[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 195 (Thursday, November 30, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H9538-H9547]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 BROWNFIELDS ENHANCEMENT, ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT, AND REAUTHORIZATION 
                              ACT OF 2017

  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 631, I call up 
the bill (H.R. 3017) to amend the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

[[Page H9539]]

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 to reauthorize and improve the 
brownfields program, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate 
consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Holding). Pursuant to House Resolution 
631, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text 
of Rules Committee Print 115-40 is adopted, and the bill, as amended, 
is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 3017

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembed,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Brownfields Enhancement, 
     Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. REDEVELOPMENT CERTAINTY FOR GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES.

       Section 101(20)(D) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9601(20)(D)) is amended by striking ``ownership or control'' 
     and all that follows through ``by virtue'' and inserting 
     ``ownership or control through seizure or otherwise in 
     connection with law enforcement activity, or through 
     bankruptcy, tax delinquency, abandonment, or other 
     circumstances in which the government acquires title by 
     virtue''.

     SEC. 3. PETROLEUM BROWNFIELD ENHANCEMENT.

       Section 101(39)(D)(ii)(II) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601(39)(D)(ii)(II)) is amended by amending 
     item (bb) to read as follows:
       ``(bb) is a site for which there is no viable responsible 
     party and that is determined by the Administrator or the 
     State, as appropriate, to be a site that will be assessed, 
     investigated, or cleaned up by a person that is not 
     potentially liable for cleaning up the site under this Act or 
     any other law pertaining to the cleanup of petroleum 
     products; and''.

     SEC. 4. CLARIFICATION OF LEASEHOLDER INTEREST.

       Section 101(40) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9601(40)) is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``(or a tenant of a person) that acquires ownership of'' and 
     inserting ``who acquires ownership of, or a leasehold 
     interest in,'';
       (2) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``or the leasehold 
     interest in the facility'' before the period at the end;
       (3) in subparagraph (B)--
       (A) in clause (ii), by inserting ``with respect to a person 
     who acquires ownership of a facility. The Administrator shall 
     establish standards and practices with respect to a person 
     who acquires a leasehold interest in a facility'' before the 
     period at the end; and
       (B) in clause (iii), by inserting ``, or acquisition of a 
     leasehold interest,'' after ``time of purchase'';
       (4) in subparagraph (H)(i)(II), by inserting ``, by the 
     instruments by which the leasehold interest in the facility 
     is acquired after January 11, 2002,'' after ``financed''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(I) Leaseholders.--In the case of a person holding a 
     leasehold interest in a facility--
       ``(i) the leasehold interest in the facility--

       ``(I) is for a term of not less than 5 years; and
       ``(II) grants the person control of, and access to, the 
     facility; and

       ``(ii) the person is responsible for the management of all 
     hazardous substances at the facility.''.

     SEC. 5. EXPANDED ELIGIBILITY FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.

       (a) Nonprofit Organizations.--Section 104(k)(1) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(k)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (G), by striking ``or'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in subparagraph (H), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(I) an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation under 
     section 501(a) of that Code;
       ``(J) a limited liability corporation in which all managing 
     members are organizations described in subparagraph (I) or 
     limited liability corporations whose sole members are 
     organizations described in subparagraph (I);
       ``(K) a limited partnership in which all general partners 
     are organizations described in subparagraph (I) or limited 
     liability corporations whose sole members are organizations 
     described in subparagraph (I); or
       ``(L) a qualified community development entity (as defined 
     in section 45D(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986).''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 104(k) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(k)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)(ii)--
       (i) by striking ``or nonprofit organizations''; and
       (ii) by striking ``entity or organization'' and inserting 
     ``eligible entity''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B)(ii)--
       (i) by striking ``or other nonprofit organization''; and
       (ii) by striking ``or nonprofit organization''; and
       (2) in paragraph (6)(A), by striking ``or nonprofit 
     organizations''.

     SEC. 6. TREATMENT OF PUBLICLY OWNED BROWNFIELD SITES.

       Section 104(k) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Exemption for certain publicly owned brownfield 
     sites.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an 
     eligible entity described in any of subparagraphs (A) through 
     (H) of paragraph (1) may receive a grant under this paragraph 
     for property acquired by that eligible entity prior to 
     January 11, 2002, even if such eligible entity does not 
     qualify as a bona fide prospective purchaser, so long as the 
     eligible entity has not caused or contributed to a release or 
     threatened release of a hazardous substance at the 
     property.'';
       (2) in paragraph (3), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) Exemption for certain publicly owned brownfield 
     sites.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an 
     eligible entity described in any of subparagraphs (A) through 
     (H) of paragraph (1) may receive a grant or loan under this 
     paragraph for property acquired by that eligible entity prior 
     to January 11, 2002, even if such eligible entity does not 
     qualify as a bona fide prospective purchaser, so long as the 
     eligible entity has not caused or contributed to a release or 
     threatened release of a hazardous substance at the 
     property.''; and
       (3) in paragraph (4)(B)(iii)--
       (A) by striking ``up to 25 percent of the''; and
       (B) by inserting ``described in any of subparagraphs (A) 
     through (H) of paragraph (1)'' after ``eligible entities''.

     SEC. 7. REMEDIATION GRANT ENHANCEMENT.

       Section 104(k)(3)(A)(ii) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9604(k)(3)(A)(ii)) is amended by striking ``$200,000 for each 
     site to be remediated'' and inserting ``$500,000 for each 
     site to be remediated, which limit may be waived by the 
     Administrator, but not to exceed a total of $750,000 for each 
     site, based on the anticipated level of contamination, size, 
     or ownership status of the site''.

     SEC. 8. MULTIPURPOSE BROWNFIELDS GRANTS.

       Section 104(k) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(k)) 
     is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (12) as 
     paragraphs (5) through (13), respectively;
       (2) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking ``Subject to 
     paragraphs (4) and (5)'' and inserting ``Subject to 
     paragraphs (5) and (6)'';
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
       ``(4) Multipurpose brownfields grants.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (D) and 
     paragraphs (5) and (6), the Administrator shall establish a 
     program to provide multipurpose grants to an eligible entity 
     based on the criteria under subparagraph (C) and the 
     considerations under paragraph (3)(C), to carry out 
     inventory, characterization, assessment, planning, or 
     remediation activities at 1 or more brownfield sites in an 
     area proposed by the eligible entity.
       ``(B) Grant amounts.--
       ``(i) Individual grant amounts.--Each grant awarded under 
     this paragraph shall not exceed $1,000,000.
       ``(ii) Cumulative grant amounts.--The total amount of 
     grants awarded for each fiscal year under this paragraph may 
     not exceed 15 percent of the amounts made available for the 
     fiscal year to carry out this subsection.
       ``(C) Criteria.--In awarding a grant under this paragraph, 
     the Administrator shall consider the extent to which the 
     eligible entity is able--
       ``(i) to provide an overall plan for revitalization of the 
     1 or more brownfield sites in the proposed area in which the 
     multipurpose grant will be used;
       ``(ii) to demonstrate a capacity to conduct the range of 
     activities that will be funded by the multipurpose grant; and
       ``(iii) to demonstrate that a multipurpose grant will meet 
     the needs of the 1 or more brownfield sites in the proposed 
     area.
       ``(D) Condition.--As a condition of receiving a grant under 
     this paragraph, each eligible entity shall expend the full 
     amount of the grant not later than the date that is 5 years 
     after the date on which the grant is awarded to the eligible 
     entity, unless the Administrator provides an extension.
       ``(E) Ownership.--An eligible entity that receives a grant 
     under this paragraph may not expend any of the grant funds on 
     remediation of a brownfield site until such time as the 
     eligible entity owns the brownfield site.''; and
       (4) by striking ``(2) or (3)'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``(2), (3), or (4)''.

