PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation, Research, and Biotechnology.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Crow, Jason [D-CO-6] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation, Research, and Biotechnology.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1459 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1459 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1459 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1459 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-21 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposal would provide $60 billion for land restoration, wildfire-risk reduction, and related work. It would fund grants to governments and nonprofit organizations and an Agriculture Department partnership program for projects on federal and nonfederal land. Grant funding could also support fire-resistant construction and equitable access to outdoor spaces. These are proposed programs and spending provisions; the supplied record does not establish enactment.
There is appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $60,000,000,000 for the Fund, to remain available until expended
(4) Eligible entity The term eligible entity means— (A) a State agency; (B) a unit of local government; (C) a Tribal government; (D) a regional government or quasi-governmental organization; (E) a special district; or (F) a nonprofit organization.
(2) to support, on non-Federal land— (A) restoration and resilience projects; (B) efforts to improve wildfire resistive construction and reduce risks within the home ignition zone; and (C) projects to expand equitable outdoor access.
(b) Establishment There is established a Restoration and Resilience Partnership Program, under which the Secretary shall carry out restoration and resilience projects in partnership areas designated under subsection (c)(1).
(9) Secretary The term Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture.
2025-02-21: Introduced in House
The bill is titled the Protect the West Act of 2025. Its definition of a restoration and resilience project covers federal land, nonfederal land, or both, and requires a design based on the best available science to measurably improve forests, rangelands and native grasslands, watershed function, or wildlife habitat.
This Act may be cited as the Protect the West Act of 2025.
(8) Restoration and resilience project The term restoration and resilience project means a project carried out on Federal land, non-Federal land, or both, that is designed in accordance with the best available science to conduct restoration that measurably improves— (A) forest conditions; (B) rangeland and native grassland health; (C) watershed function; or (D) wildlife habitat.
Eligible grant recipients would include state agencies, local and Tribal governments, regional governments or quasi-governmental organizations, special districts, and nonprofit organizations.
(4) Eligible entity The term eligible entity means— (A) a State agency; (B) a unit of local government; (C) a Tribal government; (D) a regional government or quasi-governmental organization; (E) a special district; or (F) a nonprofit organization.
to provide grants or pay-for-performance contracts from the Fund to eligible entities for the purposes described in subsection (a).
The bill would establish an Outdoor and Watershed Restoration Fund in the Treasury. The Agriculture Secretary would use it through a transparent process for the grant and partnership programs, coordinating with the advisory council on grants.
(a) Establishment There is established in the Treasury an Outdoor and Watershed Restoration Fund.
(c) Use Amounts in the Fund shall be used by the Secretary through a transparent process— (1) in coordination with the Council, to carry out the grant program; and (2) to carry out the Restoration and Resilience Partnership Program under section 6.
The bill would directly appropriate $60 billion, rather than merely authorize future funding: $20 billion for the grant program and $40 billion for the partnership program. At least $20 billion of the partnership funding would go to projects on federal land. The money would remain available until spent.
(a) In general There is appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $60,000,000,000 for the Fund, to remain available until expended, of which— (1) $20,000,000,000 shall be for the grant program; and (2) $40,000,000,000 shall be for the Restoration and Resilience Partnership Program under section 6, of which not less than $20,000,000,000 shall be for the conduct of restoration and resilience projects on Federal land under that section.
Partnership-program funding could pay staffing, salaries, and other workforce costs related to administering that program.
(b) Workforce needs and expenses Funds made available under subsection (a)(2) shall be available for staffing, salary, and other workforce needs and expenses relating to the administration of the Restoration and Resilience Partnership Program under section 6.
Activities would have to complement existing federal conservation, restoration, and resilience programs without duplicating or replacing them. Projects would remain subject to applicable law and available authorities, and the new funding would have to add to, rather than replace, other funding available to eligible recipients.
(d) Savings provisions (1) Complementary programs Activities carried out under this Act shall complement, not duplicate or replace, existing Federal conservation, restoration, and resilience programs. (2) Applicable law A restoration and resilience project on Federal land or non-Federal land developed or implemented using amounts provided under this Act shall be carried out in accordance with applicable law and available authorities.
(e) Supplement, not supplant Amounts provided under this Act shall supplement, not supplant, any Federal, State, or other funds otherwise made available to an eligible entity for activities described in this Act.
For the existing programs listed as covered authorities, required matching or shared funding could come from another covered program or this bill's appropriation. The Secretary would also have to modify, expand, or simplify those programs' eligibility and verification criteria to support activities using the Fund. The supplied text does not reproduce their existing requirements, so the precise changes to each program cannot be determined here.
(1) matching funds or cost-sharing requirements of a covered authority may be satisfied through the contribution of funding from— (A) 1 or more other covered authorities; or (B) funds appropriated under section 8; and (2) the Secretary shall modify, expand, or streamline eligibility and verification criteria for covered authorities to maximize flexibility, speed, and use of Federal funds in the most effective manner to achieve outcomes of activities using amounts in the Fund.
The Secretary could pay for successfully implemented restoration and resilience project outcomes at a negotiated price per unit of results, using a contract, grant agreement, or fixed-amount award. The Secretary would determine which projects qualify.
(g) Pay-for-Performance contract authority In using amounts in the Fund, the Secretary may use a contract, grant agreement, or fixed amount award to purchase successfully implemented restoration and resilience project outcomes from qualifying projects, as determined by the Secretary, at a negotiated per-unit price.
The Treasury Secretary or a designee could establish an account for nonfederal contributions. Contributions deposited there would be available for the two programs without another appropriation and until spent.
(h) Acceptance and use of contributions (1) In general The Secretary of the Treasury, or a designee, may establish in the Treasury an account to accept contributions of non-Federal funds for the Fund. (2) Deposit and use of contributions Contributions of non-Federal funds received for the Fund shall be— (A) deposited into the account established under paragraph (1); and (B) available to the Secretary, without further appropriation and until expended, to carry out activities described in subsection (c).
Within one year after enactment and annually thereafter, the Agriculture Department's Inspector General would have to report to specified congressional committees on the Secretary's use of the Fund, including any abuse or misuse, for both programs.
(i) Oversight Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Inspector General of the Department of Agriculture shall prepare and submit to the Committees on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and Appropriations of the Senate and the Committees on Agriculture, Natural Resources, and Appropriations of the House of Representatives a report describing the use, and any abuse or misuse, as applicable, of the Fund by the Secretary with respect to— (1) the grant program; and (2) the Restoration and Resilience Partnership Program established by section 6.
An advisory council would recommend grant funding decisions, landscape priorities, and ways to evaluate projects. It would include the Agriculture Secretary, 12 appointed members representing industries, experts, conservation organizations, and state, local, and Tribal governments, plus up to three other federal-agency representatives if the Secretary considers them necessary.
(a) Establishment There is established a Restoration Fund Advisory Council to provide recommendations to the Secretary with respect to— (1) the disbursement of amounts from the Fund for the grant program; (2) priority-setting for landscapes; and (3) evaluation and monitoring for restoration and resilience project success.
(b) Membership The Council shall be composed of— (1) the Secretary; (2) 12 members, to be appointed by the Secretary, of whom— (A) 3 shall be representatives from resource-dependent industries, including the agriculture, oil and gas, outdoor recreation, or forest products industries; (B) 3 shall be national experts from each of the fields of natural resource restoration, economic development, and community and climate resilience; (C) 3 shall be representatives of conservation, wildlife, or watershed organizations; (D) 1 shall be a representative of State government; (E) 1 shall be a representative of a unit of local government; and (F) 1 shall be a representative of a Tribal government; and (3) as determined to be necessary by the Secretary, not more than 3 representatives from other Federal agencies.
