Trump’s EPA Shifts to Make Superfund Cleanups a Central Mission

The EPA is planning to move faster on cleaning up hundreds of contaminated sites across the nation during the second Trump administration, the agency’s administrator says.

“Each Superfund site has its own unique circumstances and challenges, but the overall posture of the Trump EPA is that we want to expedite every timeline possible,” Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin said in an email to Bloomberg Law.

That makes sense for the Trump team, industry watchers say, because it orients the EPA toward highly visible, practical work that’s popular with the public, rather than abstract air or water rules with generally invisible benefits.

“Superfund activities are concrete, rather than intangible—relative to regulations, for example—and therefore easy for the public to understand,” said Steven Jawetz, a former Justice Department attorney who now specializes in the Superfund program as a partner at Beveridge & Diamond PC.

“The administration’s probably focused on Superfund because of its tangible results for local communities harmed by toxic substances, like East Palestine,” in Ohio, agreed Marcella Burke, former deputy solicitor for energy and natural resources at the Interior Department during the first Trump administration. “It directly benefits Americans who need resources and solutions.”

Underscoring the administration’s commitment to the Superfund program, Zeldin has made visits to sites in Missouri, New Jersey, and Colorado since being confirmed in January.

Superfund-related activities were prominently featured in the EPA’s recently released list of achievements in the opening weeks of President Donald Trump’s term. Included were the removal of 20,000 yards of contaminated soil at a Navy training center in Rhode Island, enforcement actions that have secured $296 million worth of cleanups, and the clearing of four sites from the Superfund National Priorities List.

“We have spent the first 100 days of this administration refocusing agency actions and funding on our core mission of protecting human health and the environment, and Powering the Great American Comeback,” Zeldin said in his email. “These steps are critical in ensuring our Superfund program, among many others, can operate at maximum effectiveness and efficiency.”

The nation’s 1,340 Superfund sites are present in nearly every state. The heaviest concentration is in and around New York, where much of the country’s industrial history is rooted.

About 90% of the sites are non-federal, meaning the EPA either does the cleanup or oversees cleanup done by responsible parties. The remaining 10% are located at federal facilities, meaning the agencies that administer those sites must clean them up.

Echoes of Trump 1.0

Superfund was also an EPA priority during the first Trump administration. Even amid political turmoil and sharp criticisms from congressional Democrats and environmental groups, the consensus among most observers is that the agency performed well.

“There was a much more, ‘Let’s get this site done, let’s not delay, let’s select a remedy and get going’ approach,” recalled Robert Fox, a partner at Manko, Gold, Katcher & Fox LLP. “It was consistent with this EPA, which is all about efficiency and getting results.”

The EPA under Trump’s first term also focused on redeveloping Superfund sites where possible and incentivizing private investment in cleanup work, Jawetz recalled—ideas that could also appeal to the agency’s current leaders.

But future progress may be hampered by the Superfund program’s ever-shrinking budget, as well as planned staff cuts.

Appropriations for the program have fallen from $2.6 billion in fiscal 1999 to $537 million in fiscal 2024, according to an April 9 Government Accountability Office report.

Those cuts are responsible for a decline in the number of sites being finished, as is the fact that the remaining sites are more complex to remediate, the report said, citing EPA officials.

Some of those financial pressures were alleviated by the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which gave the Superfund program a $3.5 billion boost in fiscal 2022 and reinstated taxes on chemical makers through 2031.

The latter provision has drawn the ire of the American Chemistry Council and other industry groups. Council CEO Chris Jahn said at April’s Global Chemical Regulations Conference that the tax should be repealed as a way of promoting economic growth.

Trump’s fiscal 2026 budget request released on May 2 seeks a $254 million Superfund cut, stating there is “no need for additional funding” because the program will levy $1.6 billion in taxes that are estimated to be available in 2026.

Democratic lawmakers also warned during a recent Senate hearing that planned cuts to the EPA’s staff would undermine the program.

Jawetz shared that concern, adding that the EPA’s effort could backfire if it makes promises it can’t keep.

“If EPA headquarters simply orders things to happen faster without providing adequate staffing or resources, everyone stands to lose,” he said.

“Local stakeholders will be frustrated when artificial schedules are not met, and the parties being directed to perform or fund the work will be frustrated by the schedules that don’t result in any benefit but threaten to waste money,” Jawetz said.

Proposed Fixes

That’s why Superfund veterans have long been calling on both the White House and Congress to make systemic changes to the program.

For example, Burke recommended the agency should foster more cooperation among state, local, and private entities focused on hazard cleanup.

To Fox, the core problem is the agonizingly slow process of determining a remedy. It requires the EPA to first understand who is being exposed to harmful pollutants, what they’re exposed to, and how to eliminate the pathway of exposure.

One tweak he suggested was that EPA issue guidance on presumptive remedies for types sites that the agency generally already knows how to fix.

“EPA has the ability to do that,” he said. “You can get bogged down in a process where you have to understand every molecule at the site.”