     SEC. 9. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR GRANT RECIPIENTS.

       Paragraph (5) of section 104(k) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(k)) (as redesignated by section 8 of 
     this Act) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B)--
       (A) in clause (i)--
       (i) by striking subclause (III); and
       (ii) by redesignating subclauses (IV) and (V) as subclauses 
     (III) and (IV), respectively;
       (B) by striking clause (ii);
       (C) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (ii); and
       (D) in clause (ii) (as redesignated by subparagraph (C) of 
     this paragraph), by striking ``Notwithstanding clause 
     (i)(IV)'' and inserting ``Notwithstanding clause (i)(III)''; 
     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) Administrative costs.--
       ``(i) In general.--An eligible entity may use up to 5 
     percent of the amounts made available

[[Page H9540]]

     under a grant or loan under this subsection for 
     administrative costs.
       ``(ii) Restriction.--For purposes of clause (i), the term 
     `administrative costs' does not include--

       ``(I) investigation and identification of the extent of 
     contamination of a brownfield site;
       ``(II) design and performance of a response action; or
       ``(III) monitoring of a natural resource.''.

     SEC. 10. RENEWABLE ENERGY ON BROWNFIELD SITES.

       Paragraph (6) of section 104(k) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(k)) (as redesignated by section 8 of 
     this Act) is amended by adding at the end of subparagraph (C) 
     the following:
       ``(xi) The extent to which a grant would facilitate the 
     production of renewable energy on the site.''.

     SEC. 11. SMALL COMMUNITY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 128(a)(1)(B) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9628(a)(1)(B)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (ii)--
       (A) in subclause (I), by striking ``; or'' and inserting a 
     semicolon;
       (B) in subclause (II), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:

       ``(III) assist small communities, Indian tribes, rural 
     areas, or disadvantaged areas in carrying out activities 
     described in section 104(k)(7)(A) with respect to brownfield 
     sites.''; and

       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) Small communities, indian tribes, rural areas, and 
     disadvantaged areas.--

       ``(I) In general.--To make grants to States or Indian 
     tribes under clause (ii)(III), the Administrator may use not 
     more than $1,500,000 of the amounts made available to carry 
     out section 104(k)(7) in each fiscal year.
       ``(II) Limitation.--Each grant made under subclause (I) may 
     be not more than $20,000.

       ``(iv) Definitions.--In this subparagraph:

       ``(I) Disadvantaged area.--The term `disadvantaged area' 
     means a community with an annual median household income that 
     is less than 2/3 of the statewide annual median household 
     income, as determined by the President based on the latest 
     available decennial census.
       ``(II) Small community.--The term `small community' means a 
     community with a population of not more than 10,000 
     individuals, as determined by the President based on the 
     latest available decennial census.''.

       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 104(g)(1) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(g)(1)) is amended by 
     inserting ``or section 128(a)(1)(B)(ii)(III)'' after ``under 
     this section''.

     SEC. 12. BROWNFIELDS FUNDING.

       Paragraph (13) of section 104(k) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(k)) (as redesignated by section 8 of 
     this Act) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(13) Authorization of appropriations.--There is 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
     $200,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2018 through 2022.''.

     SEC. 13. STATE RESPONSE PROGRAM FUNDING.

       Section 128(a)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9628(a)(3)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this subsection $50,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 2018 through 2022.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
  The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) and the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
insert extraneous material on H.R. 3017.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3017, the Brownfields 
Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization Act of 2017. 
This legislation has broad bipartisan support, and I would like to 
thank Chairman Walden and Ranking Members Pallone and Tonko.
  I would also like to specifically thank a few of my colleagues who 
have exhibited leadership and commitment on this issue, Congressman 
David McKinley, my fellow Energy and Commerce Committee member, who 
introduced this important bill, and my colleagues on the Transportation 
and Infrastructure Committee, Congressman John Katko and Congresswoman 
Elizabeth Esty who guided a similar bill through their committee.
  We have been working closely with our colleagues on the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee over these past few months, 
and the bill that we will vote on today reflects compromise on both 
sides.
  The bill takes a very important step in reauthorizing the 
Environmental Protection Agency's brownfields program for the first 
time since the law was enacted, and so I would like to also thank 
Chairman Shuster for his leadership and support as we move forward.
  The bill we are voting on today makes several important changes to 
the brownfields law that will result in more contaminated sites being 
cleaned up and returned to productive use, such as the creation of 
multipurpose grants, which will allow communities to use grant funds 
for both assessment and remediation, as well as allow communities to 
clean up more than one site in a designated area.
  The bill also provides liability relief to States and municipalities 
who voluntarily acquire brownfields property through their authority as 
a sovereign, which will allow local units of government to address 
contamination on property they acquire through tax delinquency, 
bankruptcy, and/or abandonment.
  The bill expands grant eligibility for nonprofit organizations and 
for publicly owned brownfields sites that acquired the property prior 
to January 11, 2002, which will put more parties into the mix of 
persons eligible for grant funding, which will result in more sites 
being assessed and cleaned up.
  The legislation increases the limit for remediation grants from 
$200,000 to $500,000. As we learned from witnesses at our hearings, 
this will result in more brownfields sites being cleaned up because 
many of the sites that remain to be addressed are more complicated and, 
therefore, more expensive.
  The bill provides for a limited amount of grant funds to be used for 
administrative costs, which will allow small and rural communities to 
be able to receive and utilize grant funds, and it carves out grant 
money to assist Indian Tribes in small, rural, and disadvantaged 
communities as they work to assess and clean up contaminated 
properties.
  The EPA brownfields program is critical to States and local 
communities as they address contaminated industrial and commercial 
properties and return them to productive use. Cleaning up these sites 
is great for the economy because brownfields grants can be directly 
leveraged into jobs, additional redevelopment funds, and increased 
residential and commercial property values.
  In fact, the brownfields program, on average, leverages over $16 in 
private investment for every Federal dollar spent and leverages 8\1/2\ 
jobs for every $100,000 of brownfields funds expended on assessment and 
cleanup.
  The brownfields program is a proven results-driven program that has 
changed the way contaminated property is perceived, addressed, and 
managed. A visible, national example of the brownfields program at work 
was the Houston Astros and the Los Angeles Dodgers facing off in game 
three of the World Series at Minute Maid Park in Houston, Texas. Minute 
Maid Park sits on a former brownfields site that the city of Houston 
redeveloped and obviously returned to a very productive reuse, 
especially for the Astros.
  The EPA brownfields program is uniquely positioned to protect the 
environment and spur the economy. You can tell, from the broad 
bipartisan support that H.R. 3017 enjoys, the support for the EPA 
brownfields program is unqualified. The program has strong support from 
local and State governments, private developers, and all sectors of the 
economy.
  Because brownfields funding is so important to States and local 
communities across the country, I want to encourage my colleagues on 
the appropriations committee to fully fund this important and 
successful program.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support the bill, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.


[[Page H9541]]


         House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and 
           Infrastructure,
                                 Washington, DC, November 9, 2017.
     Hon. Greg Walden,
     Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
     Washington, DC.
       I write concerning H.R. 3017, the Brownfields Enhancement, 
     Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization Act of 2017. This 
     legislation includes matters that fall within the Rule X 
     jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure.
       I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this 
     legislation before the House of Representatives in an 
     expeditious manner, and accordingly, the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure will forego action on the 
     bill. However, this is conditional on our mutual 
     understanding that foregoing consideration of the bill does 
     not prejudice the Committee with respect to the appointment 
     of conferees or to any future jurisdictional claim over the 
     subject matters contained in the bill or similar legislation 
     that fall within the Committee's Rule X jurisdiction. 
     Further, this is conditional on our understanding that 
     mutually agreed upon changes to the legislation will be 
     incorporated into the bill prior to floor consideration. 
     Lastly, should a conference on the bill be necessary, I 
     request your support for the appointment of conferees from 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure during any 
     House-Senate conference convened on this or related 
     legislation.
       I would ask that a copy of this letter and your response 
     acknowledging our jurisdictional interest as well as the 
     mutually agreed upon changes to be incorporated into the bill 
     be included in the Congressional Record during consideration 
     of the measure on the House floor, to memorialize our 
     understanding.
       I look forward to working with the Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce as the bill moves through the legislative process.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Bill Shuster,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                             Committee on Energy and Commerce,

                                 Washington, DC, November 4, 2017.
     Hon. Bill Shuster,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Shuster: Thank you for your letter concerning 
     H.R. 3017, Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, 
     and Reauthorization Act of 2017, on which the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure received an additional 
     referral.
       I appreciate your committee's willingness to forego action 
     on H.R. 3017 so that this legislation may be brought before 
     the House of Representatives in an expeditious manner. I 
     agree that foregoing consideration of the bill does not 
     prejudice your committee with respect to the appointment of 
     conferees or to any future jurisdictional claim over the 
     subject matters contained in the bill or similar legislation 
     that fall within your committee's Rule X jurisdiction. 
     Further, I agree that our mutually agreed upon changes to the 
     legislation will be incorporated into the bill prior to floor 
     consideration. Lastly, should a conference on the bill be 
     necessary, I will support your request for the appropriate 
     appointment of conferees from the Committee on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure during any House-Senate conference 
     convened on this or related legislation.
       I will place a copy of your letter and this response into 
     the Congressional Record during consideration of the measure 
     on the House floor.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Greg Walden,
                                                         Chairman.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, EPA's brownfields program has changed the way 
contaminated property is perceived, addressed, and managed. I was proud 
to work with the late Republican Congressman Paul Gillmor in creating 
the brownfields program back in 2002, and I am proud to be here once 
again today as we bring up a bipartisan reauthorization of this law.
  I want to thank our Environment Subcommittee, Chairman Shimkus, 
Ranking Member Tonko, our full committee chairman, Mr. Walden, for all 
their work in getting us to this point today, and, also, my colleagues 
on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
  By almost any metric, the brownfields program has been a remarkable 
success. Since the program's inception, more than 27,000 contaminated 
sites have been assessed or remediated, allowing communities to create 
new developments.
  Removing public health hazards by cleaning up contaminated sites is 
incredibly important for the surrounding communities. With financial 
help from the Federal Government, communities can clean up contaminated 
sites and prepare them for development for parks, commerce, housing, or 
a number of other uses that can benefit a local community.
  The EPA has found that cleaning up underutilized or abandoned 
brownfields properties reduces health risks, decreases pollution, and 
reduces storm water runoff. But this is not just a program that 
provides environmental benefits. It is a job creator that primes the 
pump for local investment and development. All told, the brownfields 
program has leveraged over $45 billion in investments surrounding these 
sites and almost 130,000 jobs, which is a stunning return on the 
Federal Government's modest investment in the program.
  Simply put, it provides tremendous value to the Federal Government 
and a boost to the economy in local communities. The brownfields 
program has been an incredibly important tool for protecting public 
health and spurring economic growth in New Jersey and throughout the 
country.
  The original authorization for the program expired in 2006, and while 
Congress has continued to appropriate resources for the program, 
funding has declined. Last year, there was a question as to whether the 
President would request any funding for this important program.
  So it is important that we reauthorize the brownfields program. I 
stress the need for continued funding. H.R. 3017 is a bipartisan bill 
that reauthorizes the program until 2022, at $200 million annually, and 
reinstates a $50 million annual authorization for grants to assist 
States and Native American Tribes. And it makes important reforms to 
improve the flexibility of the brownfields program: authorizing 
multipurpose grants; raising the limits for grants per site; and 
removing some funding caps in current law.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill also allows EPA to reserve as much as $1.5 
million in brownfields funding each year to assist small communities, 
Tribes, and rural or disadvantaged areas. Grants could be used for 
training, research, and technical assistance. Additionally, H.R. 3017 
would require the EPA to consider the potential for renewable energy 
production when ranking applications for brownfields grants to 
incentivize green energy projects.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is a compromise. I would have liked to include 
more funding for this important program, but I believe this bill will 
improve the program and bolster the Federal Government in cleaning up 
these sites, and I support the bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the 
same.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Walden), the chairman of the full committee.
  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3017, the 
Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization 
Act of 2017, sponsored by our fellow Energy and Commerce Committee 
member, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley). We thank him 
for his leadership on this.
  I especially want to thank John Shimkus, the chairman of the 
Environment Subcommittee, for his leadership in getting this done, 
along with Mr. Pallone and Mr. Tonko, who played key roles, along with 
other members of the committee to bring this legislation to the floor 
and bring it here with unanimous support from the Energy and Commerce 
Committee.
  What are brownfields? Well, they are vacant, underused, and often 
contaminated properties that are a blight on local communities across 
our Nation. The EPA's brownfields program is a successful, results-
oriented program, and it provides grants to assess and clean up these 
polluted areas.
  Since the brownfields program's inception, more than 27,000 
contaminated sites have been remediated, allowing communities across 
the country to return them to productive use. Cleaning up brownfields 
sites increases local tax bases, facilitates job growth and wage 
increases, promotes the development of new infrastructure, improves and 
protects the environment--all really good public policy goals.
  Over 129,000 jobs have been leveraged because of the brownfields 
program, and almost 70,000 acres have been made ready for reuse. The 
brownfields program has leveraged over $24 billion, a

