Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

Changes from September 11, 2023 to October 11, 2023

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform
~~September~~October 11, 2023 11, 2023
Proposals
Ashley J. Lawson
Permitting reform has been a topic of debate in the 118th Congress. One aspect of this debate Permitting reform has been a topic of debate in the 118th Congress. One aspect of this debate
Specialist in Energy Policy Specialist in Energy Policy
addresses the processes for planning, siting, approving, and paying for electricity transmission addresses the processes for planning, siting, approving, and paying for electricity transmission

lines (broadly referred to as transmission permitting in this report). Proponents of transmission lines (broadly referred to as transmission permitting in this report). Proponents of transmission
permitting reform generally identify two main desired outcomes: (1) increased use of wind and permitting reform generally identify two main desired outcomes: (1) increased use of wind and

solar energy and (2) improved electric reliability and resilience. Debate has focused on perceived solar energy and (2) improved electric reliability and resilience. Debate has focused on perceived
hurdles to the development of large, interstate electricity transmission lines which are broadly viewed as being supportive of hurdles to the development of large, interstate electricity transmission lines which are broadly viewed as being supportive of
these two desired outcomes. these two desired outcomes.
One perceived hurdle is the process for siting electricity transmission lines (i.e., approving their route and authorizing One perceived hurdle is the process for siting electricity transmission lines (i.e., approving their route and authorizing
construction). Currently, most electricity transmission siting authority resides in the states. A transmission line crossing state construction). Currently, most electricity transmission siting authority resides in the states. A transmission line crossing state
lines may require approvals from multiple state and local governments along the line’s path. Critics argue the current lines may require approvals from multiple state and local governments along the line’s path. Critics argue the current
framework adds time to the transmission development process and can allow a single state or local government to block a framework adds time to the transmission development process and can allow a single state or local government to block a
transmission project that is supported by neighboring jurisdictions. In 2005, Congress gave the Federal Energy Regulatory transmission project that is supported by neighboring jurisdictions. In 2005, Congress gave the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) limited authority to site some transmission Commission (FERC) in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) limited authority to site some transmission
lines under certain circumstances, but this authority was never used. Congress amended FERC’s siting authority in 2021. lines under certain circumstances, but this authority was never used. Congress amended FERC’s siting authority in 2021.
DOE and FERC are currently developing regulations to implement this revised authority. Some transmission permitting DOE and FERC are currently developing regulations to implement this revised authority. Some transmission permitting
reform legislative proposals would further amend this authority, for example by granting siting authority for all large reform legislative proposals would further amend this authority, for example by granting siting authority for all large
interstate transmission lines to FERC. A key point of debate around these proposals is the appropriate role of the federal and interstate transmission lines to FERC. A key point of debate around these proposals is the appropriate role of the federal and
state governments over electricity transmission line siting. Some would have the federal government take a larger role, while state governments over electricity transmission line siting. Some would have the federal government take a larger role, while
others would preserve the status quo whereby states have siting authority in most cases. others would preserve the status quo whereby states have siting authority in most cases.
A second perceived hurdle is the allocation of electricity transmission line costs to customers. A central tenet for electricity A second perceived hurdle is the allocation of electricity transmission line costs to customers. A central tenet for electricity
regulators is that the beneficiary of new electricity infrastructure should pay for that infrastructure (sometimes referred to as regulators is that the beneficiary of new electricity infrastructure should pay for that infrastructure (sometimes referred to as
the the cost causation principle). Under current practice, transmission beneficiaries are typically identified using easily quantified principle). Under current practice, transmission beneficiaries are typically identified using easily quantified
factors such as delivery of lower-cost electricity to a particular utility service territory. Costs for transmission development factors such as delivery of lower-cost electricity to a particular utility service territory. Costs for transmission development
are allocated exclusively to these identified beneficiaries. Some transmission permitting reform proposals would allocate are allocated exclusively to these identified beneficiaries. Some transmission permitting reform proposals would allocate
costs to a broader set of customers (based on a broader view of transmission benefits) and would additionally consider costs to a broader set of customers (based on a broader view of transmission benefits) and would additionally consider
benefits that may be difficult to quantify. A key point of debate around these proposals is the appropriate balance of costs and benefits that may be difficult to quantify. A key point of debate around these proposals is the appropriate balance of costs and
benefits for consumers. Some believe that identifying a broader set of benefits and beneficiaries would encourage benefits for consumers. Some believe that identifying a broader set of benefits and beneficiaries would encourage
development of beneficial transmission lines that may not be identified using current cost allocation practices. Others believe development of beneficial transmission lines that may not be identified using current cost allocation practices. Others believe
that changing cost allocation practices could increase costs for consumers without providing direct benefits. that changing cost allocation practices could increase costs for consumers without providing direct benefits.
A third perceived hurdle is the planning process for multistate electricity transmission lines. Currently, FERC requires some A third perceived hurdle is the planning process for multistate electricity transmission lines. Currently, FERC requires some
amount of planning within defined transmission planning regions. Some stakeholders believe current FERC requirements amount of planning within defined transmission planning regions. Some stakeholders believe current FERC requirements
have been ineffective at encouraging large interstate electricity transmission lines. Some proposals would strengthen have been ineffective at encouraging large interstate electricity transmission lines. Some proposals would strengthen
requirements for regional transmission planning and add requirements for interregional transmission planning. Some requirements for regional transmission planning and add requirements for interregional transmission planning. Some
proposals would additionally require minimum levels of electricity sharing (proposals would additionally require minimum levels of electricity sharing (transfer capacity) between regions. Key points of ) between regions. Key points of
debate around these proposals are costs and benefits for consumers as well as the appropriate role of federal and state debate around these proposals are costs and benefits for consumers as well as the appropriate role of federal and state
governments in determining electricity transmission needs. Some believe a stronger federal policy supporting interregional governments in determining electricity transmission needs. Some believe a stronger federal policy supporting interregional
electricity transmission could potentially lower costs for consumers and improve reliability and resilience. Others believe the electricity transmission could potentially lower costs for consumers and improve reliability and resilience. Others believe the
current process sufficiently identifies benefits for consumers and allows state regulators greater say in transmission current process sufficiently identifies benefits for consumers and allows state regulators greater say in transmission
development. development.
This report compares provisions addressing these and other selected electricity transmission topics in 11 permitting reform This report compares provisions addressing these and other selected electricity transmission topics in 11 permitting reform
proposals in the 118th Congress, including the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) which requires a study of proposals in the 118th Congress, including the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) which requires a study of
interregional transfer capacity. Separate from legislative proposals, FERC has initiated rulemakings that would address some interregional transfer capacity. Separate from legislative proposals, FERC has initiated rulemakings that would address some
of the topics identified in this report. FERC could change some national transmission policies using its existing authority, of the topics identified in this report. FERC could change some national transmission policies using its existing authority,
without enactment of new legislation specifically addressing electricity transmission permitting. Some Members of Congress without enactment of new legislation specifically addressing electricity transmission permitting. Some Members of Congress
have publicly encouraged FERC to do so. Other Members of Congress have publicly encouraged FERC to preserve the status have publicly encouraged FERC to do so. Other Members of Congress have publicly encouraged FERC to preserve the status
quo. quo.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

ultiple proposals for permitting reform have been put forward in the 118th Congress, and ultiple proposals for permitting reform have been put forward in the 118th Congress, and
some were adopted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5).1 In the current some were adopted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5).1 In the current
M policy context, the term M policy context, the term permit is commonly used in a broad sense to refer to a number is commonly used in a broad sense to refer to a number
of federal permits, approvals, authorizations, or other forms of consent around infrastructure of federal permits, approvals, authorizations, or other forms of consent around infrastructure
development. Likewise, this report uses the term permit in a broad sense. Permitting reform development. Likewise, this report uses the term permit in a broad sense. Permitting reform
proposals address electricity transmission in various ways. This report discusses current issues in proposals address electricity transmission in various ways. This report discusses current issues in
the debate around transmission permitting and summarizes the key transmission provisions in the debate around transmission permitting and summarizes the key transmission provisions in
major permitting reform bills introduced to date in the 118th Congress. Much congressional major permitting reform bills introduced to date in the 118th Congress. Much congressional
interest in electricity transmission lies in issues other than permits. Nonetheless, this report uses interest in electricity transmission lies in issues other than permits. Nonetheless, this report uses
the term the term transmission permitting reform to refer to proposals to change any aspect of transmission to refer to proposals to change any aspect of transmission
planning, siting, approval, cost allocation, and other transmission-related issues and processes. planning, siting, approval, cost allocation, and other transmission-related issues and processes.
This approach is consistent with the common use of terms in the current policy discussion. This This approach is consistent with the common use of terms in the current policy discussion. This
report focuses on topics in the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) report focuses on topics in the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
and does not cover topics related to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other and does not cover topics related to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other
environmental protection statutes. environmental protection statutes.
Background information on electricity transmission is available in the following CRS resources: Background information on electricity transmission is available in the following CRS resources:
• CRS In Focus IF12253, • CRS In Focus IF12253, Introduction to Electricity Transmission
• CRS Report R47521, • CRS Report R47521, Electricity: Overview and Issues for Congress
• CRS In Focus IF11257, • CRS In Focus IF11257, Variable Renewable Energy: An Introduction
• CRS Report R45764, • CRS Report R45764, Maintaining Electric Reliability with Wind and Solar
Sources: Background and Issues for Congress
Current Electricity Transmission Policy Issues
Proponents of transmission permitting reform generally identify two main desired outcomes: (1) Proponents of transmission permitting reform generally identify two main desired outcomes: (1)
increased use of wind and solar energy and (2) improved electric reliability and resilience. To increased use of wind and solar energy and (2) improved electric reliability and resilience. To
achieve these outcomes, a key goal of transmission permitting reform proponents is to support achieve these outcomes, a key goal of transmission permitting reform proponents is to support
increased development of large transmission lines crossing two or more states. These types of increased development of large transmission lines crossing two or more states. These types of
transmission lines are widely viewed to be more beneficial than smaller, intrastate transmission transmission lines are widely viewed to be more beneficial than smaller, intrastate transmission
lines with respect to the desired outcomes noted above. lines with respect to the desired outcomes noted above.
Some industry participants and observers have identified a number of perceived barriers to the Some industry participants and observers have identified a number of perceived barriers to the
development of large interstate transmission lines, as discussed below. development of large interstate transmission lines, as discussed below.
Siting Authority
Currently, most electricity transmission siting authority resides in the states. A transmission line Currently, most electricity transmission siting authority resides in the states. A transmission line
crossing state lines may require approvals from multiple state and local governments along the crossing state lines may require approvals from multiple state and local governments along the
line’s path. Critics argue the current framework adds time to the transmission development line’s path. Critics argue the current framework adds time to the transmission development
process and can allow a single state or local government to block a transmission project that is process and can allow a single state or local government to block a transmission project that is
supported by neighboring jurisdictions. Others argue that the current framework protects the supported by neighboring jurisdictions. Others argue that the current framework protects the
ability of states and local governments to approve (or disapprove) infrastructure that is in the best ability of states and local governments to approve (or disapprove) infrastructure that is in the best
interest of their citizens. interest of their citizens.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 added Section 216 of the Federal Power Act (FPA, 16 U.S.C. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 added Section 216 of the Federal Power Act (FPA, 16 U.S.C.
§824p), which carves out a limited role for FERC and other federal agencies in siting interstate §824p), which carves out a limited role for FERC and other federal agencies in siting interstate

1 For an overview of permitting reform provisions adopted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) see 1 For an overview of permitting reform provisions adopted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) see
CRS In Focus IF12417, CRS In Focus IF12417, Environmental Reviews and the 118th Congress, by Kristen Hite. , by Kristen Hite.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1 1

link to page 7 link to page 7 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

