PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 21, 2025
Studying NEPA’s Impact on Projects Act
This bill directs the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to annually report on the impact of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) on projects that require NEPA review. CEQ must publish the report on its website and submit it to certain congressional committees. The report must include
specified information about NEPA litigation, such as the number of cases, the status of cases, and their outcomes;
the length and costs of the environmental impact statements and environmental assessments prepared; and
the time it takes to complete environmental reviews under NEPA.
People & committees
Rep. Yakym, Rudy [R-IN-2] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5086-5087)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5086-5087)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 573.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5086-5088)
Mr. Crank moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 342.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-393.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-393.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Committee Hearings Held
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.573 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.573 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.573 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.573 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.