[[Page H9542]]

significant return on the Federal investment in the program. I read 
somewhere it was a 16-to-1 rate of return based on Federal investment 
compared to what we get out of the program.

                              {time}  1430

  A 2017 study concluded that cleaning up brownfield properties led to 
a residential property value increase of up to 15 percent within a mile 
of these brownfield sites. Another study found an estimated $29 million 
to $97 million in additional tax revenues for local governments in a 
single year after the cleanup, which is two to seven times more than 
the $12.4 million the EPA contributed to the cleanup of those 
brownfields. So, property values go up, local tax revenues go up, 
communities are improved, and we create jobs with this very important 
program.
  In my home State of Oregon, we have had a very active and effective 
brownfields program, and we have seen some great success in my own 
district. The Old Mill District in Bend--which is pictured here; this 
is the site of an old lumber mill--was one of those sites. It is easy 
to see--as the debris was here and the mill was crumbling and we lost 
all of those jobs--it was transformed into this incredible place with 
great recreation. With the reopening of the Deschutes River, we have 
movie theaters and restaurants and offices and residential housing all 
in this complex now, and it is a showplace. It is a gem of Deschutes 
County.
  Bend isn't alone. In The Dalles, where I was born, Google broke 
ground on an expansion to their data center there on 26 acres of former 
mill land that was cleaned up under this program. That expansion of the 
Google data center is a $600 million investment, expected to create 50 
new jobs.
  Also, in my hometown of Hood River, the Port of Hood River just 
finished a brownfields cleanup of another former mill site. That opened 
up 12 acres of land for future business opportunities in the area.
  And in southern Oregon, the city of Grants Pass is in the early 
stages of working towards a similar goal. They have successfully 
secured assistance through the brownfields program to begin planning 
the cleanup and redevelopment of the old Spalding Mill site.
  The Energy and Commerce Committee unanimously voted to move this 
bipartisan legislation out of the committee. We worked closely with our 
friends and colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee to make additional improvements on the way to the House 
floor.
  Mr. Speaker, we are here today because the authorization for the 
brownfields program expired in 2006. It is well past time we do our job 
as Congress to modernize and reauthorize successful programs like this. 
At the end of the day, this bipartisan legislation creates jobs, 
promotes infrastructure and economic development, and cleans up our 
communities. It is a winning scenario for everyone involved.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues who put so much time and effort 
into modernizing this program, and I urge them all to support H.R. 3017 
as we pass it into law.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko), who is the ranking member of the 
Environment Subcommittee.
  Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey, our 
ranker, who has done great work on this bill, for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill before us today represents what we can 
accomplish when we work together for the good of our local communities.
  My district includes the confluence of the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers. 
These rivers were at the heart of our Nation's early industrialization. 
Along the river banks, factories manufactured carpets, collars, leather 
goods, and many other products.
  Many of those manufacturers have since left these mill towns, but the 
legacy of contaminated land continues, and many of those sites remain 
vacant. The contamination, or the perception of contamination, makes 
developers avoid investing in these very important parcels and 
properties. Assessing and remediating these sites is critical for 
environmental revitalization and economic redevelopment.
  The Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and 
Reauthorization Act would improve an already successful EPA program. 
This legislation would reauthorize EPA's brownfields program, which 
expired in 2006. This would extend the program through 2022.
  Since 2002, with EPA's support, tens of thousands of acres of idle 
land have been made ready for productive use, increasing nearby 
property values and helping to preserve greenfields. These properties 
have been brought back onto local tax rolls, helping to support local 
economic development. In the process, more than 130,000 jobs have been 
created and some $24 billion has been leveraged from this Federal 
investment.
  Local governments are realizing that, through this program, we can 
turn a liability into a golden opportunity; but, unfortunately, there 
are many more sites yet to be assessed or remediated.
  More than 450,000 brownfields exist across our great country. Many of 
the easiest, low-hanging fruit sites have already been cleaned up. The 
more difficult ones will require more funding. In recognition of this, 
the bill increases the maximum individual grant from $200,000 to 
$500,000, which will enable more complex sites to be remediated.
  The bill creates multipurpose grants, enables nonprofits to receive 
grants, allows a small portion of grants to be used to cover 
administrative costs, and makes certain publically owned sites eligible 
for funding. These are important improvements to the program, supported 
by a wide array of stakeholders.
  Strengthening EPA's brownfields program will continue to create jobs, 
remediate contaminated land, and promote sustainable economic 
development. It is also a key factor in creating aesthetics for 
neighboring parcels, thereby enhancing the entire regional aspect of 
certain given regions across our communities. This reauthorization will 
give communities the resources, the capacity, and, indeed, the 
flexibility to turn more liabilities into opportunities.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the members of the majority, including Mr. 
McKinley; Chairman Shimkus, who is the Environment Subcommittee chair; 
and Chairman Walden, who is the Energy and Commerce chair; as well as 
our colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for 
working with us to produce this bipartisan bill, a golden opportunity 
for us to come together, work together, and accomplish.

  Finally, I want to thank the efforts of our Energy and Commerce 
ranker, Representative Frank Pallone. It was his great work that helped 
us get here also.
  I want to also acknowledge the tremendous work done by staff on both 
sides of the aisle. In particular, let me please recognize the efforts 
of Jackie Cohen, Rick Kessler, and Jeff Carroll, along with other 
members of the Energy and Commerce minority staff who worked so 
diligently on behalf of this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. McKinley), the author of this legislation.
  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, I, too, rise today in strong support of 
H.R. 3017, the Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and 
Reauthorization Act, and I am pleased to be a sponsor of this 
bipartisan effort along with my colleagues, Chairman Walden, especially 
Chairman Shimkus, and Ranking Members Pallone and Tonko for their work. 
I also want to thank the work of my colleagues on the Transportation 
and Infrastructure Committee who also were cosponsors of this 
legislation, Mr. Katko and Ms. Esty.
  The bill represents a broad, bipartisan compromise that will 
reauthorize the brownfields program for the first time since 2006. In 
addition to the reauthorization, the bill makes several key 
improvements that you have heard about here today that will result in 
more brownfield sites being cleaned up and returned to productive use.
  A little history can explain why this bill was so important to pass.
  When America's industrial manufacturing facilities and factories were 
being constructed, they typically were located on prime property along 
rivers, railroads, and roads. But, over the years, technologically 
there were

[[Page H9543]]

changes that took place that transformed how our economy operates. It 
also had to deal with unfair imports coming into America. As a result, 
many companies failed and the sites became abandoned.
  Rusting hulks of former factories and weed-infested sites have become 
an eyesore and deter investment in downtown and urban areas. Today, 
these locations could still prove to be valuable in creating jobs, and 
that is what our prime responsibility is here. We need to improve this 
negative stigma that these sites pose to communities and restore these 
brownfields into productive resources.
  America has, indeed, been identified as having 450,000 brownfield 
sites across the country, but only 27,000 have been cleaned up. This 
reauthorization is long overdue.
  One great success story is Pietro Fiorentini, a supplier to the 
natural gas industry who recently broke ground at a new manufacturing 
facility in Weirton, West Virginia, that was cleaned up through the 
brownfields program. Pietro Fiorentini spent 5 years preparing this 
site because of the level of contamination.
  I especially want to give a shout-out to Pat Ford, the executive 
director of the Business Development Corporation in the northern 
panhandle. His efforts have been tireless, working to do great things 
like creating jobs in the First District of West Virginia.
  His corporation, the Business Development Corporation, has already 
received $2.5 million over the years in brownfields grants and has 
leveraged those projects into $75 million in private sector money. It 
has resulted in over 1,250 new jobs, and another 128 have been 
preserved.
  You heard earlier from Chairman Shimkus, talking about the 16-to-1 
ratio. Pat Ford's group has a 35-to-1 ratio. For every dollar that we 
put in for the Federal Government, Pat Ford's group has created $35 of 
investment.
  In the future, as businesses develop the Appalachian ethane storage 
hub that is under way now in the Appalachian area, these newly 
reclaimed properties will allow for even more industries and create 
more jobs throughout this area.
  This bipartisan bill makes very important classifications to CERCLA 
liability and petroleum sites. It expands eligibility for nonprofit 
organizations. It, indeed, increases the limit for remediation grants 
from $200,000 to $500,000. It creates the multipurpose grants. But, 
more importantly, it makes it easier for small, rural, or disadvantaged 
communities to participate in this program.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues on the Appropriations 
Committee, however, to fully fund this vitally important brownfields 
program. Although $250 million is authorized, the appropriators have 
only allocated $153 million to this program. Consequently, 
revitalization of these former abandoned sites is delayed, and they 
remain a stigma, deterring development in our downtown communities.
  Overall, this bipartisan bill--and I thank my friends on the other 
side of the aisle for how we are all working together on this--will 
make great strides toward achieving the goals of getting more 
contaminated sites cleaned up, promoting infrastructure, and, 
importantly, creating jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the ranking member of the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, we had joint jurisdiction over this legislation, and, 
for the most part, this is a good product.
  I was actually the ranking member on the Water Resources and 
Environment Subcommittee 16 years ago when the initial brownfields 
legislation passed and later became law. We expected that the targeted 
reforms and Federal grant funds in the initial law would spur 
redevelopment of blighted areas and be of great benefit, and we were 
right. It has a proven record of success, assisting States and 
communities in redevelopment of abandoned or underutilized properties, 
leveraging Federal seed money with State, local, and private dollars, 
and creating jobs.

  Now, here is an example.
  In 2013, the city of Eugene, Oregon, got a $680,000 brownfield site 
assessment grant to improve the environment and spur economic 
development. The city used this funding for the assessment of 15 
specific properties and for the development of a local redevelopment 
plan.
  One of the results of this work is that the Ninkasi Brewery--as co-
chair of the House Craft Brewers Caucus, I had to bring beer into the 
discussion--now sits on the site of a former Eugene brownfield. In a 
decade, they have 100 employees, and it is sold right here in 
Washington, D.C., today.
  This year, Eugene was selected for an additional $500,000 in 
brownfield site assessments. I am hoping that they can replicate the 
success they had with their earlier grant from the Federal Government.
  I am pleased that we are considering this bill to extend the program 
through 2022. It will increase the funding limit from $200 to $500 per 
grant, authorize EPA to award multipurpose brownfields grants for 
projects consisting of multiple elements, and make nonprofit entities 
eligible for mediation assessment grants under the program. It will 
also allow local governments to apply for site assessment grants for 
properties acquired prior to the creation of the program.

                              {time}  1445

  Unfortunately, it falls short in two areas. The final version of this 
legislation that passed committee contained a provision ensuring that 
State and local governments that acquire brownfields properties 
continue to take steps to protect people from coming into contact with 
contamination on the property. In fact, I have a letter here from the 
Conference of Mayors where they say they would agree if there were two 
clauses: that they did not cause or contribute to the contamination and 
exercises due care with regard to any known contamination at the site.
  Unfortunately, this bill strikes out the words ``due care,'' and with 
the liability exemption, there is the possibility that properties would 
be acquired that are dangerous for entry that wouldn't be properly 
fenced or secured because of removing the ``due care.'' I don't know 
why that had to come out, since the Conference of Mayors had supported 
it.
  Second, nearly every stakeholder that testified before our committee 
stated that the current level of funding for the program is well below 
need, so we should be increasing the authorized and appropriated 
levels. Again, unfortunately, the bill under consideration today only 
reauthorizes flat funding levels for the program, which is, I think, a 
missed opportunity.
  I hope, as we move forward and resolve any differences with the 
Senate, that we can make improvements in these areas.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me time.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Speaker, I want to start by thanking the chairman, 
the ranking member, as well as committee staff for all of their hard 
work bringing this bipartisan bill to the House floor today.
  Mr. Speaker, the EPA's brownfields program is an important grant 
program for the State of Michigan and, more specifically, the district 
I represent, Michigan's Seventh District.
  Because of Michigan's rich manufacturing history, there are a number 
of former industrial sites that are ripe for revitalization. These 
sites can range from large industrial manufacturing sites to local 
corner gas stations.
  This program provides communities the chance to take abandoned and 
vacant sites and once again turn them into economic assets, all the 
while cleaning up our beautiful environment.
  Just this summer, the EPA announced that the historic former Tecumseh 
Products site in Tecumseh, Michigan, received a $500,000 grant to 
revitalize this 53-acre industrial site. This $500,000 grant will go 
towards cleaning up the former manufacturing facility site and create 
more jobs in the process.
  In Monroe, the brownfields program played a key role in restoring 
land for the River Raisin National Battlefield Park, which is one of 
the leading historic attractions in our area, and one

