We Need a U.S. Permitting Corps: Executive and Legislative Recommendations
Part 1. And Other Executive Actions to Make the Permitting Workforce More Efficient
Nearly every major national domestic priority—from energy and housing, to new infrastructure—runs through permitting. Yet, despite significant political momentum behind reform efforts, limited attention has been paid to the federal workforce that will actually be responsible for interpreting and implementing new permitting regulations and better outcomes.
Since the beginning of 2025, federal roles tasked with permitting are down 20-30%.1 Agencies have lost staff responsible for everything from data analysis, environmental science, and regulatory interpretation, to complex project management—and numerous other functions—essential to permitting. At the same time, major regulatory change, new technology to streamline workflows, and the need for speed and efficiency are placing new demands on the existing permitting workforce.
The solution is not to simply replace departed federal staff—the executive branch must instead reimagine the permitting workforce to meet the demands of a new regulatory environment. This memo details a series of recommendations for doing precisely that. These include:
- Creating a “U.S. Permitting Corps” composed of innovative interdisciplinary professionals who can be “deployed” alongside agency teams in ways that complement existing permitting staff tasked with implementing reforms and improving efficiency. The Permitting Corps could be designed and funded under the auspices of the federal Permitting Council.
- Investing in the skills to share and use of best-in-class digital tools and permitting data across agencies to improve project management, streamline processes, and accelerate permitting timelines.
- Engaging in targeted hiring for key permitting roles in scientific disciplines, project management, and regulatory skill sets to bolster overburdened permitting teams and accelerate progress on federal projects.
- Rewarding achievements by federal permitting staff and agency leaders by linking clear, outcomes-based project metrics to improvements in the permitting process.
Background
Today’s changing technology and policy landscapes are colliding with urgent, sprawling national priorities like new energy infrastructure, housing, and climate mitigation. That collision has placed a radically different set of expectations on the federal permitting process to accelerate both the speed and efficiency of projects, while also managing environmental risk. In practice, that means increased pressure on a federal permitting ecosystem that has given little consideration to the scope, composition, or key skill sets needed to implement dramatically improved permitting operations.
Permitting workforce challenges have actually existed for decades: in the form of underinvestment in dedicated permitting staff, poor coordination of permitting decisions within and across agencies, long-standing data, technology, and information gaps, and inconsistent leadership commitments to removing permitting bottlenecks. Take, for example, the federal Environmental Protection Specialist.2 This role—prominent across the agency teams who administer the complex set of procedures that make up the permitting process—frequently prepares documentation to support permitting decisions. Those decisions range from established or newer Categorical Exclusions (CEs), to the much lengthier and robust process of creating an Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), and many scenarios in-between. Today, changing workflows and the proliferation of AI and other technologies (see example here) are reshaping this job in fundamental ways—i.e., in ways that will automate or augment both routine NEPA document preparation (for example) as well as highly technical applications of policy or CE determinations.
The work of a modern permitting professional is also inherently cross-functional, sometimes interagency in scope, and needs to respond effectively to evolving permitting regulations. In practice, that means integrating large volumes of information, key data inputs, CE criteria or guidance, and environmental review findings—drawn from numerous subject matter experts and in varying formats—into a coherent evidentiary base for decision-makers. They will need to simultaneously track an evolving regulatory landscape composed of new case law, shifting interpretations of implementing regulations, and agency-specific procedural guidance; and they will need to orchestrate that integration in a manner that actually translates emerging changes into operational requirements for other permitting staff, applicants, and agency leaders.
The discrepancy between those needed skill sets and the status quo in permitting capacity illustrates that the government has failed to assess the impacts of who is leaving, who is staying, and whether any federal entity or leader is deliberately shaping what comes next for the workforce charged with making permitting faster and better. Indeed, the 20-30% reduction in roles like this one in 2025/2026 was not a planned approach issuing from new technology capabilities or streamlining regulatory changes—but future permitting workforce decisions need to be.
