[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 80 (Tuesday, May 13, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H1973-H1974]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXPEDITED APPEALS REVIEW ACT
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 677) to establish a process to expedite the review of
appeals of certain decisions by the Department of the Interior, as
amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 677
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Expedited Appeals Review
Act'' or the ``EARA''.
SEC. 2. EXPEDITED REVIEWS.
(a) Request for Expedited Review.--A party that files an
appeal of a Department of the Interior decision described
under section 4.1(b)(2) of title 43, Code of Federal
Regulations (or any successor regulations), with the Board of
Land Appeals may submit to the Board of Land Appeals written
notice of such party's intent to seek expedited review of the
appeal. If a party submits such written notice, the Board of
Land Appeals shall issue a final decision on the appeal by
not later than the date that is 6 months after the date on
which such written notice is received, except such deadline
may not be earlier than the date that is 18 months after the
date on which the appeal was initially filed with the Board
of Land Appeals.
(b) No Final Decision.--If the Board of Land Appeals does
not issue a final decision on an appeal by the deadline
described in subsection (a)--
(1) the Department of the Interior decision is deemed to be
a final agency action for purposes of section 704 of title 5,
United States Code; and
(2) notwithstanding section 706 of title 5, United States
Code, judicial review of such decision shall be de novo.
(c) Applicability.--This section shall apply to any appeal
described in subsection (a) that--
(1) is pending before the Board of Land Appeals as of the
date of enactment of this Act; or
(2) is filed with the Board of Land Appeals after the date
of enactment of this Act.
(d) Conflict.--In the event of a conflict between the
deadline described in subsection (a) and a deadline under
section 115(h) of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management
Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1724(h)) or section 525(b) of the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C.
1275(b)), the deadline described in subsection (a) shall
control.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hoyle)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.
General Leave
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 677, as amended, the bill now
under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise today in support of H.R. 677, the Expedited Appeals Review
Act, introduced by Representative Hageman. This bill addresses critical
flaws currently plaguing the review process of the Interior Board of
Land Appeals, or IBLA.
The IBLA functions as an appellate review body within the Department
of the Interior. It is tasked with resolving the many disputes that
arise in connection with the public lands and natural resources under
the Department's jurisdiction.
With over 600 appeals pending before the IBLA, however, many cases go
undecided and are simply left to expire. This effectively results in
automatic denials even though no substantive decisions have been
rendered.
Thankfully, H.R. 677 offers a needed off-ramp for appellants that the
IBLA has left in limbo. Starting 1 year after filing the appeal, an
appellant may submit a request that requires the IBLA to decide the
case within 6 months.
If the IBLA fails to meet the new deadline, the case automatically
becomes eligible for de novo judicial review outside of the Department.
This solution will reduce the existing backlog while ensuring
stakeholders receive their day in court.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to join me in support of H.R.
677, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. HOYLE of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Hageman for drawing attention to
the issues with the Interior Board of Land Appeals.
The IBLA resolves disputes related to public lands and natural
resources under the Department of the Interior. However, the IBLA can
take too long to decide these cases, leaving people waiting for years
for a decision.
For example, at the end of fiscal year 2023, the IBLA had cases on
their docket from fiscal year 2017. The Expedited Appeals Review Act
would attempt to address this problem by creating an optional process
for appellants to get expedited review from the IBLA.
Under this bill, if the IBLA does not make a decision by the
expedited review deadline, the appellant can take the case directly to
district court. The court would start the case de novo, compiling the
facts of the case without deference to the original agency's
decisionmaking.
While I agree with Representative Hageman that the IBLA timelines are
a problem, I do have some concerns that the proposed solution doesn't
get to the root of the problem. The underlying cause behind the IBLA's
delays is a lack of capacity and resources.
The Board has stated it does not have the resources needed to resolve
every appeal filed every fiscal year. Instead
[[Page H1974]]
of setting more deadlines that we know the IBLA can't meet, we should
be appropriately staffing our agencies and review boards across the
Federal Government.
Additionally, I am concerned this bill will create a fast-tracked
review procedure that advantages wealthier appellants. Taking the case
to district court is time-and resource-intensive, so only the
wealthiest appellants are likely to use the expedited review process.
By making the IBLA focus its limited resources on expedited appeals,
anyone without the money to take their case to district court may have
to wait even longer.
I hope my Republican colleagues will work with us on providing the
IBLA with the resources that would address the underlying problem here
while also having an expedited review process.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Wyoming (Ms. Hageman), the lead sponsor of the bill.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in favor of my bill, H.R. 677,
the Expedited Appeals Review Act, or EARA. This bill addresses the
backlog of appeals before the Interior Board of Land Appeals, or IBLA.
The IBLA is an appellant review board within the Department of the
Interior, and it is tasked with resolving disputes involving public
lands and natural resources under the Department's jurisdiction. This
includes appeals involving the Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management, Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement, Office of Natural Resources Revenue, and Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
It considers appeals dealing with grazing, mining, energy
development, wildfire management, timber harvesting, trespass, and
more.
The IBLA's stated mission is: ``to provide an impartial forum within
the Department of the Interior for the fair resolution of disputes
involving public lands and natural resources under the Department's
jurisdiction.''
There are, however, longstanding inefficiencies in the appeals
process. When combined with the high volume of cases, it has resulted
in a backlog of over 650 pending appeals dating all the way back to
2014.
The IBLA receives on average 290 appeals per fiscal year. Of those
cases that are not resolved on jurisdictional or procedural grounds,
only 2 percent are decided in favor of the appellant and against the
agency.
As instituted, the IBLA is not only falling short of its stated
mission for impartiality, but creating further burdens through its
extensive backlog.
The EARA creates an alternative path for expedited review, allowing
stakeholders to request an accelerated decision of their appeals within
6 months of such a request. Failure to meet this deadline then makes
the decision immediately eligible for de novo judicial review outside
of the Department.
This bill will alleviate the backlog in the IBLA, put the appealing
entities on a level playing field with the Department and promote
efficiency.
I am proud that this bill passed out of committee by unanimous
consent, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill.
{time} 1645
Ms. HOYLE of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the
legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will provide a more
efficient and predictable form of recourse for those facing extended
delays with their IBLA appeals.
Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman) for
her work on this important subject. I urge all of my colleagues to join
me in supporting H.R. 677, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 677, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________