For the past several months, the Senate Environment and Public Works (“EPW”) Committee has been reviewing recommendations on how to overhaul the Superfund process as set forth in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) to expedite the early stages of the Superfund process.
During an April 9, 2025 Committee hearing, senators from both parties expressed their support for the effort, although each party differed in their approach to streamlining the process. Republican lawmakers, led by chairman Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), focused on the pre-clean up procedural requirements imposed by CERCLA. Capito criticized that CERCLA “prioritizes process over results” and that the EPA’s “entangled web of bureaucracy, work groups, task forces and committees . . . too often slow progress.” In contrast, ranking member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said that “speed must not come at the cost of efficacy” and argued that the Trump Administration’s cuts to the EPA’s funding will lead to further delays in the process.
While still being developed and considered, several changes to CERCLA have been proposed. One proposal called for site cleanups to start before a site is even declared a Superfund site or added to the National Priorities List. This approach would allow the EPA to start remediating a site while simultaneously working to identify all potentially responsible parties. Another proposal would allow EPA to proceed with a “presumptive remedy” in cases where the selected remedy is straightforward and widely-accepted, such as for sites polluted by heavy metals.
Other concerns included whether per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) pollution will be part of any reform efforts, particularly in the wake of the Biden Administration designating perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) as hazardous substances. Some commentators have argued that inclusion of PFAS as a hazardous substance threaten bipartisan support for Superfund reform, as others have argued that it could throw the entire Superfund process into disarray. One proposal to alleviate these concerns is to change CERCLA’s liability provisions to exempt “passive receivers” of PFAS, which some have criticized as potentially leading to unintended consequences concerning other types of hazardous substances.
While the EPW Committee seems to be open to clearing some of the administrative red tape and speeding up the cleanup process, there does not seem to be any consensus for how to achieve that goal, and it will be interesting to see where the Committee ultimately lands. We will continue monitoring any Committee work on this topic and will update this blog with any new and interesting developments.