Recommendations
Fortunately, federal leaders have a real opportunity to transform permitting performance through targeted workforce actions. With the right talent embedded in well-designed teams—and sustained support for that talent—federal permitting will move faster and realize better outcomes. Based on confidential interviews conducted with permitting practitioners across agencies in early 2026, they need three skill sets to adapt to regulatory changes, accelerate permitting and maintain quality outcomes consistent with law and national permitting goals.
The recommendations detailed below are informed by these three overarching skill gaps:
- Digital tools, data, and AI to integrate new technologies into permitting tasks and workflows
- Complex project management skill sets to guide and track the schedule, cost, and quality of review procedures that make up permitting activities
- Targeted, scientific and technical skill sets in environmental and science disciplines to support consultation, data analysis, and permit decisionmaking
We recommend a series of actions by agencies at the center of government as well as permitting agency teams themselves:
Conclusion
Whether taken together as complementary pieces of a comprehensive workforce strategy, or a “menu” of options to demonstrate results quickly and scale, all our recommendations share a common goal set: increase the use of modern technology and data practices to streamline permitting workflows, improve the quality, cost, and timelines of permits, and reduce the overall likelihood of litigation and unnecessary delays. Better tools and processes won’t deliver better results on their own, however—and agency leaders and teams must be equipped to source, empower, and retain the talent needed to realize the benefits of those investments.
Part 2. And Other Legislative Ideas for Improving the Federal Permitting Workforce
Nearly every major national domestic priority—from energy and housing, to new infrastructure—runs through permitting. Yet, despite significant political momentum behind reform efforts, limited attention has been paid to the federal workforce that will actually be responsible for interpreting and implementing new permitting regulations and better outcomes.
Since the beginning of 2025, federal roles tasked with permitting are down 20-30%.3 Agencies have lost staff responsible for everything from data analysis, environmental science, and regulatory interpretation, to complex project management—and numerous other functions—essential to permitting. At the same time, major regulatory change, new technology to streamline workflows, and the need for speed and efficiency are placing new demands on the existing permitting workforce.
Congress must pass legislation and engage in oversight that reimagines the permitting workforce to meet the demands of a new regulatory environment. This memo details a series of recommendations for doing precisely that. These include:
Revising current permitting reform legislative proposals to:
- Create a “U.S. Permitting Corps” that will bring together interdisciplinary professionals who can be “deployed” with agency teams tasked with implementing reforms and improving efficiency. The Permitting Corps should be drawn from experienced permitting professionals outside government and managed and funded under the auspices of the federal Permitting Council.
- Invest in the skills to share and use best-in-class digital tools and permitting data across agencies to improve project management, streamline processes, and accelerate permitting timelines.
Using existing oversight and budget hearings to ensure agencies:
- Are engaging in targeted hiring for key permitting roles in scientific disciplines, project management, and regulatory skill sets to bolster overburdened permitting teams and accelerate progress on federal projects.
- Are rewarding achievements by federal permitting staff and agency leaders by linking clear, outcomes-based project metrics to improvements in the permitting process.
Background
Today’s changing technology and policy landscapes are colliding with urgent, sprawling national priorities like new energy infrastructure, housing, and climate mitigation. That collision has placed a radically different set of expectations on the federal permitting process to accelerate both the speed and efficiency of projects, while also managing environmental risk. In practice, that means increased pressure on a federal permitting ecosystem that has given little consideration to the scope, composition, or key skill sets needed to implement dramatically improved permitting operations.
Permitting workforce challenges have actually existed for decades: in the form of underinvestment in dedicated permitting staff, poor coordination of permitting decisions within and across agencies, long-standing data, technology, and information gaps, and inconsistent leadership commitments to removing permitting bottlenecks. Take, for example, the federal Environmental Protection Specialist. This role—prominent across the agency teams who administer the complex set of procedures that make up the permitting process—frequently prepares documentation to support permitting decisions. Those decisions range from established or newer Categorical Exclusions (CEs), to the much lengthier and robust process of creating an Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), and many scenarios in-between. Today, changing workflows and the proliferation of AI and other technologies (see example here) are reshaping this job in fundamental ways—i.e., in ways that will automate or augment both routine NEPA document preparation (for example) as well as highly technical applications of policy or CE determinations.
