David Uhlmann’s Recent Bipartisan Senate Confirmation as EPA’s Enforcement Chief Signals EPA’s Ducks are NOW Lined up
What You Need to Know
Key takeaway #1
After more than 750 days since his presidential nomination, the Senate confirmed David Uhlmann last Thursday.
Key takeaway #2
EPA now has all its steps lined up to pursue aggressive prosecution in high priority areas, including PFAS concerns.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 07.25.23
More than 750 days ago, President Biden nominated David M. Uhlmann to serve as the head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance – basically, to serve as EPA’s top cop. But the nomination stalled with the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee deadlocking last year, until finally, on July 20, 2023, the U.S. Senate confirmed his nomination in a 53-46 bipartisan vote. Now, Uhlmann will head the EPA’s federal criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement of federal environmental laws, focusing on his publicly announced goal of prosecuting those entities believed to be the primary cause of pollution hazards, while also “ensuring that companies who act with ethics and integrity are not at a competitive disadvantage with those who flout the law” – a statement he made during his September 2021 congressional testimony.[1]
As highlighted in our earlier Client Alert, “EPA is Lining Up Its Ducks for Aggressive PFAS Enforcement” on May 31, 2023, Uhlmann was a federal prosecutor for ten years, and then served another seven years, under both Democratic and Republican administrations, as Chief of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Environmental Crimes Section. There, he earned a reputation for aggressive, yet fair enforcement of environmental laws, while also taking actions to strengthen relationships among federal environmental agencies for more coordinated enforcement efforts.
Key Takeaway?
So, what does his confirmation mean?
EPA has already started taking certain actions to address high priority contamination concerns, such as PFAS contamination, setting the stage for aggressive enforcement against parties involved on all levels of PFAS contamination as quickly as possible. EPA has thus far:
- Established its roadmap - “PFAS Strategic Roadmap: EPA’s Commitments to Action 2021-2024”;[2]
- Obtained the funding to follow its roadmap; and
- Started pursuing enforcement action in other ways, while waiting for legislative action.
Now, with Uhlmann’s confirmation and his enforcement team in place, EPA’s ducks are all lined up for prosecution, and we do not expect that Mr. Uhlmann and his team will wait very long, certainly not 750 days, to act. Companies should keep a finger on the pulse of this potentially fast-moving enforcement official Congress has just confirmed.
Crowell, with its team of experienced energy and environmental regulatory, investigation, and enforcement attorneys, will continue to monitor the stage, remain engaged with EPA, and provide updates on the Administration’s PFAS measures as they develop during this prime time. With this in-depth knowledge and range of corporate and government experience, our attorneys are equipped to provide effective representation and counseling at every step of the compliance and enforcement process—including to prevent adverse action before EPA sets its sights on your company.
For more details on the steps EPA has taken thus far regarding addressing PFAS contamination issues, see https://www.crowell.com/en/insights/client-alerts/epa-is-lining-up-its-ducks-for-aggressive-pfas-enforcement.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
