § 7.35 (b)) (emphasis added). The Third Circuit noted that "[tjhis regulation clearly incorporates a discriminatory effect standard.”
New York City Env't Just. All. v. Giuliani, 214 F.3d 65 (2d Cir. 1999).
· cites it 4× “The district court concluded that the plaintiffs had shown that they would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a preliminary injunction but that they had failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims.”
New York City Env't Just. All. v. Giuliani, 50 F. Supp. 2d 250 (S.D.N.Y. 1999).
“Pursuant to Section 602, the EPA adopted regulations which state: A recipient shall not use criteria or methods of administering its program which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination because of their race, color, national origin, or sex.”
Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living v. Seif, 944 F. Supp. 413 (E.D. Pa. 1996).
“40 C.F.R. § 7.35 (b). In addition, the EPA requires: Applicants for EPA assistance [to] submit an assurance with their applications stating that, with respect to their programs or activities that receive EPA assistance, they will comply with the requirements of this Part.”
CORAL CONST. INC. v. San Francisco, 57 Cal. Rptr. 3d 781 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007).
“The Ordinance is not designed to pinpoint remedies to those suffering prior injuries and thus whether it remains in effect or not would not impact this directive.”
Franks v. Ross, 293 F. Supp. 2d 599 (E.D.N.C. 2003).
“30 provides, “No person shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving EPA assistance on the basis of race, color, national origin, 40 C.F.R. § 7.35 (c) provides, “A recipient shall…”
Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living v. Seif, 132 F.3d 925 (3rd Cir. 1997).
“which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination because of their race, color, national origin, or sex-” 40 C.F.R. § 7.35 (b). The district court dismissed Count One of CRCQL’s complaint without prejudice.”
State of Louisiana v. U S Env't Prot. Agency (W.D. La. 2024).
· cites it 2× “Based upon requirements found within the four corners of EPA’s disparate impact regulations, 40 C. F. R. § 7.35 (b),(c).1 Subsequent to the Preliminary Injunction, the parties set briefing deadlines2 for entry of final judgment.”
— 40 C.F.R. § 7.35(b) — 1 case
State of Louisiana v. U S Env't Prot. Agency (W.D. La. 2024).
“Based upon requirements found within the four corners of EPA’s disparate impact regulations, 40 C. F. R. § 7.35 (b),(c).1 Subsequent to the Preliminary Injunction, the parties set briefing deadlines2 for entry of final judgment.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.