Responsibly And Professionally Invigorating Development Act of 2015

Bill: 114-hr-348
Sponsor: Rep. Marino, Tom [R-PA-10]
Introduced: 2015-01-14 in the House
Policy area: Government Operations and Politics
Subjects: Administrative law and regulatory procedures
Congressional oversight
Economic performance and conditions
Environmental assessment, monitoring, research
Executive Office of the President
Judicial review and appeals
Licensing and registrations
Public participation and lobbying

Summary:
action_date: 2015-01-14
text: 

Responsibly And Professionally Invigorating Development Act of 2015 or the RAPID Act

 
 This bill establishes procedures to streamline the regulatory review, environmental decision making, and permitting process for major federal actions that are construction activities undertaken, reviewed, or funded by federal agencies.
 
Upon the request of a lead agency responsible for preparing environmental review documents, a project sponsor is authorized to prepare environmental review documents for those activities if the agency furnishes oversight and independently evaluates, approves, and adopts the documents prior to taking action or making any approval based on the document. 
 
No more than one environmental impact statement and one environmental assessment for a project must be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) for a project, except for supplemental environmental documents prepared under NEPA or environmental documents prepared pursuant to a court order. After the lead agency issues a record of decision, federal agencies may only rely on the environmental document prepared by the lead agency.
 
Projects may adopt certain environmental review documents of other projects located nearby or prepared by states under certain circumstances.
 
The bill sets forth provisions concerning requirements for initiating and completing environmental review for a project, including for: (1) determining the range of alternatives to be considered in environmental review documents, and (2) a schedule and deadlines for completing the review. 
 
A lead agency may not use the social cost of carbon in the environmental review or environmental decision making process.
 
Limitations are placed on claims arising under federal law seeking judicial review of a permit, license, or approval issued by a federal agency for an action subject to NEPA.

action_date: 2015-07-27
text: 
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
 

Responsibly And Professionally Invigorating Development Act of 2015 or the RAPID Act

 
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Administrative Procedure Act to establish procedures to streamline the regulatory review, environmental decision making, and permitting process required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) for construction projects that are federally funded or that require federal approval by a permit or regulatory decision.
 
Upon the request of a lead agency responsible for preparing environmental review documents, a project sponsor is authorized to prepare environmental review documents if the agency: (1) oversees the preparation of the documents, (2) provides independent evaluation of them, and (3) approves and adopts the documents prior to taking action or making any approval based on the documents. &quot;Environmental review&quot; means the federal agency procedures for preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS), environmental assessment (EA), categorical exclusion, or other document under NEPA.
 
No more than one EIS and one EA for a project must be prepared under NEPA, except for supplemental environmental documents prepared under NEPA or environmental documents prepared pursuant to a court order. After the lead agency issues a record of decision, federal agencies responsible for making any approval for that project may only rely on the environmental document prepared by the lead agency.
 
Upon the request of a project sponsor, the lead agency may: (1) adopt, use, or rely on secondary and cumulative impact analyses included in documents prepared under NEPA for projects located nearby if the analyses are pertinent to the NEPA decision for the project under review; and (2) adopt a document that has been prepared for a project under state laws as the EIS or EA for the project if those laws provide environmental protection and opportunities for public involvement that are substantially equivalent to NEPA. 
 
 The lead agency must publish a supplement to the state document before it adopts it if: (1) a significant change has been made to the project that is relevant for purposes of environmental review of the project, or (2) there have been significant changes in circumstances or availability of information relevant to the environmental review for the project. 
 
A lead agency may adopt for a project an environmental document prepared for a similar project that is nearby and that was subject to environmental review or similar state procedures within the last five years if there is a reasonable likelihood that the project will have similar environmental impacts.
 
The lead agency must invite any federal agency that is required to adopt the lead agency's environmental document to participate in the preparation of the document. A federal participating agency must collaborate on the preparation of that document unless it informs the lead agency that it: (1) has no jurisdiction, authority, expertise, or information with respect to the project; and (2) does not intend to submit comments on the project. 
 
 The bill precludes any agency that declines to participate from submitting comments on that document or taking measures to oppose any permit, license, or approval related to that project based on the environmental review. The lead agency may not act upon, respond to, or include in any document prepared under NEPA any comment submitted by a participating agency that concerns matters that are outside of the participating agency's authority and expertise.
 
Each federal agency must: (1) carry out obligations under other applicable laws concurrently and in conjunction with the review required under NEPA; and (2) make and carry out rules, policies, and procedures as may be reasonably necessary to enable the agency to ensure the completion of the environmental review and environmental decision making process in a timely, coordinated, and environmentally responsible manner.
 
The bill establishes requirements for initiating and completing environmental review for a project, including requirements with respect to: (1) the range of alternatives to be considered; (2) methodologies for analyzing those alternatives, including potential effects on employment; (3) a plan for coordinating public and agency participation in the environmental review; (4) comment periods for public and agency comments in the environmental review process; and (5) a schedule for completing the review. Participating agencies must comply with that schedule. 
 
For projects requiring preparation of an EA, the bill establishes a one-year deadline for issuing a finding of no significant impact or a Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS. For projects requiring preparation of an EIS, the bill establishes a two-year deadline for completing the EIS. Conditions for extensions are established.
 
The bill sets forth deadlines that apply to projects subject to review under NEPA and any decision under federal law relating to those projects. The bill deems a project to be approved if a federal agency fails to approve or otherwise act upon a permit, license, or other similar application for approval related to a project by those deadlines. Approval that is granted as a result of the failure of a federal agency to act is considered to be final agency action that may not be reversed by an agency. 
 
The bill prescribes responsibilities of the lead agency and the participating agencies to work cooperatively to identify and resolve issues that could delay completion of the environmental review or could result in denial of any approvals required for the project under applicable laws.
 
In the environmental review or environmental decision making process, a lead agency may not use estimates of the monetized damages associated with an incremental increase in carbon dioxide emissions in a given year.
 
The head of each federal agency must report annually on: (1) the projects for which the agency initiated preparation of an EIS or EA; (2) the projects for which the agency issued a record of decision or a finding of no significant impact and the length of time it took the agency to complete the environmental review for each such project; and (3) the filing and resolution of any lawsuits against the agency seeking judicial review of a permit, license, or approval issued by the agency for an action subject to NEPA. 
 
Limitations are placed on claims arising under federal law seeking judicial review of a permit, license, or approval issued by a federal agency for an action subject to NEPA.

action_date: 2015-09-25
text: 

Responsibly And Professionally Invigorating Development Act of 2015 or the RAPID Act

 
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Administrative Procedure Act to establish procedures to streamline the regulatory review, environmental decision making, and permitting process required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) for construction projects that are federally funded or that require federal approval by a permit or regulatory decision.
 
Upon the request of a lead agency responsible for preparing environmental review documents, a project sponsor is authorized to prepare environmental review documents if the agency: (1) oversees the preparation of the documents, (2) provides independent evaluation of them, and (3) approves and adopts the documents prior to taking action or making any approval based on the documents. &quot;Environmental review&quot; means the federal agency procedures for preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS), environmental assessment (EA), categorical exclusion, or other document under NEPA.
 
No more than one EIS and one EA for a project must be prepared under NEPA, except for supplemental environmental documents prepared under NEPA or environmental documents prepared pursuant to a court order. After the lead agency issues a record of decision, federal agencies responsible for making any approval for that project may only rely on the environmental document prepared by the lead agency.
 
Upon the request of a project sponsor, the lead agency may: (1) adopt, use, or rely on secondary and cumulative impact analyses included in documents prepared under NEPA for projects located nearby if the analyses are pertinent to the NEPA decision for the project under review; and (2) adopt a document that has been prepared for a project under state laws as the EIS or EA for the project if those laws provide environmental protection and opportunities for public involvement that are substantially equivalent to NEPA. 
 
 The lead agency must publish a supplement to the state document before it adopts it if: (1) a significant change has been made to the project that is relevant for purposes of environmental review of the project, or (2) there have been significant changes in circumstances or availability of information relevant to the environmental review for the project. 
 
A lead agency may adopt for a project an environmental document prepared for a similar project that is nearby and that was subject to environmental review or similar state procedures within the last five years if there is a reasonable likelihood that the project will have similar environmental impacts.
 
The lead agency must invite any federal agency that is required to adopt the lead agency's environmental document to collaborate in the preparation of the document. A federal cooperating agency must collaborate on the preparation of that document unless it informs the lead agency that it: (1) has no jurisdiction, authority, expertise, or information with respect to the project; and (2) does not intend to submit comments on the project. 
 
 The bill precludes any agency that declines to collaborate from submitting comments on that document or taking measures to oppose any permit, license, or approval related to that project based on the environmental review. The lead agency may not act upon, respond to, or include in any document prepared under NEPA any comment submitted by a cooperating agency that concerns matters that are outside of the cooperating agency's authority and expertise.
 
Each federal agency must: (1) carry out obligations under other applicable laws concurrently and in conjunction with the review required under NEPA; and (2) make and carry out rules, policies, and procedures as may be reasonably necessary to enable the agency to ensure the completion of the environmental review and environmental decision making process in a timely, coordinated, and environmentally responsible manner.
 
The bill establishes requirements for initiating and completing environmental review for a project, including requirements with respect to: (1) the range of alternatives to be considered; (2) methodologies for analyzing those alternatives, including potential effects on employment as well as the potential effects of the alternative on low-income communities and communities of color; (3) a plan for coordinating public and agency participation in the environmental review; (4) comment periods for public and agency comments in the environmental review process; and (5) a schedule for completing the review. Cooperating agencies must comply with that schedule. 
 
For projects requiring preparation of an EA, the bill establishes a one-year deadline for issuing a finding of no significant impact or a Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS. For projects requiring preparation of an EIS, the bill establishes a two-year deadline for completing the EIS. Conditions for extensions are established.
 
The bill sets forth deadlines that apply to projects subject to review under NEPA and any decision under federal law relating to those projects. The bill deems a project to be approved if a federal agency fails to approve or otherwise act upon a permit, license, or other similar application for approval related to a project by those deadlines. Approval that is granted as a result of the failure of a federal agency to act is considered to be final agency action that may not be reversed by an agency. 
 
The bill prescribes responsibilities of the lead agency and the cooperating agencies to work cooperatively to identify and resolve issues that could delay completion of the environmental review or could result in denial of any approvals required for the project under applicable laws.
 
In the environmental review or environmental decision making process, a lead agency may not use estimates of the monetized damages associated with an incremental increase in carbon dioxide emissions in a given year.
 
The head of each federal agency must report annually on: (1) the projects for which the agency initiated preparation of an EIS or EA; (2) the projects for which the agency issued a record of decision or a finding of no significant impact and the length of time it took the agency to complete the environmental review for each such project; and (3) the filing and resolution of any lawsuits against the agency seeking judicial review of a permit, license, or approval issued by the agency for an action subject to NEPA. 
 
Limitations are placed on claims arising under federal law seeking judicial review of a permit, license, or approval issued by a federal agency for an action subject to NEPA.


Legislative actions:
action_date: 2015-09-28
text: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 233 - 170 (Roll no. 518).
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 233 - 170 (Roll no. 518).
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: On motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 175 - 229 (Roll no. 517).
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H6255)
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to add language to the bill ensuring that nothing would apply to cases that affect safe drinking water or air quality of communities near the project, infringe on the property rights of American citizens, or adversely affect Native American tribes.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: Ms. Kuster moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on the Judiciary. (consideration: CR H6254-6255; text: CR H6254)
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 348.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: Subsequently, the Committee resumed it's sitting.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: The Committee of the Whole rose informally to receive a message from the Senate.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Johnson (GA) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Johnson (GA) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Johnson (GA) amendment No. 10.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment No. 9.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Gosar amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mrs. Dingell demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Gosar amendment No. 8.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Peters amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Peters demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Peters amendment No. 7.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Dingell amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mrs. Dingell demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Dingell amendment No. 6.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment No. 5.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Gallego amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Gallego demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Gallego amendment No. 4.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Grijalva amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Grijalva demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Grijalva amendment No. 3.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Lowenthal amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Lowenthal demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Lowenthal amendment No. 2.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 420, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Marino amendment No. 1.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
action_date: 2015-09-25
text: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6232-6247, H6247-6256; text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H6232-6235)
action_date: 2015-09-24
text: Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 348 as unfinished business.
action_date: 2015-09-24
text: On motion that the Committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
action_date: 2015-09-24
text: Mr. Goodlatte moved that the Committee rise.
action_date: 2015-09-24
text: GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 348.
action_date: 2015-09-24
text: The Speaker designated the Honorable John J. Duncan, Jr. to act as Chairman of the Committee.
action_date: 2015-09-24
text: House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 420 and Rule XVIII.
action_date: 2015-09-24
text: Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 348 and H.R. 758. The resolution provides for one hour debate on H.R. 348 and H.R. 758. The resolution provides that it shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of September 24, 2015, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules.
action_date: 2015-09-24
text: Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 420. (consideration: CR H6207-6213)
action_date: 2015-09-16
text: Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 420 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 348 and H.R. 758. The resolution provides for one hour debate on H.R. 348 and H.R. 758. The resolution provides that it shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of September 24, 2015, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules.
action_date: 2015-09-11
text: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 198.
action_date: 2015-09-11
text: Committee on Natural Resources discharged.
action_date: 2015-09-11
text: Committee on Natural Resources discharged.
action_date: 2015-07-27
text: House Committee on Natural Resources Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 11, 2015.
action_date: 2015-07-27
text: Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 114-228, Part I.
action_date: 2015-07-27
text: Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 114-228, Part I.
action_date: 2015-03-24
text: Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 15 - 11.
action_date: 2015-03-24
text: Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
action_date: 2015-03-23
text: Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law Discharged.
action_date: 2015-03-02
text: Subcommittee Hearings Held.
action_date: 2015-02-05
text: Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
action_date: 2015-01-14
text: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, 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.
action_date: 2015-01-14
text: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, 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.
action_date: 2015-01-14
text: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, 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.
action_date: 2015-01-14
text: Introduced in House
action_date: 2015-01-14
text: Introduced in House