PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate and Grid Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 6, 2023
Promoting Interagency Coordination for Review of Natural Gas Pipelines Act
This bill expands the authority of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to act as the only lead agency for the purpose of coordinating the environmental review process under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) of natural gas pipeline project applications under the Natural Gas Act. Thus, federal, state, and local agencies involved in the environmental review process must defer to FERC's approved scope for a NEPA review.
FERC must invite and designate the other participating agencies involved in the authorization process. In addition, FERC must consult with the Transportation Security Administration regarding pipeline infrastructure security, pipeline cybersecurity, pipeline personnel security, and other pipeline security measures.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill establishes a deadline for agencies to complete NEPA reviews of pipeline projects and requires concurrent reviews when multiple federal or state agencies are involved.
If a federal or state agency requires the person applying for a pipeline authorization to submit data, the agency must consider any such data gathered by aerial or other remote means that the person submits.
People & committees
Rep. Burgess, Michael C. [R-TX-26] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate and Grid Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. 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.829 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.829 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.829 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.829 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.