In a bid to strengthen safeguards for the country’s underground sources of drinking water, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unveiled a new funding package. Over $12 million in grant funding will go to states and Tribes to help refine underground injection control (UIC) programs, which regulate everything from industrial waste disposal to carbon storage wells.

This funding is part of the agency’s broader “Powering the Great American Comeback” initiative, which is aimed at promoting economic recovery while preserving environmental protections through cooperative federalism.

“States and tribes understand their water resources and underground geology best,” said Jessica Kramer, EPA Senior Advisor. “With $12 million in EPA grant funding, they will be able to solidify and expand permitting and oversight of underground injection to protect sources of drinking water while bolstering projects that support economic growth and job creation.”

What the Funding Supports

Authorized under Section 1443 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, the funding is distributed via State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) and is allocated based on factors such as population, geographic area, and levels of underground injection activity. Recipients are expected to use the grants to:

• Expand regulatory capacity and compliance monitoring

• Oversee Class VI wells—used to sequester carbon dioxide underground

• Improve data submissions and program infrastructure

These resources are meant to support expanded permitting and enforcement in the growing landscapes of industrial and energy projects that rely on underground injection.

The grant announcement builds on recent moves by the EPA to grant state primacy—that is, primary regulatory authority—for UIC programs, especially for Class VI wells:

• February 2025: West Virginia’s primacy for Class VI wells approved.

• May 2025: EPA proposed approval of Arizona’s application for full oversight of underground injection wells.

• June 2025: EPA proposed to approve Texas’s Class VI primacy application.

These shifts mark a push toward localized control, aligning with the administration’s cooperative federalism goals. 

UIC programs are essential for protecting nearly half of the U.S. population that relies on groundwater.

However, some critics have raised red flags regarding these changes:

• A 2014 GAO report noted that while current safeguards are generally protective, they do not account for emerging risks such as induced seismicity or excessive pressure buildup underground—factors that could increase the risk of contamination from injection wells.
  
  
• Environmental groups pushing back on some primacy decisions argue that states may not always maintain stringent enough standards. Notably, a coalition challenged Louisiana’s primacy for Class VI wells, claiming its regulations include potentially problematic liability waivers that could leave communities unprotected after a site is closed.
  
  
• In Texas, for example, landowners and environmentalists worry that increased CO₂ injection could exacerbate earthquakes and old well blowouts, especially in the Permian Basin—a region already facing issues with wastewater disposal and aging oil infrastructure.

The EPA positions this funding as a win-win: it supports economic growth and energy development while strengthening environmental oversight. But the critics’ cautionary notes serve as a reminder that even preventive measures need robust teeth.

Bottom line: The $12 million in grants offers important support for state and tribal programs—especially as carbon capture initiatives and industrial expansion ramp up.

Yet, ensuring that these programs remain vigilant and well-equipped to address both traditional and emerging risks will be critical to maintaining water safety and public trust.