electric transmission facilities. This section authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in consultation electric transmission facilities. This section authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in consultation
with the affected states, to designate areas experiencing electricity transmission constraints or with the affected states, to designate areas experiencing electricity transmission constraints or
congestion as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETCs). The section grants congestion as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETCs). The section grants
FERC authority to issue permits for constructing interstate electricity transmission facilities in FERC authority to issue permits for constructing interstate electricity transmission facilities in
designated NIETCs (commonly referred to as FERC’s designated NIETCs (commonly referred to as FERC’s backstop siting authority). As originally ). As originally
enacted, this authority could be exercised only if the state that has authority to approve the enacted, this authority could be exercised only if the state that has authority to approve the
facilities had “withheld approval for more than one year.” facilities had “withheld approval for more than one year.”
Two judicial decisions hamstrung the exercise of the Section 216 authority granted in 2005 to the Two judicial decisions hamstrung the exercise of the Section 216 authority granted in 2005 to the
agencies. In agencies. In Piedmont Environmental Council v. FERC (558 F.3d 304 (4th Cir. 2009)), the U.S. (558 F.3d 304 (4th Cir. 2009)), the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that FERC may not permit transmission facilities if a Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that FERC may not permit transmission facilities if a
state has denied the applicant’s request to site transmission facilities; FERC may permit the state has denied the applicant’s request to site transmission facilities; FERC may permit the
transmission facilities only in the event the state has not acted on the applicant’s request. And in transmission facilities only in the event the state has not acted on the applicant’s request. And in
California Wilderness Coalition v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy (631 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2011)), the U.S. (631 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2011)), the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated the Department of Energy’s first two NIETC Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated the Department of Energy’s first two NIETC
designations, finding that the agency had failed to consult adequately with the states as required designations, finding that the agency had failed to consult adequately with the states as required
by the FPA. Since the Ninth Circuit’s 2011 decision, the Secretary of Energy has made no further by the FPA. Since the Ninth Circuit’s 2011 decision, the Secretary of Energy has made no further
NIETC designations. NIETC designations.
In 2021, Congress amended FERC’s backstop siting authority in the Infrastructure Investment In 2021, Congress amended FERC’s backstop siting authority in the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58) to address, among other things, the issues identified by the and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58) to address, among other things, the issues identified by the
lawsuits.2 DOE is revising its determination of NIETCs and anticipates releasing guidance for lawsuits.2 DOE is revising its determination of NIETCs and anticipates releasing guidance for
applicants in Fall 2023.3 FERC is likewise revising its regulations related to the backstop siting applicants in Fall 2023.3 FERC is likewise revising its regulations related to the backstop siting
authority, as discussed in the sectiauthority, as discussed in the section “FERC Activities.”
Some transmission reform proposals would give FERC siting authority for large interstate Some transmission reform proposals would give FERC siting authority for large interstate
transmission lines (in contrast to the status quo whereby states generally site such lines), while transmission lines (in contrast to the status quo whereby states generally site such lines), while
preserving state siting authority for small transmission lines and lines that do not cross state preserving state siting authority for small transmission lines and lines that do not cross state
borders. Proponents of this approach say that having a single federal approval process would borders. Proponents of this approach say that having a single federal approval process would
speed the development of large interstate transmission lines compared to the status quo. speed the development of large interstate transmission lines compared to the status quo.
Opponents say that states are better positioned to identify the best path for all transmission line Opponents say that states are better positioned to identify the best path for all transmission line
development. Another proposal would remove DOE’s role in determining NIETCs and leave development. Another proposal would remove DOE’s role in determining NIETCs and leave
FERC as the sole federal agency involved in federal backstop siting authority. FERC as the sole federal agency involved in federal backstop siting authority.
Cost Allocation
A central tenet for electricity regulators is that the beneficiary of new electricity infrastructure A central tenet for electricity regulators is that the beneficiary of new electricity infrastructure
should pay for that infrastructure (sometimes referred to as the should pay for that infrastructure (sometimes referred to as the cost causation principle). FERC principle). FERC
enforces this principle in its transmission cost allocation policies laid out in its 2011 Order No. enforces this principle in its transmission cost allocation policies laid out in its 2011 Order No.
1000. The order specifies that costs must be allocated “in a manner that is at least roughly 1000. The order specifies that costs must be allocated “in a manner that is at least roughly
commensurate with estimated benefits.”4 A related principle (stated explicitly in Order No. 1000) commensurate with estimated benefits.”4 A related principle (stated explicitly in Order No. 1000)
is that customers that do not benefit from transmission investments should not be required to is that customers that do not benefit from transmission investments should not be required to

2 For a summary of changes made to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC’s) backstop siting authority, 2 For a summary of changes made to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC’s) backstop siting authority,
see CRS Report R47034, see CRS Report R47034, Energy and Minerals Provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58), ,
coordinated by Brent D. Yacobucci. coordinated by Brent D. Yacobucci.
3 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), “DOE Proposes National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Designation 3 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), “DOE Proposes National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Designation
Process,” May 9, 2023, https://www.energy.gov/gdo/articles/doe-proposes-national-interest-electric-transmission-Process,” May 9, 2023, https://www.energy.gov/gdo/articles/doe-proposes-national-interest-electric-transmission-
corridor-designation-process. corridor-designation-process.
4 FERC, 4 FERC, Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation by Transmission Owning and Operating Public Utilities, ,
https://www.ferc.gov/electric-transmission/order-no-1000-transmission-planning-and-cost-allocation. FERC issued https://www.ferc.gov/electric-transmission/order-no-1000-transmission-planning-and-cost-allocation. FERC issued
Order No. 1000 in 2011 to revise its policies for transmission planning and cost allocation. Order No. 1000, and two Order No. 1000 in 2011 to revise its policies for transmission planning and cost allocation. Order No. 1000, and two
related clarifying orders, are currently in force. related clarifying orders, are currently in force.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

2 2

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

cover those costs. Under current practice, transmission beneficiaries are typically identified using cover those costs. Under current practice, transmission beneficiaries are typically identified using
easily quantified factors such as delivery of lower-cost electricity to a particular utility service easily quantified factors such as delivery of lower-cost electricity to a particular utility service
territory. Costs for transmission development are allocated exclusively to these identified territory. Costs for transmission development are allocated exclusively to these identified
beneficiaries. beneficiaries.
Some transmission reform proposals would shift some transmission cost allocation to less direct Some transmission reform proposals would shift some transmission cost allocation to less direct
beneficiaries, either by considering a broader geographic spread of benefits or including benefits beneficiaries, either by considering a broader geographic spread of benefits or including benefits
that are more difficult to quantify (e.g., resilience). Proponents of this approach say it would that are more difficult to quantify (e.g., resilience). Proponents of this approach say it would
incentivize transmission projects with multiple values that might be overlooked in the current incentivize transmission projects with multiple values that might be overlooked in the current
framework. Opponents say this could increase costs for some consumers without providing direct framework. Opponents say this could increase costs for some consumers without providing direct
benefits. benefits.
Interregional Transmission Planning
Transmission planning—identifying needed upgrades or expansions to the transmission system—Transmission planning—identifying needed upgrades or expansions to the transmission system—
happens at the state level (for happens at the state level (for local projects) and at a multistate level (for ) and at a multistate level (for regional projects). ).
Transmission planning affects the kinds of transmission projects that are built in the future. Order Transmission planning affects the kinds of transmission projects that are built in the future. Order
No.1000 also addresses transmission planning, and aims in part to encourage increased No.1000 also addresses transmission planning, and aims in part to encourage increased
development of regional projects. In Order No. 1000, FERC required utilities to participate in development of regional projects. In Order No. 1000, FERC required utilities to participate in
regional transmission planning in multistate regions.5 Order No. 1000 also addresses interregional regional transmission planning in multistate regions.5 Order No. 1000 also addresses interregional
transmission by requiring transmission providers in neighboring regions to coordinate their transmission by requiring transmission providers in neighboring regions to coordinate their
planning processes. Some stakeholders argue Order No. 1000 has been ineffective at encouraging planning processes. Some stakeholders argue Order No. 1000 has been ineffective at encouraging
a large build-out of regional and interregional transmission. a large build-out of regional and interregional transmission.
Transmission permitting reform proposals reviewed by CRS do not address regional transmission Transmission permitting reform proposals reviewed by CRS do not address regional transmission
planning, but some do address planning, but some do address interregional transmission planning. Some transmission permitting transmission planning. Some transmission permitting
reform proposals would direct FERC to establish new interregional transmission planning reform proposals would direct FERC to establish new interregional transmission planning
requirements. Some would require FERC to enforce minimum levels of interregional transfer requirements. Some would require FERC to enforce minimum levels of interregional transfer
capacity. Proponents of these approaches say this would encourage more long-distance capacity. Proponents of these approaches say this would encourage more long-distance
transmission development that could potentially lower costs for consumers and improve transmission development that could potentially lower costs for consumers and improve
reliability and resilience. Opponents say the current process is sufficient and allows state reliability and resilience. Opponents say the current process is sufficient and allows state
regulators greater say in transmission development. regulators greater say in transmission development.
Other Issues
Various other topics have been included in some transmission permitting reform proposals. These Various other topics have been included in some transmission permitting reform proposals. These
include include
• FERC’s organizational structure for regulating transmission; • FERC’s organizational structure for regulating transmission;
• Consumer protection, for example an Independent Transmission Monitor to • Consumer protection, for example an Independent Transmission Monitor to
ensure transmission development is efficient and cost-effective; ensure transmission development is efficient and cost-effective;
• Presidential authority for approving international transmission lines (i.e., those • Presidential authority for approving international transmission lines (i.e., those
connecting the United States with Canada or Mexico);6 connecting the United States with Canada or Mexico);6

