EPA's FY2027 Brownfields Grants Shrink to $64 Million as Infrastructure Money Runs Out — and the 20% Match Comes Back

For four years, the EPA Brownfields program ran on borrowed abundance. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (formally the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act) poured $1.5 billion into a program whose annual competitive grant rounds had previously run well under $100 million. EPA used that money to waive the statutory 20% cost share, lift the $200,000 per-site cap on assessment work, and offer cleanup awards of up to $4 million.

The FY2027 solicitations, posted November 2, 2026, end that era in plain language. EPA's application resources page now states: "In FY 2027, grants will be funded solely by annual appropriations Congress provides to EPA's Brownfields and Land Revitalization Program."

The numbers show what that means.

The cut, by grant type

EPA posted five funding opportunities, all closing January 21, 2027:

Compare that with FY2026. On June 24, 2026, EPA announced that 190 communities were selected for 193 grant awards totaling over $248 million across the Multipurpose, Assessment, and Cleanup competitions, plus $22.5 million in supplemental funding to 31 existing RLF recipients, for more than $270 million in all.

The FY2027 pool is about 26% of FY2026's competitive total. The number of expected awards fell by more than half, from 193 to 93. Because the per-award ceilings also came down, the drop in dollars was steeper than the drop in award count.

The cut is not a political reversal. It is the scheduled end of supplemental money. The infrastructure law's brownfields funding came in five annual tranches, and EPA has now spent the last one. The program is back to its pre-2022 size, with pre-2022 rules.

What disappeared

EPA's FY27 Summary of Grant Guidelines Changes (dated November 4, 2026) lists what went away, item by item:

1. Multipurpose Grants. The summary says it directly: "A solicitation for new Multipurpose Grants will not be issued in FY27." Multipurpose grants allowed one cooperative agreement to fund assessment, cleanup planning, and cleanup across a target area, typically up to $800,000 to $1 million. That made them the most flexible product in the program, and the most popular with mid-sized cities that had a corridor of sites rather than a single parcel. Those applicants now have to choose between an Assessment grant and a Cleanup grant, or apply for both, subject to EPA's multiple-application eligibility chart.

2. The $4 million cleanup tier. In FY2026, Cleanup applications competed in two categories, up to $500,000 and up to $4,000,000, on separate selection lists. FY2027 has one list, capped at $500,000. Single-site applicants may request a waiver up to $650,000, which EPA "intends to approve on an extremely limited basis."

3. The cost-share waiver. RLF and Cleanup applicants must again contribute 20% of the federal funds as cash, labor, materials, or services. A $500,000 Cleanup grant requires a $100,000 match. Projects in U.S. territories are exempt, and hardship waivers exist. EPA says it will consider them "case-by-case" and "intends to approve such requests on an extremely limited basis." Even applicants requesting a waiver must describe how they would meet the match.

4. The per-site cap waiver for assessment. Assessment work is again limited to $200,000 per site per grant. CERCLA allows a waiver up to $350,000 based on contamination level, site size, or ownership status.

5. Coalition headroom. Assessment Coalition awards drop from $1.5 million to $1 million.

What changed in scoring, and why it matters

The most consequential changes are in the review criteria, not the dollar figures.

The "economically impoverished / disproportionately impacted populations" criterion (6.B.2.d) was removed. EPA still asks for community-need data, and the "greater than normal incidence of disease and adverse health conditions" criterion stays. But the wording shifted from "describe how" to "provide quantitative data to demonstrate that populations in the target area(s) suffer from" elevated disease incidence. Geospatial screening tools went from "encouraged" to "may use." Applicants "should" include data, and "are not expected to generate new data."

The practical result is that a need narrative built on demographic and income framing has lost a scored home. A narrative built on documented health outcomes (county asthma rates, cancer registry data, birth-defect surveillance) maps directly onto what reviewers are now told to look for.

Disaster preparedness became its own criterion. Previously folded into "Outcomes and Benefits," it now asks applicants to "provide a brief description of any extreme weather events and/or natural disasters that have occurred and their impact on populations in the target area(s)." Communities with a FEMA declaration history can cite it.

Reviewers are told to grade quality, not checklists. EPA says the criteria "were updated to emphasize the quality and impact of the applicant's approach rather than the inclusion of specific information." Over the last several cycles, many applicants learned to win by mirroring every sub-bullet. That is no longer enough.

New "first-timer" factor. Under 6.C.1 Other Evaluation Factors, EPA will consider "whether the applicant has not received any type of federal or non-federal financial assistance agreements or only had an assistance agreement(s) that closed in 2015 or earlier." For RLF, a parallel factor favors jurisdictions that lack access to an open RLF. With 93 awards instead of 193, other factors are often what separates applications with similar scores.

Past performance has a 2016 horizon. Applicants now discuss only open agreements or those whose period of performance ended in 2016 or later. If your only grants closed in 2015 or earlier, you get a neutral score.

The point weights did not change for Community-wide Assessment (155 points), Coalition (160), States and Tribes (155), or Cleanup (175). For RLF, the maximum fell from 190 to 185, and weight moved toward Task Description, Cost Estimates, and Measuring Success (35%, up from 34%), with Community Need dropping to 19%.

The threshold traps

Brownfields applications usually fail at threshold, before scoring begins, and FY2027 adds several new ways to fail.

