Full Committee Markup (June 25, 2025)

Committee on Public Works

2025-06-25

Loading video...

Source: Congress.gov

Summary

This meeting of the Committee on Transportation Infrastructure was called to order to consider an amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 3898, the Promoting Efficiency Review for Modern Infrastructure Today Act (PERMIT Act). The bill aims to reform Clean Water Act permitting processes to promote efficiency and economic activity, drawing strong debate between members prioritizing regulatory streamlining and those emphasizing environmental protection[ 00:21:28 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Ultimately, the bill, as amended, was favorably reported to the House of Representatives following a series of contested votes on proposed amendments.

Themes

Clean Water Act Reforms for Efficiency and Economic Growth

Proponents of the PERMIT Act, including Mr. Collins, Mr. Perry, and Mr. Rouzer, argued that the current Clean Water Act permitting processes are overly burdensome, unpredictable, and vulnerable to abuse, hindering American innovation and infrastructure development[ 00:21:28 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. They emphasized the need to modernize the legislation to balance economic activity with clean water protection[ 00:21:49 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Key reforms included codifying long-standing exclusions from the definition of "Waters of the United States" (WOTUS), ensuring commercially available technology is considered for compliance, and limiting the scope of Section 401 permits to actual water quality issues[ 00:22:38 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Other provisions aimed to strengthen nationwide permits, reduce duplicative regulatory processes for pesticides, restore integrity to Section 401 certifications, and expedite jurisdictional determinations. Members like Mr. Stauber and Mr. Burlison highlighted that permitting delays and "lawfare" by environmental organizations contribute to inflation and prevent essential infrastructure projects[ 00:28:21 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Mr. LaMalfa specifically addressed the necessity of exempting aerial fire retardants from Clean Water Act permits to effectively combat wildfires, citing previous legal challenges and delays.

Concerns Regarding Weakening Environmental Protections

Opponents, including Mr. Larsen, Mr. Garamendi, Ms. Wilson, and Ms. Sykes, expressed strong concerns that the PERMIT Act would weaken the Clean Water Act, undermine federal, state, and tribal authority, and make it more difficult to protect water quality. They argued that the proposed changes go beyond promoting efficiency, instead gutting agencies' power to minimize environmental impacts and increasing the likelihood of harmful pollution. Ms. Sykes notably referenced the historical pollution of the Cuyahoga River as a stark reminder of the importance of robust water protections. Concerns were raised about disproportionate impacts on rural, minority, and economically disadvantaged communities, who might bear the brunt of dirtier water and increased costs for safe drinking water. Several members, including Ms. Titus and Ms. Scholten, highlighted the specific vulnerabilities of arid regions and the Great Lakes to reduced protections, fearing increased contamination, harmful algal blooms, and risks to drinking water sources[ 01:22:40 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Amendments proposed to mitigate these concerns, such as maintaining a "no net loss of wetlands" policy, certifying no increase in harmful pollutants like PFAS, or ensuring no adverse effects on drinking water or flood risk, were largely opposed and voted down by the majority.

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting was largely contentious and partisan, reflecting deep divisions over environmental policy and regulatory oversight. While some members called for bipartisan cooperation on infrastructure and clean water, the debates on the bill and its numerous amendments often broke down along party lines. Proponents frequently used strong language to characterize current regulations as "burdensome" and "weaponized" by "radical environmentalists," leading to "frivolous lawsuits" and "absurd" requirements[ 00:23:50 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Conversely, opponents used equally strong terms, warning of "gutting authority," "dirtier water," "cancer-causing pollutants," and "deep injustice". A brief moment of heartfelt camaraderie was observed when members paused to acknowledge the contributions of a departing member, Mr. Steve Cohen. However, this did not diminish the overall highly polarized nature of the legislative discussions.

Participants

Transcript

I'll call the Committee on Transportation Infrastructure to order.  Pursuant to Committee Rule 6F and House Rule 11, Clause 2HF, the Chairman may postpone further proceedings today on any question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an amendment in which a recorded vote of the, excuse me, yeas and nays are requested.  I'd ask unanimous consent that the Chairman be authorized to declare a recess at any time during today's meeting.  Without objection, that is so ordered.   The bill and amendment text have been distributed electronically, and paper copies are also available here in the hearing room.  As a reminder, the committee may use an electronic voting system for any requested or recorded votes.  Today, the committee is considering an amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R.  3898, the Promoting Efficiency Review for Modern Infrastructure Today Act, or the PERMIT Act.  Finally, I'd ask unanimous consent for the committee to use   an amendments roster for any items under consideration by the committee, and without objection, that is so ordered.  Our item for consideration is H.R.  3898, the Permit Act, and I ask unanimous consent to discharge the subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment from further consideration of H.R.  3898, and without objection, that is so ordered.  I now call up the bill for consideration.  Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed.   The bill is now considered as read and open for amendment at any point.  I now recognize Mr. Collins to offer his amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Thank you, Chairman Graves.  I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk.  Please designate.
An amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 3898 offered by Mr. Collins of Georgia.
Without objection, the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read and shall be considered as a base text for the purposes of further amendment.  I now recognize Mr. Collins for five minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  As the chairman of the Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee, I'm proud to offer and support the amendment and the nature of a substitute to H.R.  3898, the Promoting Efficiency Review for Modern Infrastructure Today Act, or the PERMIT Act.  This legislation represents a comprehensive package of common sense improvements to the Clean Water Act's permitting processes.   processes that have come to stop American innovation in energy and infrastructure projects, rather than balance the goals of encouraging economic activity with protecting clean water.  For over 50 years, the Clean Water Act has functioned to improve the quality of our nation's rivers, lakes, and streams.  While the Act has had many successes in these 50 years, there are now many reasons to modernize the legislation in order to achieve the balance of promoting commerce and ensuring our water is clean.   This ANS represents a suite of targeted reforms to the Clean Water Act, which taken together will codify practices that have improved permitting, clarify aspects of the law to protect against frivolous lawsuits and provide greater regulatory certainty.  I want to thank all of my colleagues on the committee who brought their ideas to the table, which you will see combined together in this ANS.  I want to take a moment to talk about three standalone bills that I introduced   which have been included.  First, the bill includes my provision codifying longstanding exclusions from the definition of Waters of the United States, or WOTUS.  While WOTUS has long been a contentious topic, these exclusions have been supported for decades by Republican and Democratic administrations alike.   Also included is my bill codifying the Environmental Protection Agency's practice of issuing general permits under the Section 402 point source discharge system.  This provision provides additional regulatory certainty for those who rely on these permits by requiring EPA to reissue the general permits or provide two years' notice if the agency does not plan to reissue.
Finally, the package includes my bill requiring EPA to take into account whether technology needed to comply   with its requirements is actually commercially available in the United States.  Unfortunately, the Biden administration produced a rule updating the affluent limitation guidelines for steam powered plants that relied on experimental Chinese data and technology that may not be trustworthy, is not available in the United States, and would put great economic strain on such power plants that would be passed on to the rate payers.  This is just another example of how the Clean Water Act   has been weaponized and how, in this package, common sense prevails.  All year at T&I committees, we have been focused on the theme America builds.  However, burdensome regulatory processes and frivolous lawsuits from radical environmentalists that take advantage of well-meaning legislation like the Clean Water Act and our judicial system represent some of the biggest roadblocks for America to build.   The bottom line is that without reforming the Clean Water Act, America cannot effectively build roads, bridges, pipelines, ports, dams, levees, airports, homes, farms, or other infrastructure we need to put America first in the 21st century.  Once again, I thank Chairman Graves and all of my colleagues who have worked on this package.  I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back my time.  I now recognize Mr. Larson for his statement.
Thank you, Chair Graves and Chair Collins, for bringing this bill to the committee.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.

Sign up