Environmental Protection Desk
Environmental Protection Bills
9 bills in the Environmental Protection desk, ordered for current relevance and readability.
Environmental ProtectionHR-161-119Latest action: Apr 28, 202621 readersIn Committee
New Source Review Permitting Improvement Act
Sponsored by H. Griffith
Under the Clean Air Act, industrial facilities must obtain permits before making physical changes or operational modifications that increase air pollution emissions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) currently determines whether a change qualifies as a "modification" requiring a new permit by comparing the facility's maximum hourly emission rate before and after the change. This framework has created regulatory uncertainty, with disputes over whether routine maintenance, efficiency upgrades, or safety improvements trigger permitting requirements. Facilities and regulators have disagreed about how to measure emission increases and whether certain operational changes constitute modifications subject to federal oversight. The New Source Review Permitting Improvement Act amends the Clean Air Act to narrow the definition of modifications that trigger permitting requirements. The EPA must now measure emission increases by comparing the maximum achievable hourly emission rate in the 10-year period before a change to the rate after the change. The bill exempts changes designed to reduce emissions per unit of production or to maintain facility reliability and safety from modification status—unless the EPA determines the change would cause adverse health or environmental effects. For construction activities, the bill limits permitting requirements to physical construction of discrete emissions units, excluding other costly or permanent on-site activities that do not directly involve the emissions unit itself. These changes take effect immediately upon enactment, with no new funding required. The EPA will apply the revised definitions to pending and future permit applications. Facilities undertaking efficiency improvements, pollution controls, or safety upgrades will face reduced permitting burdens, though the EPA retains authority to require permits when it determines health or environmental risks exist. The narrower construction definition may reduce permitting delays for major industrial projects, though facilities must still demonstrate compliance with state implementation plans in areas not meeting federal air quality standards. The bill includes a rule of construction preserving the EPA's authority to treat changes as modifications under pre-existing interpretations if warranted by circumstances.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateApr 28, 2026
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-625.
Environmental Protection
Environmental ProtectionHR-180-119Latest action: Jul 22, 20251 readersIn Committee
Endangered Species Transparency and Reasonableness Act of 2025
Sponsored by Tom McClintock
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 currently requires the Department of the Interior and Department of Commerce to make listing decisions for endangered and threatened species based on the best scientific and commercial data available. However, the scientific basis for these determinations is not systematically published online, making it difficult for states, tribes, local governments, and the public to understand how species are classified. Additionally, federal expenditures on litigation related to the Endangered Species Act are not comprehensively tracked or disclosed, leaving gaps in public accountability for how resources are spent defending or implementing species protections. This bill requires the Department of the Interior, in consultation with the Department of Commerce, to publish online the scientific and commercial data underlying each species listing decision, subject to state privacy laws and Department of Defense security agreements. The bill also expands the definition of "best scientific and commercial data available" to explicitly include information submitted by state, tribal, and county governments. Additionally, the bill requires the Department of the Interior to submit annual reports to Congress and maintain a searchable public database detailing federal expenditures on Endangered Species Act litigation, including case details, agency costs, attorney fees, and employee time spent on covered suits across the Department of the Interior, Forest Service, Environmental Protection Agency, National Marine Fisheries Service, and power administrations. Implementation begins within 90 days of enactment for the first annual expenditure report, with the searchable database updated monthly thereafter. The bill uses existing agency budgets to fund these disclosure requirements. The changes affect how federal agencies document and justify species listings, potentially increasing state and tribal input into listing decisions and enabling public scrutiny of litigation spending. The disclosure of attorney fees and settlement details—even in sealed agreements—may influence settlement negotiations and litigation strategy, though the bill preserves confidentiality restrictions already in place within consent decrees.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateJul 16, 2025
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries.