Within one year after enactment and annually thereafter, the Secretary, consulting the council, would report to specified congressional committees on funded projects. Required subjects include environmental and climate benefits, restoration results, jobs, industry capacity, and progress toward resilience goals, along with recommendations for coordination and workforce improvements. These are reporting requirements, not proof that the listed benefits would occur.
(c) Report Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary, in consultation with the Council, shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Agriculture, the Committee on Natural Resources, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives a report describing— (1) the status of any restoration and resilience projects that received amounts from the Fund, including— (A) environmental and climate benefits; (B) restoration achievements; (C) attainment of restoration and habitat improvement objectives; (D) jobs created and retained; (E) the growth in outdoor industries that provide capacity to carry out restoration and resilience projects; and (F) progress towards State-, Tribal-, and community-level resilience goals;
(2) recommendations to improve coordination, align Federal, State, or Tribal resources or existing authorities, and expand workforce capacity in outdoor industries that provide capacity to carry out restoration and resilience projects through legislative and administrative changes.
The grant program would fund planning, coordination, and monitoring on nonfederal land, and collaboration and monitoring support on federal land. Its implementation funding would support restoration, fire-resistant construction and reduced ignition risks around homes, and equitable outdoor access on nonfederal land.
(a) Purposes The purposes of this section are— (1) to increase the capacity for— (A) planning, coordinating, and monitoring restoration and resilience projects on non-Federal land; and (B) providing support for collaboration and monitoring on Federal land; and (2) to support, on non-Federal land— (A) restoration and resilience projects; (B) efforts to improve wildfire resistive construction and reduce risks within the home ignition zone; and (C) projects to expand equitable outdoor access.
(d) Use of funds (1) In general The Secretary shall use amounts in the Fund to provide capacity grants or pay-for-performance contracts under paragraph (2) and implementation grants or pay-for-performance contracts under paragraph (3).
The Secretary would administer grants with council guidance. As far as practicable, both would seek input from, coordinate with, and complement or support existing state and regional restoration efforts.
(b) Establishment There is established a restoration and resilience grant program, to be administered by the Secretary, with the guidance of the Council
(c) Regional coordination The Secretary and the Council shall, to the maximum extent practicable— (1) seek input from and coordinate with State or regional efforts, initiatives, and partnerships to restore ecological integrity on Federal land and non-Federal land; and (2) complement or support existing State or regional efforts, initiatives, and partnerships to restore ecological integrity on Federal land and non-Federal land.
Applicants for capacity funding would have to explain their interest, how the money would complement existing federal funding, and how the work would follow the best available restoration science. They would also have to estimate the number and duration of restoration-related jobs created or sustained.
(ii) Contents An application submitted under clause (i) shall contain— (I) a clear and concise expression of interest; (II) an explanation for how funds would complement existing Federal funds; (III) a description of how the proposed planning, coordinating, or monitoring of restoration and resilience projects would be carried out in accordance with the best available ecological restoration science; and (IV) an estimate of the number and duration of jobs that provide capacity to carry out restoration and resilience projects that would be created, or sustained, with the funds.
As far as practicable, the Secretary would provide grant-writing training and mentoring to communities and organizations with lower capacity, less collaboration experience, or underserved status, to reduce barriers to participation.
(C) Condition To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary shall provide grant-writing training and mentoring opportunities for lower-capacity, less collaborative experience, or underserved communities and organizations to help lower the barriers to participation in, and create more inclusion in and opportunities under, the grant program.
Implementation awards would require an application meeting requirements set by the Secretary in consultation with the council. The Secretary could waive matching requirements under covered programs for applicants representing lower-capacity, less collaboration-experienced, or underserved communities and organizations, and rural communities. This would be discretionary relief from a funding requirement, not an automatic award. The underlying matching requirements are not reproduced in the supplied source.
(B) Application A grant or pay-for-performance contract under this paragraph may be made only to an eligible entity that submits to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing or accompanied by such information as the Secretary, in consultation with the Council, may require.
