PSI Sci
New here? Follow the money and the votes · Not sure of your district? Find your U.S. House member · Find your state legislators

H.R. 1029: EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2015

Before you vote › Federal bills

H.R. 1029: EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2015

114th Congress · introduced 2015-02-24 · Environmental Protection · Latest: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

  1. Where it came from: introduced 2015-02-24 · official record
  2. Who proposed it: Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3] · what a sponsor is
  3. What happened next: 3 recorded votes in our records. Latest: House roll call 119 (2015): On Agreeing to the Amendment, HR1029 (2015-03-17), Agreed to. See all
  4. Where it stands now: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
  5. If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2015

Plain summary

EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2015 (Sec. 2) This bill amends the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 to revise the process of selecting members of the Science Advisory Board, guidelines for participation in Board advisory activities, and terms of office. The Board provides scientific advice to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This bill requires the Board to independently provide that advice. Among the revisions to requirements concerning the Board's membership are the following: a requirement to balance scientific and technical points of view; a set minimum level of representation from state, local, or tribal governments; allowance of affiliation with or representation of entities that may have a potential interest in the Board's advisory activities; conflict of interest restrictions; restrictions on participation in advisory activities involving review of a member's work; restrictions on appointment of registered lobbyists; and prohibitions on member receipt of current EPA grants or contracts. The EPA must make public a list of nominees to the Board and accept public comments on the nominees. Reports filed upon the provisional nomination of a member disclosing financial relationships and interests must also be made public. The EPA must provide draft risk or hazard assessments in its regulatory proposals and documents to the Board. The Board's advice and comments must be included in the record regarding any such proposal and published in the Federal Register. The Board's member committees and investigative panels must operate in accordance with the membership, participation, and policy requirements contained in this Act, including new requirements for public participation in advisory activities of the Board. The member committees and investigative panels do not have the authority to make decisions on behalf of the Board and may not report directly to the EPA. The bill imposes additional public participation requirements: The EPA and the Board must make public all reports and relevant scientific information at the same time they are received by the Board. The Board must hold public information-gathering sessions to discuss the state of the science related to a major advisory activity. Prior to convening a member committee or investigative panel, the EPA must accept and address public comments on questions asked of the Board. The Board, member committees, and investigative panels may not accept a question that unduly narrows the scope of an advisory activity. The Board must strive to avoid making policy determinations or recommendations, communicate uncertainties, encourage dissenting members to make their views known, conduct periodic reviews to ensure that its activities address the most important scientific issues affecting the EPA, and respond to Congress fully and in a timely manner.

Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House amended), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2015

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House amended)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3] · 24 cosponsors

Cost estimate: CBO cost estimate: H.R. 1029, EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2015 (2015-03-02)

Cosponsors on this site

Andy Harris (R-MD), Randy K. Weber, Sr. (R-TX), Brian Babin (R-TX), Dan Newhouse (R-WA), Cynthia M. Lummis (R-WY), David Schweikert (R-AZ), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Pete Sessions (R-TX), Paul A. Gosar (R-AZ), Eric A. "Rick" Crawford (R-AR)

Sponsor's campaign money: Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3] reported raising $1.1 million (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.

Recorded votes

Words on this page, explained (4)
Authorization
A law that creates or continues a government program and says what it may do, often with a suggested spending ceiling. An authorization alone does not provide money; a separate appropriation does.
Bill
A proposed law. It becomes law only if it passes the legislature and is signed by the president or governor (or a veto is overridden).
Federal Register
The official daily publication of the U.S. government for agency rules, proposed rules, public notices and presidential documents.
Public comment
A chance for anyone to tell a government agency what they think about a proposed rule or plan before it is final. Agencies must consider the comments they receive.

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Record fed-us-cong114-hr1029 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong114 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong114