PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 25 · Reported to Senate · Feb 5, 2025
Strategies To Eliminate Waste and Accelerate Recycling Development Act of 2025 or the STEWARD Act of 2025
This bill establishes requirements to expand recycling and composting efforts, including by creating (1) a pilot grant program, and (2) data collection and reporting requirements.
The bill directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish a pilot program that awards grants for improving recycling accessibility in communities, particularly in underserved communities. States, local governments, Indian tribes, and public-private partnerships may apply for those grants.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill also directs the EPA to collect data related to composting and recycling infrastructure from states, local governments, and Indian tribes. Within three years and every four years thereafter, the EPA must prepare an inventory of certain recycling facilities in the United States. The EPA must also develop a metric for determining the proportion of recyclable materials in commercial and municipal waste streams that are being diverted from a circular market.
The bill allows the EPA to develop (1) a standardized estimated rate of recyclable materials that have been brought to recycling or composting facilities, and (2) an estimated national recycling rate. The EPA may use the rates and information collected to provide states, local government, and Indian tribes data and technical assistance, such as assistance to reduce their overall waste and to increase their recycling and composting rates.
The bill establishes a variety of reporting requirements for the EPA and directs the Government Accountability Office to publish a report on certain federal agency activities related to recycling.
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.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S8395-8398; text: CR S8395-8398)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 7.
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.
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.351 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.351 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.351 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.351 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.