(C) Waiver The Secretary may waive matching requirements under covered authorities for applicants for grants or pay-for-performance contracts under this paragraph representing lower-capacity, less collaborative experience, or underserved communities and organizations and rural communities.
Grant priorities would include projects supporting jobs, local or regional labor, and workforce training; collaboration among diverse interests using the best available science; shared federal and nonfederal priorities; state, local, and Tribal plans; and analysis of watershed data to estimate and measure results.
(e) Priority In carrying out the grant program, the Secretary, in consultation with the Council, shall give priority to projects that would— (1) create or sustain jobs, employ local or regional labor, or expand the outdoor workforce to provide capacity to carry out restoration and resilience projects or equitable outdoor access through training and education programs; (2) be developed through a collaborative process, relying on the best available social ecological restoration science, with multiple stakeholders representing diverse interests; (3) address shared priorities for Federal and non-Federal partners; (4) advance State, local, and Tribal plans relating to forests, water, wildlife, or equitable outdoor access; (5) utilize watershed data analytics to quantify, prioritize, and measure expected outcomes from proposed restoration activities;
Grant priorities would also include projects carried out by or in lower-capacity, less collaboration-experienced, or underserved communities and organizations. Another priority would be projects expected to improve long-term regional economic security through restoration, outdoor access, and their indirect benefits, particularly in regions transitioning from fossil-fuel extraction. Priority would not guarantee an award, and the text does not establish that these economic results would occur.
(e) Priority In carrying out the grant program, the Secretary, in consultation with the Council, shall give priority to projects that would—
(6) be carried out by or in lower-capacity, less collaborative experience, or underserved communities and organizations; or (7) improve long-term economic security in the geographic region through restoration and resilience projects, equitable outdoor access, and the indirect benefits of those projects and access, particularly in geographic regions transitioning from fossil-fuel extraction.
The partnership program's stated goals extend across the United States. They include restoring forests, grasslands, and rangelands with state, local, and Tribal governments; supporting outdoor jobs; addressing invasive species that contribute to rangeland fires; and reducing uncharacteristic wildfires in the highest-risk areas. These are declared goals, not established effects.
(a) Purposes The purposes of this section are— (1) to restore and improve the ecological integrity of forest, grassland, and rangeland ecosystems across the United States in partnership with State, local, and Tribal governments; (2) to create or sustain outdoor jobs by reducing the backlog of restoration and resilience projects on Federal land and non-Federal land; (3) to improve the resilience and carrying capacity of rangelands in the United States by preventing or mitigating invasive species, such as cheatgrass, that contribute to rangeland fire; and (4) to reduce uncharacteristic wildfires in the highest risk areas of the United States by carrying out, in accordance with applicable law, restoration and resilience projects.
Within 60 days after enactment, the Secretary would have to designate appropriate federal and nonfederal partnership areas. Governors and authorized Tribal representatives could request designations in writing for land in their state or Indian Country, respectively, and could include maps or recommendations.
(c) Designation of partnership areas (1) In general Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall designate, for the purposes of carrying out restoration and resilience projects under subsection (e), any areas of Federal land and non-Federal land that the Secretary determines to be appropriate.
(2) Submission of partnership areas by States and Tribes (A) In general The Governor of a State or an authorized representative of an Indian Tribe may submit to the Secretary, in writing, a request to designate certain Federal land or non-Federal land in the State or Indian Country, respectively, for restoration and resilience projects under subsection (e). (B) Inclusions A written request submitted under subparagraph (A) may include 1 or more maps or recommendations.
A partnership area would have to meet at least one of three conditions: high or very high wildfire potential under specified mapping or data sources; high-priority wildlife habitat urgently needing restoration, as determined through the specified consultation process; or, for federal land, location in the legally defined wildland-urban interface. The bill references another law for that last land category's definition.