5 Not all entities that own transmission lines are covered by Order No. 1000. For example, federal power marketing 5 Not all entities that own transmission lines are covered by Order No. 1000. For example, federal power marketing
administrations (e.g., the Bonneville Power Administration) are outside of FERC’s jurisdiction for transmission administrations (e.g., the Bonneville Power Administration) are outside of FERC’s jurisdiction for transmission
planning. Such entities are not required by FERC to participate in regional transmission planning, though they may planning. Such entities are not required by FERC to participate in regional transmission planning, though they may
choose to do so in a manner consistent with their statutory obligations. For a discussion of federal power marketing choose to do so in a manner consistent with their statutory obligations. For a discussion of federal power marketing
administrations, see CRS Report R45548, administrations, see CRS Report R45548, The Power Marketing Administrations: Background and Current Issues, by , by
Richard J. Campbell. For additional information, congressional offices may contact Ashley J. Lawson. Richard J. Campbell. For additional information, congressional offices may contact Ashley J. Lawson.
6 Currently, international transmission lines require a presidential permit for construction. 6 Currently, international transmission lines require a presidential permit for construction.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

3 3

link to page 4 link to page 9 link to page 4 link to page 9 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

• Reliability and resilience; and • Reliability and resilience; and
• Incentives for new technology deployment, such as Grid Enhancing Technologies • Incentives for new technology deployment, such as Grid Enhancing Technologies
(GETs) and Non-Transmission Alternatives. (GETs) and Non-Transmission Alternatives.
FERC Activities
In the last several years, FERC has initiated (but not finalized) rulemakings addressing many of In the last several years, FERC has initiated (but not finalized) rulemakings addressing many of
the issues discussed above. In many cases, FERC has proposed reforms that generally align with the issues discussed above. In many cases, FERC has proposed reforms that generally align with
the goals of legislative proposals. For example, FERC has proposed reforms to take a broader the goals of legislative proposals. For example, FERC has proposed reforms to take a broader
view for determining transmission cost allocation.7 FERC has existing authority to finalize these view for determining transmission cost allocation.7 FERC has existing authority to finalize these
rulemakings and implement some degree of transmission reform without additional congressional rulemakings and implement some degree of transmission reform without additional congressional
directives. Alternatively, Congress could provide statutory guidance for FERC’s transmission directives. Alternatively, Congress could provide statutory guidance for FERC’s transmission
policies, as some transmission reform proposals would do. policies, as some transmission reform proposals would do.
FERC is also revising its regulations implementing its backstop siting authority in response to FERC is also revising its regulations implementing its backstop siting authority in response to
IIJA (backstop siting authority is discussed in the sectioIIJA (backstop siting authority is discussed in the section “Siting Authority”). The extent to which ). The extent to which
FERC’s revised backstop siting authority could affect transmission development remains unclear. FERC’s revised backstop siting authority could affect transmission development remains unclear.
IIJA does not IIJA does not require FERC to approve projects that states have denied. Instead, the backstop FERC to approve projects that states have denied. Instead, the backstop
siting authority provides a “second chance” for projects that meet specified criteria if the projects siting authority provides a “second chance” for projects that meet specified criteria if the projects
do not receive approval from the states. Potentially, transmission project developers and states do not receive approval from the states. Potentially, transmission project developers and states
will be encouraged to come to agreements about siting, in order to avoid the federal process. will be encouraged to come to agreements about siting, in order to avoid the federal process.
Alternatively, transmission project developers may focus on project design that is likely to be Alternatively, transmission project developers may focus on project design that is likely to be
approved by FERC, regardless of state regulators’ preferences. approved by FERC, regardless of state regulators’ preferences.
Legislative Proposals
CRS analyzed the transmission permitting reform provisions in selected bills introduced in the CRS analyzed the transmission permitting reform provisions in selected bills introduced in the
118th Congress, draft legislative proposals, and legislation enacted in the 118th Congress. 118th Congress, draft legislative proposals, and legislation enacted in the 118th Congress.
Table 1 provides a summary of the provisions in each bill addressing the issues identified above. provides a summary of the provisions in each bill addressing the issues identified above.
The table is not a full analysis of each bill, and does not necessarily identify all transmission-The table is not a full analysis of each bill, and does not necessarily identify all transmission-
related provisions in each bill. For example, H.R. 1 addresses NEPA review for vegetation related provisions in each bill. For example, H.R. 1 addresses NEPA review for vegetation
management (a maintenance procedure for transmission lines) on public lands, but this provision management (a maintenance procedure for transmission lines) on public lands, but this provision
is not included in the table because NEPA is not a topic discussed in this report. The table also is not included in the table because NEPA is not a topic discussed in this report. The table also
does not identify all electricity-related provisions. For example, the Promoting Efficient and does not identify all electricity-related provisions. For example, the Promoting Efficient and
Engaged Reviews Act of 2023 addresses the process for interconnecting new power plants with Engaged Reviews Act of 2023 addresses the process for interconnecting new power plants with
the transmission system, but this provision is not included in the table. the transmission system, but this provision is not included in the table.
The bills and legislative proposals included in this analysis are The bills and legislative proposals included in this analysis are
• The Lower Energy Costs Act (H.R. 1), as passed by the House on March 30, • The Lower Energy Costs Act (H.R. 1), as passed by the House on March 30,
2023. 2023.

7 See FERC, Building for the Future Through Electric Regional Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation and 7 See FERC, Building for the Future Through Electric Regional Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation and
Generator Interconnection, https://www.ferc.gov/media/rm21-17-000. In July 2023, FERC issued Order No. 2023 Generator Interconnection, https://www.ferc.gov/media/rm21-17-000. In July 2023, FERC issued Order No. 2023
modifying its regulations for interconnecting new power plants to the transmission system. These modifications could modifying its regulations for interconnecting new power plants to the transmission system. These modifications could
potentially support some goals of transmission permitting reform proposals, namely increased use of wind and solar potentially support some goals of transmission permitting reform proposals, namely increased use of wind and solar
energy and improved reliability. energy and improved reliability.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

4 4

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

• The Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act (CETA) of 2023 • The Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act (CETA) of 2023
discussion draft, released by Representatives Casten and Levin on April 27, discussion draft, released by Representatives Casten and Levin on April 27,
2023.8 2023.8
• The Building American Energy Security Act of 2023 (S. 1399), introduced by • The Building American Energy Security Act of 2023 (S. 1399), introduced by
Senator Manchin on May 2, 2023. Senator Manchin on May 2, 2023.
• The Spur Permitting of Underdeveloped Resources Act (SPUR Act; S. 1456), • The Spur Permitting of Underdeveloped Resources Act (SPUR Act; S. 1456),
introduced by Senator Barrasso on May 4, 2023. introduced by Senator Barrasso on May 4, 2023.
• The Revitalizing the Economy by Simplifying Timelines and Assuring • The Revitalizing the Economy by Simplifying Timelines and Assuring
Regulatory Transparency Act (RESTART; S. 1449) Act, introduced by Senator Regulatory Transparency Act (RESTART; S. 1449) Act, introduced by Senator
Capito on May 4, 2023. Capito on May 4, 2023.
• The Promoting Efficient and Engaged Reviews Act of 2023 (PEER Act) • The Promoting Efficient and Engaged Reviews Act of 2023 (PEER Act)
discussion draft, released by Senators Carper and Schatz on May 18, 2023.9 discussion draft, released by Senators Carper and Schatz on May 18, 2023.9
• The Interregional Transmission Planning Improvement Act of 2023 (S. 1748), • The Interregional Transmission Planning Improvement Act of 2023 (S. 1748),
introduced by Senator Heinrich on May 18, 2023. introduced by Senator Heinrich on May 18, 2023.
• The Facilitating America’s Siting of Transmission and Electric Reliability Act of • The Facilitating America’s Siting of Transmission and Electric Reliability Act of
2023 (FASTER Act of 2023; S. 1804), introduced by Senator Heinrich on June 1, 2023 (FASTER Act of 2023; S. 1804), introduced by Senator Heinrich on June 1,
2023. Companion legislation (H.R. 4689) was introduced by Representative 2023. Companion legislation (H.R. 4689) was introduced by Representative
Peters on July 17, 2023. Peters on July 17, 2023.
• The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5), enacted on June 3, 2023. • The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5), enacted on June 3, 2023.
• The Connecting Hard-to-reach Areas with Renewably Generated Energy Act of • The Connecting Hard-to-reach Areas with Renewably Generated Energy Act of
2023 (CHARGE Act of 2023; S. 2480), introduced by Senator Markey on July 2023 (CHARGE Act of 2023; S. 2480), introduced by Senator Markey on July
25, 2023. Companion legislation (H.R. 5154) was introduced by Representative 25, 2023. Companion legislation (H.R. 5154) was introduced by Representative
Ocasio-Cortez on August 4, 2023. Ocasio-Cortez on August 4, 2023.
• The Building Integrated Grids With Inter-Regional Energy Supply Act (BIG • The Building Integrated Grids With Inter-Regional Energy Supply Act (BIG
WIRES Act; S. 2827/H.R. 5551), introduced by Senator Hickenlooper and WIRES Act; S. 2827/H.R. 5551), introduced by Senator Hickenlooper and
Representative Peters on September 18, 2023. Representative Peters on September 18, 2023.

8 The Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act discussion draft is available at https://seec.house.gov/sites/ 8 The Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act discussion draft is available at https://seec.house.gov/sites/
sustainableenergyandenvironmentcoalitioncaucus.house.gov/files/sustainableenergyandenvironmentcoalitioncaucus.house.gov/files/
CETA%20Act%20Discussion%20Draft%2023.04.26.pdf. CETA%20Act%20Discussion%20Draft%2023.04.26.pdf.
9 The Promoting Efficient and Engaged Reviews Act (PEER Act) discussion draft is available at 9 The Promoting Efficient and Engaged Reviews Act (PEER Act) discussion draft is available at
https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/5/carper-schatz-unveil-environmental-review-and-permitting-https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/5/carper-schatz-unveil-environmental-review-and-permitting-
reform-proposal. reform-proposal.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

5 5

Table 1. Selected Electricity Transmission Provisions in Selected Legislative Proposals and
Enacted Legislation in the 118th Congress
Inter-
regional
Building
Trans-
American
mission
Fiscal
Energy
Planning
Respon-
BIG
Lower
Security
Improve-
FASTER sibility Act CHARGE
WIRES
Energy
CETA Act
Act of
RESTART PEER Act
ment Act
Act (S.
of 2023
Act (S.
Act (S.
Costs Act discussion
2023
SPUR Act
Act
discussion of 2023 (S.
1804 /
(P.L. 118-
2480 /
2827 /
Topic
(H.R. 1)
draft
(S. 1399)
(S. 1456)
(S. 1449)
draft
1748)
H.R. 4689)
5)
H.R. 5154) H.R. 5551)
Federal Federal
Not Not
Would give Would Would give Would
Not Not
Not Not
Would give Would give
Not Not
Would Would
Not Not
Not Not
Not Not
Siting Siting
addressed addressed
FERC FERC
amend amend
addressed addressed
addressed addressed
FERC FERC
addressed addressed
amend amend
addressed addressed
addressed addressed
addressed addressed
Authority Authority
authority to backstop authority to backstop
authority to authority to
backstop backstop
issue issue
siting siting
issue issue
siting siting
certificate of authority to certificate of authority to
certificate of certificate of
authority to authority to
public public
allow FERC allow FERC
public public
allow allow
convenience to convenience to
convenience convenience
transmission transmission
and and
determine determine
and and
developers developers
necessity for transmission necessity for transmission
necessity for necessity for
to request to request
certain certain
facilities in facilities in
certain large, certain large,
certain certain
large, large,
the national the national
interstate interstate
proposed proposed
interstate interstate
interest (i.e., interest (i.e.,
transmission transmission
routes to be routes to be
transmission removes transmission removes
lines. lines.
designated designated
lines. lines.
DOE DOE
Would Would
as a NIETC. as a NIETC.
Would Would
NIETC NIETC
provide right provide right
Would Would
provide provide
designations designations
of eminent of eminent
encourage encourage
right of right of
for for
domain for domain for
transmission transmission
eminent eminent
purposes of purposes of
holders of holders of
developers developers
domain for domain for
backstop backstop
such a such a
to enter to enter
holders of holders of
siting siting
certificate. certificate.
into into
such a such a
authority). authority).
community community
certificate. certificate.
Facilities Facilities
benefit benefit
must be must be
agreements agreements
interstate interstate
with with
(including (including
affected affected
offshore) or offshore) or
parties. parties.
international international
CRS-6 CRS-6

Inter-
regional
Building
Trans-
American
mission
Fiscal
Energy
Planning
Respon-
BIG
Lower
Security
Improve-
FASTER sibility Act CHARGE
WIRES
Energy
CETA Act
Act of
RESTART PEER Act
ment Act
Act (S.
of 2023
Act (S.
Act (S.
Costs Act discussion
2023
SPUR Act
Act
discussion of 2023 (S.
1804 /
(P.L. 118-
2480 /
2827 /
Topic
(H.R. 1)
draft
(S. 1399)
(S. 1456)
(S. 1449)
draft
1748)
H.R. 4689)
5)
H.R. 5154) H.R. 5551)
and meet and meet
other other
criteria. criteria.
Cost Cost
Not Not
Would Would
Would Would
Not Not
Not Not
Would Would
Would Would
Not Not
Not Not
Would Would
Not Not
Allocation Allocation
addressed addressed
establish establish
establish establish
addressed addressed
addressed addressed
establish establish
establish establish
addressed addressed
addressed addressed
establish establish
addressed addressed
cost cost
cost cost
cost cost
cost cost
cost cost
allocation allocation
allocation allocation
allocation allocation
allocation allocation
allocation allocation
principles principles
principles principles
principles principles
principles principles
principles principles
based on based on
based on based on
based on based on
for inter- for inter-
based on based on
broader set broader set broader set broader set
broader set regional broader set regional
broader set broader set
of benefits of benefits
of benefits of benefits
of benefits of benefits
transmission transmission
of benefits of benefits
than status than status
than status than status
than status than status
projects projects
than status than status
quo, for quo, for
quo, for quo, for
quo. quo.
based on based on
quo. quo.
certain large transmission certain large transmission
Would Would
broader set broader set
Would Would
interstate interstate
determined determined
require require
of benefits of benefits
require require
transmission by FERC to transmission by FERC to
other other
than status than status
other other
facilities or facilities or
be in the be in the
changes to changes to
quo. quo.
changes to changes to
offshore offshore
national national
cost cost
cost cost
transmission interest. transmission interest.
allocation allocation
allocation allocation
facilities. facilities.
methodol- methodol-
methodol- methodol-
ogies, ogies,
ogies, ogies,
including including
including including
preventing preventing
preventing preventing
ones that ones that
ones that ones that
discourage discourage
discourage discourage
distributed distributed
distributed distributed
generation, generation,
generation, generation,
energy energy
energy energy
efficiency, efficiency,
efficiency, efficiency,
demand demand
demand demand
CRS-7 CRS-7

Inter-
regional
Building
Trans-
American
mission
Fiscal
Energy
Planning
Respon-
BIG
Lower
Security
Improve-
FASTER sibility Act CHARGE
WIRES
Energy
CETA Act
Act of
RESTART PEER Act
ment Act
Act (S.
of 2023
Act (S.
Act (S.
Costs Act discussion
2023
SPUR Act
Act
discussion of 2023 (S.
1804 /
(P.L. 118-
2480 /
2827 /
Topic
(H.R. 1)
draft
(S. 1399)
(S. 1456)
(S. 1449)
draft
1748)
H.R. 4689)
5)
H.R. 5154) H.R. 5551)
response, or response, or
response, response,
energy energy
or energy or energy
storage. storage.
storage. storage.
Inter- Inter-
Not Not
Would Would
Not Not
Not Not
Not Not
Would Would
Would Would
Not Not
Directs Directs
Would Would
Would Would
regional regional
addressed addressed
direct FERC addressed direct FERC addressed
addressed addressed
addressed addressed
direct FERC direct FERC addressed direct FERC direct FERC addressed
NERC and NERC and
direct FERC direct FERC direct FERC direct FERC
Trans- Trans-
to to
to to
to to
FERC to FERC to
to to
to to
mission mission
promulgate promulgate
promulgate a promulgate promulgate a promulgate
study study
promulgate promulgate promulgate promulgate
Planning Planning
a rule a rule
rule rule
a rule a rule
existing existing
a rule a rule
a rule a rule
addressing addressing
requiring requiring
addressing addressing
~~interregiona~~ inter- requiring requiring
requiring requiring
inter- inter-
transmission inter- transmission inter-
~~l transfer~~regional
transmission specified transmission specified
regional regional
providers to regional providers to regional
~~capability~~transfer
providers to levels of providers to levels of
transmission transmission
engage in engage in
transmission transmission
~~and~~capability
engage in engage in
inter- inter-
planning. planning.
interregional planning. interregional planning.
~~recommend~~ and inter-inter-
regional regional
Would Would
and inter- and inter-
~~levels that~~
recommend regional and transfer regional and transfer
direct FERC direct FERC
connection- connection-
~~would~~levels that
intercon- intercon-
capacity capacity
to establish to establish
wide wide
~~demon-~~
would nection- nection-
between between
minimum minimum
planning planning
~~strably~~
demon- wide wide
regions. regions.
transfer transfer
processes. processes.
~~strengthen~~strably
planning planning
capacity capacity
Would Would
~~reliability.~~strengthen
processes. processes.
between between
direct FERC direct FERC
reliability. Would Would
regions. regions.
to establish to establish
direct FERC direct FERC
minimum minimum
to establish to establish
transfer transfer
minimum minimum
capability capability
transfer transfer
between between
capacity capacity
regions. regions.
between between
regions. regions.
CRS-8 CRS-8

Inter-
regional
Building
Trans-
American
mission
Fiscal
Energy
Planning
Respon-
BIG
Lower
Security
Improve-
FASTER sibility Act CHARGE
WIRES
Energy
CETA Act
Act of
RESTART PEER Act
ment Act
Act (S.
of 2023
Act (S.
Act (S.
Costs Act discussion
2023
SPUR Act
Act
discussion of 2023 (S.
1804 /
(P.L. 118-
2480 /
2827 /
Topic
(H.R. 1)
draft
(S. 1399)
(S. 1456)
(S. 1449)
draft
1748)
H.R. 4689)
5)
H.R. 5154) H.R. 5551)
Other Other
Would Would
Would Would
None None
Would Would
None None
Would Would
None None
None None
None None
Would Would
Not Not
Topics Topics
modify modify
establish an addressed establish an addressed
modify modify
addressed addressed
establish an establish an
addressed addressed
addressed addressed
addressed addressed
establish an addressed establish an addressed
approval approval
Office of Office of
approval approval
Office of Office of
Office of Office of
process for Trans- process for Trans-
process for process for
Trans- Trans-
Trans- Trans-
international mission at international mission at
international international
mission at mission at
mission at mission at
transmission FERC. transmission FERC.
transmission transmission
FERC. FERC.
FERC. FERC.
facilities. facilities.
Would Would
facilities. facilities.
Would Would
Would Would
require require
require require
require require
independent independent
independent independent
independent independent
transmission transmission
transmission transmission
transmission transmission
monitors monitors
monitors for monitors for
monitors monitors
for each for each
each each
for each for each
transmission transmission
transmission transmission
transmission transmission
planning planning
planning planning
planning planning
region. region.
region. region.
region. region.
Would Would
Would Would
Would Would
promote promote
promote promote
promote promote
adoption of adoption of
adoption of adoption of
adoption of adoption of
GETs and GETs and
GETs and GETs and
GETs and GETs and
NTAs. NTAs.
NTAs. NTAs.
NTAs. NTAs.
Source: CRS analysis of legislation in Congress.gov, CETA Act discussion draft available at https://seec.house.gov/sites/CRS analysis of legislation in Congress.gov, CETA Act discussion draft available at https://seec.house.gov/sites/
sustainableenergyandenvironmentcoalitioncaucus.house.gov/files/CETA%20Act%20Discussion%20Draft%2023.04.26.pdf, and PEER Act discussion draft available at sustainableenergyandenvironmentcoalitioncaucus.house.gov/files/CETA%20Act%20Discussion%20Draft%2023.04.26.pdf, and PEER Act discussion draft available at
https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/5/carper-schatz-unveil-environmental-review-and-permitting-reform-proposal. https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/5/carper-schatz-unveil-environmental-review-and-permitting-reform-proposal.
Notes: FERC = Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; NERC = North American Electric Reliability Corporations; DOE = U.S. Department of Energy; NIETC = FERC = Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; NERC = North American Electric Reliability Corporations; DOE = U.S. Department of Energy; NIETC =
National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor; GETs = Grid-Enhancing Technologies; NTAs = Non-Transmission Alternatives. This table does not provide a National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor; GETs = Grid-Enhancing Technologies; NTAs = Non-Transmission Alternatives. This table does not provide a
comprehensive analysis of selected legislative proposals or enacted legislation. comprehensive analysis of selected legislative proposals or enacted legislation.

CRS-9 CRS-9

link to page 9 link to page 9 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

Biden Administration Priorities
On May 10, 2023, the White House released a fact sheet outlining the Biden Administration’s On May 10, 2023, the White House released a fact sheet outlining the Biden Administration’s
priorities for permitting reform.10 For transmission, these priorities are priorities for permitting reform.10 For transmission, these priorities are
• providing for electric transmission siting and cost allocation; • providing for electric transmission siting and cost allocation;
• developing minimum interregional transfer requirements; • developing minimum interregional transfer requirements;
• broadening the benefits considered for cost allocation; and • broadening the benefits considered for cost allocation; and
• accelerating the deployment of GETs. • accelerating the deployment of GETs.
The Administration fact sheet does not provide legislative details for these priorities. For The Administration fact sheet does not provide legislative details for these priorities. For
example, the fact sheet does not clarify the meaning of “providing for electric transmission siting example, the fact sheet does not clarify the meaning of “providing for electric transmission siting
and cost allocation.” While announcing the Administration’s priorities for permitting reform, and cost allocation.” While announcing the Administration’s priorities for permitting reform,
White House Senior Advisor John Podesta said “Congress should give FERC clear authority to White House Senior Advisor John Podesta said “Congress should give FERC clear authority to
issue permits for interstate transmission lines.”11 issue permits for interstate transmission lines.”11
Concluding Observations
Various proposals in the 118th Congress could potentially affect new transmission development. Various proposals in the 118th Congress could potentially affect new transmission development.
Many of the provisions identified inMany of the provisions identified in Table 1 aim to promote increased development of large, aim to promote increased development of large,
interstate transmission lines. Federal policy is not the only factor affecting development of such interstate transmission lines. Federal policy is not the only factor affecting development of such
infrastructure. Other factors include electricity market conditions and state regulatory decisions. infrastructure. Other factors include electricity market conditions and state regulatory decisions.
Other topics included in some permitting reform debate could also potentially affect new Other topics included in some permitting reform debate could also potentially affect new
transmission development. These include proposals to modify NEPA implementation and transmission development. These include proposals to modify NEPA implementation and
proposals to address energy infrastructure development on public lands. A separate, but related, proposals to address energy infrastructure development on public lands. A separate, but related,
issue is the process for approving offshore transmission lines which is currently overseen by the issue is the process for approving offshore transmission lines which is currently overseen by the
Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.12 Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.12
Several of the issues addressed by proposed provisions (e.g., cost allocation) would provide Several of the issues addressed by proposed provisions (e.g., cost allocation) would provide
policy direction to FERC within FERC’s existing authority. FERC could adopt these policies policy direction to FERC within FERC’s existing authority. FERC could adopt these policies
absent congressional action. FERC has initiated rulemakings addressing some of the topics absent congressional action. FERC has initiated rulemakings addressing some of the topics
discussed in this report. In other words, some FERC transmission policies could change in the discussed in this report. In other words, some FERC transmission policies could change in the
coming years even without Congress passing legislation specifically addressing these policies. coming years even without Congress passing legislation specifically addressing these policies.
Some Members of Congress have publicly called on FERC to do so. For example, on July 24, Some Members of Congress have publicly called on FERC to do so. For example, on July 24,
2023, Majority Leader Schumer sent a letter to FERC commissioners urging them to strengthen 2023, Majority Leader Schumer sent a letter to FERC commissioners urging them to strengthen
and finalize their transmission rulemakings.13 Regarding transmission planning, Senator Schumer and finalize their transmission rulemakings.13 Regarding transmission planning, Senator Schumer

10 White House, “Fact Sheet: Biden-Harris Administration Outlines Priorities for Building America’s Energy 10 White House, “Fact Sheet: Biden-Harris Administration Outlines Priorities for Building America’s Energy
Infrastructure Faster, Safer, and Cleaner,” May 10, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-Infrastructure Faster, Safer, and Cleaner,” May 10, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-
releases/2023/05/10/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-outlines-priorities-for-building-americas-energy-releases/2023/05/10/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-outlines-priorities-for-building-americas-energy-
infrastructure-faster-safer-and-cleaner/. infrastructure-faster-safer-and-cleaner/.
11 The White House, “Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Senior Advisor John Podesta on the Biden-Harris 11 The White House, “Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Senior Advisor John Podesta on the Biden-Harris
Administration’s Priorities for Energy Infrastructure Permitting Reform,” May 10, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/Administration’s Priorities for Energy Infrastructure Permitting Reform,” May 10, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/
briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/05/10/remarks-as-prepared-for-delivery-by-senior-advisor-john-podesta-on-the-briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/05/10/remarks-as-prepared-for-delivery-by-senior-advisor-john-podesta-on-the-
biden-harris-administrations-priorities-for-energy-infrastructure-permitting-reform/. biden-harris-administrations-priorities-for-energy-infrastructure-permitting-reform/.
12 For additional information about offshore electricity infrastructure development, see CRS Report R46970, 12 For additional information about offshore electricity infrastructure development, see CRS Report R46970, U.S.
Offshore Wind Energy Development: Overview and Issues for the 118th Congress, by Laura B. Comay and Corrie E. , by Laura B. Comay and Corrie E.
Clark. Clark.
13 Letter from Senator Charles E. Schumer to Commissioners Willie L. Phillips, James Danly, Allison Clements, Mark 13 Letter from Senator Charles E. Schumer to Commissioners Willie L. Phillips, James Danly, Allison Clements, Mark
(continued...) (continued...)
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

10 10

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

wrote in support of FERC’s proposal to include long-term scenarios in transmission planning and wrote in support of FERC’s proposal to include long-term scenarios in transmission planning and
encouraged FERC to additionally “require that one of those scenarios includes consideration of a encouraged FERC to additionally “require that one of those scenarios includes consideration of a
high penetration of variable energy resources.”14 Senator Schumer also wrote in support of high penetration of variable energy resources.”14 Senator Schumer also wrote in support of
FERC’s proposal to include two GETs in transmission planning and encouraged FERC to FERC’s proposal to include two GETs in transmission planning and encouraged FERC to
additionally “include other grid enhancing technologies that serve transmission functions and can additionally “include other grid enhancing technologies that serve transmission functions and can
avoid the need for new transmission, such as energy storage” and “require consideration of avoid the need for new transmission, such as energy storage” and “require consideration of
reconductoring with advanced conductors.” Regarding cost allocation, Senator Schumer wrote “I reconductoring with advanced conductors.” Regarding cost allocation, Senator Schumer wrote “I
am concerned that the proposal does not require the use of a specific list of benefits” and “any am concerned that the proposal does not require the use of a specific list of benefits” and “any
final rule must include cost allocation provisions, and prescribe a set of benefits of final rule must include cost allocation provisions, and prescribe a set of benefits of
transmission…. Moreover, transmission planners should specifically assess benefits during transmission…. Moreover, transmission planners should specifically assess benefits during
periods of grid stress, when the electric reliability benefits of transmission assets are the greatest.” periods of grid stress, when the electric reliability benefits of transmission assets are the greatest.”
Regarding backstop siting authority, Senator Schumer wrote “it is also important that FERC Regarding backstop siting authority, Senator Schumer wrote “it is also important that FERC
expeditiously finalize its Federal backstop siting authority … and this should include allowing expeditiously finalize its Federal backstop siting authority … and this should include allowing
transmission projects to use the Commission’s long-standing pre-filing process to decrease the transmission projects to use the Commission’s long-standing pre-filing process to decrease the
risk of further delays of project approval.” risk of further delays of project approval.”
Other Members have publicly called on FERC to preserve the status quo. For example, Senator Other Members have publicly called on FERC to preserve the status quo. For example, Senator
Cramer sent a letter to FERC commissioners on September 12, 2023, providing his views on Cramer sent a letter to FERC commissioners on September 12, 2023, providing his views on
FERC’s transmission policies. Regarding transmission planning, Senator Cramer wrote “any FERC’s transmission policies. Regarding transmission planning, Senator Cramer wrote “any
attempt by FERC to undermine this state authority [to shape the electricity generation mix] … attempt by FERC to undermine this state authority [to shape the electricity generation mix] …
under the guise of transmission planning would be a legal farce, and the intentions behind these under the guise of transmission planning would be a legal farce, and the intentions behind these
misguided policies would be clear.” Regarding cost allocation, Senator Cramer wrote, “forcing misguided policies would be clear.” Regarding cost allocation, Senator Cramer wrote, “forcing
customers in states who do not want power from intermittent, unreliable generators, or customers in states who do not want power from intermittent, unreliable generators, or
unnecessary expanded transmission capacity is the antithesis of the just and reasonable standard unnecessary expanded transmission capacity is the antithesis of the just and reasonable standard
demanded of FERC.” Regarding backstop siting authority, Senator Cramer wrote: demanded of FERC.” Regarding backstop siting authority, Senator Cramer wrote:
I am concerned the process is being subverted to serve transmission developers rather than I am concerned the process is being subverted to serve transmission developers rather than
the national interest. Although this is outside of FERC’s responsibility, it appears DOE is the national interest. Although this is outside of FERC’s responsibility, it appears DOE is
skirting its role in this process…. By establishing NIETCs at the request of developers, skirting its role in this process…. By establishing NIETCs at the request of developers,
rather than through a DOE-led corridor process, there is a clear risk this backstop authority rather than through a DOE-led corridor process, there is a clear risk this backstop authority
will be utilized by those able to lobby political leadership in Washington rather than will be utilized by those able to lobby political leadership in Washington rather than
transmission planners capable of determining actual need.15 transmission planners capable of determining actual need.15

Author Information

Ashley J. Lawson Ashley J. Lawson

Specialist in Energy Policy Specialist in Energy Policy

C. Christie, July 20, 2023, https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/230720_- C. Christie, July 20, 2023, https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/230720_-
_letter_to_ferc_on_transmission_reformspdf.pdf. _letter_to_ferc_on_transmission_reformspdf.pdf.
14 Solar and wind are examples of variable energy resources. 14 Solar and wind are examples of variable energy resources.
15 Letter from Senator Kevin Cramer to Commissioners Willie L. Phillips, James Danly, Allison Clements, Mark C. 15 Letter from Senator Kevin Cramer to Commissioners Willie L. Phillips, James Danly, Allison Clements, Mark C.
Christie, September 12, 2023, https://senatorkevincramer.box.com/s/pt9lbl6jb23xcfga4nx8kfncnxgkllyj. Christie, September 12, 2023, https://senatorkevincramer.box.com/s/pt9lbl6jb23xcfga4nx8kfncnxgkllyj.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

11 11

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
R47627 R47627 · VERSION 68 · UPDATED
12 12