[[Page H9544]]

that I am delighted to say I was involved with former Congressman John 
Dingell in making an impact for this great district.
  The positive impact for these communities and many others is 
invaluable. Revitalizing these blighted areas encourages economic 
redevelopment, injects new tax revenue into our local economy, and 
assists local governments with the support they need to address these 
projects.
  H.R. 3017 reauthorizes the vital brownfields program so that more 
positive work can be done in Michigan and in every one of our 
districts. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).
  Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3017, the 
Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization 
Act of 2017.
  The bill before us today is a good bipartisan, compromise bill that 
will reauthorize $250 million in funding for the brownfields program 
under the Environmental Protection Agency for each fiscal year through 
2021.
  The EPA's brownfields program has a long history of empowering 
States, local communities, and other stakeholders to work together to 
prevent contaminated sites from endangering public health and the 
environment.
  Brownfields grants continue to serve as the foundation of the EPA's 
brownfields program. These grants support revitalization efforts by 
funding environmental assessments, cleanup, and job training activities 
nationwide.
  Additionally, this bill makes a number of overall improvements to the 
law that will strengthen brownfields remediation into the future.
  In 2013, the Downriver Community Conference in my district received a 
brownfields funding grant to clear out asbestos and other hazardous 
materials from a hangar at the Willow Run Airport. Once the original 
home of Rosie the Riveters during World War II, today the site of the 
Arsenal of Democracy is now the home of the American Center for 
Mobility, a national DOT proving ground for the testing and validation 
of connected and automated vehicles, autonomous vehicles.
  There are many success stories like this one and all across the 
country that would not have been possible without brownfields grant 
funding. This matters.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank every member of the Energy and Commerce 
Committee for working across the aisle to find a bipartisan way forward 
on reauthorization. We need to do more of this.
  This program has proved its merits again and again and has 
historically had strong bipartisan support. It is my sincere hope this 
will carry over to today's vote and will continue through the 
appropriations process.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Lance), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
  Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the great 
work of the Energy and Commerce Committee on the Brownfields 
Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization Act.

  Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Shimkus for leading another 
environmental victory to the House floor.
  The brownfields program has worked and it must be reauthorized. Over 
59,000 sites nationwide and 419 in New Jersey have been transformed by 
remediation and redevelopment, freeing our land and water of harmful 
chemicals and other hazards. This is a tremendous win for environmental 
protection, economic development, and for communities that have 
struggled with contaminated sites.
  In the district I serve, facilities in Dover, East Amwell, 
Phillipsburg, Roxbury, and Somerville are slated for revitalization.
  This public-private partnership has been a winning formula, as the 
brownfields program has already prompted $22 billion in private 
investment across this Nation, a major return on a minimal, though 
important, Federal investment.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this important legislation.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time remains on both 
sides?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New Jersey has 16\1/2\ 
minutes. The gentleman from Illinois has 13\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson), the ranking member of the Committee 
on Science, Space, and Technology.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the brownfields 
program has been a notable success in our Nation's history, and I want 
to applaud all of the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee as 
well as the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for supporting 
this legislation.
  The brownfields program has helped to transform and clean up 
countless abandoned, idled, or potentially contaminated commercial and 
industrial sites all across the United States. These once blighted 
areas within our communities are now valuable tracts of land thanks to 
the brownfields program.
  As a Congresswoman from north Texas, I have seen firsthand the 
benefits that brownfields redevelopment brings to a community. A 72-
acre site in my district now known as Victory Park was transformed by 
the brownfields program from an industrial wasteland populated by an 
old paint factory and an abandoned packing house. Since then, and 
thanks in large part to the brownfields program, this same plot is now 
home to the American Airlines Center and other retail and commercial 
space and high-level housing.
  This is just one example in my congressional district and across the 
country of how successful we can be in converting depressed, decaying 
areas into vibrant economic and cultural centers that can increase 
employment and productivity in a region, placing sites on the tax roll 
rather than the tax dole.
  This is why I stand together with my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle to support H.R. 3017.
  The bill will take the important step to reauthorize brownfields 
approval through 2022. While the bill represents a flat 
reauthorization, it makes crucial changes to the program that will 
improve the way States, cities, counties, and other stakeholders are 
able to utilize brownfields sites.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope we will support this legislation.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Katko), a cosponsor of the legislation and also a major 
leader on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
  Mr. KATKO. Mr. Speaker, representing central New York, the issue of 
blighted properties and contaminated land that remain from previous 
industrial hubs is all too familiar to me.
  The brownfields program has been pivotal in the redevelopment and 
reuse of previously uninhabitable and unusable properties throughout my 
district.
  Earlier this year, I worked with Congresswoman Esty to advance 
brownfields reauthorization legislation through the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee. I am proud to now see this bipartisan 
comprehensive bill advancing through the House.
  This measure contains many of the important reforms authored by 
Representative Esty and myself, including language clarifying liability 
for local governments and lease holders, and expanding eligibility to 
assessments and remediation grants.
  These provisions are intended to increase the effectiveness of 
brownfields grants and will lead to faster cleanups.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Congresswoman Esty, Chairman Shuster of 
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, his staff, and 
Representative McKinley for working to advance this important 
legislation to preserve and enhance this critical program.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Napolitano).
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Pallone and Mr. Shimkus for 
their hard work.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in support of the 
Environmental Protection Agency's brownfields program, H.R. 3017, a 
highly successful program by all accounts.
  In the past two Congresses, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and 
Environment has evaluated the program

[[Page H9545]]

in multiple hearings. What we have learned each time is that the 
program continues operating, as it has since its creation, very 
efficiently and successfully.
  Data provided by the EPA shows that, since its inception, the 
brownfields program has leveraged more than 122,800 jobs and over $23.6 
billion in cleanup and redevelopment funding. For every dollar of 
brownfields funding--Federal funding--more than 16 other public and 
private dollars are leveraged on a national level, and more than eight 
jobs are leveraged for every $100,000 of EPA brownfields funds 
expended.
  It is undeniable that this program is working as it should and that 
communities across the Nation are benefiting from the investment of the 
Federal dollars in this program.
  The changes made to the program in this bill before the House today 
will improve it and increase the flexibility with which communities 
will be able to utilize the program.
  Although I support the bill, I am puzzled by this body's reluctance 
to increase the funding for a very successful program for the 
brownfields. This program's successes have been continually hindered by 
insufficient funds, as you have heard from other speakers.
  By the EPA's own estimates, over the past 5 years, funding 
deficiencies have caused 1,676 viable proposals to go unfunded. These 
sites are not only sitting idle and unproductive, but we are missing 
out on the return on the investment that these sites could realize. In 
fact, had these proposals received funding, it is estimated those 
grants would have leveraged approximately 54,680 jobs and over $10.3 
billion in public and private financing.
  This begs the question: Why aren't we investing more in the 
redevelopment of brownfields space?
  If this is the success rate of an underfunded program, imagine the 
potential economic impact and potential for job creation that could 
come from fully funding the program.
  Nevertheless, the program received bipartisan support, and I am 
pleased to support the legislation to reauthorize the program and 
improve its success.
  I also plan to continue working on the issue of ensuring that local 
governments maintain their existing obligation to exercise care in 
preventing potential exposure of our citizens to hazardous substances 
found on brownfields sites.

