Comment Submitted by Jorge Quezada Flores

I am submitting this comment in my individual capacity. I generally support HUD’s effort to remove unnecessary and duplicative review steps from the environmental review process for large housing projects. In housing development, time is not a neutral factor. Delays can threaten financing, increase development costs, and make it harder to produce affordable housing, especially in high-cost regions. At the same time, I recommend that HUD include clear guardrails as it implements this change. HUD should clarify when additional environmental review or technical assistance may still be appropriate, especially for projects involving contamination, flood risk, wildfire risk, or environmental justice concerns. HUD should also track whether this rule actually reduces processing time and whether removing the FECO/PECO review requirement results in any increase in environmental review errors or missed issues. I support streamlining when a review step is truly duplicative, but efficiency should not come at the expense of public trust, environmental compliance, or accountability. HUD should finalize this change with clear guidance, documentation expectations, and post-implementation monitoring.