(d) Requirements To be eligible for designation under subsection (c), an area shall— (1) have a high or very high wildfire potential as determined by— (A) the map of the Forest Service entitled Wildfire Hazard Potential Version 2020; (B) any other mapping resource or data source approved by the Secretary that depicts the risk of wildfires; or (C) fire-risk assessment resources or mapping tools maintained by the applicable State; (2) have high-priority wildlife habitat urgently in need of restoration, as determined by the Secretary, in consultation with eligible entities and the applicable Governor or representative of an Indian Tribe; or (3) in the case of Federal land, be in the wildland-urban interface.
(10) Wildland-urban interface The term wildland-urban interface has the meaning given the term in section 101 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6511).
The Secretary would carry out projects in designated partnership areas. Priorities would include restoring characteristic low-intensity fire where fires naturally occur frequently, reducing hazardous vegetation through small-tree work, thinning and strategic fuel breaks, and maximizing retention of old and large trees as appropriate for the forest type.
(e) Restoration and resilience projects (1) In general Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), the Secretary shall carry out restoration and resilience projects on land designated under subsection (c).
(2) Priority The Secretary shall give priority to restoration and resilience projects that would— (A) focus on the reintroduction of characteristic, low-intensity fire in frequent fire regime ecosystems; (B) reduce hazardous fuels by focusing on small-diameter trees, thinning, and strategic fuel breaks; (C) maximize the retention of old and large trees, as appropriate for the forest type;
Other partnership priorities would include measurable improvements in at-risk wildlife habitat and water quality or quantity in waterways flowing through and out of priority areas, plans for measuring success, and community and homeowner involvement in wildfire-risk reduction. Projects emphasizing advance risk reduction and community adaptation to fire in the wildland-urban interface would also receive priority.
(2) Priority The Secretary shall give priority to restoration and resilience projects that would—
(D) measurably improve habitat conditions for at-risk wildlife; (E) measurably improve water quality or water quantity outcomes in waterways that flow through and out of priority areas; (F) establish plans for measuring project success and environmental outcomes; (G) promote community and homeowner involvement in planning and implementing actions to mitigate the risk posed by wildfire in the wildland-urban interface; (H) emphasize proactive wildfire risk mitigation actions in the wildland-urban interface; and (I) increase fire adaption in communities located within the wildland-urban interface.
For partnership projects, the Secretary would coordinate with the Interior Secretary on federal land where applicable, and with eligible entities and other relevant stakeholders on nonfederal land. Projects would have to comply with applicable law, and federal-land projects would also have to follow the management objectives of applicable land or resource plans.
(3) Coordination The Secretary shall carry out restoration and resilience projects under this subsection— (A) on Federal land, in coordination with the Secretary of the Interior, as applicable; and (B) on non-Federal land, in coordination with eligible entities and other relevant stakeholders, as determined by the Secretary.
(4) Requirements (A) In general A restoration and resilience project shall be carried out in accordance with— (i) in the case of a restoration and resilience project carried out on Federal land, the management objectives of an applicable land or resource management plan; and (ii) applicable law.
Eligible entities carrying out grant-program restoration projects and the Secretary carrying out partnership projects could use existing legal authorities, including the programs listed as covered authorities. Those include good neighbor authority, watershed and forestry programs, and conservation programs under title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985.
(f) Authorities Eligible entities may use existing authorities when carrying out a restoration and resilience project, including a covered authority.
(B) Inclusions The Secretary may use existing authorities when carrying out a restoration and resilience project on land designated under subsection (c), including any covered authority.
(A) the good neighbor authority established by section 8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a);
(E) the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.);
(G) the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.);
(L) a conservation program under title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.), including the Regional Conservation Partnership program under subtitle I of that title (16 U.S.C. 3871 et seq.).
Partnership projects could not take place in wilderness areas, designated wilderness study areas, specified roadless areas, or federal areas where Congress or a presidential proclamation restricts or prohibits vegetation removal. They also could not construct permanent roads or trails or remove old-growth stands as defined in the referenced law.
