Nominee to lead EPA Enforcement Will Be Aggressive and Thorough
Time 4 Minute Read
Nominee to lead EPA Enforcement Will Be Aggressive and Thorough
Categories: Enforcement, EPA, Policy

The White House announced on July 22, 2021, President Biden’s nomination of David Uhlmann to be the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Uhlmann is currently the director of the Environmental Law and Policy Program at the University of Michigan Law School and was previously a federal prosecutor for 17 years, including as the Chief of the Environmental Crimes Section of the US Department of Justice. His nomination signals the White House’s clear intent to reinvigorate EPA’s enforcement program after what the EPA’s Inspector General found in its March 31, 2020 report to be years of declining case statistics across multiple administrations.

In leading OECA, Uhlmann will oversee all administrative, civil/judicial, and criminal enforcement programs and EPA’s compliance monitoring and assurance program, which includes civil inspections, evaluations, and investigations. He will have at least one opportunity to set National Compliance Initiatives (“NCIs,” formerly known as National Enforcement Initiatives), which are national program priorities that focus enforcement and compliance resources on the most serious environmental violations. NCIs are designated every three years, with the current group set to expire in 2023. Thus, Uhlmann will have more than a year to review current NCI’s (including the naming of “compliance initiatives” vs. “enforcement initiatives”) and determine whether to continue any and/or propose new areas to focus. It is likely that, given the Biden Administration’s focus on climate change and environmental justice, a significant amount of Uhlmann’s focus for OECA will be on the same areas, with some compliance/enforcement initiatives focusing on specific types of violations that disproportionately impact climate and environmental justice communities.

Uhlmann’s focus as a professor, and the topic of many of his public presentations in the last nearly ten years, has been on the decline in environmental enforcement by the EPA, and specifically the decline in criminal prosecutions. He has led the Environmental Crimes Project, the first empirical study of criminal enforcement under U.S. pollution laws, and has used the data collected to advocate before Congress, in legal forums such as American Bar Association events, and in the media. In short, since leaving government in 2007 he has been an outspoken critic of EPA’s declining enforcement trends. As the Assistant Administrator for OECA, Uhlmann will be in his most influential position yet to attempt to address the reasons behind the trends.

Uhlmann’s role at OECA will also be informed by his long and successful career as a federal prosecutor. As Chief of the Environmental Crimes Section, Uhlmann chaired the Justice Department’s Environmental Crimes Policy Committee, made up of representatives from United States Attorney’s Offices around the country. He also coordinated national legislative, policy, and training initiatives across a variety of federal agencies, including EPA, Fish & Wildlife Service, the U.S. Coast Guard, and others. In short, Uhlmann will bring to OECA a deep understanding of EPA, its partner agencies, and the policies and practices that will be necessary to achieve the Biden Administration’s environmental enforcement and compliance goals.

President Biden’s nomination of Uhlmann is a critical step in filling positions that will have a direct role in managing Administration priorities. OECA, and other EPA program offices such as the Office of Air and Radiation, are currently lead by career staff in temporary “Acting” positions. Nominating appointees and ensuring their Senate confirmation will allow policies to be developed, put in place, and executed in ways that do not happen without a political appointee leading a program. The Biden Administration has been very direct about its intention to increase environmental enforcement. Uhlmann’s nomination is a very strong signal of how serious the Administration is in this regard. Given this unambiguous policy direction, companies should prioritize review of environmental compliance and performance and remain vigilant.

  • Partner

    As a former US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) attorney, Sam utilizes his agency, regulatory, enforcement, and practical experience to help his clients navigate environmental, energy, natural resource, sustainability ...

  • Counsel

    Todd advises companies and executives nationwide when environmental, regulatory, or enforcement issues suddenly place operations, leadership, or reputation under scrutiny, and early decisions carry outsized risk. He is ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 6 Minute Read

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) recently announced it is “exercising its enforcement discretion to no longer pursue criminal charges . . . on allegations of tampering with onboard diagnostic devices in motor vehicles” under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). According to DOJ, this exercise of discretion not to criminally prosecute is based on “sound enforcement principles, efficient use of government resources[,] and avoiding overcriminalization of federal environmental law.” DOJ’s announcement is an about-face from years of criminal prosecutions for identical conduct, including an increase of these prosecutions under the first Trump administration. As a result of this new policy, DOJ is now dismissing existing CAA criminal tampering cases—more than a dozen prosecutions thus far—and the decision may impact some 20 or more ongoing investigations. DOJ stated in its announcement that it intends to continue to pursue civil enforcement for tampering cases under the Act in partnership with EPA.

Time 5 Minute Read

Perhaps the biggest EPR news to date is the February 6, 2026 decision by the US District Court for the District of Oregon granting the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors Inc. (NAW) a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of Oregon’s Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act (RMA) pending a decision on the merits.[1] The Oregon litigation has the potential to affect the scope of EPR programs across the country, potentially extending beyond packaging to other products. In the meantime, product manufacturers and retailers must continue to wrestle with how best to manage EPR compliance and related costs and business impacts.

Time 7 Minute Read

EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) recently announced a major shift in the agency’s approach to environmental enforcement, emphasizing swift, efficient achievement of compliance over punitive or expansive enforcement measures. The “Reinforcing a ‘Compliance First’ Orientation for Compliance Assurance and Civil Enforcement Activities” memo (not publicly available as of this writing) clarifies that EPA’s primary goal is to ensure compliance with federal environmental laws using the most defensible and clear interpretations of statutory or regulatory mandates, thereby reducing ambiguity and regulatory uncertainty to industry’s benefit. The memo has implications for future compliance and enforcement activity as well as ongoing cases.

Time 8 Minute Read

While the Trump Administration has emphasized regulatory reform and prioritized agency efficiency across the federal government, EPA continues to pursue aggressive enforcement of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Actions taken by EPA over the first six months of President Trump’s current term demonstrate sustained FIFRA enforcement, with notably high penalty amounts being assessed, including one case resulting in a $3 million penalty. These latest enforcement trends signal that pesticide manufacturers, distributors, and sellers must remain vigilant in complying with FIFRA requirements.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page