Environmental Protection
Environmental ProtectionHR-167-119Latest action: May 14, 20250 readersPassed Chamber
Community Reclamation Partnerships Act of 2025
Sponsored by Darin LaHood
The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 established a federal program to reclaim land and water damaged by coal mining, with particular focus on mines that operated after August 3, 1977. However, abandoned mines from before that date—often located in Appalachia and other coal regions—have left behind degraded landscapes and polluted waterways, particularly from acid mine drainage that continues to contaminate streams and groundwater. States have approved reclamation plans but lack sufficient federal funding and flexible mechanisms to engage private entities and nonprofits in cleanup work at these legacy sites. The Community Reclamation Partnerships Act authorizes states with approved reclamation programs to enter into memoranda of understanding with federal and state agencies to address mine drainage pollution, establishing coordinated strategies for water quality improvement, monitoring, and long-term treatment system maintenance. The bill also creates a new "Community Reclaimer" partnership model, allowing states to contract with private companies, nonprofits, or other entities to remediate abandoned mine lands. The Department of the Interior must approve Community Reclaimer projects within 120 days if they meet criteria including technical capability, financial resources, consistency with state plans, and state assumption of liability for project performance (except gross negligence or intentional misconduct). States must conduct public notice and comment periods before submitting memoranda, with at least 15 days' notice and one public meeting in an accessible location. The Department of the Interior and Environmental Protection Agency have 120 days to approve or disapprove memoranda. Community Reclaimers may reprocess recovered mine materials and use sale proceeds to offset remediation costs, with revenues also reimbursing federal agencies. The program sunsets September 30, 2032, creating a defined timeframe for implementation and evaluation of this partnership model.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateMay 13, 2025
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1970-1971)
Environmental Protection
Environmental ProtectionHR-123-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20251 readersIn Committee
Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
The Environmental Protection Agency currently conducts chemical toxicity assessments through its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program, a centralized office that evaluates the health risks posed by chemical substances. This program has operated as the primary mechanism for generating hazard identification and dose-response assessments—scientific evaluations of how chemicals affect human health at different exposure levels. These assessments inform EPA regulatory decisions across multiple program areas, from water quality to air pollution to chemical safety. The Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act redirects this responsibility by requiring the EPA's program offices—including the Office of Water, Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Land and Emergency Management, and Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention—to conduct covered assessments themselves rather than relying on the centralized IRIS program. The bill requires these assessments to follow specified scientific standards emphasizing best available science, transparency in methodology, characterization of uncertainty, and consideration of all available data. The EPA Administrator must also establish a steering committee within 30 days to coordinate assessments across program offices and prevent duplication of effort, with the committee chaired by the Assistant Administrator of the Office of Research and Development. Implementation begins immediately upon enactment. All existing IRIS assessments remain in a new chemical assessment database maintained by the Office of Research and Development, which will be updated as program offices complete new assessments. Beginning two years after enactment and every two years thereafter, the Office of Research and Development must certify to Congress that all completed assessments followed the required scientific standards. The bill does not specify new funding but requires coordination of existing research and development appropriations with program office priorities. This restructuring shifts assessment authority from a single specialized office to multiple program offices, potentially accelerating assessments aligned with specific regulatory programs while requiring new coordination mechanisms to avoid duplicative work.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Environmental Protection
Environmental ProtectionHR-65-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20250 readersIn Committee
Armed Forces Endangered Species Exemption Act
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 currently prohibits the taking, harming, or killing of endangered and threatened species across the United States, with limited exceptions. The law requires the Department of the Interior to designate "critical habitat"—areas essential for species survival—and mandates that federal agencies consult with Interior before taking actions that might jeopardize listed species or their habitats. Military installations have long operated under some protections, but the current framework still requires Interior to evaluate whether military lands qualify as critical habitat and still obligates the Department of Defense to consult on certain activities. This bill amends the Endangered Species Act to broadly shield Department of Defense operations from species protections. The Secretary of the Interior is prohibited from designating any military installation, National Guard facility, or any other land the Secretary of Defense claims is needed for military purposes as critical habitat. Additionally, the bill exempts military personnel—including Defense Department contractors—from the act's core prohibitions on taking or harming endangered species when engaged in "national defense-related operations," defined expansively to include weapons testing, military training, general preparedness, and any action the Secretary of Defense deems necessary. The Department of Defense is also relieved of the requirement to consult with Interior on these activities. These changes take effect immediately upon enactment with no specified funding mechanism, as they operate by removing regulatory obligations rather than creating new programs. The exemptions apply regardless of whether operations occur on military installations or elsewhere. In practice, this means the Department of Defense gains unilateral authority to determine which lands are off-limits to species protection and can conduct military activities—from weapons testing to training exercises—without environmental review or consultation, even if those activities harm or kill protected species. Existing environmental management plans on military lands remain in place but lose their connection to federal species protections.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Environmental Protection
Environmental ProtectionHR-181-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20250 readersIn Committee
To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide that artificially propagated animals shall be treated the same under that Act as naturally propagated animals, and for other purposes.
Sponsored by Tom McClintock
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 currently allows the Department of the Interior to regulate the trade and handling of endangered and threatened species. Under existing law, the Interior Department distinguishes between animals bred in captivity (artificially propagated) and those living in the wild (naturally propagated) when applying protections. This distinction has meant that captive-bred animals sometimes receive different regulatory treatment than wild populations, affecting industries like zoos, aquariums, and wildlife breeders who work with endangered species. This bill amends the Endangered Species Act to require the Department of the Interior to treat artificially propagated animals identically to naturally propagated animals in all determinations under the law. The bill also directs the Interior Department to authorize the use of artificial propagation—breeding endangered species in captivity—as a mitigation tool when the law requires compensation for harm to endangered species. These changes eliminate the regulatory distinction between captive-bred and wild animals and explicitly permit captive breeding as an approved mitigation strategy. The amendments take effect immediately upon enactment and apply retroactively to all species already listed as endangered or threatened. No new funding is required, as the Interior Department already administers the Endangered Species Act. The practical effect is that permits for captive-bred animals would face the same restrictions as wild-caught animals, potentially streamlining some permitting processes while affecting how the Interior Department enforces protections for species recovery programs and habitat restoration requirements.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Environmental Protection
Environmental ProtectionHR-102-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20250 readersIn Committee
American Sovereignty and Species Protection Act of 2025
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 currently allows the Department of the Interior to list any species as endangered or threatened based on biological and ecological criteria, regardless of whether that species is native to the United States. The law also permits the federal government to provide financial assistance for species conservation efforts globally, including funding for the acquisition of land or water rights in foreign countries. This broad authority has enabled protections for nonnative species found within U.S. borders and supported international conservation projects. This bill amends the Endangered Species Act to prohibit the Department of the Interior from listing any species as endangered or threatened unless that species is native to the United States. Additionally, the bill prohibits the use of federal financial assistance under the Act's international cooperation provisions to acquire land, water, or other interests in foreign countries. These changes narrow the scope of species eligible for federal protection and restrict how conservation funding can be deployed internationally. The restrictions take effect upon enactment. The Department of the Interior must apply the nonnative species prohibition to any future listing decisions, potentially affecting pending petitions for nonnative species protection. Existing listings of nonnative species would remain in place unless separately repealed. The prohibition on foreign land acquisition eliminates a funding mechanism previously available for international conservation partnerships, redirecting resources toward domestic conservation efforts or reducing overall spending on species protection abroad.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Environmental Protection
Environmental ProtectionHR-135-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20250 readersIn Committee
Manatee Protection Act of 2025
Sponsored by Vern Buchanan
The West Indian manatee currently holds "threatened" status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, a classification that provides baseline protections but reflects the species' recovery from near extinction in the 1970s. Manatee populations have faced renewed decline in recent years, particularly in Florida waters, due to factors including boat strikes, loss of warm-water habitat, and algal blooms that reduce food availability. The threatened designation, while offering some legal safeguards, does not trigger the full suite of protective measures available under the law for species facing more immediate extinction risk. The Manatee Protection Act of 2025 requires the Secretary of the Interior to reclassify the West Indian manatee from threatened to endangered status under the Endangered Species Act. This change operates by directing the Department of the Interior to add the manatee to the endangered species list maintained under section 4(c) of the 1973 Act. The reclassification bypasses the standard listing process—which typically involves scientific review and public comment periods—and mandates immediate endangered designation regardless of other legal provisions. Once reclassified, the manatee gains access to stricter protections, including enhanced habitat conservation requirements and more rigorous review of federal projects that might affect the species. The Department of the Interior will need to develop or revise recovery plans and coordinate with state wildlife agencies, particularly Florida's Department of Environmental Protection. Federal agencies undertaking projects in manatee habitat—such as coastal development, dredging, or water management—will face heightened scrutiny and potential project delays. Funding for manatee protection programs may increase through existing Endangered Species Act appropriations, though the bill itself contains no new funding authorization.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Environmental Protection
Environmental ProtectionHR-106-119Latest action: Jan 3, 20250 readersIn Committee
LIST Act of 2025
Sponsored by Andy Biggs
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 currently requires the Department of the Interior to list species as endangered or threatened based on scientific evidence of risk. Once listed, species remain protected unless the agency initiates a formal delisting process, which typically requires demonstrating that recovery goals have been met or that the original listing was scientifically justified. The act allows for five-year reviews to assess whether a species' status should change, but these reviews operate within a framework that generally maintains protections unless clear evidence of recovery emerges. Currently, the burden and procedural requirements for removing a species from the list are substantial and time-consuming. The LIST Act of 2025 amends the Endangered Species Act to streamline delisting and downlisting procedures. The Department of the Interior must now initiate delisting if recovery plan goals have been met or if the agency determines a species has recovered sufficiently. The bill also requires the department to remove a species from the list within 90 days if it receives or produces scientific information showing the original listing was based on data that was inaccurate beyond reasonable scientific margins, fraudulent, or misrepresentative. Additionally, the bill expands five-year review considerations to explicitly include recovery plan criteria, factors underlying the original listing decision, and findings of error in the listing determination itself. These changes take effect immediately upon enactment. The 90-day deadline for removing erroneously listed species creates a compressed timeline compared to current practice. Positive findings that a listing was based on flawed data are not subject to judicial review, though negative findings may be challenged in court. The bill also imposes a ten-year restriction on submitting future petitions for individuals or organizations found to have knowingly submitted fraudulent or misrepresentative information. Implementation relies on existing Interior Department resources, though the accelerated timelines may require reallocation of staff within the agency's wildlife programs.
Environmental Protection
Latest updateJan 3, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Environmental Protection