ePermit Act

119 HR 4503 EH: ePermit Act U.S. House of Representatives text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. I 119th CONGRESS1st Session H. R. 4503

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AN ACT To improve environmental reviews and authorizations through the use of interactive, digital, and cloud-based platforms, and for other purposes.

1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the ePermit Act.

2.FindingsThe Congress finds that— (1)coordination between Federal, State, and local agencies and project sponsors is critical to ensuring the timely and effective completion of environmental reviews and authorizations, including through the sharing of relevant information, alignment of environmental review timelines, and integration of authorizations, while maintaining compliance with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements; (2)digital strategies for environmental reviews have proven to make the community engagement process more accessible, available, and transparent to all stakeholders, especially the communities in which new projects are built; (3)establishing robust data architectures will ensure data integrity, improve transparency, reduce costs, and enhance the ability of the Federal Government to serve the public; (4)Federal agency use of modern software that can track the full lifecycle of environmental reviews and authorizations is critical for— (A)effective project management and process improvement; (B)enabling workflow automation, transparency, and tracking; and (C)simplifying reporting requirements; (5)modern business process management systems that track Federal agency workflows and produce vendor neutral, interoperable event, task, and other milestone data that can be shared with other Federal agency systems can reduce costs and improve performance for Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews and authorizations; (6)case and project management systems— (A)are essential tools for managing the tasks and activities associated with environmental reviews and authorizations; and (B)provide Federal agencies more data and insight into such environmental reviews and authorizations; (7)well-defined business rules can enable process automation that allows Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations to expedite routine tasks and workflows, and improve transparency and accuracy of project timeline estimates, which in turn can help project sponsors better plan for application preparation and project delivery milestones; (8)taking a standardized, digital-first perspective to environmental reviews and authorizations at Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations will improve document quality, lead to more concise reports, enable the reuse and accessibility of the data underpinning Federal agency analyses and decisions, and enable objective, technology-assisted evaluation of environmental impacts, analysis, and documentation, and accelerate future environmental reviews and authorizations; (9)Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations, project sponsors, and the public should have access to up-to-date information on accurate timelines and the status of environmental reviews and authorizations; and (10)allowing for seamless information exchange among Federal agencies and between Federal agencies and project sponsors will increase predictability and efficiency of environmental review and authorization schedules for project sponsors.

3.Establishment of data standards (a)In generalNot later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall develop, publish, and iteratively update data standards for the collection and curation of authorization data by Federal agencies, which shall be used to— (1)assist with environmental reviews and authorizations; (2)organize, define, and standardize various concepts, formats, and protocols that are included in environmental reviews and authorizations; and (3)reduce the need for redundant environmental reviews by creating a shared vocabulary and software systems that will support vendor neutrality, data interoperability, workflow automation, and automatic data exchange between Federal agencies. (b)InclusionsThe data standards developed, published, and iteratively updated under subsection (a) shall include the following: (1)A standardized taxonomy that allows Federal agencies to identify and track data types, relationships, and values. (2)Comprehensive categories for data, such as— (A)projects; (B)processes; (C)environmental documents; (D)public comments; (E)geospatial information; (F)public engagement events, as applicable by process or Federal agency; (G)case events; and (H)milestones to ensure clarity and uniformity.

4.Development of prototype toolsThe Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services, the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall design, test, and build prototype tools for environmental reviews and authorizations that will assist Federal agencies in implementing the minimum functional requirements described in section 5. The Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall prioritize designing, testing, and building tools under this section that— (1)support authorization case or project management systems that manage tasks, milestones, and activities associated with environmental reviews and authorizations, and provide Federal agencies more data and insight into such reviews and authorizations; (2)enable— (A)application submission and tracking portals used by project sponsors, enabling greater transparency; and (B)public comment opportunity tracking portals to increase transparency; (3)facilitate automated applications, environmental reviews. and authorizations; (4)allow data exchange between Federal agency systems; and (5)accelerate complex environmental reviews.

5.Publication of guidance for implementation of data standards and minimum functional requirements (a)PublicationNot later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall publish guidance for how each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations implements— (1)the data standards published under section 3; and (2)the following minimum functional requirements: (A)Application data sharing that enables automated transfer of relevant environmental review and authorization data among Federal agencies. (B)Automated project screening to assist frontline staff with reviewing project sponsor provided information for completeness and accuracy and determining if a categorical exclusion or other general authorization applies to an action. Automated project screening may not be used by the Council on Environmental Quality or a Federal agency to unlawfully restrict any activities on Federal lands. (C)Public availability of screening criteria and related decision models. (D)Automated case or project management tools which include a repository of relevant data and metadata that enable advanced tracking, reporting, and optimization to aid workflows. (E)Integrated geographic information system analysis tools which incorporate geospatial data layers and models for each resource analyzed as part of an environmental review or authorization for a given study area. (F)Document management tools that preserve metadata associated with geospatial analysis, modeling, and other analytic processes conducted during an environmental review or authorization, to support future reviews and enable Artificial Intelligence-assisted analysis of past decisions. (G)Automated comment compilation and analysis tools, including services for comment categorization and response that handle the lifecycle of comment submission, analysis, categorization and response with Artificial Intelligence support where appropriate. (H)Administrative record management tools that maintain both portable document formats and data-rich repositories accessible to both machine and human users. (I)Common or interoperable Federal agency services that integrate shared services, shared applications, and common user experiences for Federal agency staff, project sponsors, and the public. (b)InclusionsThe guidance published under this section shall include the following: (1)Guidelines for cloud-based storage, data sharing protocols, and application programming interfaces to enable the Council on Environmental Quality to work with Federal agencies to use authorization data to aid Federal agencies in modernizing their environmental reviews and authorizations and for iterative development of the authorization portal. (2)Provisions that support scalability and adaptability of the minimum requirements to emerging technologies.

6.Implementation of data standards and minimum functional requirements (a)ImplementationThe head of each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations shall— (1)not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act— (A)compare existing Federal agency systems for environmental reviews and authorizations under their authority with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2) and report findings from such comparison to the Council on Environmental Quality; (B)assess whether existing Federal agency technological capabilities are consistent with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); (C)submit to the Council on Environmental Quality a report that estimates the completion dates for implementing the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); and (D)submit to the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality, an implementation plan that— (i)describes how the Federal agency will implement the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); and (ii)describes how, to the extent the Federal agency determines necessary to meet relevant statutory requirements, the Federal agency will adopt or implement the prototype tools tested, designed, and built under section 4; and (2)not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, begin implementing the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2). (b)ReportNot less frequently than twice each year, the Chief Information Officer of each Federal agency, in consultation with the Chief Environmental Review and Permitting Officer of each Federal agency, shall submit to the Council on Environmental Quality and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a report on the progress of the Federal agency towards meeting the requirements of subsection (a).