(C) Exclusions A restoration and resilience project may not be carried out— (i) in a wilderness area or designated wilderness study area; (ii) to construct a permanent road or trail; (iii) on any Federal land on which, by an Act of Congress or Presidential proclamation, the removal of vegetation is restricted or prohibited; (iv) in an inventoried roadless area or comparable roadless area defined by a State-specific rule; or (v) to remove old growth stands (as defined in section 102(e)(1) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6512(e)(1))).
Within 60 days after enactment, the Secretary would have to report to Congress on forestry funding under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the law commonly called the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The report would explain landscape prioritization, performance measures, and allocations to states, forests, and Indian Tribes.
7. Oversight Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that, with respect to funding made available by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117–58; 135 Stat. 429) or Public Law 117–169 (commonly known as the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022) for purposes of forestry— (1) explains the methodology for priority landscapes set by the Secretary; (2) describes the metrics the Secretary is using for measuring performance and outcomes; and (3) describes the allocation of funds to States, forests, and Indian Tribes.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated December 5, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the Agriculture and Natural Resources committees on February 21, 2025. It also records referral to the Subcommittee on Conservation, Research, and Biotechnology on March 20, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-12-05T21:57:36Z.
2025-02-21: Introduced in House
2025-02-21: Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-03-20: Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation, Research, and Biotechnology.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-21. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or separate policy rider is identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to this version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials or establish attachment history.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places meeting the earmark definition is identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. Program-level allocations alone do not establish earmarks. This conclusion is limited to this version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials; formal earmark status cannot be established from the supplied bundle.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The findings identify special matching relief and grant-selection preferences related to the main grant policy. Classification does not judge their justification or establish actual awards.
Implementation-grant or performance-contract applicants representing lower-capacity, less collaboration-experienced, or underserved communities and organizations, and rural communities, could receive a waiver of matching requirements under covered authorities. This provides potential relief from a required funding contribution for specified applicants, subject to the Secretary's discretion. It does not guarantee an award, and the underlying matching requirements are not reproduced in the supplied source.
(3) Implementation grants (A) In general Implementation grants or pay-for-performance contracts shall be made available to eligible entities for the purpose described in subsection (a)(2).
(C) Waiver The Secretary may waive matching requirements under covered authorities for applicants for grants or pay-for-performance contracts under this paragraph representing lower-capacity, less collaborative experience, or underserved communities and organizations and rural communities.
(B) Application A grant or pay-for-performance contract under this paragraph may be made only to an eligible entity that submits to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing or accompanied by such information as the Secretary, in consultation with the Council, may require.
Section 5(e)(6) would require grant-program priority for projects carried out by or in lower-capacity, less collaboration-experienced, or underserved communities and organizations. This is an express selection preference within the grant program, distinct from ordinary eligibility, participation assistance, and the discretionary matching waiver. Priority does not guarantee an award.
(e) Priority In carrying out the grant program, the Secretary, in consultation with the Council, shall give priority to projects that would—
(6) be carried out by or in lower-capacity, less collaborative experience, or underserved communities and organizations;
Section 5(e)(7) would give grant-program priority to projects that would improve long-term regional economic security through restoration and resilience projects, equitable outdoor access, and their indirect benefits, particularly in regions transitioning from fossil-fuel extraction. The particular emphasis on those regions is a geographic selection preference tied to the program's economic-security objective. Location in such a region alone does not satisfy the stated economic-security condition, and priority does not guarantee an award.
(e) Priority In carrying out the grant program, the Secretary, in consultation with the Council, shall give priority to projects that would—
(7) improve long-term economic security in the geographic region through restoration and resilience projects, equitable outdoor access, and the indirect benefits of those projects and access, particularly in geographic regions transitioning from fossil-fuel extraction.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Dec 5, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI