PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 6.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 30, 2025
Brownfields Reauthorization Act of 2025
This bill extends through FY2030 and modifies the Brownfields Program under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The Brownfields Program is administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to provide grants and technical assistance to states, communities, tribes, and other entities to assess, clean up, and reuse contaminated properties.
First, the bill expands eligibility for Brownfields Program resources to tax-exempt organizations defined under section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code, which are organizations that are not organized for profit and do not provide net earnings to private shareholders or individuals (e.g., chambers of commerce).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Additionally, the bill
increases to $1 million the maximum grant amount that the EPA may provide for brownfield remediation per site,
removes the 5% cap that a grant recipient may use for administrative costs,
reduces the cost-sharing requirement for grant recipients from 20% to 10%,
requires the EPA to waive cost-sharing requirements for grant recipients located in small communities or disadvantaged areas,
authorizes the use of grants by a state or Indian tribe for the implementation of a response program,
modifies the criteria used to rank grant applications by requiring the consideration of whether the applicant has a plan to engage a diverse set of local groups and organizations that represent the views of the local community directly affected by the proposed brownfield project, and
requires the EPA to report on and update application ranking criteria and the approval process.
People & committees
Sen. Capito, Shelley Moore [R-WV] · R–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 6.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Capito without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Capito without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Committee consideration held. Business Meeting printed. S. Hrg. 119-267.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Introduced in Senate
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.347 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 S.347 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 S.347 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 S.347 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.