Washington, DC – Today, Representative Scott Peters (CA-50) released the following statement ahead of House Natural Resources Committee Chair Bruce Westerman’s markup of the Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development or SPEED Act.

"I’m glad Chairman Westerman is marking up the SPEED Act this week. It’s extremely important that we reform the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) to better power our economy, protect our environment and lower costs for consumers. From our previous work together on Save our Sequoias and the Fix Our Forests Act, I know that Chairman Westerman is working honestly and diligently to find bipartisan solutions.

“To that end, the SPEED Act is a huge step forward. I hope that as the bill is marked up and moves to the House floor, we can find a way to address my and several of my colleagues’ remaining concerns. 

“First, permit certainty. Recent actions by the Trump Administration to revoke already issued and legally sound permits, and their reluctance or refusal to issue permits for new wind and solar projects is unprecedented and must be prevented going forward. The language already in the bill is welcome but needs to be strengthened.

“Second, remedies. This bill removes the ability for a court to stop a project if the environmental analysis supporting the permit is found to be faulty – even if the analysis is incompetent or fraudulent. While I am open to restricting injunctive relief for violations of NEPA, there should be some opportunity for a court to delay, modify or revoke the permit that relies on that analysis. The judicial review process should be reformed to be swift, fair, and targeted, and we are confident we can come to agreement on a bill that achieves those goals.

“Finally, the effort to reduce litigation and increase certainty by putting blinders on agency analysis – described as codifying the Seven County decision – may backfire. That case held that federal agencies were not required to analyze certain impacts that were remote in place and time.  The bill goes much further – affirmatively prohibiting that analysis.  Notwithstanding the practical impacts of agencies implementing these restrictions – slowing down reviews – this could actually increase litigation, as project sponsors and opponents could now use this new standard to litigate over what is and is not in scope, creating additional uncertainty, and delaying project timelines.

“I am confident that all parties are working in good faith to reach a broader bipartisan deal that will deliver a transparent and accountable permitting process that will allow America to truly compete. I look forward to continuing to work with the Natural Resources Committee, fellow Democrats, and other stakeholders to achieve this goal, as this bill moves through markup and to the House floor.”

###