7.Unified interagency data system (a)In general (1)Unified interagency data systemTo the maximum extent practicable, the Chair of the Council of Environmental Quality and the head of each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations shall iteratively develop and maintain a unified interagency data system consisting of interconnected Federal agency systems and shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations. (2)Authorization portal (A)In generalThe shared services developed and maintained under paragraph (1) shall include a common interactive, digital, cloud-based authorization portal, which shall— (i)be designed in a manner consistent with— (I)the recommendations of the Council on Environmental Quality included in the study submitted pursuant to section 110 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4336d) titled Council on Environmental Quality Report to Congress on the Potential for Online and Digital Technologies to Address Delays in Reviews and Improve Public Accessibility and Transparency under 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); and (II)the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); (ii)serve as a platform for tracking and displaying real-time data on environmental reviews and authorizations made available through application programming interfaces or other reporting mechanisms from Federal agency systems that are compliant with the data standards and data architecture described in this Act; (iii)be supported by a decentralized, cross-network digital infrastructure software that ensures vendor neutrality and interoperability of data and models across Federal agencies; (iv)include a mechanism for the dissemination of relevant information (such as a notice of intent for public comment, public meetings, project statuses, or a notice of intent to begin an environmental review) to local communities, as applicable; (v)allow a project sponsor to submit all necessary documentation for environmental reviews and authorizations in one unified and secure portal; (vi)support interactive, digital, and cloud-based tools enabling applicants to edit documents and collaborate with relevant Federal agencies in real time; (vii)support visual features, including video, animation, geographic information system displays, interactive maps, and three-dimensional renderings; (viii)provide for the exchange of information to and from Federal agency data systems via an application programming interface or another reporting mechanisms; (ix)allow for the submission of geospatial data associated with project location, footprint, and impact; (x)support automatic documentation of submission and process timelines; and (xi)allow the following metrics to be tracked over time— (I)estimates of achieved efficiencies, such as reductions in the time between receipt of applications and final authorization decisions; (II)comparisons of authorization timelines before and after the implementation of this Act; (III)usage of the authorization portal and other statistics from the Digital Analytics Program; (IV)metrics on the number of public comments received, responses provided, and community meetings held; (V)the number of projects subject to litigation based on authorization deficiencies or inefficiencies; (VI)a list of Federal agencies that are not yet fully compliant with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2), along with their progress toward compliance; and (VII)examples or repositories of Federal agency-developed digital workflows enabled by the implementation of this Act, including visualizations of data sharing, authorizations and decision logic, and environmental reviews. (B)Administrative supportThe Administrator of General Services shall host the authorization portal as a shared service for Congress, Federal agencies, and the public. (C)AccessabilityThe authorization portal shall be accessible to Congress, Federal agencies, and the public, with appropriate safeguards to protect sensitive or classified information and information restricted by user type as appropriate. (D)Public accessibilityTo the extent practicable and consistent with other law, the authorization portal shall provide public access to non-sensitive data, including authorization timelines, location, project type, environmental reviews, and mitigation measures. (E)Congressional access and oversight (i)In generalThe authorization portal shall provide Congress with direct access to aggregated performance data and other analytics to enable real-time oversight of Federal agencies. (ii)Artificial intelligence support systems and training materialsCongress shall have access to the data, fine-tuning procedures, and prompt configurations specifically created or adapted for Artificial Intelligence systems used to support environmental review or authorization activities, excluding proprietary or general pretraining materials unrelated to such agency-specific customization. (iii)Technical assistanceThe Council on Environmental Quality shall provide to Congress technical assistance upon request to ensure effective use of the authorization portal and Artificial Intelligence systems for oversight purposes. (3)Cybersecurity and compliance considerationsThe authorization portal shall be designed to promote vendor neutral interoperability, reduce redundancy, and ensure compliance and coordination with other laws, including— (A)section 552a of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Privacy Act of 1974), and subchapter II of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code; (B)the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program established under section 3608 of title 44, United States Code; and (C)the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency of the Department of Homeland Security, for a case in which the project is in coordination with a Federal agency with stringent security requirements. (b)Deadlines (1)Shared services pilotNot later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Council on Environmental Quality shall oversee piloting of shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations, including the authorization portal under subsection (a)(2). (2)Unified system development and implementationTo the maximum extent practicable, not later than December 1, 2027, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall develop and implement the unified interagency data system required under subsection (a)(1). (c)ReportNot less frequently than annually, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the Council on Environmental Quality’s progress on developing a unified interagency data system under subsection (a).

8.Authority to enter into contractsSubject to the availability of appropriations, the Council on Environmental Quality may enter into contracts and other arrangements for analyses, services, and products with Federal agencies, private organizations, and businesses, and make such payments as determined necessary by the Council on Environmental Quality to carry out the provisions of this Act.

9.Clarifying rulemaking authorityNothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the Council on Environmental Quality or a Federal agency to impose additional regulatory processes or requirements beyond those expressly stipulated under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) or any other law.

10.Savings clauseTo the extent that a data system, technology, or tool developed or incorporated into a unified interagency data system under this Act is not limited by project type, the data system, technology, or tool shall not have its use be restricted by project type.

11.DefinitionsIn this Act: (1)AuthorizationThe term authorization means any license, permit, approval, finding, determination, or other administrative decision issued by an agency and any interagency consultation that is required or authorized under Federal law in order to site, construct, reconstruct, or commence operations of a project administered by a Federal agency. (2)Authorization dataThe term authorization data means— (A)any data relevant for a Federal agency to— (i)determine the effect on the environment of an action for which an authorization is required by the Federal agency; and (ii)determine whether to issue such authorization; and (B)any community input or public comment on such determinations. (3)Data architectureThe term data architecture means the design and organization of data systems, including frameworks for data storage, processing, and exchange. (4)Data standardsThe term data standards means agreed-upon specifications for data formats, structures, and definitions to ensure consistency and vendor neutral interoperability. (5)Environmental reviewThe term environmental review means any Federal agency procedures or processes for— (A)applying a categorical exclusion; or (B)preparing an environmental assessment, an environmental impact statement, or another document required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). (6)Federal agencyThe term Federal agency has the meaning given the term agency in section 551 of title 5, United States Code. (7)Federal Permitting Improvement Steering CouncilThe term Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council has the meaning given the term Council in section 41001 of the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 4370m). Passed the House of Representatives December 9, 2025.Kevin F. McCumber,Clerk.

