PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 22, 2007
Refuge Ecology Protection, Assistance, and Immediate Response Act - (Sec. 4) Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to provide under the Refuge Ecology Protection, Assistance, and Immediate Response Grant Program or the REPAIR Program (established by this Act): (1) a grant to any eligible applicant to carry out a qualified control project to control harmful nonnative species; and (2) a grant to any state to carry out an assessment project to identify harmful nonnative species, assess the needs to restore, manage, or enhance native fish, wildlife, and habitats, identify priorities, and identify mechanisms to increase capacity building for native fish, wildlife, and habitats.
Requires the Secretary to consult with the Invasive Species Advisory Committee: (1) on the projects proposed for such grants, including the scientific merit, technical merit, feasibility, and priority of proposed projects; and (2) regarding the development of a database concerning control projects carried out with such grants.
Requires the Invasive Species Advisory Committee to: (1) consult with the Secretary on the creation of criteria and guidelines for such grants; (2) consult with the Secretary regarding whether proposed control projects are qualified control projects, as determined under this Act; and (3) carry out functions relating to the monitoring of control projects.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Specifies that eligible applicants for grants to carry out qualified control projects shall: (1) be a state, local government, interstate or regional agency, university, or private person; (2) have adequate personnel, funding, and authority to carry out and monitor or maintain a control project; and (3) have entered into an agreement with the Secretary or the Secretary's designee for a national wildlife refuge or refuge complex.
Sets forth requirements for determining the selection of qualified control projects, including the ranking of such projects.
Instructs the Secretary to ensure: (1) a balance of smaller and larger projects conducted; and (2) an equitable geographic distribution of projects carried out among all regions and states within which such projects are proposed to be conducted.
Sets forth requirements for: (1) the duration and renewal of grants; (2) reporting by grantees carrying out control and assessment projects; and (3) federal and non-federal cost sharing for such projects. Provides that the federal share of the cost of the portion of a control project that is carried out on national wildlife refuge lands or waters shall be 100%, including the cost of acquisition by the federal government of land or waters.
Requires the Secretary to report to Congress on the implementation of such Program. Requires such reports to include an assessment of specified, data, trends, and reviews concerning the control projects carried out under this Act.
Bars the Secretary from making a grant for a control project on national wildlife refuge lands or lands in proximity to refuge resources before a non-federal interest has entered into a written agreement with a national wildlife refuge or refuge complex under which the non-federal interest agrees to: (1) monitor and maintain the control project according to the plan required by this Act; and (2) provide any other items of cooperation the Secretary considers necessary to carry out the project.
(Sec. 5) Authorizes the Secretary to provide financial assistance to enable an immediate response to outbreaks of harmful nonnative species that threaten or may negatively impact refuge resources that are at a stage at which rapid eradication or control is possible, and to ensure eradication or immediate control of such species. Requires the provision of such assistance to local and state agencies, universities, or nongovernmental entities for the eradication of an immediate harmful nonnative species threat only under specified conditions, including that the proposed response to such threat minimizes adverse impacts to the structure and function of national wildlife refuge ecosystems and adverse effects on nontarget species. Makes the federal share of the cost of any activity carried out with such assistance 100%. Requires recipients of such assistance to monitor and report on activities carried out with such assistance.
(Sec. 6) Directs the Secretary, consistent with the National Wildlife Refuge System Volunteer and Community Partnership Enhancement Act of 1998, to establish a cooperative volunteer harmful nonnative species monitoring and control program to administer and coordinate projects implemented by partner organizations concerned with national wildlife refuges to address such species that threaten national wildlife refuges or adjacent lands.
Requires each project administered and coordinated to include one of the following activities: (1) habitat surveys; (2) detection and identification of new introductions or infestations of harmful nonnative species; (3) harmful nonnative species control projects; or (4) public education and outreach to increase awareness concerning such species and their threat to the refuge system.
(Sec. 7) Describes this Act's effect with respect to: (1) other authorities, responsibilities, obligations, or powers of the Secretary under any other statute; and (2) preemption of any provision or enforcement of state law relating to management of fish and wildlife resources.
(Sec. 8) Requires the Secretary to submit biennial reports summarizing all grant activities relating to invasive species initiated under this Act.
(Sec. 9) Authorizes appropriations. Allows not more than 25% of amounts appropriated for carrying out this Act to be available in any fiscal year for immediate response assistance under this Act. Limits expenditure for administrative expenses.
People & committees
Rep. Kind, Ron [D-WI-3] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S14234)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S14234)
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 H11791-11793)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H11791-11793)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 767.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11791-11795)
Ms. Bordallo moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 251.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-397.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-397.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Oceans.
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.
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.767 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.767 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.767 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.767 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.