PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 25, 2005
Brownfields Improvement Act of 2005 - Amends the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to require the Secretary of Commerce to coordinate activities relating to the redevelopment of brownfield sites and the promotion of eco-industrial development under such Act with other Federal agencies, States, local governments, consortia of local governments, Indian tribes, nonprofit organizations, and public-private partnerships.
Authorizes the Secretary to make grants for projects to alleviate or prevent conditions of excessive unemployment, underemployment, blight, and infrastructure deterioration associated with brownfield sites through projects involving: (1) the development of public facilities or services; (2) business development; (3) the development of affordable housing; (4) planning; (5) technical assistance; (6) training; and (7) the purchase of environmental insurance with respect to certain of these activities.
Sets forth grant criteria. Authorizes assistance under this Act for activities identified by a community, the economy of which is injured by one or more brownfield sites.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes appropriations for brownfield site redevelopment grants for FY 2006 through 2010.
Limits the Federal share of costs for activities funded by such grants to 75 percent of the total.
Defines "brownfield site" by reference to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) as real property the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant (subject to certain exclusions), and with respect to which an entity has received or is eligible to receive CERCLA funding for site characterization, assessment, or remediation.
People & committees
Rep. Lynch, Stephen F. [D-MA-9] · D–MA
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 Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, 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 Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, 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 Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, 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 currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 15, 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.336 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.336 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.336 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.336 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.