EPA’s “Compliance First” Shift in Enforcement

On December 5, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) internally circulated a memorandum — which has leaked to the public — that reorients civil enforcement activities around a single guiding principle: “Compliance First.” This shift, at least as outlined in the memorandum signed by Acting Assistant Administrator Craig J. Pritzlaff, signals a deliberate move away from enforcement strategies that prioritize punitive measures or expansive interpretations of regulatory authority in favor of efforts which promote achieving timely, efficient, and legally defensible compliance.

The Policy’s Core Commitments

Since the January inauguration, the Trump Administration has stated a continuing commitment toward EPA’s traditional mission of protecting human health and the environment, including emergency response efforts. (For more, see here.) In the Trump Administration’s view, however, recent years have seen EPA stray from traditional tools to achieve these ends. The new policy memo expresses a desire to achieve better cooperation with partners (including states and even industry) and to achieve compliance without distracting from other priorities like rebooting American manufacturing or restoring “dominance” in the energy space. (See “Pillar 2” here.)

The “Compliance First” memorandum centers around the question of “how can compliance be achieved in the most efficient and quickest means possible?” In EPA’s view, past enforcement postures sometimes prolonged negotiations, allowed evidence to go stale, or imposed remedies beyond statutory requirements.

Under the newly announced framework:

• Compliance is the North Star: EPA wants enforcement to resolve violations quickly and bring entities into compliance, not drag out negotiations or impose broad remedies.
• Legal Precision Matters: Findings and injunctive relief must reflect the “best reading” of the law with substantially less tolerance for creative interpretations. (Note, “best readings” of statutory authority square with the recent Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo – for more, see here.)
• Collaboration is In: EPA is placing a greater emphasis on state coordination, open communication, and voluntary compliance tools, suggesting a more cooperative posture.
• Broad Remedies Are Out: The memo rescinds 2021 guidance on expansive injunctive relief and bans supplemental environmental projects (SEPs) until further notice.
• LEAPS is the New Lens: Enforcement decisions will be judged against five factors — Law, Evidence, Analysis, Programmatic impact, and Stakeholder impact. (We break further down “LEAPS” below.)

This philosophy announced in “Compliance First” essentially builds out Administrator Zeldin’s “Powering the Great American Comeback” initiative, which frames environmental protection and economic growth as mutually reinforcing goals.

Six Pillars of the Compliance First Mandate

EPA distills the framework into six operational factors:

1. Compliance Assistance Toolkit. Enforcement will not be the only tool. Expect greater emphasis on proactive outreach, technical assistance, and voluntary programs like self-reporting and audits.
2. State Partner Coordination. Cooperative federalism is back in focus. EPA states it will act on a “clear federal interest,” coordinate closely with authorized states, and avoid duplicative actions, aiming for consistency in compliance determinations and to strengthen capacity.
3. Open Communication. Transparency is key. EPA commits to a “no surprises” approach, maintaining dialogue with Tribes, states, and regulated entities throughout inspections and enforcement to accelerate compliance.
4. Findings of Violation. Gone are the days of expansive interpretations. Findings must be “clear and unambiguous,” tailored, and based on the “best reading” of applicable law, with careful attention to canons, past practice, and live litigation. According to the memo, ambiguities will be elevated for national-level resolution to ensure consistency rather than resolved ad hoc. (Note: This approach has precedent outside of the Trump Administration; as discussed here, the Biden Administration EPA took a similar approach to “environmental justice” enforcement.)
5. Compliance Requirements and Injunctive Relief. Expect to see more quick and concise remedies. The memo advises that when formal enforcement is necessary, remedies must be tailored, be aimed at achieving compliance swiftly, and rest squarely within clear statutory or regulatory authority. The memo rescinds the 2021 guidance promoting broad injunctive tools and SEPs. Until further notice, SEPs are off the table.
6. Reasoned Decision-Making. Enter the LEAPS framework, described as a structured approach to ensure enforcement decisions are rational, transparent, and defensible.

Decoding the New Code Word: LEAPS

The memo touts the “LEAPS framework” as providing a disciplined lens for evaluating enforcement decisions. The “LEAPS” acronym breaks down as follows:

• Law. Anchor every decision in the clearest, most defensible interpretation of statutory and regulatory authority.
• Evidence. Build cases on unequivocal facts and “gold-standard” science; unsupported allegations erode credibility and delay compliance.
• Analysis. Apply rigorous reasoning to connect evidence with legal requirements, where remedies are to be proportionate and tailored.
• Programmatic Impact. Consider ripple effects across EPA programs — permitting, monitoring, and beyond — including whether the proposed enforcement would inadvertently expand regulatory scope.
• Stakeholder Impact. Evaluate how actions affect states, Tribes, and regulated entities and aim to act swiftly to prevent third-party litigation from distorting policy.

Next Steps: Process Consistency and Forthcoming Tools

To reduce ambiguity across air, water, waste, and chemicals programs, EPA intends to work with the US Office of General Counsel to consolidate criteria across all media defining when violations warrant formal enforcement, informal enforcement, or field warnings, improving national consistency and public transparency. Until that guidance is issued, the memo advises case teams to follow current practices informed by the memo’s principles.

EPA also sets a national escalation pathway for legal ambiguity. According to the memo, where a facility raises a credible interpretive concern, or staff identify material ambiguity, issues must be promptly elevated to ensure nationally consistent application of federal law.

Bottom Line and Practical Implications for the Regulated Community

EPA’s “Compliance First” policy could be a structural shift in enforcement philosophy. By embedding LEAPS into decision-making and rescinding prior guidance on broad remedies, the agency is signaling an intent to focus on clear law, solid evidence, and practical solutions. For practitioners, understanding this framework might be essential to navigating enforcement in 2026 and beyond.

For regulated entities, the headline is that EPA now expresses speed and clarity as key decisional criteria. Facilities should anticipate more proactive technical assistance and “find-and-fix” encouragement. In turn, companies that come prepared with rapid corrective action plans aligned to the “best reading” of applicable requirements may see faster resolution paths and narrower injunctive terms.

Compliance strategies should be anchored firmly in text and established practice, with legal positions documented against the canons and precedents EPA highlights. Where ambiguity exists, elevating issues early — supported by technical and legal analysis — may facilitate national-level clarity and avoid local inconsistencies.