Cleanup ownership by the deadline. The applicant must be the sole owner of the site and "must own the site by January 21, 2027." If you hold title in fee simple, you provide the recording date. If you have an unrecorded deed, you attach it and cite the state law establishing conveyance. Quitclaims, nominee agreements, and 99-year irrevocable leases need EPA approval as "functionally equivalent." EPA "strongly recommends" calling your Regional Brownfields Contact before applying. If an acquisition is still in negotiation, it is now a deadline problem.

Community notification dates are hard-coded. For Cleanup applicants, the public meeting must happen no later than January 14, 2027, and the notification ad must run at least seven calendar days before it, which means January 7, 2027 at the latest. The ad must state that the draft application, including the draft Analysis of Brownfield Cleanup Alternatives (ABCA), is available now, where to find it, how to comment, and when and where the meeting is. If an element is missing, or the draft isn't actually posted when the ad runs, the application fails threshold. EPA "will not accept a receipt or order confirmation for purchasing the ad or a signed affidavit" as proof of the run date. Keep a dated copy of the ad or post itself.

The state letter is gone, but the certification isn't. Cleanup applicants no longer need a State or Tribal letter confirming sufficient site characterization. Instead, they must affirm that an Environmental Professional (as defined at 40 CFR 312.10) has certified that characterization is sufficient. Alternatively, they can affirm that it will be sufficient before award. EPA warns that failing to deliver that certification "may result in EPA not making the award." The new rule also asks for a current acknowledgement letter from the state or tribal environmental authority, and "letters regarding applications from prior years will not be accepted."

Drawdown requirements roll forward a year. Current Assessment and Multipurpose grantees must have drawn down 70% by October 1, 2026 to apply for Community-wide Assessment, Coalition, or Cleanup grants. Current States-and-Tribes grantees need 60%. Both dates have passed, so either you qualify or you don't.

Duplicate submissions are settled automatically. If the same applicant exceeds the allowed number or type of applications and doesn't withdraw any, EPA "will accept the first application received in Grants.gov and deem all other applications submitted by that applicant ineligible." Departments of the same city or state under one executive count as one applicant, even with different Unique Entity IDs. A city's redevelopment authority and its public works department cannot each submit a Cleanup application if they report to the same mayor. For tribes, EPA defers to the tribe's own interpretation.

Risk review. EPA checks SAM.gov for suspension and debarment at selection, then runs a risk review under Section 6.D before award.

Who should apply, and for what

First-time applicants with a corridor problem: Community-wide Assessment ($500,000, no match) remains the best entry point. The first-timer factor favors you, and 30 awards is the largest award count of the five competitions. Assessment grants pay for Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments, cleanup planning, and reuse planning. That work produces the documentation you need for a future Cleanup grant.

Small and rural communities without staff capacity: Join an Assessment Coalition as a non-lead member. Each coalition must include at least one non-lead member that has never received a MARC grant, or whose most recent one closed in 2015 or earlier. That makes inexperienced partners an asset to a lead applicant. Check your history in EPA's Brownfields Grant Fact Sheet Tool before you commit.

Owners of a single, characterized site: Cleanup ($500,000, 20% match) is the right product, but only if you will hold title by January 21 and can run the notification process before mid-January. Budget the $100,000 match now. Eligible match includes in-kind staff time and materials, as long as the costs are allowable under the grant.

States, tribes, and Alaska Native corporations: The States and Tribes track offers $1 million and requires at least 10 sites. It rules out also applying for Community-wide Assessment or Coalition grants, including as a coalition member. State universities are not eligible for this track.

Counties or regional authorities without an RLF: EPA did not run an RLF competition in FY2026, so this is the first new RLF round since FY2025. The new factor favoring jurisdictions without RLF access, plus the restriction to entities without an open RLF agreement, makes this one of the less crowded tracks for qualified first-timers.

The calendar

• November 9, 2026, 1 PM ET: Narrative criteria webinar for Community-wide Assessment, Coalition, and States and Tribes.
• November 12, 2026, 2 PM ET: Narrative criteria webinar for RLF and Cleanup.
• Late November to mid-December: Hire or confirm your Environmental Professional, secure the state or tribal acknowledgement letter, draft the ABCA (Cleanup), and confirm coalition partners' MARC history.
• January 7, 2027: Last day to publish the Cleanup community notification ad.
• January 14, 2027: Last day to hold the Cleanup public meeting.
• January 21, 2027: Applications due in Grants.gov. The posting lists no time of day, so submit days early.

The bigger picture

The infrastructure-law years trained a generation of local governments to treat brownfields money as plentiful, the match as optional, and $4 million cleanups as normal. FY2027 resets all three expectations at once. At 93 awards nationally, roughly two per state, Brownfields is once again a selective program.

Two strategies follow. First, stack funding. State brownfield programs, state revolving funds, Community Development Block Grants, and Economic Development Administration (EDA) public works grants can carry the remediation work that EPA no longer covers at $4 million scale. The "Use of Existing Infrastructure" criterion (6.B.1.g/h) now asks applicants to describe the state of existing utilities and roads and the funding they will seek for needed upgrades, which effectively rewards a credible stacking plan. Second, if your community lost an FY2026 application, treat this cycle as a resubmission with a smaller ask, not a fresh start. The review criteria now favor focused, well-executed plans over comprehensive ones.

Applicants still need a Phase II report, title to the site, and a dated newspaper ad in hand by January. For full guidelines, eligibility charts, and the FY27 change summary, see EPA's MARC grant application resources page. Our earlier analysis of the FY2027 Brownfields Job Training competition shows the same contraction pattern in that program.