The work of a modern permitting professional is also inherently cross-functional, sometimes interagency in scope, and needs to respond effectively to evolving permitting regulations. In practice, that means integrating large volumes of information, key data inputs, CE criteria or guidance, and environmental review findings—drawn from numerous subject matter experts and in varying formats—into a coherent evidentiary base for decision-makers. They will need to simultaneously track an evolving regulatory landscape composed of new case law, shifting interpretations of implementing regulations, and agency-specific procedural guidance; and they will need to orchestrate that integration in a manner that actually translates emerging changes into operational requirements for other permitting staff, applicants, and agency leaders.
The discrepancy between those needed skill sets and the status quo in permitting capacity illustrates that the government has failed to assess the impacts of who is leaving, who is staying, and whether any federal entity or leader is deliberately shaping what comes next for the workforce charged with making permitting faster and better. Indeed, the 20-30% reduction in roles like this one in 2025/2026 was not a planned approach issuing from new technology capabilities or streamlining regulatory changes—but future permitting workforce decisions need to be.
Before those workforce deficits undermine the potential benefits of permitting reform efforts, Congress has opportunities to help bridge talent gaps so that the permitting workforce is ready to take full advantage of both the regulatory flexibilities and permitting-focused technology now available to them.
Congress is working on a series of legislative initiatives to improve permitting, including the PERMIT Act, SPEED Act, ePermit Act, and the CERTAIN Act. These legislative initiatives and Administration actions hold promise for accelerating and improving permitting – providing cost savings, moving projects forward faster, and driving better outcomes for all involved in the federal permitting process.
However, most of the focus is on deploying new technologies and changing regulatory and program direction and not on providing direction or resources on the talent needed to implement these critical improvements.
This presents Congress with an opportunity to improve the speed and quality of permitting using skill sets and technologies available to agencies today. Through talent development and the dispersion of technology use cases across agencies, the government can transform both the reputation and experience of permitting for all the actors in the process. The quality of a permit depends on the expertise of the permitting professionals doing the work; and the bottom line for lawmakers and agency leaders alike is that workload and mission demands don’t match the talent supply—and that new talent configurations and strategies are needed to execute on permitting priorities.
Recommendations
Fortunately, Congress has a real opportunity to transform permitting performance through targeted workforce actions. With the right talent embedded in well-designed teams—and sustained support for that talent—federal permitting will move faster and realize better outcomes. Based on confidential interviews conducted with permitting practitioners across agencies in early 2026, they need three skill sets to adapt to regulatory changes, accelerate permitting and maintain quality outcomes consistent with law and national permitting goals.
The recommendations detailed below are informed by these three overarching skill gaps:
- Digital tools, data, and AI to integrate new technologies into permitting tasks and workflows
- Complex project management skill sets to guide and track the schedule, cost, and quality of review procedures that make up permitting activities
- Targeted, scientific and technical skill sets in environmental and science disciplines to support consultation, data analysis, and permit decisionmaking
We recommend a series of actions by agencies at the center of government as well as permitting agency teams themselves:
Conclusion
Whether taken together as complementary pieces of a comprehensive workforce strategy, or a “menu” of options to demonstrate results quickly and scale, all our recommendations share a common goal set: increase the use of modern technology and data practices to streamline permitting workflows, improve the quality, cost, and timelines of permits, and reduce the overall likelihood of litigation and unnecessary delays. Legislation that provides better tools and processes won’t deliver better results on their own, however—and agency leaders and teams must be equipped to source, empower, and retain the talent needed to realize the benefits of those investments.
Despite significant political momentum behind reform efforts, limited attention has been paid to the federal workforce that will actually be responsible for interpreting and implementing new permitting regulations and better outcomes.
“Federal data and access to it is not a partisan issue. It is a people issue. Our country cannot achieve greatness without access to the data that measure what we value, who we are, and where we’re heading.”
The United States federal government invests nearly $150 billion annually in research and development. However, the supporting evidence generates wildly different estimates depending on the methods and available data.
The digital government field has an opportunity to build a more responsive and resilient government by pushing into new frontiers, with new tools, approaches, and even organizations that don’t exist yet. This is the time for radical experimentation, delivery, and exploration.