🔓
Sign in as a Member to unlock the full view of HR.1874. · Full carveout list, all affected companies, party defectors, and 30-day trade predictions.
Become a Member$24.50/mo already a Member? Sign in →
HR.1874 · 119TH CONGRESS

To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to establish a conclusive presumption that a State concurs to certain activities, and for other purposes.

Status
Introduced
Latest Action
2025-03-06
Sponsor
Kiley, Kevin (R-California)
Official Source
Investability
82/100
Stage
INTRODUCED
Related Bills
0
Full Text
6,604 chars
Alive
Yes

What This Bill Does · Plain English

GovGreed Synthesis · AI extraction
Amends Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to create a 'conclusive presumption' that a coastal state concurs with federal consistency determinations for four categories of 'covered activities': national security activities (DoD, DHS, intelligence community), critical infrastructure projects, disaster recovery/mitigation activities, and activities with significant national or regional economic impact (in low-income or high-unemployment areas). Under current law, states can object to federally licensed/funded projects as inconsistent with their coastal management programs, causing delays or blocking projects; this bill removes state veto power for covered activities. State objections 'may not delay or otherwise prevent the activity from proceeding.' The Secretary of Commerce has only 30 days to nullify the presumption by finding an activity is not covered; otherwise it becomes final and binding.

Top Winners · Companies that benefit if HR.1874 passes

40% confidence
Williams and other interstate pipeline operators have faced state coastal-consistency denials (notably in New York/New Jersey) blocking gas pipelines; pipelines qualify as critical infrastructure.
35% confidence
Energy Transfer's pipeline projects have been delayed by state coastal-zone objections; bill would curtail that leverage.
30% confidence
ONEOK/midstream operators benefit from faster coastal permitting for federally authorized infrastructure.
30% confidence
Large E&C contractors for federal infrastructure, defense, and disaster-recovery projects benefit from removal of state permitting delays.
25% confidence
Defense contractors' coastal facility/national-security activities gain automatic state concurrence.

Top winners identified by GovGreed LLM analysis.

Action Timeline

2025-03-06
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1032-1033)
2025-03-05
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
2025-03-05
Introduced in House
2025-03-05
Introduced in House

Frequently Asked Questions

Did HR.1874 pass?
HR.1874 is still alive. Current stage: INTRODUCED. Pass likelihood: 82%.
What does HR.1874 do?
Amends Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to create a 'conclusive presumption' that a coastal state concurs with federal consistency determinations for four categories of 'covered activities': national security activities (DoD, DHS, intelligence community), critical infrastructure projects, disaster recovery/mitigation activities, and activities with significant national or regional economic impact (in low-income or high-unemployment areas). Under current law, states can object to federally licensed/funded projects as inconsistent with their coastal management programs, cau…
Who sponsored HR.1874?
HR.1874 was sponsored by Kevin Kiley (R-California).
What companies benefit from HR.1874?
Top public companies expected to benefit: WMB, ET, OKE. Affected sectors: multiple.

Full Bill Text

119 HR 1874 IH: To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to establish a conclusive presumption that a State concurs to certain activities, and for other purposes. U.S. House of Representatives 2025-03-05 text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. I 119th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 1874 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 5, 2025 Mr. Kiley of California introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources A BILL To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to establish a conclusive presumption that a State concurs to certain activities, and for other purposes. 1. Conclusive presumption for certain activities Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 ( 16 U.S.C. 1456 ) is amended by adding at the end: (j) Conclusive presumption for certain activities (1) In general Except as provided in paragraph (3), with respect to a covered activity, a coastal state shall be conclusively presumed to concur with— (A) a consistency determination provided to the coastal state by a Federal agency under subsection (c)(1)(C); (B) a determination or other finding of a Federal agency under subsection (c)(2) that a development project in the coastal zone of the coastal state is consistent with the enforceable policies of the approved state management program of the coastal state; (C) a certification provided to the coastal state by an applicant under subsection (c)(3)(A) or person under subsection (c)(3)(B); and (D) a determination or other finding of a State or local government under subsection (d) that an application for Federal assistance submitted by such State or local government is consistent with the enforceable policies of the approved state management program of the coastal state. (2) Limitation on objection An objection or other challenge by a coastal state to an activity subject to a conclusive presumption of concurrence under paragraph (1) may not delay or otherwise prevent the activity from proceeding. (3) Review of presumptive concurrence (A) In general Not later than 30 days after the Secretary receives a consistency determination, certification, or other relevant finding under this section, the Secretary may issue a written determination with respect to an activity subject to a conclusive presumption of concurrence under paragraph (1) that nullifies the conclusive presumption of concurrence if the Secretary finds that the activity is not a covered activity. (B) Presumption of finality If the Secretary does not issue a written determination under subparagraph (A) with respect to an activity subject to a conclusive presumption of concurrence under paragraph (1) within the time period described in that subparagraph, the conclusive presumption of concurrence shall be final and binding. (4) Definitions In this subsection: (A) Activity with a significant national or regional economic impact The term activity with a significant national or regional economic impact means an activity— (i) that is authorized or funded in whole or in part by the Federal Government; and (ii) that is carried out in— (I) an area with a low per capita income; or (II) an area with a high unemployment rate. (B) Area with a high unemployment rate The term area with a high unemployment rate means an area where the unemployment rate, for the most recent 24-month period for which data is available, is at least 1 percentage point higher than the national average unemployment rate for such period, as determined by the Secretary using the most recent data available from— (i) the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the Department of Commerce; (ii) the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor; (iii) another Federal source the Secretary determines appropriate; or (iv) if no recent Federal data is available, data from the State agencies of such area the Secretary determines appropriate. (C) Area with a low per capita income The term area with low per capita income means an area where the per capita income is not more than 20 percent less than the national average per capita income, as determined by the Secretary using the most recent data available from— (i) the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the Department of Commerce; or (ii) another Federal source the Secretary determines appropriate. (D) Covered activity The term covered activity means— (i) a national security activity; (ii) a critical infrastructure project; (iii) a disaster recovery or mitigation activity; or (iv) an activity with a significant national or regional economic impact. (E) Critical infrastructure The term critical infrastructure has the meaning given the term in section 1016(e) of the USA PATRIOT Act ( 42 U.S.C. 5195c(e) ). (F) Critical infrastructure project The term critical infrastructure project means any project— (i) that is authorized or funded in whole or in part by the Federal Government; and (ii) that involves— (I) the planning, construction, maintenance, or improvement of critical infrastructure; (II) a facility or an activity associated with any critical infrastructure sectors; or (III) a material or asset that is essential to the operation, maintenance, or development of critical infrastructure. (G) Critical infrastructure sectors The term critical infrastructure sectors has the meaning given the term in section 2001 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 ( 6 U.S.C. 601 ). (H) Disaster recovery or mitigation activity The term disaster recovery or mitigation activity means an activity— (i) that is authorized or funded in whole or in part by the Federal Government; and (ii) that is carried out to prevent, prepare for, respond to, recover from, or mitigate the effects of— (I) an emergency; (II) a major disaster; or (III) any other incident or threat that the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency determines poses a significant risk to public health, safety, or property. (I) Emergency; major disaster The terms emergency and major disaster have such meanings given such terms in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act ( 42 U.S.C. 5122 ). (J) Intelligence community The term intelligence community has the meaning given the term in section 3 of the National Security Act of 1947 ( 50 U.S.C. 3003 ). (K) National security activity The term national security activity means an activity that is carried out by or on behalf of— (i) the Department of Defense; (ii) the Department of Homeland Security; or (iii) the intelligence community. .
🔒 GovGreed Pro · Trading Intelligence on HR.1874 Get Access — $24.50/mo
Loading intelligence layer…
Bill text sourced from GovInfo.gov · public domain · last updated 2026-07-29. Plain-English summary, score breakdown, and trading-intelligence panels are GovGreed-original analysis derived from STOCK Act filings, SEC Form 4 disclosures, FEC contributions, and Senate LDA lobbying reports — all publicly filed federal records. GovGreed is not affiliated with the U.S. Government. Not financial advice. [live render]