A Republican bill with 3 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Streamline Transit Projects Act. It amends title 49 of the United States Code to let certain funding recipients assume responsibilities related to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Eligible recipients are direct fund recipients located in urbanized areas with populations over 200,000 that demonstrate the capacity to perform these responsibilities. The Secretary may assign responsibilities for determining categorical exclusions and related environmental reviews to these recipients through memoranda of understanding. Eligible recipients that assume these responsibilities become solely liable for compliance and are deemed to be a Federal agency for those purposes. The Secretary retains the power to monitor compliance and terminate the assignment of responsibilities if the recipient fails to adequately carry them out.
Yes· 3 of 14
- Scored +5
Does this improve buses, trains and other public transport?
By empowering eligible urban transit agencies to handle their own categorical exclusions, the bill significantly speeds up transit project development.
- Scored +4
Would people in cities be better off under this?
Urban residents in areas with populations over 200,000 benefit directly from faster delivery and expansion of local transit projects.
- Scored +4
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The legislation enhances local and state-level governance by allowing eligible transit recipients to assume federal NEPA responsibilities.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill decentralizes federal authority by delegating environmental review responsibilities to local transit agencies.
- Scored -2
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
Allowing local transit agencies to assume NEPA categorical exclusion reviews could potentially reduce federal environmental oversight stringency.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Assistance and Support: Under section 2 adding new section 5322(d)(2), upon request by an eligible recipient, the Secretary must provide technical assistance, training, or other support relating to assuming responsibilities, developing memoranda of understanding, or addressing corrective actions. This ensures recipients get federal help when needed.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Sole Legal Liability: Under section 2 adding new section 5322(c)(2), an eligible recipient that assumes responsibility for a Federal law is solely responsible and solely liable for complying with and carrying out that law, with the Secretary having no responsibility or liability. This places the full burden of compliance and potential liability directly on the local transit agency.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban residents in areas with populations over 200,000 benefit directly from faster delivery and expansion of local transit projects. Would business owners be better off under this? — Transit agencies and associated contractors benefit from streamlined regulatory processes and reduced project delays. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income populations frequently depend on public transportation and benefit from faster, more efficient transit improvements. Would union members be better off under this? — Faster project approvals can increase demand for construction and transit operational labor. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults often rely heavily on public transit systems which stand to benefit from expedited project delivery.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Accelerating transit project delivery through NEPA reforms can improve overall infrastructure efficiency and regional economic productivity. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Shifting oversight responsibilities to capable local entities encourages localized accountability and efficient resource allocation. Is this likely to create jobs? — Streamlining the environmental review process can expedite transit projects, potentially supporting construction and transit sector employment. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — Delegating environmental review responsibilities to local transit agencies can reduce federal administrative burdens and overhead costs.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this improve buses, trains and other public transport? — By empowering eligible urban transit agencies to handle their own categorical exclusions, the bill significantly speeds up transit project development. Does this repair or build roads and bridges? — The bill directly facilitates the streamlining and faster delivery of public transit and infrastructure projects. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — Faster transit project deployment can encourage public transportation use and reduce long-term vehicular carbon emissions. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Allowing local transit agencies to assume NEPA categorical exclusion reviews could potentially reduce federal environmental oversight stringency.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The legislation enhances local and state-level governance by allowing eligible transit recipients to assume federal NEPA responsibilities. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The legislation maintains public notice and comment requirements as part of establishing memoranda of understanding. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill decentralizes federal authority by delegating environmental review responsibilities to local transit agencies.
- 6/1/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/1/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
John CurtisRepublican · Utah
Mark KellyDemocrat · Arizona
Jon OssoffDemocrat · Georgia
Raphael WarnockDemocrat · Georgia