Bipartisan measure affirms federal role in electrical transmission planning, axes permit and litigation timelines, assures oil/gas public lands leasing.
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee has adopted a permitting reform bill that seeks to accelerate electric grid expansion, restrict litigation and trim timelines for energy and mineral mining proposals.
The panel passed the Energy Permitting Reform Act (EPRA) on July 31 with a 15–4 vote. After Congress returns from its August recess, it will go to the Senate floor for a chamber vote.
The reforms proposed in S. 4753, co-sponsored by chair Sen. Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), have been debated in committee hearings for more than a year.
“The need for permitting reform has come up in almost every hearing that we’ve had this Congress,” Manchin said. “No matter what side of the fence you may be on, everyone knows it can’t happen unless we reform our permitting—how we do things. So, the time to act is now.”
The adoption follows two key federal policy alignments issued in May: the Department of Energy’s (DOE) selection of potential National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETCs)and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) adoption of Order No. 1920.
Order No. 1920 requires utilities and operators in the nation’s three major transmission grids and 22 subregional grids to collaborate when expanding and broadens commission siting authority “in the national interest.”
EPRA seeks to codify DOE’s NIETC and FERC’s Order No. 1920, citing an October 2023 report by DOE’s Grid Deployment Office that determined it’s in the “national interest” for federal agencies to coordinate grid expansions.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects electricity demand could increase between 30 percent to more than 75 percent by 2050. Studies warn that, without grid upgrades, the United States will not be able to meet that demand.
The bill enshrines FERC’s authority to regulate transmission, preempting lawsuits challenging its jurisdiction after the Supreme Court struck down the “Chevron deference” to federal rule-making in its June 28 Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo ruling.
Six Years to 150 Days
EPRA includes three judicial review revisions, most notably reducing deadlines for filing lawsuits against proposed projects or agency decisions from six years to 150 days.
“Lawfare” litigation has bedeviled fossil fuel energy projects for generations but according to a July 2023 study by Stanford University, while 28 percent of proposed energy projects face litigation overall, two-thirds of renewable energy proposals are challenged in court.
The 150-day filing deadline is longer than the 90-day cutoff included in HR 1, The Lower Energy Costs Act, adopted by the Republican-controlled House in 2023 and idling unheard in the Democrat-majority Senate.
The proposed bill installs a first-ever deadline for agencies to respond to court remand reviews within 180 days and requires courts to prioritize challenges to energy or mineral projects.
The bill would require the Department of the Interior (DOI) to hold lease sales in accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which requires quarterly sales for oil and gas leases on public lands and for offshore oil, gas, and wind every other year.
EPRA would require that DOI make at least 50 percent of leases, or at least 2 million acres, available for oil and gas before approving renewable energy proposals.
It mandates DOI hold offshore lease auctions of at least 60 million acres annually between 2025-29 rather than every other year. Geothermal energy leases would also be conducted annually.
The proposed measure requires DOI to begin reviewing lease applications within 90 days of submission and issue decisions within 90 days of completing environmental reviews.
Under EPRA, DOI would double its goal for permitting renewable energies on federal lands. Under the Energy Act of 2020, DOI aimed to permit 25 gigawatts (GW) of renewable-sourced power by 2025. It exceeded that goal in April. That target would be 50 GW “no later than 2030” if the bill becomes law.
The proposal includes significant modifications to DOI mining rules. Among them is a reversal of “mill site” regulations that allow ancillary activities such as storage, waste disposal, and processing at mining claims without documented discovery of minerals.
EPRA would require agencies to verify the existence of minerals before permitting ancillary activities on claim sites.
The bill would mandate that DOE determine within 90 days of FERC final environmental reviews if exporting liquified natural gas (LNG) to a country lacking a free trade agreement with the United States is in the “public interest” or be automatically approved.
In January 2024, DOE “paused” LNG export permit reviews to refine what “public interest” means. On July 1, a federal judge stayed DOE’s LNG export “pause.”
Amendments Shot Down
Numerous amendments were offered during the July 31 Senate “business meeting,” or “markup,” where panelists get final shots to submit changes. Only one regarding forest restoration by Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) was approved.
Sen. Josh Hawley’s (R-Mo.) failed amendment requiring FERC transmission siting be approved, not merely noticed, by regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and state planners would have essentially negated FERC’s Order No. 1920, which may be revised with 48 rehearing requests and three new members joining the five-seat FERC.
The committee deferred Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-Alaska) amendment promoting small hydroelectric and hydrokinetic projects for rural communities until it can be discussed when EPRA is introduced for a floor vote.
“After more than a year of bipartisan negotiations …we are now one step closer to getting the bipartisan Energy Permitting Reform Act signed into law,” Barrasso said. “Our bill is a true, all-of-the-above energy policy—targeted, timely, and good for all Americans.”
While some in GOP House leadership will oppose EPRA, the House Sustainable Energy and Environmental Coalition, led by Reps. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) and Mike Levin (D-Calif.) welcomed it.
Many EPRA provisions are also in their Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act, introduced in January, referred to eight committees—a death sentence—and not heard from since.
“While there are aspects of the bill that can be improved and provisions that we have concerns about,” Casten and Levin said in a statement, “we are eager to continue the critical discussion on permitting reform.”