US Senate permitting bill would give FERC a one-year backstop to site transmission lines
Victoria Shinder2 min readThe chairs and ranking members of the US Senate's two energy committees introduced a 417-page permitting bill on 30 September, the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act. Shelley Moore Capito and Sheldon Whitehouse of the Environment and Public Works Committee and Mike Lee and Martin Heinrich of Energy and Natural Resources presented it together just before the Senate recessed for the midterm elections. The Bipartisan Policy Center, which published a section-by-section explainer, expects a cloture vote on the motion to proceed on 9 November; amendments are to be considered when the Senate returns.
Transmission. The bill would let the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission permit a transmission line when a state lacks siting authority or has not approved the line within a year, if the line is in the public interest, protects or benefits consumers, improves reliability or meets other criteria. For lines of 345 kV or more, developers could apply to FERC and the state at the same time, although FERC could not issue its permit until the one-year conditions were met; today the federal process cannot begin until the year has passed. Costs would be allocated in proportion to the core economic benefits customers receive, such as reliability, less congestion and market access. Several sections focus on existing rights of way and upgrades of existing lines, and many provisions resemble the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024.
Reviews and lawsuits. The window to challenge a project under the National Environmental Policy Act would shrink from the general six-year default to 150 days after the authorisation is made public. Fourteen categories of action would be excluded from NEPA instead of seven, including transmission and pipeline repairs and upgrades within existing rights of way. Agencies could rely on a programmatic review for 10 years instead of five and accept a state or tribal review that serves a similar function.
Permit certainty. The bill would limit when agencies can revoke or suspend permits already issued. Sponsors of listed project types, from wind and solar to coal, nuclear, pipelines, mining and LNG, could sue when a permit is improperly denied or delayed more than 60 days past a deadline because of a pattern of disparate treatment. Proving a pattern would require statistical evidence and a showing of intent; damages would run from 50% to 100% of the project's expected construction cost. According to Utility Dive, the deal came together after President Trump told Democratic lawmakers that wind and solar would be treated better in the bill; Whitehouse said the question of regular order for those projects is still unresolved.
What it means
For grid developers, the transmission title is the core: a federal backstop that can start in parallel with the state process, and a cost allocation rule tied to measured benefits. The disparate-treatment clause is the political price, and it cuts both ways: it protects wind and solar from the current administration and fossil projects from a future one.