WW/TRADEPOLIC

Filed 657W3M read

Senate Permitting Bill Would Impose Two-Year NEPA Deadlines

The Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 sets two-year EIS deadlines and tightens litigation rules, targeting permitting delays that NAM says cost manufacturers $8 billion a year.

By
James Calloway
Filed
Length
657 words
Read
3 min
Manufacturers ‘all in’ on Senate permitting reform bill: NAM
Manufacturers ‘all in’ on Senate permitting reform bill: NAMThomas Cizauskas / Openverse

Key points03

  • Bill introduced Sept. 30 by Sens. Heinrich, Lee, Capito and Whitehouse sets a two-year deadline for environmental impact statements and one year for environmental assessments.
  • NAM says permitting delays cost manufacturers about $8 billion annually; the bill creates a Permitting Improvement Fund authorized at $20 million per year through fiscal 2033.
  • The bill sets a 150-day deadline for filing claims under NEPA, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation Act, and limits who can sue.

A bipartisan Senate bill introduced Sept. 30 would force federal agencies to complete environmental impact statements within two years and environmental assessments within one, handing manufacturers their most concrete permitting reform in years and potentially easing a backlog that industry groups say costs $8 billion annually.

The Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, sponsored by Sens. Martin Heinrich, Mike Lee, Shelley Moore Capito and Sheldon Whitehouse, now awaits consideration by the full Senate in the coming weeks. It draws backing from both parties — and an emphatic endorsement from the National Association of Manufacturers, whose president and CEO, Jay Timmons, called it a "game-changing agreement."

The bill "delivers long-overdue reforms to our nation's permitting process, while maintaining American's commitment to environmental stewardship," Timmons said in a statement.

"This legislation reflects input from members of Congress on both sides of the aisle and from a diverse group of stakeholders," the four senators said jointly.

What the bill changes

The legislation narrows the definition of "major federal actions" subject to National Environmental Policy Act review. Projects with no or minimal federal funding or involvement would be excluded from NEPA review entirely, as would projects receiving only certain forms of federal support, such as loans or loan guarantees.

For activities that remain subject to NEPA, the two-year deadline for environmental impact statements and the one-year deadline for environmental assessments would replace an open-ended timeline that manufacturers blame for stalled capital projects.

The bill also mandates a "unified interagency data system" — interconnected agency systems and shared services for environmental reviews and authorizations. The platform would track and display real-time data, let project sponsors submit required documentation electronically and allow performance metrics to be monitored over time.

On litigation, the bill sets a 150-day deadline for filing claims under a range of environmental statutes, including NEPA, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation Act. It limits who can bring a claim and restricts when courts can issue injunctions halting a project.

Additional provisions:

  • Deadlines for agency actions in permitting reviews, such as confirming receipt of applications.
  • A Permitting Improvement Fund, authorized at $20 million per year through fiscal 2033, to help agencies deliver timely reviews and authorizations.
  • A bar on the federal government rescinding permits for previously authorized projects absent specific circumstances, such as a court order or permit violation.
  • Expedited permitting for projects sited on federal lands.

Why it matters for shippers and builders

For manufacturers and the industrial supply chains behind them, the commercial stakes are direct. NAM says permitting delays cost manufacturers roughly $8 billion a year, constraining hiring and limiting their ability to build and expand operations. Faster, more predictable approvals would compress project timelines and reduce the carrying costs of capital tied up in permitting limbo.

Industry representatives have pressed the case for months, including at a January hearing of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee. The Trump administration has also prioritized permitting reform: its proposed EPA budget sought an additional $14 million to "cut through the red tape," even as it slashed the agency's overall funding.

Timmons framed the bill as an economic unlock. "Our nation's permitting system is outdated and burdensome, delaying projects across industries and contributing to rising costs across the economy," he said. "Removing these barriers would unlock greater investment and growth. Manufacturers are ready to build, and modernized permitting will help us race to the future."

The legislation's path runs through a Senate calendar already crowded with spending fights — Republicans failed to agree on a continuing resolution to fund the government past Dec. 11 at an Aug. 4 lunch meeting led by Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. If the full Senate takes up the bill in the coming weeks as expected, the two-year EIS deadline and the $20 million-a-year review fund will be the provisions manufacturers watch closest.

Original: techtarget.com

Share this article:

More from James Calloway

James Calloway

Show full bio

Correspondent covering consumer brands and retail at Waybill Wire.

130 articles

Related05

  1. CORSIA Phase 1 SAF Supply Chokepoint: Authorisation, Not Ambition

  2. Mexico Customs Overhaul Threatens Border Delays, Cargo Seizures

  3. Section 232 Drone Tariffs of 25%–100% Hit Imports Sept 3

  4. Trump Slaps Tariffs on Key Input for Solar Panels and Chips

  5. Brazil's IMO Compromise: How Surplus Trading Meets the FuelEU Reality

« PrevNext »