                              {time}  1500

  In reconciling the differences between H.R. 3017 and H.R. 1758--the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's reported brownfields 
reauthorization bill--a provision in H.R. 1758 requiring communities to 
maintain an appropriate level of care in association with the liability 
protections was dropped from the bill.
  I will continue to push for the restoration of this protection, and 
will continue to move through Congress. Again, I support the program.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Gibbs), who is a member of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee.
  Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3017, the 
Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization 
Act of 2017.
  There is bipartisan support for the EPA program that proves when the 
Federal-State partnership operates as intended, work gets done.
  Brownfields cleanup and redevelopment benefits the environment, the 
community, and the local economy. This legislation reauthorizes the 
brownfields program and expands eligibility for nonprofit organizations 
to receive grants.
  In my home State of Ohio, the brownfields program has leveraged over 
$1 billion for property revitalization. In my district specifically, 
brownfields funding was used to restore a former industrial 
manufacturing site, now used as Chesapeake Energy Company's office 
complex.
  I thank the sponsors for introducing this bill and I urge my 
colleagues to support its passage.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. Esty).
  Ms. ESTY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 
Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization 
Act of 2017.
  I want to thank my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee, 
Congressman McKinley and Congressman Pallone, for their bipartisan work 
to advance a brownfields reauthorization bill to the floor today.
  I also want to thank my friend and colleague, Congressman Katko, for 
his partnership in working with me to drive the momentum behind the 
brownfields remediation authorization in the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee.
  Mr. Speaker, we are here today to pass a bill that is a win-win for 
our cities and towns all across America. The bill before us today 
increases the funding and makes important changes to the EPA's 
brownfields program, changes that are 15 years in the making.
  Since 2002, the EPA's brownfields program has been an engine for job 
creation and economic growth in every single congressional district 
across this country. We have cleaned up local eyesores and contaminated 
sites, putting these properties back onto the tax rolls. That is good 
for the economy and it is good for the environment.
  In essence, brownfields grants help us do the ultimate recycling, the 
recycling of land. This bill makes important changes to make the 
brownfields program work even better. It allows grants to be used for 
assessments. It allows grants to be used by nonprofits, and for 
multipurpose grants, and it increases the grant limits from $200,000 to 
$500,000 per project.
  In Waterbury, Connecticut, they will now be able to use grants 
previously that they could not use to put valuable land back into 
productive use.
  In the cities of New Britain and Meriden, they will now be able to 
use Federal funding for multipurpose grants. Previously they have had 
to rely on State and local money to do these important transformative 
projects in our former industrial powerhouses across the northeast.
  My district alone has 66 EPA-identified brownfields sites. And with 
over 450,000 remaining brownfields sites across the country, the need 
for more brownfields funding and for greater flexibility is manifest 
and important to every Member of this Chamber.
  For every acre of brownfields that is redeveloped, approximately 10 
jobs are created. Let me repeat that: 10 jobs.
  Our voters send us here to get things done. They want us to make our 
towns more beautiful and safer, and they want us to create jobs, and 
this bill does both. So I am very proud of the bipartisan work and dual 
committee work to bring this important bill to the floor after 15 
years.
  It is an opportunity for us to show to the American people that 
bipartisanship works and committees work when we are allowed to do our 
work together. So, again, I want to thank my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle and both committees for their wonderful work here today. 
It is a win for America.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Faso), a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee.
  (Mr. FASO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. FASO. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Shimkus for his leadership in this 
regard. I thank the Speaker and my colleagues for the opportunity to 
speak in support of H.R. 3017, the Brownfields Enhancement, Economic 
Redevelopment, and Reauthorization Act.
  Mr. Speaker, like many of my colleagues, my district has numerous 
former industrial sites that have benefited directly from brownfields 
grant funding.
  Shortly after the program was authorized, the EPA selected the City 
of Oneonta as a recipient of a $200,000 brownfields assessment grant to 
prepare reuse plans for a 100-acre heavy industrial area. This modest 
assessment grant helped accelerate ongoing efforts to support site 
enhancement by providing essential financial support to the city.
  Similarly, Montgomery County has been able to utilize designations to 
assist it in the redevelopment of the former Beech-Nut manufacturing 
facility in the Village of Canajoharie.
  Mr. Speaker, I offer my full support for this bipartisan legislation 
because

[[Page H9546]]

it works to better the lives of families and communities throughout my 
district and across America. I urge all my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle to support this critical legislation.

