The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has entered a new phase of restructuring under Administrator Lee Zeldin, with sweeping changes aimed at streamlining operations, integrating science more directly into regulatory processes, and achieving what the agency calls “a more efficient and exceptional EPA.”

The announcement, detailed in Zeldin’s recent Newsweek op-ed, outlines a broad overhaul of personnel structures across key offices, including air, water, and chemical safety. The reorganization emphasizes reduced spending, improved state partnerships, and a stronger link between scientific research and policy implementation.

According to Zeldin, the initiative builds on efforts to “Power the Great American Comeback,” a slogan tied closely to the Trump administration’s regulatory and economic agenda. He pointed to previously implemented cost-cutting measures—including cancelled grants and contracts—as already saving taxpayers $22 billion, with a projected additional $300 million in annual savings by fiscal year 2026.

One of the most significant shifts involves breaking down silos between EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) and program offices. Scientific staff will now be embedded directly into operational departments, with the goal of ensuring research aligns more directly with the agency’s legal mandates. A new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions will coordinate these efforts at the top level.

Other highlights of the restructuring include:

• A new Office of State Air Partnerships within the Office of Air and Radiation to improve collaboration with state and tribal agencies on permitting issues.
  
  
• A realigned Office of Clean Air Programs designed to enhance transparency and better organize core air quality functions.
  
  
• In the Office of Water, new efforts to connect scientific input with regulatory action on pressing topics like water reuse, emergency response, and cybersecurity.
  
  
• The addition of over 130 technical experts in the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention to address long-standing backlogs in chemical and pesticide reviews and to advance the agency’s PFAS testing strategy.
  
  
• Zeldin emphasized that the changes would help restore EPA staffing to levels seen during the Reagan administration, while still meeting the agency’s statutory obligations under laws like the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Toxic Substances Control Act.

Critics Raise Concerns Over Impact on Science, Climate, and Environmental Justice

While the reorganization promises efficiency and cost-savings, it has sparked strong criticism from environmentalists, scientists, and former agency officials.

A central concern is the planned dissolution of the EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD), with reports suggesting up to 75% of its staff could be laid off. Critics argue that sidelining this core research arm could severely undermine the agency’s ability to base decisions on independent science—particularly in areas like air and water quality, chemical safety, and climate change.

The reorganization also calls for dissolving the Office of Atmospheric Protection and the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, which are responsible for regulating air pollution and climate initiatives. Observers warn this could sharply curtail the EPA’s climate-related efforts and its ability to enforce clean air standards.

Additionally, nearly 800 environmental justice grants—totaling over $1.5 billion—have reportedly been canceled as part of broader budget revisions. These grants were intended to fund projects in communities disproportionately affected by pollution and climate impacts. Environmental justice advocates say this move undercuts efforts to address longstanding disparities in public health and environmental protection.

These changes come amid a broader deregulatory push by the Trump administration, including significant EPA budget cuts and a shift in focus away from climate change mitigation. Critics contend that the agency’s new direction prioritizes economic interests over environmental safeguards and public health.

Despite the backlash, EPA officials maintain that the restructuring will improve accountability, reduce bureaucratic delay, and better align the agency’s operations with its statutory mission.