Whitehouse Condemns DOGE's Involvement in EPA Funding Decisions

Unaccountable, unqualified gatekeepers and layers of red tape are an attack on clean air, clean water, and congressional authority

Washington, D.C.—Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ranking Member of the Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), is demanding answers from Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin about new documents revealing that all agency funding actions greater than $50,000 must now have approval from the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).  Decision-making power in the hands of unqualified, unaccountable gatekeepers threatens the EPA’s ability to protect clean air and clean water and represents the latest iteration of the Trump administration’s illegal actions to obstruct the congressional authorization and appropriations process.  What began as Trump’s blanket freeze of funding for programs that lower families’ energy bills while reducing pollution has evolved into a harmful series of ever-evolving roadblocks that undermine the agency’s ability to deliver for the American public and that violate the United States Constitution.

“According to documents obtained exclusively by the Democratic Staff of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), the EPA has recently issued new guidance to senior staff indicating that ‘all [funding] actions greater than $50,000 now require approval from an EPA DOGE Team member.’ This escalation of the role that DOGE plays in EPA funding decisions threatens to delay routine funding processes and hand complex financial decisions to unvetted individuals with no demonstrable expertise in environmental policy or fiscal management,” wrote Ranking Member Whitehouse.

“[A]gency actions including contracting and grant-making now face unnecessary bureaucratic delays … [and] the involvement of Elon Musk’s unvetted, inexperienced team raises serious concerns about improper external influence on specialized agency decision-making,” continued Ranking Member Whitehouse. “Allowing unskilled, self-proclaimed ‘experts,’ not vetted for conflicts of interest, to have veto power over funding determinations is inappropriate and risks compromising the agency’s mission to protect public health and the environment.”

These new EPA restrictions not only hamstring the agency’s ability to fulfill its mission, but they also insert new layers of red tape in violation of the Constitution. “Requiring a certification that an agency funding decision does not conflict with executive orders is illegal.  It is already established by court order that it is Congress that authorizes and appropriates funds for specific purposes, not the Office of Management and Budget or the President via executive order or DOGE.  In short, rather than reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, the new measures impose administrative burdens that will disrupt Congressionally directed programs, hinder federal agencies’ ability to function effectively, and usurp Congressional spending power. This new directive is just the latest salvo in EPA’s illegal campaign to block appropriated and obligated funding to projects and initiatives with which the Administrator and the President disagree,” emphasized the Ranking Member.

Ranking Member Whitehouse is demanding answers from Administrator Zeldin by March 14, 2025.

The text of the letter is below, and a full version (with footnotes) is available HERE.

Dear Administrator Zeldin:

I write to express deep concern about the role of the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) in reviewing and approving funding decisions at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). According to documents obtained exclusively by the Democratic Staff of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), the EPA has recently issued new guidance to senior staff indicating that “all [funding] actions greater than $50,000 now require approval from an EPA DOGE Team member.”   This escalation of the role that DOGE plays in EPA funding decisions threatens to delay routine funding processes and hand complex financial decisions to unvetted individuals with no demonstrable expertise in environmental policy or fiscal management. Accordingly, I request that you immediately reverse this policy and provide responses to my inquiries below.

On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14158, establishing and implementing the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency.” That order directed you, as an agency head, to establish within EPA a DOGE Team to “implement the President’s DOGE Agenda.” On February 26, 2025, President Trump further explained DOGE’s mission in Executive Order 14222, which provided guidance on DOGE’s role over spending in government contracts, grants, and loans. More specifically, the order clarified DOGE’s authority to scrutinize discretionary spending and terminate or modify existing contracts and grants.

According to the information EPW Democratic Staff obtained, EPA is now operationalizing these executive orders. On March 3, 2025, EPA sent an email instructing all division directors and deputy directors that “any assistance agreement, contract, or interagency agreement transaction $50,000 or greater must receive approval from an EPA DOGE Team member.”  The email further states that program offices are required to “complete and sign the attached EO Compliance Review Form for all funding actions.”  The Compliance Review Form seeks confirmation that the funding action “does not conflict with the Executive Orders.” A separate email concurrently sent to Project Officers and Contract Officer Representatives reiterates that “any assistance agreement, contract, or interagency agreement transaction $50,000 or greater must receive approval from any EPA DOGE Team member” and that “[p]rograms and regions should aim to submit a single tranche of actions for DOGE review each day between 3pm - 6pm EST.”  All three documents obtained by EPW Democratic Staff are enclosed with this letter.

This new directive is troubling for several reasons.

First, agency actions including contracting and grant-making now face unnecessary bureaucratic delays. Previously, routine approvals covered essential expenditures such as small-scale grants for air and water quality monitoring, laboratory equipment purchases, hazardous waste disposal at federal sites, and funding for municipal recycling programs. Second, the involvement of Elon Musk’s unvetted, inexperienced team raises serious concerns about improper external influence on specialized agency decision-making.  EPA assistance agreements, contracts, grants, and interagency agreements can often be valued at rates significantly greater than $50,000 and may involve multiple parties, rely upon complex transactional arrangements, and require specialized knowledge of environmental science, policy, and regulations. Allowing unskilled, self- proclaimed “experts,” not vetted for conflicts of interest, to have veto power over funding determinations is inappropriate and risks compromising the agency’s mission to protect public health and the environment.

Third, requiring a certification that an agency funding decision does not conflict with executive orders is illegal. It is already established by court order that it is Congress that authorizes and appropriates funds for specific purposes, not the Office of Management and Budget or the President via executive order or DOGE.

In short, rather than reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, the new measures impose administrative burdens that will disrupt Congressionally directed programs, hinder federal agencies’ ability to function effectively, and usurp Congressional spending power. This new directive is just the latest salvo in EPA’s illegal campaign to block appropriated and obligated funding to projects and initiatives with which the Administrator and the President disagree.

The consequences of this latest initiative extend beyond procedural slowdowns. As has been observed in disaster-stricken areas such as East Palestine, Ohio, communities rely on the agency’s ability to quickly approve and distribute funds to restore access to clean water and rebuild damaged infrastructure. Delays caused by additional approval requirements could prolong outages, exposing communities to unsafe conditions and heightened public health risks. 

Given these concerns, please respond to the follow questions and requests for documents by no later than March 14, 2025:

1. How many DOGE staff currently work at EPA?
2. Do any DOGE staff at EPA have any professional experience in accounting, forensic auditing, contracting, grant-making, environmental policy, or environmental science? Please provide current CVs for all DOGE staff working at EPA.
3. How many funding actions worth at least $50,000 did the Agency make per week in 2024? Please provide the weekly average.
4. Please provide a full list of criteria DOGE staff will use in reviewing agency funding decisions.
5. Please provide your asserted statutory or Constitutional basis for requiring that agency funding decisions be consistent with executive orders.
6. Please list all funding decisions that have been subjected to this new process, including the dates when approval was first sought, the dates wen approval was granted or denied, and the basis for any denials.
7. Given the involvement of DOGE, which is led by the world’s richest man, what safeguards have you implemented or will you implement to prevent undue private influence over EPA’s decisions?
8. Have you instituted a recusal process for DOGE staff from any agency funding decision that may implicate the financial interests of Elon Musk? If so, please provide details as to how it will work and the conditions that will trigger it.
9. Provide all documents and communications between and among you, EPA staff, volunteers or employees of DOGE, Elon Musk, Russell Vought, the Office of Management and Budget, and the White House concerning the $50,000 funding directive issued at EPA on March 3, 2025.

I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.