The SPEED Act amends MAP-21 to adjust the cost thresholds that determine whether a project qualifies for a categorical exclusion (CE) for projects with limited Federal assistance. It raises the CE thresholds from $6,000,000 to $12,000,000 for subparagraph (A) and from $35,000,000 to $70,000,000 for subparagraph (B).
By increasing these thresholds, more transportation projects will qualify for a CE rather than undergoing more extensive environmental reviews. The bill does not change the CE framework itself, only the monetary limits, and it is presented as a mechanism to expedite project delivery while preserving the existing exclusion category.
The SPEED Act is introduced by Rep. Harriet Hageman in the 119th Congress and is titled the Small Projects Expedited Execution and Delivery Act.
At a Glance
What It Does
Amends MAP-21 Section 1317(1) to raise two CE (categorical exclusion) thresholds: A) $6,000,000 → $12,000,000 and B) $35,000,000 → $70,000,000 for projects of limited Federal assistance.
Who It Affects
State departments of transportation, local transportation agencies, metropolitan planning organizations, and other project sponsors relying on Federal-aid funding for transportation projects.
Why It Matters
Expands the set of projects eligible for CE treatment, potentially accelerating delivery and reducing permitting overhead for small-to-medium projects while maintaining the basic CE framework.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The SPEED Act changes how much a project can cost before it loses its categorically excluded status. Specifically, it increases the thresholds used to determine eligibility for a categorical exclusion for projects with limited Federal assistance under MAP-21.
The two thresholds affected are raised from $6 million to $12 million and from $35 million to $70 million. The practical effect is that more transportation projects—especially smaller ones funded with federal money—could skip the more onerous environmental review process that applies to larger projects.
The bill does not alter the categories of projects eligible for exclusions, nor does it add new environmental requirements; it simply lifts the monetary ceiling that determines whether a project qualifies for exclusion. The law retains the existing CE framework but allows a broader set of smaller and mid-sized transportation projects to be delivered with streamlined procedures.
The SPEED Act’s aim is to speed up project delivery while staying within the same general environmental-review structure dictated by MAP-21.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill raises two CE thresholds under MAP-21: $6M → $12M and $35M → $70M.
Applies specifically to projects of limited Federal assistance.
Short title is the Small Projects Expedited Execution and Delivery Act (SPEED Act).
Only thresholds change; the underlying CE framework remains intact.
Introduced in the 119th Congress by Rep. Harriet Hageman (R).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This section designates the bill’s citation as the Small Projects Expedited Execution and Delivery Act (SPEED Act). It preserves the normal congressional practice of naming the act and sets the public-facing shorthand for reference. The provision signals the bill’s scope is limited to the MAP-21 framework without introducing new program authorities.
Categorical exclusion thresholds for projects of limited Federal assistance
Section 2 amends MAP-21, 23 U.S.C. 1317(1), by raising two monetary thresholds that determine when a project qualifies for a categorical exclusion (CE). Subparagraph (A) increases the threshold from $6,000,000 to $12,000,000, and subparagraph (B) increases the threshold from $35,000,000 to $70,000,000. The practical effect is to broaden the set of projects eligible for CE treatment, thereby reducing the likelihood of a full environmental review for those projects and speeding their delivery, assuming other CE criteria are met. The change keeps the existing exclusion framework intact while shifting the cost boundary that triggers more intensive review.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- State departments of transportation and other public agencies administering highway programs, which can push more projects through the CE process without triggering additional environmental reviews.
- Metropolitan planning organizations and local governments that sponsor small- to mid-sized transportation improvements funded with federal aid, enabling faster project initiation and completion.
- Construction contractors and developers working on smaller transportation projects who benefit from reduced permitting delays and streamlined approvals.
- FHWA and other federal stakeholders seeking greater efficiency in project delivery within the existing CE framework.
Who Bears the Cost
- Environmental advocacy groups and communities near projects that would have received more scrutiny under CE thresholds, due to potentially reduced environmental review.
- Local residents exposed to projects with less rigorous review could face greater environmental or health risk uncertainties, depending on project specifics.
- State and local agencies may incur litigation or oversight costs if reduced review leads to environmental or safety concerns that later require remediation or mitigation.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Raising monetary CE thresholds accelerates project delivery but risks reduced environmental safeguards and stakeholder input, forcing a choice between speed and environmental due diligence.
The SPEED Act trades off a potentially shorter project timetable against the risk that more projects receive only minimal environmental review. In practice, raising CE thresholds redefines what counts as a small, limited-Federal-assistance project and could narrow the set of projects that require detailed NEPA analysis.
A key tension will be ensuring that increased speed does not come at the expense of environmental protections or community input. States will need clear, consistent guidance to apply the new thresholds uniformly, and federal oversight may face new pressures if projects encounter environmental concerns after being categorized as excluded.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.