Citizen Portal
Sign In

Members warn cuts and grant cancellations strain state and local clean-up, resilience and drinking-water programs

3588966 · May 20, 2025

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Members and local officials told the subcommittee that EPA grant cancellations and proposed cuts to state revolving funds and categorical grants would disrupt brownfields cleanups, water infrastructure, resilience hubs and lead service-line replacements; EPA pledged case-by-case engagement.

Lawmakers from communities with contaminated sites, lead pipe networks, and disaster resilience projects pressed EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin on the agency’s recent terminations of competitively awarded grants and the proposed cuts to state categorical grants and revolving funds.

Representative Donald McEachin and others described projects in their districts — including a $500,000 brownfields grant pause, resilience hub funding for New Orleans (Stay Ready NOLA), and support for Dillard University — that were stopped by the agency’s review. Representative Nanette Barragán and Rep. Bob Menendez called attention to brownfields as a bipartisan program and described local examples where funding leveraged redevelopment and job training.

Members warned that proposed reductions — including Democratic members’ characterization of a $2.46 billion reduction to water state revolving funds and a $1 billion reduction to categorical grants, and the administration’s assertion of overall budget reductions — would hamper states’ ability to implement federally delegated programs and to fund water infrastructure and lead-service-line replacements.

“Can you commit to this committee that [Brownfields] will not be impacted by budget cuts?” Representative Menendez asked. Zeldin replied that funding levels are determined through the congressional appropriations process but described Brownfields as a program with strong bipartisan support and said EPA would work with Congress on funding decisions. He also said some appropriated funds must go out during the fiscal year and that EPA will fulfill statutory obligations while ensuring ‘‘no waste and abuse’’ in grant spending.

Members pointed to specific community impacts: air-purifier distributions for families in East Palo Alto that were canceled; flood-mitigation small grants and demolition planning in rural districts; training and resilience hubs in Louisiana intended to provide shelter, charging and lineman staging after hurricanes; and job-training brownfields grants paused in Elizabeth, New Jersey. Zeldin offered to work with members and to have agency staff examine individual grant elements that may align with administration priorities.

The hearing also raised longer-term questions about staffing and capacity. Members said proposed staff reductions in EPA’s Office of Research and Development and other program offices could diminish technical assistance and the agency’s ability to oversee delegated state programs and to carry out Superfund cleanups. Zeldin said the agency had begun travel to regions and field offices, that he had visited Superfund sites and that some funding streams from recent laws (IIJA and IRA) supplement Superfund remediation budgets. He said the agency intends to delist sites and accelerate cleanups where possible, but provided no specific commitment to restore each canceled grant.