119 HR 4503 IH: ePermit Act U.S. House of Representatives 2025-07-17 text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. I119th CONGRESS1st SessionH. R. 4503IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESJuly 17, 2025Mr. Johnson of South Dakota (for himself and Mr. Peters) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural ResourcesA BILLTo improve environmental reviews and authorizations through the use of interactive, digital, and cloud-based platforms, and for other purposes.

1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the ePermit Act.

2.FindingsThe Congress finds that— (1)coordination between Federal, State, and local agencies and project sponsors is critical to ensuring the timely and effective completion of environmental reviews and authorizations, including through the sharing of relevant information, alignment of environmental review timelines, and integration of authorizations, while maintaining compliance with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements; (2)digital strategies for environmental reviews have proven to make the community engagement process more accessible, available, and transparent to all stakeholders, especially the communities in which new projects are built; (3)establishing robust data architectures will ensure data integrity, improve transparency, reduce costs, and enhance the ability of the Federal Government to serve the public; (4)Federal agency use of modern software that can track the full lifecycle of environmental reviews and authorizations is critical for— (A)effective project management and process improvement; (B)enabling workflow automation, transparency, and tracking; and (C)simplifying reporting requirements; (5)modern business process management systems that track Federal agency workflows and produce interoperable event, task, and other milestone data that can be shared with other Federal agency systems can reduce costs and improve performance for Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews and authorizations; (6)case management systems— (A)are essential tools for managing the tasks and activities associated with environmental reviews and authorizations; and (B)provide Federal agencies more data and insight into such environmental reviews and authorizations; (7)well-defined business rules can enable process automation that allows Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations to expedite routine tasks and workflows, and improve transparency and accuracy of project timeline estimates, which in turn can help project sponsors better plan for application preparation and project delivery milestones; (8)taking a standardized, digital-first perspective to environmental reviews and authorizations at Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations will improve document quality, lead to more concise reports, enable the reuse and accessibility of the data underpinning Federal agency analyses and decisions, and enable objective, technology-assisted evaluation of environmental impacts, analysis, and documentation, and accelerate future environmental reviews and authorizations; (9)Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations, project sponsors, and the public should have access to up-to-date information on accurate timelines and the status of environmental reviews and authorizations; and (10)allowing for seamless information exchange among Federal agencies and between Federal agencies and project sponsors will increase predictability and efficiency of environmental review and authorization schedules for project sponsors.

3.Establishment of data standards (a)In generalNot later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall develop, publish, and iteratively update data standards for the collection and curation of authorization data by Federal agencies, which shall be used to— (1)assist with environmental reviews and authorizations; (2)organize, define, and standardize various concepts, formats, and protocols that are included in environmental reviews and authorizations; and (3)reduce the need for redundant environmental reviews by creating a shared vocabulary and software systems that will support data interoperability and automatic data exchange between Federal agencies. (b)InclusionsThe data standards developed, published, and iteratively updated under subsection (a) shall include the following: (1)A standardized taxonomy that allows Federal agencies to identify and track data types, relationships, and values. (2)Comprehensive categories for data, such as— (A)projects; (B)processes; (C)environmental documents; (D)public comments; (E)geospatial information; (F)public engagement events, as applicable by process or Federal agency; (G)case events; and (H)milestones to ensure clarity and uniformity.

4.Development of prototype toolsThe Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services, the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall design, test, and build prototype tools for environmental reviews and authorizations that will assist Federal agencies in implementing the minimum functional requirements described in section 5. The Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall prioritize designing, testing, and building tools under this section that— (1)support authorization case management systems that manage tasks, milestones, and activities associated with environmental reviews and authorizations, and provide Federal agencies more data and insight into such reviews and authorizations; (2)enable application submission and tracking portals used by project sponsors, enabling greater transparency; (3)facilitate automated applications, environmental reviews. and authorizations; (4)allow data exchange between Federal agency systems; and (5)accelerate complex environmental reviews.

5.Publication of guidance for implementation of data standards and minimum functional requirements (a)PublicationNot later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall publish guidance for how each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations implements— (1)the data standards published under section 3; and (2)the following minimum functional requirements: (A)Application data sharing that enables automated transfer of relevant environmental review and authorization data among Federal agencies. (B)Automated project screening to assist frontline staff with reviewing project sponsor provided information for completeness and accuracy and determining if a categorical exclusion or other general authorization applies to an action. Automated project screening may not be used by the Council on Environmental Quality or a Federal agency to unlawfully restrict any activities on Federal lands. (C)Public availability of screening criteria and related decision models. (D)Automated case management tools which include a repository of relevant data and metadata that enable advanced tracking, reporting, and optimization to aid workflows. (E)Integrated geographic information system analysis tools which incorporate geospatial data layers and models for each resource analyzed as part of an environmental review or authorization for a given study area. (F)Document management tools that preserve metadata associated with geospatial analysis, modeling, and other analytic processes conducted during an environmental review or authorization, to support future reviews and enable Artificial Intelligence-assisted analysis of past decisions. (G)Automated comment compilation and analysis tools, including services for comment categorization and response that handle the lifecycle of comment submission, analysis, categorization and response with Artificial Intelligence support where appropriate. (H)Administrative record management tools that maintain both portable document formats and data-rich repositories accessible to both machine and human users. (I)Common or interoperable Federal agency services that integrate shared services, shared applications, and common user experiences for Federal agency staff, project sponsors, and the public. (b)InclusionsThe guidance published under this section shall include the following: (1)Guidelines for cloud-based storage, data sharing protocols, and application programming interfaces to enable the Council on Environmental Quality to work with Federal agencies to use authorization data to aid Federal agencies in modernizing their environmental reviews and authorizations and for iterative development of the authorization portal. (2)Provisions that support scalability and adaptability of the minimum requirements to emerging technologies.

6.Implementation of data standards and minimum functional requirements (a)ImplementationThe head of each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations shall— (1)not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act— (A)compare existing Federal agency systems for environmental reviews and authorizations with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2) and report findings from such comparison to the Council on Environmental Quality; (B)assess whether existing Federal agency technological capabilities are consistent with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); (C)submit to the Council on Environmental Quality a report that estimates the completion dates for implementing the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); and (D)submit to the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality, an implementation plan that— (i)describes how the Federal agency will implement the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); and (ii)describes how, to the extent the Federal agency determines necessary to meet relevant statutory requirements, the Federal agency will adopt or implement the prototype tools tested, designed, and built under section 4; and (2)not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, begin implementing the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2). (b)ReportNot less frequently than twice each year, the Chief Information Officer of each Federal agency, in consultation with the Chief Environmental Review and Permitting Officer of each Federal agency, shall submit to the Council on Environmental Quality and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a report on the progress of the Federal agency towards meeting the requirements of subsection (a).

7.Unified interagency data system (a)In general (1)Unified interagency data systemTo the maximum extent practicable, the Chair of the Council of Environmental Quality and the head of each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations shall iteratively develop and maintain a unified interagency data system consisting of interconnected Federal agency systems and shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations. (2)Authorization portal (A)In generalThe shared services developed and maintained under paragraph (1) shall include a common interactive, digital, cloud-based authorization portal, which shall— (i)be designed in a manner consistent with— (I)the recommendations of the Council on Environmental Quality included in the study submitted pursuant to section 110 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4336d) titled Council on Environmental Quality Report to Congress on the Potential for Online and Digital Technologies to Address Delays in Reviews and Improve Public Accessibility and Transparency under 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); and (II)the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); (ii)serve as a centralized platform for tracking and displaying real-time data on environmental reviews and authorizations made available through application programming interfaces or other reporting mechanisms from Federal agency systems that are compliant with the data standards and data architecture described in this Act; (iii)include a mechanism for the dissemination of relevant information (such as a notice of intent for public comment, public meetings, project statuses, or a notice of intent to begin an environmental review) to local communities, as applicable; (iv)allow a project sponsor to submit all necessary documentation for environmental reviews and authorizations in one unified and secure portal; (v)support interactive, digital, and cloud-based tools enabling applicants to edit documents and collaborate with relevant Federal agencies in real time; (vi)support visual features, including video, animation, geographic information system displays, interactive maps, and three-dimensional renderings; (vii)provide for the exchange of information to and from Federal agency data systems via an application programming interface or another reporting mechanisms; (viii)allow for the submission of geospatial data associated with project location, footprint, and impact; (ix)support automatic documentation of submission and process timelines; and (x)allow the following metrics to be tracked over time— (I)estimates of achieved efficiencies, such as reductions in the time between receipt of applications and final authorization decisions; (II)comparisons of authorization timelines before and after the implementation of this Act; (III)usage of the authorization portal and other statistics from the Digital Analytics Program; (IV)metrics on the number of public comments received, responses provided, and community meetings held; (V)the number of projects subject to litigation based on authorization deficiencies or inefficiencies; (VI)a list of Federal agencies that are not yet fully compliant with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2), along with their progress toward compliance; and (VII)examples or repositories of Federal agency-developed digital workflows enabled by the implementation of this Act, including visualizations of data sharing, authorizations and decision logic, and environmental reviews. (B)Administrative supportThe Administrator of General Services shall host the authorization portal as a shared service for Congress, Federal agencies, and the public. (C)AccessabilityThe authorization portal shall be accessible to Congress, Federal agencies, and the public, with appropriate safeguards to protect sensitive or classified information and information restricted by user type as appropriate. (D)Public accessibilityTo the extent practicable and consistent with other law, the authorization portal shall provide public access to non-sensitive data, including authorization timelines, location, project type, environmental reviews, and mitigation measures. (E)Congressional access and oversight (i)In generalThe authorization portal shall provide Congress with direct access to aggregated performance data and other analytics to enable real-time oversight of Federal agencies. (ii)Technical assistanceThe Council on Environmental Quality shall provide to Congress technical assistance upon request to ensure effective use of the authorization portal for oversight purposes. (3) Cybersecurity and compliance considerations The authorization portal shall be designed to promote interoperability, reduce redundancy, and ensure compliance and coordination with other laws, including— (A) section 552a of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Privacy Act of 1974), and subchapter II of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code; (B) the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program established under section 3608 of title 44, United States Code; and (C) the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency of the Department of Homeland Security, for a case in which the project is in coordination with a Federal agency with stringent security requirements. (b)Deadlines (1)Shared services pilotNot later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Council on Environmental Quality shall oversee piloting of shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations, including the authorization portal under subsection (a)(2). (2)Unified system development and implementationTo the maximum extent practicable, not later than December 1, 2027, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall develop and implement the unified interagency data system required under subsection (a)(1). (c)ReportNot less frequently than annually, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report on the Council on Environmental Quality’s progress on developing a unified interagency data system under subsection (a). (d)Authorization of appropriationsThere is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2032, to remain available until expended.

8.Authority to enter into contractsThe Council on Environmental Quality may enter into contracts and other arrangements for analyses, services, and products with Federal agencies, private organizations, and businesses, and make such payments as determined necessary by the Council on Environmental Quality to carry out the provisions of this Act.

9.Clarifying rulemaking authorityNothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the Council on Environmental Quality or a Federal agency to impose additional regulatory processes or requirements beyond those expressly stipulated under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) or any other law.

10.DefinitionsIn this Act: (1)AuthorizationThe term authorization means any license, permit, approval, finding, determination, or other administrative decision issued by an agency and any interagency consultation that is required or authorized under Federal law in order to site, construct, reconstruct, or commence operations of a project administered by a Federal agency. (2)Authorization dataThe term authorization data means— (A)any data relevant for a Federal agency to— (i)determine the effect on the environment of an action for which an authorization is required by the Federal agency; and (ii)determine whether to issue such authorization; and (B)any community input or public comment on such determinations. (3)Data architectureThe term data architecture means the design and organization of data systems, including frameworks for data storage, processing, and exchange. (4)Data standardsThe term data standards means agreed-upon specifications for data formats, structures, and definitions to ensure consistency and interoperability. (5)Environmental reviewThe term environmental review means any Federal agency procedures or processes for— (A)applying a categorical exclusion; or (B)preparing an environmental assessment, an environmental impact statement, or another document required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). (6)Federal agencyThe term Federal agency has the meaning given the term agency in section 551 of title 5, United States Code. (7)Federal Permitting Improvement Steering CouncilThe term Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council has the meaning given the term Council in section 41001 of the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 4370m).

119 HR 4503 : ePermit Act U.S. House of Representatives 2025-12-10 text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. IIB119th CONGRESS1st SessionH. R. 4503IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATESDecember 10, 2025 Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public WorksAN ACTTo improve environmental reviews and authorizations through the use of interactive, digital, and cloud-based platforms, and for other purposes.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the ePermit Act.2.FindingsThe Congress finds that—(1)coordination between Federal, State, and local agencies and project sponsors is critical to ensuring the timely and effective completion of environmental reviews and authorizations, including through the sharing of relevant information, alignment of environmental review timelines, and integration of authorizations, while maintaining compliance with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements;(2)digital strategies for environmental reviews have proven to make the community engagement process more accessible, available, and transparent to all stakeholders, especially the communities in which new projects are built;(3)establishing robust data architectures will ensure data integrity, improve transparency, reduce costs, and enhance the ability of the Federal Government to serve the public;(4)Federal agency use of modern software that can track the full lifecycle of environmental reviews and authorizations is critical for—(A)effective project management and process improvement;(B)enabling workflow automation, transparency, and tracking; and(C)simplifying reporting requirements;(5)modern business process management systems that track Federal agency workflows and produce vendor neutral, interoperable event, task, and other milestone data that can be shared with other Federal agency systems can reduce costs and improve performance for Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews and authorizations;(6)case and project management systems—(A)are essential tools for managing the tasks and activities associated with environmental reviews and authorizations; and(B)provide Federal agencies more data and insight into such environmental reviews and authorizations;(7)well-defined business rules can enable process automation that allows Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations to expedite routine tasks and workflows, and improve transparency and accuracy of project timeline estimates, which in turn can help project sponsors better plan for application preparation and project delivery milestones;(8)taking a standardized, digital-first perspective to environmental reviews and authorizations at Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations will improve document quality, lead to more concise reports, enable the reuse and accessibility of the data underpinning Federal agency analyses and decisions, and enable objective, technology-assisted evaluation of environmental impacts, analysis, and documentation, and accelerate future environmental reviews and authorizations;(9)Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations, project sponsors, and the public should have access to up-to-date information on accurate timelines and the status of environmental reviews and authorizations; and(10)allowing for seamless information exchange among Federal agencies and between Federal agencies and project sponsors will increase predictability and efficiency of environmental review and authorization schedules for project sponsors.3.Establishment of data standards(a)In generalNot later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall develop, publish, and iteratively update data standards for the collection and curation of authorization data by Federal agencies, which shall be used to—(1)assist with environmental reviews and authorizations;(2)organize, define, and standardize various concepts, formats, and protocols that are included in environmental reviews and authorizations; and(3)reduce the need for redundant environmental reviews by creating a shared vocabulary and software systems that will support vendor neutrality, data interoperability, workflow automation, and automatic data exchange between Federal agencies.(b)InclusionsThe data standards developed, published, and iteratively updated under subsection (a) shall include the following:(1)A standardized taxonomy that allows Federal agencies to identify and track data types, relationships, and values.(2)Comprehensive categories for data, such as—(A)projects;(B)processes;(C)environmental documents;(D)public comments;(E)geospatial information;(F)public engagement events, as applicable by process or Federal agency;(G)case events; and(H)milestones to ensure clarity and uniformity.4.Development of prototype toolsThe Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services, the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall design, test, and build prototype tools for environmental reviews and authorizations that will assist Federal agencies in implementing the minimum functional requirements described in section 5. The Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall prioritize designing, testing, and building tools under this section that—(1)support authorization case or project management systems that manage tasks, milestones, and activities associated with environmental reviews and authorizations, and provide Federal agencies more data and insight into such reviews and authorizations;(2)enable—(A)application submission and tracking portals used by project sponsors, enabling greater transparency; and(B)public comment opportunity tracking portals to increase transparency;(3)facilitate automated applications, environmental reviews. and authorizations;(4)allow data exchange between Federal agency systems; and(5)accelerate complex environmental reviews.5.Publication of guidance for implementation of data standards and minimum functional requirements(a)PublicationNot later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall publish guidance for how each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations implements—(1)the data standards published under section 3; and(2)the following minimum functional requirements:(A)Application data sharing that enables automated transfer of relevant environmental review and authorization data among Federal agencies.(B)Automated project screening to assist frontline staff with reviewing project sponsor provided information for completeness and accuracy and determining if a categorical exclusion or other general authorization applies to an action. Automated project screening may not be used by the Council on Environmental Quality or a Federal agency to unlawfully restrict any activities on Federal lands.(C)Public availability of screening criteria and related decision models.(D)Automated case or project management tools which include a repository of relevant data and metadata that enable advanced tracking, reporting, and optimization to aid workflows.(E)Integrated geographic information system analysis tools which incorporate geospatial data layers and models for each resource analyzed as part of an environmental review or authorization for a given study area.(F)Document management tools that preserve metadata associated with geospatial analysis, modeling, and other analytic processes conducted during an environmental review or authorization, to support future reviews and enable Artificial Intelligence-assisted analysis of past decisions.(G)Automated comment compilation and analysis tools, including services for comment categorization and response that handle the lifecycle of comment submission, analysis, categorization and response with Artificial Intelligence support where appropriate.(H)Administrative record management tools that maintain both portable document formats and data-rich repositories accessible to both machine and human users.(I)Common or interoperable Federal agency services that integrate shared services, shared applications, and common user experiences for Federal agency staff, project sponsors, and the public.(b)InclusionsThe guidance published under this section shall include the following:(1)Guidelines for cloud-based storage, data sharing protocols, and application programming interfaces to enable the Council on Environmental Quality to work with Federal agencies to use authorization data to aid Federal agencies in modernizing their environmental reviews and authorizations and for iterative development of the authorization portal.(2)Provisions that support scalability and adaptability of the minimum requirements to emerging technologies.6.Implementation of data standards and minimum functional requirements(a)ImplementationThe head of each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations shall—(1)not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act—(A)compare existing Federal agency systems for environmental reviews and authorizations under their authority with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2) and report findings from such comparison to the Council on Environmental Quality;(B)assess whether existing Federal agency technological capabilities are consistent with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2);(C)submit to the Council on Environmental Quality a report that estimates the completion dates for implementing the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); and(D)submit to the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality, an implementation plan that—(i)describes how the Federal agency will implement the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); and(ii)describes how, to the extent the Federal agency determines necessary to meet relevant statutory requirements, the Federal agency will adopt or implement the prototype tools tested, designed, and built under section 4; and(2)not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, begin implementing the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2).(b)ReportNot less frequently than twice each year, the Chief Information Officer of each Federal agency, in consultation with the Chief Environmental Review and Permitting Officer of each Federal agency, shall submit to the Council on Environmental Quality and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a report on the progress of the Federal agency towards meeting the requirements of subsection (a).7.Unified interagency data system(a)In general(1)Unified interagency data systemTo the maximum extent practicable, the Chair of the Council of Environmental Quality and the head of each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations shall iteratively develop and maintain a unified interagency data system consisting of interconnected Federal agency systems and shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations.(2)Authorization portal(A)In generalThe shared services developed and maintained under paragraph (1) shall include a common interactive, digital, cloud-based authorization portal, which shall—(i)be designed in a manner consistent with—(I)the recommendations of the Council on Environmental Quality included in the study submitted pursuant to section 110 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4336d) titled Council on Environmental Quality Report to Congress on the Potential for Online and Digital Technologies to Address Delays in Reviews and Improve Public Accessibility and Transparency under 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); and(II)the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2);(ii)serve as a platform for tracking and displaying real-time data on environmental reviews and authorizations made available through application programming interfaces or other reporting mechanisms from Federal agency systems that are compliant with the data standards and data architecture described in this Act;(iii)be supported by a decentralized, cross-network digital infrastructure software that ensures vendor neutrality and interoperability of data and models across Federal agencies;(iv)include a mechanism for the dissemination of relevant information (such as a notice of intent for public comment, public meetings, project statuses, or a notice of intent to begin an environmental review) to local communities, as applicable;(v)allow a project sponsor to submit all necessary documentation for environmental reviews and authorizations in one unified and secure portal;(vi)support interactive, digital, and cloud-based tools enabling applicants to edit documents and collaborate with relevant Federal agencies in real time;(vii)support visual features, including video, animation, geographic information system displays, interactive maps, and three-dimensional renderings;(viii)provide for the exchange of information to and from Federal agency data systems via an application programming interface or another reporting mechanisms;(ix)allow for the submission of geospatial data associated with project location, footprint, and impact;(x)support automatic documentation of submission and process timelines; and(xi)allow the following metrics to be tracked over time—(I)estimates of achieved efficiencies, such as reductions in the time between receipt of applications and final authorization decisions;(II)comparisons of authorization timelines before and after the implementation of this Act;(III)usage of the authorization portal and other statistics from the Digital Analytics Program;(IV)metrics on the number of public comments received, responses provided, and community meetings held;(V)the number of projects subject to litigation based on authorization deficiencies or inefficiencies;(VI)a list of Federal agencies that are not yet fully compliant with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2), along with their progress toward compliance; and(VII)examples or repositories of Federal agency-developed digital workflows enabled by the implementation of this Act, including visualizations of data sharing, authorizations and decision logic, and environmental reviews.(B)Administrative supportThe Administrator of General Services shall host the authorization portal as a shared service for Congress, Federal agencies, and the public.(C)AccessabilityThe authorization portal shall be accessible to Congress, Federal agencies, and the public, with appropriate safeguards to protect sensitive or classified information and information restricted by user type as appropriate.(D)Public accessibilityTo the extent practicable and consistent with other law, the authorization portal shall provide public access to non-sensitive data, including authorization timelines, location, project type, environmental reviews, and mitigation measures.(E)Congressional access and oversight(i)In generalThe authorization portal shall provide Congress with direct access to aggregated performance data and other analytics to enable real-time oversight of Federal agencies.(ii)Artificial intelligence support systems and training materialsCongress shall have access to the data, fine-tuning procedures, and prompt configurations specifically created or adapted for Artificial Intelligence systems used to support environmental review or authorization activities, excluding proprietary or general pretraining materials unrelated to such agency-specific customization.(iii)Technical assistanceThe Council on Environmental Quality shall provide to Congress technical assistance upon request to ensure effective use of the authorization portal and Artificial Intelligence systems for oversight purposes.(3)Cybersecurity and compliance considerationsThe authorization portal shall be designed to promote vendor neutral interoperability, reduce redundancy, and ensure compliance and coordination with other laws, including—(A)section 552a of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Privacy Act of 1974), and subchapter II of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code;(B)the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program established under section 3608 of title 44, United States Code; and(C)the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency of the Department of Homeland Security, for a case in which the project is in coordination with a Federal agency with stringent security requirements.(b)Deadlines(1)Shared services pilotNot later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Council on Environmental Quality shall oversee piloting of shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations, including the authorization portal under subsection (a)(2).(2)Unified system development and implementationTo the maximum extent practicable, not later than December 1, 2027, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall develop and implement the unified interagency data system required under subsection (a)(1).(c)ReportNot less frequently than annually, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the Council on Environmental Quality’s progress on developing a unified interagency data system under subsection (a).8.Authority to enter into contractsSubject to the availability of appropriations, the Council on Environmental Quality may enter into contracts and other arrangements for analyses, services, and products with Federal agencies, private organizations, and businesses, and make such payments as determined necessary by the Council on Environmental Quality to carry out the provisions of this Act.9.Clarifying rulemaking authorityNothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the Council on Environmental Quality or a Federal agency to impose additional regulatory processes or requirements beyond those expressly stipulated under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) or any other law.10.Savings clauseTo the extent that a data system, technology, or tool developed or incorporated into a unified interagency data system under this Act is not limited by project type, the data system, technology, or tool shall not have its use be restricted by project type.11.DefinitionsIn this Act:(1)AuthorizationThe term authorization means any license, permit, approval, finding, determination, or other administrative decision issued by an agency and any interagency consultation that is required or authorized under Federal law in order to site, construct, reconstruct, or commence operations of a project administered by a Federal agency.(2)Authorization dataThe term authorization data means—(A)any data relevant for a Federal agency to—(i)determine the effect on the environment of an action for which an authorization is required by the Federal agency; and(ii)determine whether to issue such authorization; and(B)any community input or public comment on such determinations.(3)Data architectureThe term data architecture means the design and organization of data systems, including frameworks for data storage, processing, and exchange.(4)Data standardsThe term data standards means agreed-upon specifications for data formats, structures, and definitions to ensure consistency and vendor neutral interoperability.(5)Environmental reviewThe term environmental review means any Federal agency procedures or processes for—(A)applying a categorical exclusion; or(B)preparing an environmental assessment, an environmental impact statement, or another document required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).(6)Federal agencyThe term Federal agency has the meaning given the term agency in section 551 of title 5, United States Code.(7)Federal Permitting Improvement Steering CouncilThe term Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council has the meaning given the term Council in section 41001 of the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 4370m).Passed the House of Representatives December 9, 2025.Kevin F. McCumber,Clerk.

119 HR 4503 RH: ePermit Act U.S. House of Representatives 2025-12-04 text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. IBUnion Calendar No. 341119th CONGRESS1st SessionH. R. 4503[Report No. 119–392]IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESJuly 17, 2025Mr. Johnson of South Dakota (for himself and Mr. Peters) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural ResourcesDecember 4, 2025Additional sponsors: Mr. Crank, Mr. Magaziner, Mr. Evans of Colorado, Mr. Gray, Mr. Calvert, Ms. Davids of Kansas, Mrs. Kiggans of Virginia, Mr. Auchincloss, Mr. Hurd of Colorado, and Mr. VindmanDecember 4, 2025Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printedStrike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italicFor text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on July 17, 2025A BILLTo improve environmental reviews and authorizations through the use of interactive, digital, and cloud-based platforms, and for other purposes.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the ePermit Act.2.FindingsThe Congress finds that—(1)coordination between Federal, State, and local agencies and project sponsors is critical to ensuring the timely and effective completion of environmental reviews and authorizations, including through the sharing of relevant information, alignment of environmental review timelines, and integration of authorizations, while maintaining compliance with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements;(2)digital strategies for environmental reviews have proven to make the community engagement process more accessible, available, and transparent to all stakeholders, especially the communities in which new projects are built;(3)establishing robust data architectures will ensure data integrity, improve transparency, reduce costs, and enhance the ability of the Federal Government to serve the public;(4)Federal agency use of modern software that can track the full lifecycle of environmental reviews and authorizations is critical for—(A)effective project management and process improvement;(B)enabling workflow automation, transparency, and tracking; and(C)simplifying reporting requirements;(5)modern business process management systems that track Federal agency workflows and produce vendor neutral, interoperable event, task, and other milestone data that can be shared with other Federal agency systems can reduce costs and improve performance for Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews and authorizations;(6)case and project management systems—(A)are essential tools for managing the tasks and activities associated with environmental reviews and authorizations; and(B)provide Federal agencies more data and insight into such environmental reviews and authorizations;(7)well-defined business rules can enable process automation that allows Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations to expedite routine tasks and workflows, and improve transparency and accuracy of project timeline estimates, which in turn can help project sponsors better plan for application preparation and project delivery milestones;(8)taking a standardized, digital-first perspective to environmental reviews and authorizations at Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations will improve document quality, lead to more concise reports, enable the reuse and accessibility of the data underpinning Federal agency analyses and decisions, and enable objective, technology-assisted evaluation of environmental impacts, analysis, and documentation, and accelerate future environmental reviews and authorizations;(9)Federal agencies responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations, project sponsors, and the public should have access to up-to-date information on accurate timelines and the status of environmental reviews and authorizations; and(10)allowing for seamless information exchange among Federal agencies and between Federal agencies and project sponsors will increase predictability and efficiency of environmental review and authorization schedules for project sponsors.3.Establishment of data standards(a)In generalNot later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall develop, publish, and iteratively update data standards for the collection and curation of authorization data by Federal agencies, which shall be used to—(1)assist with environmental reviews and authorizations;(2)organize, define, and standardize various concepts, formats, and protocols that are included in environmental reviews and authorizations; and(3)reduce the need for redundant environmental reviews by creating a shared vocabulary and software systems that will support vendor neutrality, data interoperability, workflow automation, and automatic data exchange between Federal agencies.(b)InclusionsThe data standards developed, published, and iteratively updated under subsection (a) shall include the following:(1)A standardized taxonomy that allows Federal agencies to identify and track data types, relationships, and values.(2)Comprehensive categories for data, such as—(A)projects;(B)processes;(C)environmental documents;(D)public comments;(E)geospatial information;(F)public engagement events, as applicable by process or Federal agency;(G)case events; and(H)milestones to ensure clarity and uniformity.4.Development of prototype toolsThe Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services, the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall design, test, and build prototype tools for environmental reviews and authorizations that will assist Federal agencies in implementing the minimum functional requirements described in section 5. The Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall prioritize designing, testing, and building tools under this section that—(1)support authorization case or project management systems that manage tasks, milestones, and activities associated with environmental reviews and authorizations, and provide Federal agencies more data and insight into such reviews and authorizations;(2)enable—(A)application submission and tracking portals used by project sponsors, enabling greater transparency; and(B)public comment opportunity tracking portals to increase transparency;(3)facilitate automated applications, environmental reviews. and authorizations;(4)allow data exchange between Federal agency systems; and(5)accelerate complex environmental reviews.5.Publication of guidance for implementation of data standards and minimum functional requirements(a)PublicationNot later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall publish guidance for how each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations implements—(1)the data standards published under section 3; and(2)the following minimum functional requirements:(A)Application data sharing that enables automated transfer of relevant environmental review and authorization data among Federal agencies.(B)Automated project screening to assist frontline staff with reviewing project sponsor provided information for completeness and accuracy and determining if a categorical exclusion or other general authorization applies to an action. Automated project screening may not be used by the Council on Environmental Quality or a Federal agency to unlawfully restrict any activities on Federal lands.(C)Public availability of screening criteria and related decision models.(D)Automated case or project management tools which include a repository of relevant data and metadata that enable advanced tracking, reporting, and optimization to aid workflows.(E)Integrated geographic information system analysis tools which incorporate geospatial data layers and models for each resource analyzed as part of an environmental review or authorization for a given study area.(F)Document management tools that preserve metadata associated with geospatial analysis, modeling, and other analytic processes conducted during an environmental review or authorization, to support future reviews and enable Artificial Intelligence-assisted analysis of past decisions.(G)Automated comment compilation and analysis tools, including services for comment categorization and response that handle the lifecycle of comment submission, analysis, categorization and response with Artificial Intelligence support where appropriate.(H)Administrative record management tools that maintain both portable document formats and data-rich repositories accessible to both machine and human users.(I)Common or interoperable Federal agency services that integrate shared services, shared applications, and common user experiences for Federal agency staff, project sponsors, and the public.(b)InclusionsThe guidance published under this section shall include the following:(1)Guidelines for cloud-based storage, data sharing protocols, and application programming interfaces to enable the Council on Environmental Quality to work with Federal agencies to use authorization data to aid Federal agencies in modernizing their environmental reviews and authorizations and for iterative development of the authorization portal.(2)Provisions that support scalability and adaptability of the minimum requirements to emerging technologies.6.Implementation of data standards and minimum functional requirements(a)ImplementationThe head of each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations shall—(1)not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act—(A)compare existing Federal agency systems for environmental reviews and authorizations under their authority with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2) and report findings from such comparison to the Council on Environmental Quality;(B)assess whether existing Federal agency technological capabilities are consistent with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2);(C)submit to the Council on Environmental Quality a report that estimates the completion dates for implementing the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); and(D)submit to the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality, an implementation plan that—(i)describes how the Federal agency will implement the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2); and(ii)describes how, to the extent the Federal agency determines necessary to meet relevant statutory requirements, the Federal agency will adopt or implement the prototype tools tested, designed, and built under section 4; and(2)not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, begin implementing the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2).(b)ReportNot less frequently than twice each year, the Chief Information Officer of each Federal agency, in consultation with the Chief Environmental Review and Permitting Officer of each Federal agency, shall submit to the Council on Environmental Quality and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a report on the progress of the Federal agency towards meeting the requirements of subsection (a).7.Unified interagency data system(a)In general(1)Unified interagency data systemTo the maximum extent practicable, the Chair of the Council of Environmental Quality and the head of each Federal agency responsible for environmental reviews or authorizations shall iteratively develop and maintain a unified interagency data system consisting of interconnected Federal agency systems and shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations.(2)Authorization portal(A)In generalThe shared services developed and maintained under paragraph (1) shall include a common interactive, digital, cloud-based authorization portal, which shall—(i)be designed in a manner consistent with—(I)the recommendations of the Council on Environmental Quality included in the study submitted pursuant to section 110 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4336d) titled Council on Environmental Quality Report to Congress on the Potential for Online and Digital Technologies to Address Delays in Reviews and Improve Public Accessibility and Transparency under 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); and(II)the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2);(ii)serve as a platform for tracking and displaying real-time data on environmental reviews and authorizations made available through application programming interfaces or other reporting mechanisms from Federal agency systems that are compliant with the data standards and data architecture described in this Act;(iii)be supported by a decentralized, cross-network digital infrastructure software that ensures vendor neutrality and interoperability of data and models across Federal agencies;(iv)include a mechanism for the dissemination of relevant information (such as a notice of intent for public comment, public meetings, project statuses, or a notice of intent to begin an environmental review) to local communities, as applicable;(v)allow a project sponsor to submit all necessary documentation for environmental reviews and authorizations in one unified and secure portal;(vi)support interactive, digital, and cloud-based tools enabling applicants to edit documents and collaborate with relevant Federal agencies in real time;(vii)support visual features, including video, animation, geographic information system displays, interactive maps, and three-dimensional renderings;(viii)provide for the exchange of information to and from Federal agency data systems via an application programming interface or another reporting mechanisms;(ix)allow for the submission of geospatial data associated with project location, footprint, and impact;(x)support automatic documentation of submission and process timelines; and(xi)allow the following metrics to be tracked over time—(I)estimates of achieved efficiencies, such as reductions in the time between receipt of applications and final authorization decisions;(II)comparisons of authorization timelines before and after the implementation of this Act;(III)usage of the authorization portal and other statistics from the Digital Analytics Program;(IV)metrics on the number of public comments received, responses provided, and community meetings held;(V)the number of projects subject to litigation based on authorization deficiencies or inefficiencies;(VI)a list of Federal agencies that are not yet fully compliant with the data standards published under section 3 and the minimum functional requirements described in section 5(a)(2), along with their progress toward compliance; and(VII)examples or repositories of Federal agency-developed digital workflows enabled by the implementation of this Act, including visualizations of data sharing, authorizations and decision logic, and environmental reviews.(B)Administrative supportThe Administrator of General Services shall host the authorization portal as a shared service for Congress, Federal agencies, and the public.(C)AccessabilityThe authorization portal shall be accessible to Congress, Federal agencies, and the public, with appropriate safeguards to protect sensitive or classified information and information restricted by user type as appropriate.(D)Public accessibilityTo the extent practicable and consistent with other law, the authorization portal shall provide public access to non-sensitive data, including authorization timelines, location, project type, environmental reviews, and mitigation measures.(E)Congressional access and oversight(i)In generalThe authorization portal shall provide Congress with direct access to aggregated performance data and other analytics to enable real-time oversight of Federal agencies.(ii)Artificial intelligence support systems and training materialsCongress shall have access to the data, fine-tuning procedures, and prompt configurations specifically created or adapted for Artificial Intelligence systems used to support environmental review or authorization activities, excluding proprietary or general pretraining materials unrelated to such agency-specific customization.(iii)Technical assistanceThe Council on Environmental Quality shall provide to Congress technical assistance upon request to ensure effective use of the authorization portal and Artificial Intelligence systems for oversight purposes.(3)Cybersecurity and compliance considerationsThe authorization portal shall be designed to promote vendor neutral interoperability, reduce redundancy, and ensure compliance and coordination with other laws, including—(A)section 552a of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Privacy Act of 1974), and subchapter II of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code;(B)the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program established under section 3608 of title 44, United States Code; and(C)the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency of the Department of Homeland Security, for a case in which the project is in coordination with a Federal agency with stringent security requirements.(b)Deadlines(1)Shared services pilotNot later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Council on Environmental Quality shall oversee piloting of shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations, including the authorization portal under subsection (a)(2).(2)Unified system development and implementationTo the maximum extent practicable, not later than December 1, 2027, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall develop and implement the unified interagency data system required under subsection (a)(1).(c)ReportNot less frequently than annually, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, in consultation with the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, and other relevant stakeholders and Federal agencies, shall submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the Council on Environmental Quality’s progress on developing a unified interagency data system under subsection (a).8.Authority to enter into contractsThe Council on Environmental Quality may enter into contracts and other arrangements for analyses, services, and products with Federal agencies, private organizations, and businesses, and make such payments as determined necessary by the Council on Environmental Quality to carry out the provisions of this Act.9.Clarifying rulemaking authorityNothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the Council on Environmental Quality or a Federal agency to impose additional regulatory processes or requirements beyond those expressly stipulated under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) or any other law.10.Savings clauseTo the extent that a data system, technology, or tool developed or incorporated into a unified interagency data system under this Act is not limited by project type, the data system, technology, or tool shall not have its use be restricted by project type.11.DefinitionsIn this Act:(1)AuthorizationThe term authorization means any license, permit, approval, finding, determination, or other administrative decision issued by an agency and any interagency consultation that is required or authorized under Federal law in order to site, construct, reconstruct, or commence operations of a project administered by a Federal agency.(2)Authorization dataThe term authorization data means—(A)any data relevant for a Federal agency to—(i)determine the effect on the environment of an action for which an authorization is required by the Federal agency; and(ii)determine whether to issue such authorization; and(B)any community input or public comment on such determinations.(3)Data architectureThe term data architecture means the design and organization of data systems, including frameworks for data storage, processing, and exchange.(4)Data standardsThe term data standards means agreed-upon specifications for data formats, structures, and definitions to ensure consistency and vendor neutral interoperability.(5)Environmental reviewThe term environmental review means any Federal agency procedures or processes for—(A)applying a categorical exclusion; or(B)preparing an environmental assessment, an environmental impact statement, or another document required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).(6)Federal agencyThe term Federal agency has the meaning given the term agency in section 551 of title 5, United States Code.(7)Federal Permitting Improvement Steering CouncilThe term Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council has the meaning given the term Council in section 41001 of the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 4370m).December 4, 2025Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed