Energy permitting reform is one of the hottest topics in Congress and state houses nationwide. Federal legislation is building momentum, while parallel efforts at streamlining energy approvals have also emerged at the state level. Though the fate of pending bills remains uncertain, changes could come as early as the end of 2024.
Federal Permitting Bills
In late July, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee approved a bipartisan bill that would accelerate federal permitting, siting, and environmental reviews for energy infrastructure projects. The bill, S. 4753, is sponsored by Senators Joe Manchin (I-WV) and John Barrasso (R-WY). It would, among other things, reduce the timeframes for federal agency approvals of renewable energy, critical mineral mining, and transmission lines; narrow the statute of limitations for lawsuits challenging project approvals; and open up additional federal lands to coal, oil, and natural gas production.
It is widely recognized that current federal permitting and approval processes are inadequate for advancing renewable energy and transmission projects—especially at the pace and scale necessary to unlock the Inflation Reduction Act’s full decarbonization potential. The IRA could support an estimated 30,000 to 60,000 new projects, all of which would go through environmental review and federal permitting processes. Environmental impact studies under the National Environmental Policy Act can take several years to complete, and permitting decisions are often stalled by litigation. This legislation is designed to shorten those permitting and approval processes. Some version of the bill could go to vote as soon as the end of this year or early 2025.
Another bipartisan bill referred to as the Streamlining Powerlines Essential to Electric Demand (SPEED) and Reliability Act, H.R. 7786, would significantly expedite the federal siting and permitting of interregional transmission lines. These lines are necessary to meet an anticipated jump in electricity demand as states advance their efforts to decarbonize through electrification, domestic manufacturing expands under the IRA, and new renewables come online to meet that demand. These interregional transmission lines are currently subject to environmental review by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Department of Energy (DOE). The SPEED and Reliability Act would streamline that process by, among other things, requiring FERC to conduct a single environmental review for individual “high-impact” transmission lines deemed to be in the public interest and imposing timelines to ensure the federal permitting process is complete within 2 years and 3 months.
According to Representative Scott Peters (D-CA), who sponsored the bill in the House (co-sponsored by Andrew Garbarino (R-NY), John Curtis (R-UT), and Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA)), the SPEED and Reliability Act would let the market tell the government where these high impact transmission lines should go to meet growing demand. This applicant-driven route designation process would shorten the permitting process by avoiding DOE’s current, almost 2-year-long corridor designation process.
Senator John Hickenlooper (D-CO) has introduced S.4027, an identical bill, which underscores that transmission permitting reform is receiving high-level attention across the political spectrum.
The upcoming federal election may influence what ultimately gets voted on and when. For instance, in its current form, the Manchin-Barrasso bill, S. 4753, represents a compromise of political priorities, with renewable energy and transmission projects on one side and fossil fuel production on the other. Which party wins the presidency (and Congress) this fall could influence the direction of this legislation during the lame-duck session between the election and January 20, 2025. Lawmakers at the Democratic National Convention expressed optimism that the legislation could gain momentum during the lame-duck session and possibly even pass before the end of the year. If Kamala Harris prevails and Democrats control one or both houses, Democrats may be more assertive in limiting the bill’s fossil fuel provisions, whereas a second Trump presidency could provide a greater incentive for compromise. Regardless, the bill still needs to pass both the Senate and House, which alone will impose constraints on negotiations.
State-Level Activity
As Congress grapples with federal permitting reform, states have seen varying degrees of success in streamlining and expediting their own permitting processes.
In the Northeast, New York revamped its large-scale renewable energy permitting process twice in the last four years, each time with the intent to further consolidate permitting jurisdiction in a centralized permitting agency and expedite the permitting process. Most recently, the state passed the Renewable Action through Project Interconnection and Deployment (RAPID) Act to replace the lengthy and inefficient Article VII transmission siting process and consolidate permitting jurisdiction of major transmission lines within the previously created Office of Renewable Energy Siting (now Office of Renewable Energy Siting and Electric Transmission).
In 2022, California passed similar reforms via Assembly Bill 205, which created a centralized permitting office for large wind and solar projects and a 270-day environmental review period from the date of a complete application.
Massachusetts did not succeed in enacting siting and permitting reforms during its formal legislative session, which ended in July. Although there seemed to be broad consensus on reforms, the House and Senate ultimately could not advance a clean energy permitting and siting bill out of conference. Though the bill is not dead yet, it may be 2025 before it is taken up again.
Our Energy & Climate team is monitoring these developments across the country.
