For the last several years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfields Program has operated in an expanded funding environment. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), also known as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, added $1.5 billion to the program over five years and changed how many communities approached cleanup, assessment and redevelopment planning. Larger grant requests became more common. Project pipelines grew. Consultants and local governments built strategies around a level of federal support that was never designed to be permanent.
That phase is now giving way to a leaner and more competitive period. The myth is that the end of BIL expansion means brownfields opportunity is disappearing. The reality is more optimistic: opportunity remains, but the margin for weak strategy is narrowing.
The EPA continues to solicit applications, select grantees and fund cleanup and redevelopment work. In April 2025, EPA announced 207 communities selected for 214 fiscal year 2025 Brownfields Assessment, Revolving Loan Fund and Cleanup awards totaling more than $224 million, plus $42 million in supplemental funding for 34 existing Revolving Loan Fund recipients. Onterris helped communities across the United States secure nearly $17 million of those EPA Brownfield Grants to transform underutilized properties into vibrant public spaces. The program is still active. What has changed is the competitive environment around it.
EPA has now provided an early planning framework for fiscal year 2027. The agency anticipates issuing solicitations in fall 2026 for Assessment, Revolving Loan Fund and Cleanup grants, with applications due approximately 60 calendar days after the solicitations are published. EPA’s current planning table anticipates $64 million across those competitions: $15 million for Community-wide Assessment Grants, $13 million for Assessment Coalitions, $12 million for Community-wide Assessment Grants for States and Tribes, $10 million for Revolving Loan Fund Grants and $14 million for Cleanup Grants. EPA also notes that a Multipurpose Grant solicitation will not be issued in fiscal year 2027, and that all amounts are subject to change.
The reset is financial, not philosophical
Brownfields funding has always been about more than environmental cleanup. Done well, it turns underused land into housing, commercial space, public amenities, clean energy sites, multi-use community hubs, health facilities and tax-generating property. EPA reports that, through April 1, 2026, Brownfields and Land Revitalization work has helped assess 42,999 properties, clean up 3,063 properties, make 13,025 properties ready for anticipated use, leverage $45 billion and support 228,917 jobs.
Accomplishments
Source: EPA Brownfields Accomplishments
That impact is why the program continues to attract bipartisan support. It is also why demand is likely to remain high even as supplemental BIL funding winds down. The competitive issue is not whether brownfields matter. The issue is how communities demonstrate that their project is ready, fundable and positioned to deliver measurable public value.
The reset is no longer theoretical. EPA states that fiscal year 2027 Brownfields grants will be funded solely by annual appropriations provided to the Brownfields and Land Revitalization Program. That means applicants should prepare for a cycle shaped by statutory limits, defined grant caps and stronger competition for a smaller pool of funds than communities saw during the BIL-supported period.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that Senate Bill 347, the Brownfields Reauthorization Act of 2025, would authorize $200 million annually from 2025 through 2030 for brownfields cleanup grants and $375 million over the same period for state response programs, if appropriated. While the legislation signals continued congressional support for the program, it does not guarantee future appropriations at BIL-era levels. Until Congress acts, applicants should plan for a tighter funding environment rather than assume BIL-level capacity will continue. Reauthorization is moving, but not settled.
Reauthorization remains the central policy question. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee unanimously passed the Brownfields Reauthorization Act of 2025 on February 5, 2025, and the bill was placed on the Senate legislative calendar the same day. In March 2026, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment held a hearing on multiple brownfields legislative proposals, including draft bills intended to reauthorize, modernize, streamline or expand elements of the program.
That movement matters. The proposals under discussion could increase award limits, adjust cost-share requirements, expand eligibility, support rural communities and create new financing tools. Those are positive signals for the long-term health of the program.
They are not yet operating rules.
Until reauthorization is enacted, applicants should assume the current program structures still apply. EPA’s fiscal year 2027 planning guidance reinforces that point by returning applicants to annual appropriation statutory requirements. Individual grant awards must remain within CERCLA Section 104(k) statutory limits, site assessments may not exceed $200,000 per site and Cleanup and Revolving Loan Fund recipients must provide a 20% cost share or match.
The practical takeaway is clear: do not build a strategy around a law that has not passed. Build a strategy that works under current rules, then adapt quickly if Congress expands the toolkit.
Funding pauses have made execution risk more visible
The post-BIL reset is not only about total dollars. It is also about confidence in timing.
In early 2025, the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments reported that the EPA suspended access to its fiscal year 2022 Revolving Loan Fund award, totaling $8,661,808, in response to executive orders issued by President Trump. NVCOG said the suspension affected 13 projects and created uncertainty for housing, private redevelopment and regional revitalization efforts. Connecticut lawmakers also reported that the council could not access an $8.66 million balance through the federal portal and linked the issue to broader federal grant-freeze actions and the implementation of an executive order.
This example does not represent the full Brownfields Program, but it shows why funding timing and project readiness matter. It should be read as a warning about execution risk. The EPA has continued to announce awards and issue funding opportunities. In a constrained environment, communities need grant strategies that account for timing, documentation, alternative funding sources and the ability to keep projects moving if administrative reviews slow access to funds.
Fiscal year 2027 will favor disciplined applications
Fiscal year 2027 starts on October 1, 2026, and EPA anticipates issuing Brownfields solicitations in fall 2026. Because applications will be due approximately 60 calendar days after those solicitations are published, communities should not wait for the final guidelines before building their site pipeline, confirming eligibility, documenting need and assembling partners.
That does not make success less achievable. It makes preparation more important.
Strong applications will need to do five things well.
First, choose the right grant lane.
EPA anticipates fiscal year 2027 solicitations for Community-wide Assessment, Assessment Coalition, Community-wide Assessment Grants for States and Tribes, Revolving Loan Fund and Cleanup grants. A Multipurpose Grant solicitation will not be issued in fiscal year 2027. Communities that may have considered a combined assessment, cleanup and planning strategy through a Multipurpose Grant should now evaluate whether their project is better suited for one of the available grant types.
Second, define the target area with evidence.
A broad statement of need will not be enough. Applicants should connect target areas to specific community conditions, such as vacancy, disinvestment, housing demand, public health concerns, infrastructure reuse or economic development plans.
Third, show a realistic site pipeline.
Competitive proposals should identify priority sites, explain why those sites are eligible and show how assessment or cleanup will unlock reuse. A long list of possible sites is less persuasive than a focused pipeline with clear next steps.
Fourth, connect cleanup to implementation.
EPA funding is often catalytic. Applicants should explain what happens after assessment, cleanup or Revolving Loan Fund activity. That includes likely redevelopment uses, partner roles, permitting path, market feasibility and how additional public or private funding could be secured.
Fifth, calibrate the request.
Bigger is not automatically better. In a funding-constrained cycle, an ambitious but executable request may compete better than a larger request that depends on uncertain timing, unresolved site control or weak reuse assumptions.
Applicants also need to plan around match and site-specific limits. EPA states that site assessments may not exceed $200,000 per site, and that Cleanup and Revolving Loan Fund recipients must provide a 20% cost share or match. For communities seeking Cleanup or RLF funding, match strategy should be part of the application plan from the start, not a detail resolved after selection.
Revolving Loan Fund strategy needs special attention
Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) grants deserve separate focus because they often play a powerful role in closing cleanup financing gaps. The EPA describes RLF grants as a way to capitalize a local fund that can provide loans and subgrants for cleanup, with repaid loans returned to the fund for future reuse. EPA also notes that RLF recipients need strong real estate finance, loan servicing, credit analysis and long-term program management capacity.
EPA has now signaled that RLF grants are expected to be part of the fiscal year 2027 competition. EPA’s current planning table anticipates RLF grants with a maximum project period of five years, a maximum award of $1 million, 10 estimated awards and $10 million total for the grant type. Like Cleanup grants, RLF awards will be subject to a 20% cost share or match.
That makes readiness especially important. Communities pursuing RLF funding should be prepared to show not only a cleanup need, but also the administrative, financial and project-management capacity to operate a fund, move loans or subgrants, manage compliance and keep cleanup projects advancing after award.
Communities with active RLF programs should document performance, keep viable cleanup projects ready and prepare for close review of spending, compliance and outcomes. Communities without an RLF should begin evaluating whether pursuing a future RLF competition may be appropriate for their long-term development goals. In the interim, they should assess whether partnership with an existing recipient or coalition structure offers a better route.
No multipurpose competition means applicants need to choose the right lane
One of the clearest fiscal year 2027 signals is what EPA does not plan to offer. EPA states that a Multipurpose Grant solicitation will not be issued in fiscal year 2027.
That matters because Multipurpose Grants have allowed communities to combine eligible assessment, cleanup and planning activities under a single award structure. Without that option in the anticipated fiscal year 2027 competition, applicants should be more deliberate about matching their project needs to the available grant category.
For some communities, the right answer may be a Community-wide Assessment Grant that builds a stronger site pipeline. For others, it may be a Cleanup Grant focused on a priority property with a defined reuse path. For regional or multi-jurisdictional efforts, an Assessment Coalition may provide the right structure. For communities with a recurring need to close cleanup financing gaps, an RLF strategy may be more appropriate.
The point is not simply to apply. The point is to apply in the lane where the project is most eligible, most executable and most competitive.
From scarcity to stronger project selection
The post-BIL period should not be viewed merely as a time of lost funding. It is also a chance to sharpen the quality of brownfields investment.
When dollars are abundant, some projects move forward because they are eligible. When dollars are constrained, projects move forward because they are eligible, differentiated and ready. That shift can strengthen outcomes if communities use it well.
For applicants, the strongest posture is practical optimism. The program continues to deliver measurable environmental, economic and community benefits. The EPA reports that each Brownfields Grant dollar awarded has leveraged an average of $19.47, and every $100,000 awarded has leveraged an average of 10 jobs through fiscal year 2025. Those outcomes give communities a strong platform. The next step is to make each application precise enough to compete.
A practical path forward
Communities preparing for fiscal year 2027 should start with a simple question: which brownfield sites can we move from uncertainty to action within the grant period?
The answer should guide the application, not the other way around. Applicants should confirm ownership or access, document community need, prioritize sites with realistic reuse potential, align the scope with EPA evaluation criteria and build a funding plan that can survive delay. For Cleanup and RLF applicants, that plan should include a credible match strategy. For assessment applicants, it should account for the $200,000 per-site assessment limit and the need to show how assessment activity will lead to reuse, cleanup or investment.
Applicants should also monitor EPA’s final fiscal year 2027 guidelines and any policy changes EPA publishes before the solicitations are issued. But they should not wait for the fall 2026 application window to begin. With applications expected to be due approximately 60 calendar days after solicitations are published, the communities that start early will have a meaningful advantage.
Brownfields redevelopment has always rewarded persistence. The next phase will reward focus.
The communities best positioned to succeed will not be the ones that chase the largest possible request. They will be the ones that choose the right grant lane, define the right scope, assemble the right partners and show EPA how federal dollars will turn environmental challenges into durable community assets.