Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 3017

Reauthorizing the EPA’s Brownfields Program to Provide Grants for Cleaning Up and Redeveloping Contaminated Industrial Sites

Argument in favor

This bipartisan bill reauthorizes an important EPA program that provides grants for cleaning up old, contaminated industrial sites known as “brownfields” and redeveloping them into an economic asset for the community.

Jim2423's Opinion
···
11/28/2017
This is in many ways the only way hazardous waste sites will ever get cleaned up. Yes restore their ability to grant funds for cleanup and the ability to go after the culprits who created the sites to begin with. Thank you Congress.
Like (95)
Follow
Share
Elise 's Opinion
···
11/30/2017
I agree that the responsible parties should be liable for the cost of the clean up and be criminally penalized. However, that has not happened yet and likely will not given the inherent limited liability of corporations. Let’s get it cleaned up and change the laws for next time so that we won’t have to foot the bill for future negligence.
Like (43)
Follow
Share
Veronica's Opinion
···
11/30/2017
We need to start focusing on preserving our natural resources and cleaning up the messes made. I agree with the comments about having the responsible corporations contribute financially to the cleanup so as to incentive future business practices to focus on being more eco-friendly.
Like (31)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

While it may be bipartisan, this bill reauthorizing the EPA’s brownfields program doesn’t provide enough funding for the program. Alternatively, brownfield sites should be left as they are and not cleaned up or redeveloped.

jayar's Opinion
···
11/30/2017
Throw the corporate management in jail and forfet their assets until it's cleaned up.
Like (47)
Follow
Share
Stallion's Opinion
···
11/30/2017
So it is up to the tax payer to clean up messes that were vreated by irresponsible companies
Like (12)
Follow
Share
KenBudris's Opinion
···
11/28/2017
This is something that corporate America should be paying for. If they’re going to be paying a lot less in taxes, I don’t think the rest of us can afford $888 million to clean up their old messes.
Like (7)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house Passed November 30th, 2017
    Roll Call Vote 408 Yea / 8 Nay
      house Committees
      Committee on Energy and Commerce
      Health
      Environment and Climate Change
      Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
      Water Resources and Environment
    IntroducedJune 22nd, 2017

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

What is House Bill H.R. 3017?

This bill would reauthorize the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Brownfields Program, which provides grants to clean up and redevelop contaminated industrial sites by providing $250 million annually over the 2018-2022 period. Within the program, multipurpose grants would be created to give communities flexibility when trying to clean up multiple brownfields sites, while the limit for remediation grants would rise from $200,000 and $500,000.

Eligibility for grants would be expanded to include non-profit organizations and entities that owned property before the original enactment of the brownfields law, which would make it easier for small, rural, or disadvantaged communities to participate in the program.

Impact

Entities receiving grants under the brownfields program; communities that benefit from the clean up and redevelopment of brownfields; and the EPA.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 3017

$888.00 Million
The CBO estimates that enacting this bill would cost $888 million over the 2018-2022 period.

More Information

In-DepthSponsoring Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) introduced this bill to reauthorize the EPA’s Brownfields Program, which provides resources for cleaning up and redeveloping contaminated industrial sites:

“Across the Northern Panhandle and the rest of West Virginia we have hundreds of former industrial sites that sit empty. Many of these sites would be attractive for redevelopment but have legacy contamination issues that must be addressed first. The Brownfields Program has been an important tool to turn abandoned eyesores into economic opportunity.”

Original cosponsor Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) added:

“The Brownfields Program benefits communities across the country. In Danville, the largest city in my district, a $400,000 Community Wide Brownfield Assessment Grant recently helped leverage $472,373 in additional funding for a dozen projects. But even with this investment, there is still much more work to be done to create jobs and revitalize local economies. I’m happy to see this bipartisan bill advance today, and I urge the Appropriations Committee to fund the program at the authorized amount.”

This legislation passed the House Energy and Commerce Committee on a voice vote and has the support of six bipartisan cosponsors in the House, evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: John Messina - National Archives / Public Domain)

AKA

Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization Act of 2017

Official Title

To amend the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 to reauthorize and improve the brownfields program, and for other purposes.

