A bill to amend titles 23 and 49, United States Code, to streamline the environmental review process for highway projects, and for other purposes.

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Project Delivery Improvement Act of 
2011''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that--
            (1) in addition to amounts available as of the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the United States needs to expend 
        $20,000,000,000 to maintain the transportation infrastructure 
        of the United States;
            (2) up to $80,000,000,000 per year in additional spending 
        could be used for projects that would provide positive economic 
        returns;
            (3) the United States needs at least $255,000,000,000 per 
        year in transportation spending during the 50-year period after 
        the date of enactment of this Act--
                    (A) to maintain the transportation system of the 
                United States in a state of good repair; and
                    (B) to complete necessary upgrades of that system;
            (4) transportation spending as of the date of enactment of 
        this Act falls 60 percent short of the amount required; and
            (5) because revenues deposited in the Highway Trust Fund 
        are declining--
                    (A) transportation project costs need to be 
                reduced; and
                    (B) regulatory requirements for those projects 
                should be streamlined.

SEC. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS.

    (a) Use of Proprietary and Experimental Products.--Section 112 of 
title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(h) Use of Proprietary and Experimental Products.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section--
            ``(1) a State may use for any highway project 1 or more 
        proprietary, patented, or experimental products selected by the 
        State without competitive bidding or approval by the Secretary; 
        and
            ``(2) the use by the State of a product described in 
        paragraph (1) for a highway project shall not affect the 
        eligibility of the State or the highway project to receive 
        Federal funds.''.
    (b) Preservation of Parklands.--Section 138 of title 23, United 
States Code, is repealed.
    (c) Participating Agencies.--Section 139 of title 23, United States 
Code, is amended--
            (1) in subsection (c)(5), by striking ``may be'' and 
        inserting ``shall be'';
            (2) in subsection (d), by striking paragraph (1) and 
        inserting the following:
            ``(1) In general.--The lead agency shall be responsible 
        for--
                    ``(A) determining the purpose of and need for a 
                project; and
                    ``(B) inviting and designating participating 
                agencies in accordance with this subsection.''; and
            (3) in subsection (f)--
                    (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``provide an 
                opportunity for involvement by participating agencies 
                and the public in defining'' and inserting ``provide 
                for an opportunity for public comment on the definition 
                of'';
                    (B) in paragraph (2)--
                            (i) by striking ``Following participation 
                        under paragraph (1)'' and inserting the 
                        following:
                    ``(A) In general.--After the period of public 
                comment under paragraph (1)''; and
                            (ii) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(B) Long-range transportation plan.--For a 
                project included in an adopted long-range 
                transportation plan under section 134 or 135, the lead 
                agency may use the purpose and need presented in the 
                plan without further agency collaboration.''; and
                    (C) in paragraph (4), by striking subparagraph (B) 
                and inserting the following:
                    ``(B) Range of alternatives.--
                            ``(i) In general.--Following participation 
                        under paragraph (1), the lead agency shall 
                        determine the range of alternatives for 
                        consideration in any document which the lead 
                        agency is responsible for preparing for the 
                        project.
                            ``(ii) Exclusion of alternatives.--The lead 
                        agency may exclude from consideration under 
                        clause (i) any alternative that, as determined 
                        by the lead agency, would not meet the purpose 
                        of and need for the project determined under 
                        paragraph (1)(A), regardless of whether the 
                        alternative would impact the environment to a 
                        greater degree than the preferred 
                        alternative.''.
    (d) Limitations on Claims.--Section 139(l) of title 23, United 
States Code, is amended--
            (1) in each of paragraphs (1) and (2), by striking ``180 
        days'' each place it appears and inserting ``90 days''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) Burden of proof.--In any claim described in the first 
        sentence of paragraph (1), the individual or entity bringing 
        the claim shall bear the burden of proving the claim.''.
    (e) Exclusions; Document Combination.--Section 139 of title 23, 
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(m) Categorical Exclusions; Document Combination.--
            ``(1) Categorical exclusions.--
                    ``(A) In general.--A highway project carried out 
                within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway or a 
                highway funded under section 118(e) shall be considered 
                to be a categorical exclusion under section 771.117(a) 
                of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (or a 
                successor regulation).
                    ``(B) State authority.--A State may designate or 
                classify a highway project carried out by the State as 
                a categorical exclusion under section 771.117(a) of 
                title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor 
                regulation).
            ``(2) Document combination.--To further expedite the 
        environmental review process for a project under this section, 
        the Secretary may combine the final environmental impact 
        statement and the record of decision for the project if a 
        preferred alternative is identified in the environmental impact 
        statement.''.
    (f) Policy on Lands, Wildlife and Waterfowl Refuges, and Historic 
Sites; De Minimis Impacts.--Section 303 of title 49, United States 
Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking the section heading and inserting the 
        following:
``Sec. 303. Policy on lands and wildlife and waterfowl refuges'';
            (2) in subsection (a), by striking ``, wildlife and 
        waterfowl refuges, and historic sites'' and inserting ``and 
        wildlife and waterfowl refuges'';
            (3) in subsection (c)--
                    (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
                            (i) by striking ``Subject to subsection 
                        (d), the Secretary'' and inserting ``The 
                        Secretary''; and
                            (ii) by striking ``, or land of an historic 
                        site of national, State, or local significance 
                        (as determined by the Federal, or local 
                        officials having jurisdiction over the park, 
                        area, refuge, or site)''; and
                    (B) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and 
                inserting the following:
            ``(1)(A) there is no prudent and feasible alternative to 
        using that land; and
            ``(B) the program or project includes all practicable 
        planning to minimize harm to the park, recreation area, or 
        wildlife and waterfowl refuge resulting from the use; or
            ``(2) the Governor of the State, and, if applicable, the 
        mayor or chief executive officer of the city, county, or 
        borough having management responsibility for or ownership of 
        areas or sites described in paragraph (1)(B) agree that the 
        transportation project is the preferred alternative.''; and
            (4) by striking subsection (d).

Summary: Project Delivery Improvement Act of 2011 - Authorizes a state to select without competitive bidding or the approval of the Secretary of Transportation (DOT) one or more proprietary, patented, or experimental products for use in a federal-aid highway project. Declares that state use of such products shall not affect the eligibility of the state or highway project to receive federal funding. Repeals certain parkland preservation requirements prohibiting the Secretary from approving a transportation program or project requiring the use of public park lands unless there is no feasible alternative to the use of such land. Makes the lead agency responsible for determining the purpose of and need for a project. Decreases from 180 days to 90 days after publication in the Federal Register of a notice that a permit, license, or approval for a highway or public transportation capital project is final the deadline for filing a claim seeking judicial review of the permit, license, or approval. Places the burden of proof of the claim on the claimant. Authorizes a state to designate a highway project as a categorical exclusion . Revises US policy on public lands and wildlife and waterfowl refuges to exclude historic sites. Authorizes the Secretary to approve a transportation program or project requiring the use of a park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge only if the Governor of the state agrees that such project is the preferred alternative.