A new federal cleanup proposal for the Butte Priority Soils Operable Unit drew criticism from residents and environmental advocates Tuesday evening at a public hearing held at the Montana Tech Auditorium in Butte. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is seeking community input on a revised remediation plan that lowers allowable lead levels in residential soil and interior dust while expanding the area subject to cleanup — though some residents say the changes do not go far enough.
What the EPA Is Proposing
The revised plan would reduce the lead cleanup threshold in residential soil and interior dust from the current 1,200 parts per million to 456 parts per million. That figure sits above both the Anaconda standard of 400 ppm and a more aggressive 175 ppm limit proposed during the Biden administration, which the EPA subsequently scrapped before issuing this current proposal.
The plan also shortens the window for home and yard evaluation and sampling from 25 years to 15 years, and expands the residential sampling and remediation zone to cover approximately 7,100 additional households. The EPA has set a target blood lead level of 5 micrograms per deciliter for residents in the affected area.
Community Reaction
Reaction at Tuesday’s hearing reflected a community that has spent four decades navigating cleanup efforts stemming from Butte’s Superfund designation. Evan Barrett of Butte Watchdogs for Social and Environmental Justice acknowledged incremental progress while voicing broader dissatisfaction. “Generally, we’re advancing the ball down the field in a game we’ve been playing for 40 years,” Barrett said. “That’s progress. That being said, there’s not much about it that I like.”
Critics pointed to the gap between the proposed 456 ppm standard and the stricter limits seen elsewhere — particularly the 175 ppm figure that had briefly been on the table under the previous administration. That proposal’s reversal has remained a point of contention for residents who believe federal regulators should hold Butte to a tighter standard than what is currently on offer.
The comparison to Anaconda is also drawing attention. The nearby community operates under a 400 ppm lead limit — 56 ppm lower than the new Butte proposal — prompting questions about why Butte’s standard remains higher despite its larger Superfund footprint and longer remediation history.
EPA’s Position
EPA Regional Administrator Cyrus Western defended the proposal as a meaningful step forward after years of limited progress. “The message is, we’re here to make progress,” Western said. “The days are over where we are just spinning our tires in place and not really making any progress.”
The agency framed the expansion of the sampling area — adding 7,100 households — as a significant commitment of resources, even as advocates questioned whether the proposed lead threshold adequately protects children and vulnerable populations. Federal officials indicated they intend to issue formal responses to public input through a record of decision amendment expected later this summer.
What Comes Next
The public comment period remains open through June 30, giving residents, environmental groups, and local officials roughly two additional weeks to submit written feedback. The EPA regional administrator’s office will then compile those comments and incorporate formal responses into the record of decision amendment, which is expected to be released before the end of summer.
The Butte Superfund site has been the subject of cleanup negotiations and legal disputes for decades, with remediation efforts repeatedly complicated by disputes over funding, standards, and timelines. The current proposal represents the Trump EPA’s first major formal action on the Butte residential soil cleanup since taking over from the Biden administration’s approach.
For a community that has lived with contamination concerns for generations, the gap between what advocates believe is necessary and what federal regulators have proposed is shaping up to be the central fight of this latest chapter — one that state and local officials in Montana may weigh in on before the June 30 deadline closes.