    This is in many ways the only way hazardous waste sites will ever get cleaned up. Yes restore their ability to grant funds for cleanup and the ability to go after the culprits who created the sites to begin with. Thank you Congress.
    Like (95)
    Follow
    Share
    Throw the corporate management in jail and forfet their assets until it's cleaned up.
    Like (47)
    Follow
    Share
    I agree that the responsible parties should be liable for the cost of the clean up and be criminally penalized. However, that has not happened yet and likely will not given the inherent limited liability of corporations. Let’s get it cleaned up and change the laws for next time so that we won’t have to foot the bill for future negligence.
    Like (43)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to start focusing on preserving our natural resources and cleaning up the messes made. I agree with the comments about having the responsible corporations contribute financially to the cleanup so as to incentive future business practices to focus on being more eco-friendly.
    Like (31)
    Follow
    Share
    While the corporations who made the mess should be the ones paying for cleanup, we cannot afford to dally. Because they act like children and refuse to clean up their mess, the EPA must act like the parent and get this hazardous waste cleaned up before it kills too much wildlife and harms too many people. Afterwards, we can focus on penalizing the companies.
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    So it is up to the tax payer to clean up messes that were vreated by irresponsible companies
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    The EPA Brownfield program is essential to recovering contaminated land and restoring clean environmental conditions in cities and communities.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    I've worked with brownfield grants at the municipal level in several of Connecticut's bigger cities. EPA grants are a crucial resource that leverage jobs and private investment. If you think going after a bankrupt company that abandoned a site decades ago and expecting them to pay for it is good policy you're insane.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Fine the companies that contaminated the environment, this will make other companies more careful about their environmental footprints. I am not paying for some CEO to line his pockets while carelessly destroying the environment
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    This is something that corporate America should be paying for. If they’re going to be paying a lot less in taxes, I don’t think the rest of us can afford $888 million to clean up their old messes.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    I’m saying yes but I have some reservations- what is the “and other purposes”? That is like “and natural flavors” on the ingredients. It tells the consumer nothing. Don’t add bits of extra to a bill. It should be one item and cleanly worded.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes, of course we need to clean up our messes. Unless we want to end up with a wasteland across the country. Add to it, the ability to receive reimbursement from the Corporations or the CEOs, personally, who created the mess in the first place. Or put them in jail for desecrating our landscape. They need to stop raping and shitting anywhere they want. This is a no brainer.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes the responsible party should pay for it whenever possible. But the companies that cause the mess are often bankrupt before the cleanup happens. So the funds need to come from somewhere to incentivize others to redevelop the site
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    When a corporation refuses to clean up after wrecking our environment the governments responsibility is to do the job and bill the offending corporation.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    My concern is the health impact that these lands would have on future generations. I've grown up around super fund sites and have seen too many people with cancer and other assorted health issues because of the toxins they have had to endure day in and day out.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Many of these sites are left from corporations that are long gone. Companies that operated in the 1920’s-1950’. I think it would be a difficult task to “go after” dead owners of these corporations. Come On, people.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    A clean environment is essential for the health and productivity of the citizenry.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    why should my tax dollars pay for a company's screw up, the states needs to go after these companies and make them pay for ruining their land, and it will aid other states to vet companies before allowing business to proceed in their states.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Planting hemp on brownfield sites would be the most cost effective and environmentally sound way clean up soil contamination.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill is something I would answer differently if Obama was still president and the EPA was still in the hands of people who cared whether the contamination involved was really going to be done away with, but since the EPA now has nothing to do with protecting the environment anymore, but polluting it as much as possible and not caring a jot if people are harmed by contamination, I do not think that this is a good idea. Big Businesses could use it to build factories where people will die working on sites that have not been properly cleaned up, or criminal real estate developers could just build housing projects on top of it without cleaning up the contamination, because they would make money and they wouldn't care if the men women and children living there died of the contamination or not. The fact that two Republican politicians think this is such a good thing makes me suspicious that this is the case here. Let it be done under a Democratic president who believes in saving the planet, not Republicans who do not care if their own children and grandchildren die, so long as THEY MAKE MONEY!
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE