S.1894 - Small Projects Expedited Execution and Delivery Act; SPEED Act (119th Congress)
Summary
The SPEED Act (S.1894) proposes amendments to the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), specifically Section 1317(1), which concerns categorical exclusions for projects receiving limited federal assistance. The bill seeks to increase the threshold for these exclusions, raising the limit in subparagraph (A) from $6,000,000 to $12,000,000 and in subparagraph (B) from $35,000,000 to $70,000,000. This adjustment aims to expedite the execution and delivery of small projects by reducing the regulatory burden.
By increasing the financial thresholds for categorical exclusions, the bill intends to streamline the approval process for smaller infrastructure projects. This could lead to quicker project implementation and reduced administrative costs.
The bill was introduced in the Senate by Ms. Lummis and Mr. Cramer and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of the SPEED Act would be to accelerate the approval and implementation of smaller infrastructure projects that qualify for categorical exclusions under MAP-21. This is achieved by raising the financial limits that define which projects are eligible for this expedited review process.
This change would likely result in reduced bureaucratic delays and lower costs associated with environmental reviews and permitting. Ultimately, it could lead to faster improvements in local infrastructure and public services.
However, it could also lead to less rigorous environmental reviews for a larger pool of projects, potentially resulting in unforeseen environmental consequences.
Potential Benefits
- Faster Project Completion: Raising the threshold for categorical exclusions allows smaller projects to proceed more quickly, benefiting communities through timely infrastructure improvements.
- Reduced Administrative Costs: Streamlining the approval process lowers the costs associated with environmental reviews and permitting, freeing up resources for project implementation.
- Stimulation of Local Economies: Expedited project delivery can stimulate local economies by creating jobs and improving public services.
- Increased Efficiency: By reducing bureaucratic delays, the bill promotes more efficient use of government resources.
- Flexibility for States: The increased thresholds provide states with greater flexibility in managing and prioritizing smaller infrastructure projects.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for Environmental Oversight: Higher thresholds could lead to less rigorous environmental reviews for a larger number of projects, potentially resulting in negative environmental impacts.
- Reduced Public Input: Categorical exclusions may limit opportunities for public input and scrutiny of project plans.
- Risk of Inefficient Spending: Without thorough review, there is a risk that some projects may not be the most efficient or effective use of taxpayer dollars.
- Uneven Distribution of Benefits: The benefits of expedited project delivery may not be evenly distributed across all communities, potentially favoring areas with existing infrastructure or political influence.
- Unintended Consequences: The increased thresholds could have unintended consequences, such as encouraging project sponsors to artificially inflate project costs to meet the new limits.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The SPEED Act appears to align with the Constitution, particularly Article I, Section 8, which grants Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce and provide for the general welfare. The bill aims to improve infrastructure and facilitate economic activity, which falls under these enumerated powers.
There are no apparent violations of individual rights or liberties as protected by the Bill of Rights. The bill does not infringe upon freedom of speech, religion, or other fundamental rights.
However, Congress should ensure that the streamlined approval process does not compromise environmental protections or due process rights, which could raise constitutional concerns.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).