The U.S. House of Representatives passed the SPEED Act Thursday, a sweeping effort to cut the five-year wait times that have stalled major energy and infrastructure projects.
What the SPEED Act Does
The bill, approved 221-196, would place statutory limits on environmental reviews, broaden the scope of actions that don’t require review, set clear deadlines, and restrict who can bring legal challenges and what remedies courts can impose.
Why NEPA Has Been Delayed
The National Environmental Policy Act, a 55-year-old law, requires detailed analysis for major projects and allows for public comments before approvals. A recent study found that environmental reviews often total nearly 600 pages and take nearly five years to complete.
Bipartisan Backing
Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Arkansas, the bill’s chief sponsor, said, “The SPEED Act is a focused, bipartisan effort to restore common sense and accountability to federal permitting.” Westerman, who chairs the House Natural Resources Committee, added, “Unfortunately, what was meant to facilitate responsible development has been twisted into a bureaucratic bottleneck that delays investments in the infrastructure and technologies that make our country run.”
Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, co-sponsor, said lawmakers from both parties have long agreed that “America’s broken permitting system is delaying investments in the basics we need – energy, transportation and housing.” He added, “Support for the measure gives me hope that Congress is finally ready to take the win on permitting reform.”
Opposition and Amendments
California Rep. Jared Huffman, the top Democrat on the Natural Resources panel, criticized the bill, saying, “The SPEED Act treats environmental reviews as a nuisance rather than a tool to prevent costly, harmful mistakes.” He continued, “Weakening environmental review won’t fix permitting challenges (and) won’t help us build the clean energy future that we need. Gutting NEPA only invites more risk, more mistakes, more litigation, more damage to communities that already face too many environmental burdens.”
The bill was altered by a GOP amendment that allows the Trump administration to continue blocking some offshore wind projects. The American Clean Power Association, which represents wind developers, pulled its support because of changes demanded by Republican Reps. Andy Harris of Maryland and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey. Jason Grumet, the group’s CEO, said, “The GOP amendment fundamentally changed legislation that represented genuine bipartisan progress on permitting reform. It’s disappointing that a partisan amendment … has now jeopardized that progress, turning what should have been a win for American energy into another missed opportunity.”
Harris, who chairs the conservative House Freedom Caucus, defended the amendment, saying it “will protect legal actions the Trump administration has taken thus far to combat the Biden offshore wind agenda,” including a project in Maryland that the administration has moved to block. Westerman called the change minor and said that without it, “we probably would not have gotten permitting reform done.”
Business Support
Business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, hailed the vote. Rodney Davis, senior vice president for government affairs, said, “Permitting reform is not just a business issue – it is a national priority.” He added, “Delays in project approvals hinder economic development, increase costs for consumers and undermine America’s ability to build and maintain critical infrastructure. Modernizing this process will enable timely construction of projects that deliver affordable and reliable energy … expand broadband connectivity (and) strengthen our ability to compete in the global race for AI innovation.”
Environmental Concerns
Environmental groups said the bill undermines a fundamental environmental law while empowering the Trump administration to permit polluting projects without adequate review. Stephen Schima, a senior lawyer for Earthjustice Action, said, “We urgently need to build the infrastructure necessary to address the climate crisis and to transition to a clean energy economy, but this bill is not the solution.” He added, “Far from helping build the clean energy projects of the future, the SPEED Act will only result in an abundance of contaminated air and water, dirty projects and chronic illnesses, with fewer opportunities to hold polluters accountable in court.”
Next Steps
The House approval shifts focus to the Senate, where a broader deal that includes changes to the Clean Water Act to facilitate pipeline projects and transmission lines is being considered. Democrats, including Sens. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, are also pursuing legislation to make it harder for President Donald Trump to cancel permits for clean-energy projects.
Key Takeaways
- The SPEED Act passed the House 221-196 to cut five-year NEPA delays.
- The bill limits environmental reviews, sets deadlines, and restricts legal challenges.
- Bipartisan support coexists with strong opposition from environmentalists and some Republicans.
- A GOP amendment allows the Trump administration to block offshore wind projects.
- Business groups praise the reform; environmental groups warn of weakened protections.
With the bill now in the Senate, lawmakers will decide whether the proposed reforms can balance the need for faster permitting with the protection of environmental safeguards.
