PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 22, 2010
Groundwork USA Trust Act of 2010 - Establishes the Groundwork USA Trust Program.
Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the Groundwork USA national office, to award grants to eligible nonprofit organizations to: (1) provide training, research, and technical assistance to individuals and organizations to facilitate the inventory of brownfield sites, site assessments, remediation of brownfield sites, community involvement, or site preparation; (2) reclaim vacant and derelict lands for conservation, recreation, and economic development; (3) clean up and care for neglected areas; (4) return brownfields to economically productive use; (5) integrate environmental education, food security, health and fitness, resource management, and job training; (6) encourage businesses, local governments, nonprofits, and communities to work together for sustainable environmental care and enhancement; (7) support businesses, local governments, nonprofits, and communities in efforts to improve their local environment; (8) acquire real property and buildings to rehabilitate and improve upon for the local community and perform maintenance on such property and buildings; and (9) develop programs that encourage regional and national partnering with other environmental organizations.
Limits the maximum amount for a grant award under the program to $400,000 for any fiscal year.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires annual reporting by grant recipients.
People & committees
Rep. Tsongas, Niki [D-MA-5] · 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 National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to House Financial Services
Referred to House Natural Resources
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and 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 House Energy and Commerce
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.5134 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.5134 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.5134 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.5134 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.