  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
to enter into a colloquy.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. PALLONE. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, the bill we are voting on today makes 
several important changes to the brownfields law that will result in 
more contaminated sites being cleaned up.
  The changes we are making also bring more parties into the process by 
clarifying their eligibility to receive funding under the brownfields 
program, including making nonprofit entities eligible to receive all 
forms of brownfields funding.
  Unfortunately, the Environmental Protection Agency provided us 
technical assistance a week ago, telling us that the definition we used 
for how to delineate which nonprofit organizations should be included 
was too limited, and would exclude a number of important organizations 
that the EPA currently provides funding to through the brownfields 
program, including the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste 
Management Officials, commonly known as ASTSWMO, and other entities 
organized under section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code that are 
involved in the cleanup of brownfields sites around the country.
  We need to address this issue as this process moves forward. We need 
to figure out how to ensure that these organizations do not lose the 
funding that they rely on to make significant contributions to the 
brownfields program.
  Does the gentleman agree?
  Mr. PALLONE. Yes. And I thank the gentleman for raising this drafting 
issue. The bill's provisions on nonprofit entities were meant to 
reflect the EPA's current practice. It now appears that we have 
inadvertently excluded some organizations that receive grants under 
that current practice.
  It is unfortunate that the technical assistance bringing this issue 
to our attention was provided so late in the process, but I hope we can 
work together to ensure that the EPA is providing testimony and 
technical assistance in a much more timely fashion moving forward.
  So I want to thank the gentleman for working with Democrats to 
develop this legislation, which will provide significant environmental 
and public health benefits. I believe we can continue to work together 
as we move this bill into law to address this drafting issue.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. I thank the gentleman for his courtesies.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maine (Mr. Poliquin).
  Mr. POLIQUIN. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on 
this very important bill.
  Mr. Speaker, Maine is vacationland. We have a population in Maine of 
only 1.3 million people, but every year we have about 40 million 
visitors to our great State.
  We have thousands of sparkling, clean lakes and ponds, hundreds of 
miles of swift-running rivers, and we have 3,600 miles of stunningly 
beautiful coastline. I have never, ever, met anybody who has vacationed 
in Maine who did not leave without a smile. It is just a great place to 
live and bring up kids.
  Now, the tourist industry employs about 150,000 people directly in 
the State of Maine, and it is critical that we have a pristine 
environment in Maine to further this industry.
  Mr. Speaker, during the past 40 years, sadly, most of our paper 
mills, our textile mills, and our shoe factories in the great State of 
Maine have closed and, in many cases, they have left behind 
contaminated brownfields contaminated with heavy metals and chemicals.
  Now, those of us who have been blessed with children know how 
critically important their health is. My mother is 89 and had a great 
career as a nurse, and we grew up in our house with taking care of 
others. I raised my son as a single parent, taking care of my son. I 
understand how much easier it is to stay healthy and be healthy if you 
are in a clean environment.
  Mr. Speaker, that is why H.R. 3017 is so important. It makes sure 
that we provide funding to clean up polluted contaminated brownfields 
industrial sites.
  Mr. Speaker, since 1994, hundreds of brownfields across this great 
country have been cleaned up. When they are cleaned up, they are often 
repurposed into athletic fields, schools, and hospitals. This, at the 
same time, strengthens our local communities because they are put back, 
in many cases, on the property tax rolls, if they are a private sector 
development.
  In the town of Millinocket, right smack in the middle of my district, 
Miller's Department Store is an old building, decaying and full of 
mold, and it is being benefited from a grant from this brownfields 
program.
  The T.W. Dick property in Gardiner, in central Maine, used to be a 
steel fabricator. It is now contaminated with heavy metals and is 
experiencing a new life because of this program.
  Mr. Speaker, cleaning up our environment to help our kids stay safe 
and healthy should not ever be a partisan issue. This is as bipartisan 
as you could possibly find. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I am encouraging 
Republicans and Democrats alike to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 3017. Let's do 
something common sense, provide the funding to clean up these 
brownfields sites and repurpose this land for the betterment of our 
families.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, so I yield 
myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by talking about how important 
this program has been to our Nation and, in particular, to my home 
State, since it was created back in 2002.
  New Jersey has too many of these types of contaminated sites, and we 
need Federal help to clean them up and redevelop them.

  For example, a former Dupont property on the waterfront in Carteret 
is being redeveloped to be a ferry terminal to carry commuters to New 
York City. That site is a great example of how a redeveloped 
brownfields site can be beneficial for the community.
  Asbury Park, another town in my district, received two substantial 
Federal brownfields grants last year. One of those grants is being used 
to assess eight contaminated sites and prepare two cleanup plans. The 
other grant is going to assessing and redeveloping sites around the 
train station and the downtown area that were contaminated with 
petroleum.
  Just this week, I visited another brownfields site being redeveloped 
in my district, the Woodbridge Waterfront Park. When completed, the 
waterfront park will include approximately 30 acres of restored 
wetlands, walking trails, a boardwalk overlooking the wetlands, and a 
viewing platform on the Raritan River. So Federal funds through the 
brownfields program help make these projects happen.
  The brownfields program is proof that having a strong economy and 
protecting the environment is not an either/or issue. We can have both.
  I am pleased to support this bipartisan bill. I would urge all of my 
colleagues to vote for it.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I am just going to sum up, too, with thanking my ranking member of 
the full committee, Mr. Pallone; obviously, my ranking member on the 
subcommittee, Mr. Tonko; the associated staffs on both that had been 
mentioned numerous times. They did a lot of work in this process. It 
was good to get to know the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee 
a little bit better, and we look forward to working with them more.

                              {time}  1515

  Mr. PALLONE. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SHIMKUS. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I forgot to thank some of the staff who 
worked so hard on this on my side of the aisle: Jaqueline Cohen, who is 
sitting here; Rick Kessler; Tuley Wright; Mary Martin; and I know there 
were others.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield the time to the 
gentleman. They tell me what to do sometimes, also, even on that side 
of the

[[Page H9547]]

aisle; so, happy to yield. I just want to thank them.
  Mr. Speaker, everybody has examples of brownfields in their district 
throughout the State. They are all pretty good stories about returning 
them to productive use.
  I have one produced by the EPA from Danville, Illinois. There are 
eight sites. We can go through them.
  The point is, here is a successful program that we have authorized. 
Our appropriators helped appropriate money that really leverages a 
little bit of Federal dollars with private or local community dollars 
to bring these locations back to productive use. It is a good effort.
  Mr. Speaker, we have got other things on the horizon to work together 
on. I enjoyed the opportunity to do that.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues, I ask them to vote yes on the 
bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3017, 
the Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and 
Reauthorization Act.
  This legislation will strengthen the Brownfields Program, an 
important program created by Congress and the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency in 2002 that assists communities with the cleanup of 
brownfields sites and encourages economic redevelopment.
  The EPA has estimated that there are 450,000 brownfield sites 
nationwide. Through the lifetime of the program, nearly 64,000 acres 
have been revitalized. Every federal dollar spent on rehabilitating 
brownfields leverages over $16 on average. To date, the Brownfields 
Program has leveraged nearly $24 billion and created over 124,000 jobs 
across the United States.
  Houston is home to one of the country's best known brownfields 
success stories, Minute Maid Park, home of the World Series Champion 
Houston Astros. Minute Maid Park was built on a former 38-acre 
brownfield site in Downtown Houston.
  Our district, which is home to dozens of abandoned and former 
industrial sites in need of environmental cleanup and redevelopment, 
needs to see the expansion of the Brownfields Program so we can have 
more success stories like Minute Maid Park.
  I hope that appropriators will fully fund the Brownfields Program at 
the authorized levels set in this bill, including $200 million annually 
for grants to assess and clean up brownfields properties and $50 
million annually for grants to assist states and Indian tribes 
establish and enhance their own cleanup programs. We have seen funding 
for Brownfields drop steadily in recent years, which has impacted local 
communities' ability to assess and clean up sites in Texas and around 
the country.
  This legislation received strong bipartisan support in the Energy and 
Commerce Committee and passed by voice vote.
  I ask all of my colleagues to join me and vote in support of the 
Brownfields Enhancement, Economic Redevelopment, and Reauthorization 
Act.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). All time for debate has 
expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 631, the previous question is ordered on 
the bill, as amended.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________